Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-18 PacketLEE HOWARD 3900 Parducci Road Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 462-6944 February 18, 2004 c~ o~U~ Mayor Larson & Members of the City Council 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 FEB 18 2O04 CI ,'7,r' OF UKIAH ClT'Y C[ E,r": ~":':': -rs.'E~; ?k'ENT RE: Water System Improvement Mitigated Negative Declaration Dear Mayor Larson & Members of the City Council: I have reviewed the City of Ukiah's files relating to its proposed Water Improvement System and proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. As you know, this project will 'have numerous potential, significant adverse environmental impacts. Such impacts require the full analysis of a complete Environmental Impact Report. I have reviewed these reports and find that the City of Uldah has failed to meet the requirements of California law, and that the report is inadequate to be used to satisfy the requirements of CEQA, or the requirements to approve such a project, as it fails to consider the whole project. This negative declaration does not address the project as a whole., or many of the complex and controversial significant impacts it will cause. The significant adverse important impacts that must be analyzed in a full and complete Environmental Impact Report are"as follows: o The City of Ukiah has an inadequate water supply in the summer months to service all of its potential development without a contract for water from the Russian River Flood Control District. The need for this contract and its impact on our regional water supply must be fully evaluated in an Environmental Impact report before the City of Ukiah can approve this water project, because this increase in usage is a significant impact. . The new water tank, general Set Fuel Tank and filters are going to be located in both the floodway and the flood plain (See Attached FEMA Maps). A full review, within a complete Environmental Impact Report, of the potential impact as to the loss of these structures in a flood, must be completed before the City of Uldah can make a decision on this project, due to this signifi~t environmental impact. Ukiah City of Council February 18, 2004 Page 2 . Flooding of this area and drainage: This project has the potential to significantly alter the drainage and flood waters in and around the proposed site. The proposed structures act as dams and divert water flow. With the addition of the new structures for this project it will be even more important to have a full review of the project, within a complete Environmental Impact Report. . A full biological resource mitigation plan for Orr Creek is required. And this plan should include a fish impact study that must be completed as part of the Environmental Impact Report on this project, due to its significant impact (Endangered Species Act). . The project has the potential to induce development in the City of Ukiah's "Sphere of Influence". A full impact analysis of this growth must be in a full Environmental Impact Report before the City of Ukiah can make a decision on this project. The City of Ukiah has recently adopted negative declarations and mitigated negative declarations for other proposed projects although such abbreviated environmental review is appropriate only if"clearly" no potentially significant environment impacts may occur. If a "fair argument" is presented that a project might have significant impacts, then an Environmental Impact Report is required. It is, of course, the duty of the City of Ukiah to develop all of the technical data necessary to analyze each potentially significant environmental impact. Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will allow the Ukiah City Council to make a fully informed decision, backed by objective data, regarding the cumulative and possible growth inducing aspects of the City ofUkiah's project which will affect scores of residents and limited resources. I object to this project going forward without the preparation of a full Environmental Impact Report. Sincerely, Lee Howard CITY OF UKIAH WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/ INITIAL STUDY December 15, 2003 Gary Broad Land-Usc/Environmental Pl:mncr Table of Contents Section 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Executive Summary IntroductionmPurpose of the Initial Study Environmental Checklist/Evaluation Environmental Checklist Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Project Sponsors Incorporation of Mitigation Measures Evaluation of Environmental Impacts II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XX. Aesthetics Agriculture Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Project Alternatives Mandatory Findings of Significance Summary of Project Mitigation Measures Resource Used to Prepare Initial Study Appendix A. Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Page 1. 1. 2. 3. 9. 9. 10. 11. 13. 15. 17. 23. 24. 29. 31. 34. 35. 36. 39. 40. 41. 41. 43. 45. 47. 48. 51. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document considers the environmental impacts of the proposed City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project. The project involves upgrades to the existing water treatment plant, including a treatment building expansion, a 1.5 million gallon (mg) water storage tank and pump station at the adjacent softball fields, and a 1.5 million gallon water tank and a .3 million gallon water tank at the Ukiah Mumcipal Golf Course in the foothills of western Ukiah. As part of this Initial Study, several detailed environmental reports were prepared. Environmental Collaborative completed a biological assessment of the project because of the potential wildlife habitat value of the golf course site and the potential impacts of the water tanks, grading and filling activity. Recommended mitigation measmes related to biological resources are contained within Initial Study Section IV. Archaeological Resource Service completed a cultural resources evaluation of the proposed plant expansion and water storage tanks. While no cultural resources were discovered, recommended mitigation measures related to the protection of any potential resources are contained within Initial Study Section V. Miller Pacific Engineering Group completed a preliminary geotechnical investigation tbr the water system improvements. They concluded that the most significant geologic hazards at the project site are strong seismic ground shaking, slope stability and erosion. Based on their research, geologic reconnaissance and initial investigation, Miller Pacific concluded that the project is feasible and the sites are suitable for the planned improvements. Section VI. of this Initial Study, Geology and Soils, includes mitigation measures to reduce potential geotechnical impacts from the treatment plant expansion and water tank construction to less than significant levels. Additional potentially significant impacts were identified in the areas of aesthetics, air quality and noise. In all these areas, the Initial Study found that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project design to mitigation potential impacts to a less than significant level. The environmental review did not find any mitigation measures necessary in the following categories: agricultural resources, land use and planning, hydrology/water quality, hazards and hazardous materials. mineral resources, population and housing, public serv'ices, recreation, transportation/traffic, utilities and service systems and mandateD., findings of significance, i 2. INTRODUCTION--PURPOSE OF TIlE INTIAL STUDY This Initial Study presents an environmental impact cvaluation of thc City of Ukiah's proposal to upgrade its water treatment plant facilities and to add additional stora,~,c capacity. The city is likely to finance thc construction ofimprovcments to its water treatment facilities through some type of public bond offering Thc city x~ ill use its - own funds for thc proposed water tank improvements. Thc project involves thc following: 1.) a x~'atcr treatment building expansion Io the cxislin,g x~'alcr treatment plant: 2.) a 1.5 million gallon x~'atcr storage tank. :~ pump station, a 1,000-gallon fuel tank and 24" finished watcr pipeline construction at thc softball fields adjacent to fl~c water treatment plant: and 3.) a 1.5 million gallon water tank and a .3 million gallon xvat_cr tank constructic)n adjacent to existing x~'atcr tanks at thc Ukiah Municipal Golf Course m thc foothills of western Ukiah This Initial Study provides thc conmtunity with teleran! inI'ormation regarding thc potcmial environment:ti citers of thc proposed p~t[icct and provides City of Ukiah and I)cpartn~cnt of llcalth Services decision-makers ~A'ilh information to usc as the basis t¢~ determining whether to prepare a Negative Declaration (NI')t or an Environmental Impact Report (I~IR) under the requirements of the California Environmental Quzility Act (CEQA.) A Negative Declaration x~'ould be prepared if it could bc conclusively demonstrated that thc proposed project would not ~csult in one or more significant effects on thc environment. A Negative Declaration would also 1 be prepared if the Initial Study identified one or more potentially significant environmental effects, but modifications (mitigation measures) to the proposed project made by or agreed to by the applicant would reduce the effects to a less than significant level (referred to as a Mitigated Negative Declaration.) Alternately, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be prepared if, based upon the Initial Study, it could be determined that the amount or extent of information available during preparation of the Initial Study was insufficient to reach a determination with regard to potential environmental effects. An EIR would also be prepared if a potential impact identified in the Initial Study could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance or if two qualified and competent experts in the same field arrived at different conclusions about a potential environmental effect. The City of Ukiah originally intended to seek a grant from the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SDWSRF) Program financial assistance administered by the Department of Health Services (DHS), Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management (Division) for construction of water treatment facilities improvements. The SDWSRF Program is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and any projects so funded must be compliant with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA.) To comply with NEPA, the EPA established specific "NEPA-like" requirements in the Operating Agreement with DHS for administering the SDWSRF Program. Although the city no longer intends to seek this grant, this Initial Study was prepared to satisfy both CEQA requirements and "NEPA-like" requirements. This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21178.1)(CEQA) and the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (including the 1999 Updatc)(Chaptcr 3, Title 14, California Code of Regulations)(CEQA Guidelines.) This Initial Study considers all aspects of the proposed project as rcquircd by Section 15063(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST/EVALUATION The Environmental Checklist as contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines was used to focus this study on the physical, social and economic factors that may be impacted or further impacted by implementation of the proposed City of Ukiah Water Treatment Plant Improvement Project. The CEQA Checklist poses a series of questions across a wide range of environmental considerations that serve as the basis for research and analysis, leading to one of four conclusions: · Thc project, as proposed, will result in a "Potentially Significant Impact;" · The project, as proposed, will result in a "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation I ncorporat ion ;" · Thc project, as proposed, will result in a "Loss ~l'han Significant Impact:" or · Thc project, as proposed, will result in "_No Impact." ~%cction 15382 oFthc (?I~Q:\ (guidelines defines a signilhc:int clTcct on thc environment "... a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any et'thc physical conditions xvithin thc area articled by thc prQjcct, including land. air. x~ atcr. n~incrals, flora, t~una, ambient noise, and ot~i~ts el' }~istoric or aesthetic signiticancc. :~n economic or social changes related to a physical change n~ax' bc considered in determining xvhcthcr thc physical chat~gc is signiGcant." t:olloxving each of thc topical areas addrcsscd in the t£nx'iT'ont~cntal Checklist. a discussion is prescntt.'cl regarding thc topical environmental setting, thc relevance et'the proposed project to thc setting and any a~d all potcnlial impacts within the topical area. All mitigation measures necessary to reduce any identified potential significant impacts to a less than significant level are provided as appropriate. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ao d. f. g. h. i. Project Title: City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Ukiah Contact Person and Phone Number: Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager City, of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400, (707) 463-6286 Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 001-020-78, 001-030-01, 001-090-01 (Golf Course); 179-010-09 (Water Treatment Plant); and 179-010-09 (Softball Fields) Project Location: Water Treatment Plant, 935 City Well Road, Ukiah; Adjacent softball fields, east side Highway 101on City Well Rd.; and Ukiah Municipal Golf Course, 599 Park Blvd. Project Sponsor: City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 General Plan Designation: Public (P) Zoning: Public Facilities (PF) Description of Project: (Describe the whole action, including but not limited to later project phases, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for implementation.) On May 22, 2001, the Department of Health Services conducted an investigation of the Cid, of Ulfi~'s domestic water system. In its July 11, 2001 letter to the City of Ukiah, the Department listed items that must be addressed to ensure compliance with the California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) and the Califomia Code of Regulations (CCR_) Based on its storage capacity assessment for the water system, the Department determined the follox~sng: Zone 1 currently has 2,635,000 gallons of available storage. The storage necessary is 5,600,000 gallons. Therefore, Zone 1 is deficient in water storage by approximately 3,000,000 gallons. Zone 1 consists of the portions of the city not in Zone 2 or the west end of Medocino Place or San Jacinto Drive plus 7 connections outside the ci~' limits south of Jefferson Lane and on South State Street. Zone 2 currently has 100,000 gallons of available storage while the necessary storage is 360,000 gallons. Therefore Zone 2 is deficient in storage by 260,000 gallons. Zone 2 consists of the west end section of Maple Avenue west of Fairway Avenue, Faire, ay Avenue, the West end of Standl~, Strect west of Anton Stadium, Standley Avenue. Giorno Avenue and the west end of Park Boulevard west of Todd Grove Park. Included in the department's list was a requirement that Ukiah submit a plan and time schedule for upgrading thc water system's storage capacity. The department's conclusions proved to tlc prescient. In Julv 2002, Ukiah o£ficials dcclare~l a water cmergcn%' m thc middle ora heat wave, with record setting temperatures creating a sudden cxccss~x c water usc in thc city over an eight hour period. Irrigation was suspended at ali city Gcilitics and other large irrigation users were ask'cd to roi'rain from xvatcring. Residents xvcrc asked to quit watering lawns, doing laundry and washing their cars m~til thc tanks were back at a normal lex'el Additional water was obtaincd from thc Millx'icx~ \\'atcr District through a mutual agreement. ('ltv pumps were unable lo keep up x~ t~h thc daily demand and could not replenish thc citx"s 1.5 million gallon xvatcr tank ox'cm~ghl ils usual. 'l'hc tank. located in the foothills above tim municipal ?If course, provides back-up xvalcr supply xvhcn cI1v demand exceeds linc daily lmmping capabilily al Ibc city xvclls 3 This was not the city's first brush with a water emergency. A similar one-day incident occurred in Ukiah more than 10 years ago. The public responded quickly and storage levels returned to normal the next day. The city is now close to having water supply emergencies on a regular basis, however, as it lacks adequate water storage. Inadequate water storage is forcing irrigation at the golf course and parks to be shut off for two or three days at a time an increasing number of times each year. The average daily water usage is so close to the ~stem's and reservoir's capacity that a temperature spike from 85 to 110 degrees can produce an emergency. While the city's average annual water demand is 3.2 million gallons per day (mgd), during the summer months the daily demand exceeds to 6 mgd. The city presently takes in 6.1 million gallons per day --any demand above this level must be served from city storage tanks holding 2.4 mg in reserve. On the day of the water shortage, the demand was so high and within such a short period that the tanks were being depleted faster than water could be pumped back into them. The project involves improvements to the existing treatment plant and its water storage capacity. Specific improvements are as follows: Proposed Improvements at the Existing Treatment Plant/Adjacent Softball Fields · Addition of a 1.5 million gallon water storage tank at the existing softball fields between the Highway 101 and water treatment plant. The tank w411 be north of the existing well building and south of the access road to the water treatment plant. It x~-ill be 120 feet in diameter and 20 feet high. · A pump station with three high service pumps, a generator and a 1,000 gallon, double-containment, above- ground diesel tank to service the emergency generator will be located to the east of the tank. · A 24-inch finished water pipeline and a 30-inch storage tank overflow/drain will nm eastward approximately 800 feet to the treatment plant. · A 40-foot wide by 100-foot long, 20-foot high treatment building expansion will be added to the east side of the existing treatment building. The expansion will be constructed on an existing raised, concrete pad. The addition will be a metal building to match the existing treatment building. It will house two additional filter modules, increasing total treatment process capacity from 6 mgd to 12 mgd and an operations laboratory. Proposed Improvements at the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course · Addition of a .3 million gallon water storage tank immediately west of thc existing 25-foot diameter X 30- foot tall concrete tank. The proposed tank will be 39 feet in diameter and 35 feet high and constructed of bolted steel. 850 cubic yards of excavation will be required. · Addition of a 1.5 ms, 120-foot diameter, 20-thor high, concrete water storage tank to the northwest of thc existing 150-foot diameter tank. · Excavation of approximately 38,850 cubic yards of material for tank construction. 28,000 cubic yards of spoils fill will bc retained on-site in a 280 foot long by 160 foot high mound reaching a maximum height of approximately 20 feet abo¥c existing grade. Thc rcmaining approximately 10.850 cubic yards x~411 bc also bc retained on-site and backfillcd on the upside of thc 1.5 mg concrete tank after tank completion. No cxport of materials from the site is prc~poscd. (Sec attached Attachment I i,ocation Plan, Attachment 2 Storage Tank Site Plan Water System lmprovcmcnts and Attachment 3 Treatment Facilities Site Improvements. ~ l)rt\iect construction will bo completed in two phases. Storage tank construction is anticipated to begin in Ma5, 2004 and be completed in October ~( 04. Thc x~'atcr treatment plant upgrades arc slated to begin in August 2004 and to be completed in June In all. 3.3 mg of additi(mal storage x¥ill bc built for a total storage capacity of 5.9 ms. Whilc thc overriding reason for this project is to ensure that Citx' of [Jkiah xYatcr users arc provided with a reliable water supply cvcn during 4 co '-I- Z ~:r:o Cb 0 CZ rtl A'I"I'ACI t?,.It:.NT I t .\'I"I'ACI t\lt:~'F q the peak summer demand periods and to comply with DHS mandates for water storage capacity levels, the proposed water system improvements will provide additional secondary benefits. The existing water storage shortfall requires the overuse of system pumps to refill storage tanks during peak periods; the city could avoid overusing its pumps if its storage capacity were enlarged. The improvements will also allow the city to take filtration units off-line for maintenance and emergency repair. It will allow staffto clean out large holding tanks and filtration systems and perform general maintenance on plumbing without disrupting the sen'icc to its customers. The water system improvement project has the twin goals of improving reliability and redundancy in order to enhance the operation of the treatment plant and better serve the city's residents and water users. The existing facilities cannot meet present demand or water treatment requirements with an assured level of reliability and dependability. The upgraded water system will not affect the plant's design capacity, nor result in any increase in the number of users provided with water service by the City of Ukiah. The water treatment plant was built in 1992, with a TRIDENT adsorption contact clarifier/mixed media filtration system. It has two filter modules capable of processing three mgd each. The plant design enables two additional modules to be installed to achieve a treatment process capacity of 12.0 mgd to match the potential Ranney output. While the City of Ukiah is permitted for 13 mgd of water, operational deficiencies are keeping the daily yield below the city's goals of 9 mgd from the Ranney collector. The existing treatment plant has two backw,,ash clarification ponds, each with a 216,000 capacity, sized for the treatment plant's design capacity of 12 mgd. The plant's clearwell has a capacity of 135,000 gallons and is incapable of meeting the contact time requirements at the maximum designed plant flow of 12 mgd. Additional finished water storage will be provided by the 1.5 mg storage tank at the plant. The city serves a population of 15,500 people and a total of 7,050 connections. Since 1980, water use has increased an average of 1.2% a ',,ear. Because Ukiah is largely built-out, future water use is anticipated to continue to increase at the historically low rate. The average peak day demand (from 1994 through 2000) was 7.18 mgd. The city has pursued steps to restore its physical source capacity, including rehabilitation of the existing Ranney collector and the construction of additional laterals. As a result of the rehabilitation, water production from the Ranney collector increased 720,000 gallons/day by August 2003. Unfortunately, well number 5 was in the cone of influence of the Ranney collector and has subsequently stopped producing and well number 2/6 has also gone do'. J. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting This project will be located in txvo distinct areas: thc water treatment plant and adjacent softball fields and the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. The water treatment plant and file adjacent softball fields arc located east of Highway 101 approximately, one-half mile nol--t}l of thc East Perkins Street frccxvav exit. Access to both sites is provided from northbound tlighway,; 101 only via a fl-ccxYav exit l'or City Well Road. Thc softball fields arc sited immediatch, cast of thc frccxvay and Citx' \Veil Road while the treatment plant iS located adjacent to thc softball fields and to thc cast. Thc densely x~'oodcd Orr Creek I-iparlan corridor borders thc southcrn cdgc of thc sites. Agricultural fields and related structures and uses bound thc properties to thc north and south. These surrounding parcels to thc north, south and cast arc localcd outside of thc Ukiah city limits. Thc softball field site is improved xx ~th txvo sotiball diamonds, unpaved parking area and an existing well building. Thc treatment plant site includes thc existing treatment building, txvo xvashxvatcr reclamation basins and solids dcxvatcring basins. An access road serving both parccls ams along thc north side ofcach property. ']'hc silos arc fiat Thc softball field site is located on tt~c valley tloor, and has bccn extensively disturbed by past agricultural cultivation and more recent development of ballfield improvements. Most of the proposed water tank footprint falls in an unpaved parking area for the softball field visitors and a soil stockpile. Vegetative cover is dominated by non-native ruderal grasses and forbs, such as wild oats (Avena sp.), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), filaree (Erodium sp.), clover (Trifolium sp.) and wild radish (Ral~hanus sativus). A small stand of non-native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) grows on the north edge of the soil stockpile south of the paved access road to the wastewater treatment plant. Several mature black walnut trees (Juglans californica var. hindsii) grow along the paved access road. The sparse cover, lack of any surface water, and frequency of human activity limits the wildlife habitat value of the softball field site. Wildlife associated with the area is common to non-native grasslands and suburban habitat, consisting of several species of birds, California vole, and Botta's pocket gopher. Bird species observed or suspected to use the surrounding grasslands and agricultural fields include scrub jay, mourning dove, brown towhee, goldfinches, flycatchers, and several species of sparrow. Several raptors (birds of prey) may occasionally forage through the area, such as American kestrel, red-tailed hawk, and turkey vulture, but the low prey base limits the likelihood that the site provides an important source of prey for these species. No evidence of any bird nesting or large mammal denning activity was observed on the ball field site. The Ukiah Municipal Golf is located in northwest Ukiah. The course is located within a transition area, in which residential development on roughly quarter acre lots to the east, south and north of the course and x~4thin the city limits gives way to large undeveloped, steeply-sloped, wooded land in the western hills above the golf course. The parcel includes the golf course, a club house and the wooded hillside west of the golf course which includes an existing 25-foot diameter, welded steel water storage tank with a 100,000 gallon capacity and a 150-foot diameter, concrete storage tank with a 2.3 mg capacity. Thc golf course tank sites are located on wooded hillsides dominated by mixed oak woodland and grassland. Dominant tree species include: interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), black oak (Q. kelloggii), and madrone (Arbutus menziesii). Other tree species found in the woodland include: California bay (Umbellularia californica), coast live oak (Q. agrifolia), and a few valley oak (Q. lobata). Large manzanita (Manzanita sp.) and toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia) shrubs are scattered through the understory of the woodland, together with a cover of native and non-native grasses and forbs. Herbaceous species in the understory of the woodland include: rattlesnake ~ass (Briza minor), purple needle grass (Nassella sp.), mule's ears (Wyethia sp.), California poppy (Eschxcholzia californica), and iris (Iris sp.). Several stands of the highly invasive non-native French broom (Genista monspessulana) are spreading through thc woodland and fringe of access roads through the hillside near the site. The woodlands at the golf course sites provide !bt greater wildlife habitat values than thc softball field site. They arc bordered by undeveloped lands to thc west. provide protective covcr and nesting opportunities for birds and small mammals, and thc acorns and other sccd crops provide an important source of food in thc later SUllllllcr alld t~dl. Species associated with thc x~'oodlands include mule deer, grey squirrel, dccr mouse. x~'ild turkey, jays. woodpeckers, warblers, alligator lizard? cnsatina, ncxvts, gopher snake, and western rattle snake. Thc trees could provide nesting habitat tbr several species of rapiers, but no evidence of any bird nesting or large mammal denning activity was observed during thc field reconnaissance. k. ()lher aRencies whose al, proval is or may be required {e.g., permits, financin~ approval, or pa ['t icipalion a~rec[ncnl): l)cl>artmcnt of }tcalth 5crv~ccs l)ivi5ioll Ot' l)rinking Water and tSlvironmcnlal Management I. Incorporation by Reference: Under direction of thc project sponsors, several technical studies and supplemental evaluations wcrc prepared m supl~orl of thc proposed p~t¥cct and arc incorporated into thc Initial Stud,,' by reference A Cultural Resources Evaluation of the City of Ukiah Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Project, Ukiah, Mendocino County, California submitted by Katherine Flynn, Archaeological Resource Service, December 2003. Preliminary Report Geotechnical Investigation, City of Ukiah Water System Improvements. I Jkiah, California, November 1, 2002 prepared by Miller Pacific Engineering Group City of Ukiah Water System Improvements Biological Resource Assessment, Jim Martin, ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATIVE, December 2002, Updated in August 2003. m. Summary of Findings: Potentially significant impacts were identified in the following areas: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils and noise. Aesthetics. Potential impacts will result from the construction of a 120-foot diameter water tank and a 39- foot diameter water tank at the Municipal Golf Course, from 38,850 cubic yards of grading for tank construction, from a 10,850 cubic yard and a 28,000 cubic yard fill slope to dispose of the excess spoils on-site, and from tree and vegetation removal for these activities. Additional potential impacts will result at the water treatment plant/softball field site from the addition of a 1.5 million gallon water tank. Mitigation measures must be implemented to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level, including thc retention of existing vegetation outside of the project area, thc addition of native trees for visual screening, thc replanting of native vegetation along cut and 1511 slopes, the use of earth-tones if the tank at thc softball field is made of metal and thc provision of landscaping between Highway 101 and the proposed tank. Air Quality. Potential impacts are a result of standard incremental emissions increases from construction activity within an area that fails to meet the State 24-hour PM-10 standard. Standard mitigation measures to reduce construction-related emissions, such as watering exposed soil to control dust and stabilizing inactive construction areas can reduce potential air quality impacts to less than significant levels. Biological Resources. In order to avoid any potential impact to raptors and their nests from construction activity, a pre-construction nesting survey must be conducted in grading and conslruction is initiated during thc months of April through August. Thc ephemeral drainagcways in thc vicinity of thc golf course tanks sites must bc avoided or al0proval must be obtained from the Army Corps, California Department of Fish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board. In order to mitigate potential impacts from site grading and thc removal of 187 trees greater than 4 inchcs in diameter, a tree protcction plan which includes thc protection oftrccs to bc retained, rc-cstablishmcnt of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and a program for replanting trees x~'ith trunk diameters greater than 12 inches shall bc prepared. Cultural resources :\n archaeological sur|~cc su~'cv of thc x~'alcr trcatmcat site ~d ~c propos~ tm~k silos did not cncounlcr any surt~cc evidence of archaeological rcsourccs. As thc sites arc moderately sensitive. there is a potential ctdmral resources to be discovered during actual pmicct construction. Mitigation measures have b~n included requiring x~'ork to be temporarily halted in thc event mchac~logical material ~s uncovered and fi~r arch:~col ~gical monitoring to occur if discovered material could be disturbed bx' prs!jcct (}coloqk_'/_~(~i!~..D~c most s~gni ficant geologic hazards at thc project site arc strong seismic ground shaking. slope stability and erosion. Standard mitigation measures include adhering to thc seismic design fact~s t¥om thc geot¢chnical invc.stigation, stabili/.ation or repair of any slides that intercept thc new tank .qitcs or 7 cut slopes behind them, preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and on-going geotechnical engineer review of plans and grading, compaction and foundation excavation. Noise. The construction of a 1.5 mg concrete water tank at the golf course site could lead to a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels from concrete trucks traveling from the concrete plant to the golf course to begin concrete pours at 6:00 a.m.. While such a temporary impact can be viewed as less than significant, as a further mitigation measure it is recommended that the Director of Public Works require a construction management plan for the concrete pour, a construction u'affic management plan, and dislxibute early morning construction traffic onto different streets and neighborhoods to the maximum degree feasible. The environmental review did not find any mitigation measures necessary in the following categories: agricultural resources, land use and planning, hydrology/water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, utilities and service systems and mandatory findings of significance. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. · Aesthetics · Biological Resources [] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [] Mineral Resources [] Public Services [] Utilities/Service Systems [] Agricultural Resources · Cultural Resources [] Hydrology/Water Quality · Noise [] Recreation [] Mandatory Findings of Significance · Air Quality · Geology/Soils [] Land Use/Planning [] Population/Housing [] Transportation/Traffic Preparation: The City of Ukiah has had this Initial Study prepared. Interested persons may obtain a copy of this document at the City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400. 6. PROJECT SPONSOR'S INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES As project sponsor, I (undersigned) have reviewed the Imtial Study for the City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project and have particularly reviewed the mitigation measures and monitoring programs identified herein. I accept the findings of the/Jmitial Study, including recommended mitigation measures, and hereby agree to modi~l~wrol~osed pro'3~ design to include and incorporate all mitigation measures and monitoring programs ' S/~a'tur ' '~ /'~ Date Printed Name/ Determination: Based on the attached Initial Study and without a public hearing, it is my judgment that: :¢"'"' I lqnd that although the propo/~cd project could have a sigt~ificant effect on thc environment, flacrc xssll not be ~..ig~qcmjt effect i~U~ehsc because revisions in thc prqicct have bccn made by or agreed to by thc pr~j~t [~ncnt. A ~(¢TEI) NI~(i:XT1VE I)}5CL:XRATION will bc prepared. 7. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS' a. b. d. A brief explanation is provided for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer is explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). All answers take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. The checklist answers indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more Potentially Significant Impact entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from Potentially Significant Impact to a Less Than Significant Impact. Thc mitigation measures are described and a brief explanation given of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. e. The explanation of each issue identifies: 1) the significance criteria or threshold; if an3', used to evaluate each question; and 2) the mitigation measure identified, if an3', to reduce the impact to less than significant. 10 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [] · b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not [] · limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or [] · quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which [] [] would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? [] [] [] [] [] [] [] · a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The City of Ukiah 1995 General Plan recognizes the high level of scenic beauty of Ukiah's western hills. It credits the tree-studded hillsides with helping to shape the rural setting of the city and playing a significant role in the quality of life. The Ukiah General Plan recognizes that preserving the hills on the west side of the Ukiah Valley will provide enviromnental benefits to the Valley. The hillsides are recognized as an aesthetic and visual resource fundamental to the Ukiah residents, to the tourist industry and for their economic value. The General Plan includes the following language intended to protect these hillsides: Goal OC-10: Conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills. Policy OC-10.2 Roads and structures shall be designed and sited to conserve or avoid damage to thc natural hillside resources where feasible. Implementation Measure OC-10.2(b)' Site and design development to minimize impacts on vicws from thc Valley. Implementation Measnres OC-I 0.2(c): Clearings for roads, buildings, and fire protection zones shall be sited in the least visible and ecologically damaging locations possible and screened with x'¢gctation where feasible. Goal OC-11. Conserve cnaslal oak woodlands in the hills. 'l'hc Gcncral Plan also includes thc folloxving language rclated to protcction of sccnic arcas: Goal (;!'-24' Conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the Ilkiah Valley. (;oal (;P-25' Ensure aesthetic qualities in the design and construction of the community. (;(}al (;P-26' Require that landscaping be a significant component of development and redeveh) pment. 11 Goal GP-27: Maintain scenic viewsheds of the Valley. This project will result in excavation in the western hillsides above the Municipal Golf Course for construction of a 120-foot diameter and a 39-foot diameter water tank. A 1:1 cut slope will be developed above the smaller tank and a series of 10-foot benches cut behind the larger tank. A total of 38,000 cubic yard of earth will be excavated for the larger tank and 850 cubic yards for the smaller tank. A 28,000 cubic yards spoils fill area will be mounded into an area along the existing access road. This fill area will be about 280 feet long and extend up the hill about 160 feet and have a maximum height above existing grade of about 20 feet. The fill area will begin at an elevation of 780 feet above mean sea level and reach a maximum elevation of approximately 830 feet. Most of the proposed fill area is void of vegetation, with most vegetation and trees located toward the edge of the proposed fill area. As the hillside behind the fill area continues to rise to more than 1000 feet in elevation, the fill mound will be blended into its hillside backdrop and, with appropriate revegetation, after completion will not be visually distinguishable from off-site vantage points against the adjacent hillside topography. This fill area is also located at a relatively low elevation on the hillside, toward the golf course level. The remaimng amount, approximately 10,850 cubic yards, will be backfilled behind the concrete tank on the upslope side after completion of the tank. Again, the backfilled area can be revegetated both to control erosion and to restore a more natural looking hillside and will not be visually apparent from off- site vantage points. The area proposed for the two additional tanks has already been disturbed through the construction of two existing water tanks. The existing tanks are well-screened from off-site vantage points because they are located relatively low in elevation on the hillside and because of existing vegetation in front of the tanks. The proposed tanks would similarly be shielded from off-site visibility because of the existing vegetation and the elevation of the tanks. The amount of disturbance will be reduced by constructing the 1.5 mg tank of concrete, rather than metal, and then backfilling behind the tank. Overall impacts to the hillside are less than significant in light of proposed development being concentrated within thc lower portions of thc hillside, with a considerable area of upper hillside land being preserved intact. Thc following mitigation measures should bc included x~'ith this project in order to further mitigate impacts to the hillside scenic vista to less than significant levels: · Existing vegetation outside of thc area of prt\jcct grading, filling and construction shall be protected and retained to protect views to the site. · Finished grading lk)r 1511 areas shall, as feasible, attempt to leave areas m a natural looking hillside condition. · A landscape plan shall bc prepared, subject to Planning Dcpamncnt review and approval, which mcludcs thc folloxving: I) thc addition ofnativc trees to fill-in any views to thc tanks from off- site vantage points: and 2.) thc provision of native vegetation, to thc maximum extent possiblc, along cut and fill slopes to provide a natural-looking hillside environment. · Any metal tanks shall bc carlhtonc in color and blend into thc surrounding hillside cnvironmcnt. · Mitigation measures included in Section IV.. Biology, shall be incorporated into thc prQjcct design in order to also mitigate potential aesthetic impacts related to loss of vegetation and tree protection. 12 Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The Ukiah General Plan also recognizes the scenic qualities along Highway 101. General Plan Goal OC- 28 states to "visually enhance the Highway 101 corridor through the planning area" and Policy OC-28.1 states to "upgrade the visual appearance of the comdor along Highway 101." Neither the softball field nor the water treatment plant is particularly scenic in character. Proposed improvements at the softball fields will be located approximately 300 feet east of Highway 101 and are therefore of limited visibility to passing vehicular traffic. Nevertheless, in light of the highway's scenic qualities, the following mitigation measures are recommended to soften the impacts of site development at the softball fields to less than significant levels: If the proposed water tank at the softball field is to be constructed from metal, it shall be earth- tone color to blend it into natural colors of the site. A landscape plan shall be prepared and implemented providing screen vegetation between proposed softball field improvements and Highway 101, as necessary, to soften views from the highway to proposed site improvements. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? !!. The proposed mitigation measures in subsections a and b above will also ensure that potential impacts from development at the softball field site and the golf course site will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect da), or nighttime views in the area? This project will not create a substantial source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views of the area. This project will allow for the construction of a 1.5 million gallon water tank, a pump house, fuel tank and an expansion of the water treatment plant. The closest of these improvements, the 1.5 mg water storage tank, is located more than 350 feet from highway 101. None of these improvements will have any exterior lighting that would create substantial light or glare or adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. This projcct will also involve the construction of 1.5 mg and a .3 mg water storage tanks at the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. There will not be any exterior lighting associated with the tanks which would crcatc substantial light or glare or adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Potentialh' Significan! i'otcmiallv llnless 1 ~.ss Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact lncorporalcd Impact I m pat't A(;RICUI,TIIR,\I. RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant cnvironmcnlal effects. Icad agencies may refer to thc California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by thc California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to usc m assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would thc project: 13 a) b) c) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact [] [] [] · [] [] [] · [] [] [] · Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? Neither the existing water treatment plant site, the adjacent softball fields nor the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course are designated as prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of state, vide importance on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. This project will therefore not convert any such designated areas to a non-agricultural use. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricuhura/ use, or a Williamson Act contract? This project will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use of a Williamson Act contract. The existing water treatment plant, the adjacent softball riel& and the Municipal Golf Course are all zoned Public Facilities rather than for agricultural use. None of these sites are within a Williamson Act contract. Involve other changes in ire existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-a~gricu/tura/ use? This prqicct will not involve other changes in thc existing environment, which could result in thc conversion of farnlland to non-agricultural use. This project will be limited to improvements ncccssar',' to upgrade thc operation of an existing xvatcr treatment system, including its storage capacity. These improvements arc not of a nature to affect other agricuhural or farmland areas. Thc proposed tank and Facility improvements at thc xvatcr treatment plant and softball fields will not induce any surrounding land uses to convert l¥oln farmlands to non-agricuhural uses. Thc addition of two storage tanks in thc foothills above thc golf course will not result m thc conversion of any farmland to non-agricultural usc. Thc proposed ,valor treatment plant improvements will allow thc Git,, oF[ ;kiah to mcct thc peak walcr demands ~,t' its present water users and will not lead to thc conversion of farmland to non-agricultural usc X ~(~.~'1' BRt)AD~4)N(~)INrl V~'{,l~lt. ,,.4~'~hI~I'LIAII INFII^I .TT1TII~ }I~AI I)N.A}T 12 II 01 14 III. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless l,ess Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the [] · applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute [] · substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any [] · criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant [~ [] concentrations ? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ~ [] of people? [] [] · [] [] · No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air qualio, plan? The City of Ukiah is located in the fiat and narrow Ukiah Valley. The mountains to the west and east sides of the valley restrict the horizontal east-west movement of pollutants. The combined effects of moderate winds, clear skies, frequent atmospheric inversions that restrict vertical dilution and a terrain that restricts horizontal dilution result in a relatively high potential for air pollution. While thc potential is high, thc actual pollutant levels are relatively low due to the lack ofup~4nd sources and the rclativclv low level of development in the local air basin. Air quality in Ukiah meets all federal and state air standards x~5th thc exception of thc State 24-hour PM-10 standard. This standard was exceeded on 3 days in 1990.2 days in 1991.0 days in 1992, 2 days in 1993 and 1 day in 1994. It has not been exceeded since 1()')4. Sources of PM- 10 include field burning, dust from unpaved road and grading operations, combustion and automobiles. 54 of thc 58 counties in California arc dcsignatcd non-attainment for PM-10, \\]lic}l lnG[InS that most of thc California air basins exceed thc permitted 24- hour conccntration. Thc State .Air Resources Board (ARB) docs not require an Attainment Plan for jurisdictions that violate the PM- 1() standard As part of thc regional air basin, thc project s~tc would bca very minor contributor, although an incremental contributor, to thc quality of thc basin. Construction activity associated with thc proposed project would temporarily generate emissions of regional criteria pollutants during grading and construction pcriods for thc ncxv trcatmcnt building and storage tanks. Thc clnissions produced construction would bc considered as short-term and not si~nil}cant in nature because thcv would bc limited in duration to thc construclion period and would va~' depending upon the construction activity. 15 c) To reduce construction-related emissions related to the generation of PM-10 to less than significant levels, the following specific controls should be implemented as mitigation measures: · Maintain construction equipment in accordance with manufacturers' specifications. · Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. · All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. · All construction debris, including dirt and mud, shall be promptly cleaned and cleared from all roadways. · All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. · Trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. · Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. · Hydroseed or apply soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas prior to project completion. · To the extent feasible, construction equipment shall be left idling for not more than 10 minutes. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? This project will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an e,,dsting or project air quality violation. The upgrading of any existing water treatment facility does not result in the release of any pollutants or materials into the air which violate air quality standards or affect existing or projected air quality violations. Short-term construction-related impacts could result during the project construction. Mitigation measures to reduce construction-related impacts to less than significant levels are included in Section IIIa. above. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? This project will not result in a cumulatively considcrablc net increase of any criteria pollutant for which thc project r%ion is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Shorl-tcrm construclion-rclatcd impacls could result during thc project construction. Mitigation measures to reduce construction-related impacts to less than significant levels arc included in Section II la. above This project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Thc operation o£ ~he exislin5 water lrcalmen~ facililv does not result in thc production of substantial pollutant concentrations, nor would thc proposed treatment plant improvcmcnts Icad to substantial pollutant concentrations. Thc process of treating xvatcr to meet health standards and suitable taste and odor lcvcls 16 does not generate airborne pollutants. Moreover, the location of this site is in a low-intensity, agricultural area east of Highway 101 and is not immediately proximate to any sensitive receptors such as residential areas. The addition of three water storage tanks, one at the softball fields by the water treatment plant and two at the Municipal Golf Course, will not result in the generation of any substantial pollutant concentrations. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? This project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The water treatment process is designed to ensure that potable drinking water is provided in terms of both health/safety and in quality/taste. (Water treatment is a different situation than wastewater treatment.) The proposed expansion to the treatment plant will not result in the creation of any objectionable odors. No odors will be generated through the construction of three water storage tanks---one at the softball fields and two at the golf course. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser¥ice? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with thc movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. {or impede the use of native wildlife nurser,,' sites'! c) Contlic! with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a trcc prcscrx'atlon policy or ordinance? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] [] [] · 17 f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] [] [] · Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Biological resources associated with the project sites were identified through a review of available background information and a field reconnaissance survey. Available documentation was reviewed to provide information on general resources in the Ukiah area, presence of sensitive natural communities, and the distribution and habitat requirements of special-status species which have been recorded from or are suspected to occur in the project vicinity. A field reconnaissance survey was conducted by James Martin, a biologist and principal of Environmental Collaborative, on December 22, 2002 to determine the vegetation and wildlife resources, presence of any sensitive natural communities, potential for jurisdictional wetlands, and suitability of the sites to support populations of special-status species. Supplemental surveys were conducted by Jane Valerius on 23 May and 1 August 2003 to determine presence or absence of any special-status plant species from the golf course sites. The following provides a summary of the biological and wetland resources on the sites. and an assessment of the significance of the potential impacts of project implementation. Special-status species are plants and animals that are legally protected under the state and/or federal Endangered Species Acts~ or other regulations, as well as other species that are considered rare enough by the scientific community and trustee agencies to warrant special consideration, particularly with regard to protection of isolated populations, nesting or denning locations, communal roosts and' other essential habitat. Species with legal protection under the Endangered Species Acts often represent major constraints to development, particularly when they are wide ranging or highly sensitive to habitat disturbance and where proposed development would result in a "take''2 of these species. Records maintained by thc California Natural Diversity Data Basc (CNDDB) of thc CDFG (2002) · and other intbrmation sources indicate that several special-status plant and animal species have bccn reported from or arc suspected to occur in thc Ukiah vicinity. No occurrences from thc CNDDI3 records actually extend over the proposed tank locations. Known occurrcnccs in thc vicinity include I Thc federal t:~ndagcrcd Species Ac! (t:}SA) of 1973 declares lhat all federal dcpa~tmcnls and agencies shall ulili>'c l}~cir aulhorily to conserve endangered and lhrcalcncd plan! and animal species. The Califon~ia }!ndangcrcd l ('t!,SA) (~1' 19:44 pa'allcls Irc p~licicx ~I' I"ISA and pc~lains ti) native £?alif~rnia species. 2 "'1 akc" as dcfincd by fl~c I:tSA ~cans "Io harass, ha~n, |)ursuc, hunt, shoot, wound, k~ll, t~ ap, captu~'c ()r collect" ~ ~}~catcncd or cndagcrcd si)coles "1 lan~" is fuilhc~ dclh~cd by O~c [JSI:WS to include thc killing or' harming of wi ld]il~' duc Io significant obstruclit~n ~f csscnlial bchavi(~r patlcn~s (i.e., breeding, tkcding, or sheltering) ~rough signilicai~l h~ibilat modification or dcgradalion. 'l't~c C?IDI:G also considers thc loss of lislcd species habital as lake, al~ough Iris policy lacks slal/ltOlX' aulh~rilv and case law suppo~l un(let thc CESA 18 several reported occurrences of foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) along the Russian River and tributary streams, an occurrence of northwestern pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata marmorata) extends along the Russian River corridor just northeast of the ballfield site, and a general occurrence of Burke's goldfields (Lasthenia burkeO encompasses most of the Ukiah area. Foothill yello,v legged frog, which is a federal Species of Concern and a CDFG Species of Special Concern, is restricted to perennial and intermitted streams not found on any of the sites. North,~, .::stcl-?, pond turtle is also a CDFG Species of Special Concern and is generally restricted to riparian corridors and marshes, and suitable habitat for this species is absent on the sites. The occurrence of Burke's goldfields, a state and federally listed endangered species, was reported in 1986 from the vicinity of Ukiah and the Russian River and has not been found in subsequent survey efforts. Based on conditions encountered during the December 2002 field reconnaissance, past disturbance has eliminated the potential for occurrence of Burke's goldfields and other special-status plant species from the ballfield site. However, it was determined that there was a potential for one or more special-status plant species to occur in the relatively undisturbed woodland in the vicimty of the golf course sites. These include: the State-threatened north coast semaphore grass (Pleuropogon hooverianus), Mendocino bush mallow (Malacothamnus mendocinensis) which is presumed to be extinct but was last observed in 1939 from the Ukiah vicinity, and Colusa layia (Layia septenrionalis), among others. Detailed surveys are typically required during the spring and early summer months when most plants are in flower to conclusively determine presence or absence from an area, unless the species has conspicuous characteristics year-round. Supplemental sun, cys were conducted in May and early August 2003 which confirmed absence of any special-status plant species in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites. No impacts on special-status plant species are anticipated due to the absence of any populations in the vicini~ of proposed improvements. No evidence of active raptor nests was observed in the vicinity of any of the sites, but there is a possibili~, that new nests could be established in the future. Raptors and their nests are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Fish and Game Code of California. Essential habitat for special-status animal species is absent from the sites and no significant impacts are anticipated. One or more bird species of concern may occasionally fly over the sites, but suitable nesting habitat and important foraging habitat is absent from the softball field site and no significant impacts would occur as a result of thc project. No evidence of any rapier nests was observed in the woodlands at the golf course sites, but there is a possibility that new nests could be established in thc future before construction proceeds. Thc potential loss of activc nests could be avoided by removing trccs during thc non-nesting season or by conducting a prcconstruction survey if vegetation clearance must bc done during thc nesting season. Thc follox¥ing measures arc rccolnmcndcd to mitigate potential impacts on special-status animal species to lcss-than-signil'icant lex, ds: :\ pre-construction nesting survey shall bc conducted tbr tree nesting rapiers if grading and construction is to bc initiated during thc months of April through August. Thc surveys shall be conducted by a qualificd biologist no more than 30 days prior to imitation of grading Il' :my rapier nests arc ]bund within thc construction area after April and before August, grading and construction in thc area shall either stol) or continue only after thc nests arc protected by an adequate setback approved by a clualificd biologist, lfpcnnancnt avoidance of nests is not feasible, impacts shall be mmimi×cd by avoiding disturbances to thc birds during thc nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies that the birds have cithcr a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the juveniles from those nests are foraging independently and capable of independent survival at an earlier date. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Sensitive natural communities are absent from the sites and no adverse impacts are anticipated. As such, no mitigation is required. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Although definitions vary to some degree, wetlands are generally considered to be areas that are periodically or permanently inundated by surface or ground water, and support vegetation adapted to life in saturated soil. Wetlands are recognized as important features on a regional and national level due to their high inherent value to fish and wildlife, use as storage areas for storm and flood waters, and water recharge, filtration and purification functions. The CDFG, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California Regional Water Quality Control Board have jurisdiction over modifications to wetlands and other "waters of the United States." Jurisdiction of the Corps is established through provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material x~sthout a permit. Regional Water Quality Control Board jurisdiction is established through Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. which requires certification or waiver to control discharges in water quality. Jurisdictional authority c;f the CDFG over wetland areas is established under Sections 1601-1606 of ~he State Fish and Game Code, which pertains to activities that would disrupt the natural flow or alter the channel, bed or bank of any lake. river or stream. A preliminary wetland assessment of the sites was conducted during the field reconnaissance. No evidence of any jurisdictional wetlands, unvegetated other waters, or drainage channels were observed on the softball field site. Three cphcmcral drainagcs occur on the hillside between the two proposed water tanks at the golf course sites, but do not support an,,. wetland vegetation. These ephemeral drainages gcncrally have a width of two feet or less and a'depth of less than one foot. They would most likely be considered jurisdictional "other , " . x~ atcrs by the Corps and fall under the jurisdiction of thc CDFG. No wetlands or jurisdictional waters occur on the softball field site or would bc directly affected by thc proposed project at this location No wetlands would be directly affected at the golf course sites, but grading and construction would occur in thc vicinity of thc ephemeral drainages on thc hillside bctxvccn thc proposed new tanks. Adequate protections would be necessary to prevent inadvcrlcnt fill m these features or secondary effects of sedimentation. A Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan usin,., Best Management Pta-cruces would be required as part of thc grading pcrmit tbr thc proicct, which x~ o~ld ensure that thc potential for any down gradient sedimentation impacts arc adcquatc(v controlled Thc folloxving mcasurcs arc rccommcndcd to mitigatc potential impacts on wetland resources to lcss- than-significant lcvcls: 20 The proposed project shall avoid the ephemeral drainages in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites to the maximum extent practicable. If complete avoidance is not feasible, the proposed improvements shall be coordinated with representatives of the Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB, and any required authorization obtained prior to any modification to jurisdictional waters. Additional conditions may be required by jurisdictional agencies to minimize disturbance and provide appropriate mitigation. These include restrictions on construction activities during the low flow summer months, prohibition on placement of fill or equipment maintenance within the ephemeral drainages, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. · A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing Best Management Practices to ad&ess the potential for erosion and sedimentation. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratoryfish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Proposed improvements would have little effect on wildlife resources at the softball field site due to the extent of past disturbance. The mature trees in the vicinity of the proposed tank at the softball field should be avoided due to the limited cover in the area and the value they provide wildlife. Proposed grading to accommodate the two tanks and soil disposal at the golf course sites would require tree removal and would temporarily disrupt wildlife use of the area. An estimated 187 trees with mink diameters greater than four inches would be removed based on the preliminary grading plans for the project. Of these trees to be removed, an estimated 42 percent would be black oak, 38 percent live oak, 20 percent madrone, and less than one percent valley oak. While substantial areas of oak woodland would remain undisturbed in the surrounding area and many of the trees to be removed are relatively small in size with trunk diameters less than 10 inches, the tree removal in this area is considerable. Regeneration of woodland habitat on the graded slopes may take a considerable length of time unless a revegetation program is implemented as part of the project. Grading would also create suitable growing conditions for further establishment of French broom, which would limit habitat values unless carefully controlled. The following measures arc rccommendcd to mitigate potential impacts on wildlife habitat rcsourccs to less-than-significant levels: Mitigation IXleasure: A Tree Protection and Rcvcgctation Plan shall bc prepared by a qualified landscape architect or certified arborist, which provides for protection of trees to be retained, re- establishment of grassland ground covcr on graded slopes and replacement of trees removed as pan of thc project. Thc plan shall bc rcvicwcd and approved by thc planning dcpanmcnt prior thc issuance of any building or grading permits or any site preparation and construction activiw_ Thc following requirements and restrictions shall be incorporated into the plan: Tree removal shall bc minimized with vailcv oaks and other matm'c trees avoided to thc maximum extent practicablc. All trees shall be avoided on the softball field site. Thc mature valley oaks on thc golf course sites shall also bc avoidcd, specifically including the 32-inch diameter valley oak south of thc existing 150-foot diameter tank and thc scattered mature valley oaks at thc western fiingc of the golf course fairway just dox~qa slope from thc proposed central soil disposal arca. 21 Detailed guidelines shall be prepared to control possible damage to trees to be preserved. The location of trees to be retained within 50 feet of proposed grading shall be identified in the field through flagging or other obvious marking method prior to any grading. Temporary fencing shall be provided along the outermost edge of the dripline of each tree or group of trees to be retained in the vicinity, of grading to avoid compaction of the root zone and mechanical damage to thinks and limbs. Storage of construction equipment, materials, and stockpiled soils shall be prohibited within the tree dripline of trees to be preserved to prevent possible damage. A program shall be developed which provides for replanting of trees removed on graded slopes. Trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as feasible, for all trees with trunk diameters greater than 12 inches removed as part of the project. Suitable species which shall be used in the tree replacement shall include: valle:,.' oak (Quercus lobata), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). Replacement tree plantings shall be irrigated during the dry summer months as necessary to ensure establishment, t:,. pically for a minimum of two years. Replacement tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a minimum of five 3,'ears. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall be replaced at a 1'1 ratio on an annual basis. A program to remove French broom shall be incorporated into thc Revegetation Plan to eliminate this species and prevent its reestablishment. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent reestablishment and spread of broom The removal and monitoring program shall include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants when soils are saturated, and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April. Monitoring and routine removal shall be provided on an annual basis for a minimum of five years to prevent reestablishment. Co,Tflict with any local policies r~r ordi.atTcex .?.otecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation po/icy or ordina~,.c'c'~ Thc Gitv of Ukiah's General Plan contains a nt:::~ber of goals and policies related to thc protection of valley oaks and usc of nalivc plzmt spccics4 in ta:':d.<cat>ing. These consist of thc tblloxving policies from thc Open Space and Conscrvatior~ Element: Goal OC-IO: Conserve the natural w'oodlands environment of the area hills. Goals OC-11' Conserve coastal oak woodlands in the hills. (;oal 0('-22' Conserve and rcplenist~ vallcx ,~aks in the Valley. Iml~lementation Measure ~)( '-22. l(a)' \Vhc:'~ r:'vicwing proposals for dcvclopn~cnt, require that all valley oaks on thc pro. iect area bc idcnlificd, ar~.d ensure that all reasonable efforts have bccn Vo a) undertaken to protect the trees. Goals OC-23' Native plant landscaping shall be encouraged. Policy 0C-23: Define standards that include native plant landscaping. In general, the project would conform with the goals and policies of the City of Ukiah General Plan regarding avoidance of valley oaks and use of native species in landscaping. Required mitigation measures recommend protecting tree resources, avoiding the removal of valley oak, and replanting with valley oak and other native species would ensure compliance with the relevant goals and policies on the Ukiah General Plan. No additional mitigation is required. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The proposed project would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Commumty Conservation Plan or other approved conservation plan. No such conservation plans have been adopted encompassing the project vicinity and no impact is therefore anticipated. No mitigation is required. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of [] · a historical resource as defined in' 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of [] · an archaeological resource pursuant to' 15064.5 ? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological [5 [~ resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred [5 i5 outside of formal cemeteries? [] [] [] [] Cause a substantial adversc change in the .vi,gn(/~cance (4f a historical resource a.s' dc~fined in ' 15064.5.v Sec discussion below. eau.re a .vuh.v[anlial adverse chanj4c in Ibc .vi,tjnZ/)c~ncc ~{/'an arc/~acohwz'ca! rc.volircc pur.~'uanl lo ,%'[atutc / 3064.5'; change x~ill occur because the project x~ill no~ afI'cct known area of a site (sec also discussion bcloxv. ) 23 See discussion below. The project will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries? See discussion below. No human remains have been identified at these sites. The following discussion relates to a), b), c) and d) above. Because of the possibility of archaeological or cultural resources being located in this area, Archaeological Resource Service was retained to conduct an archaeological evaluation of the project. Their evaluation consisted of an extensive review of the literature, preparation of a cultural resource overview to determine the distribution of cultural resources in or in close proximity to the project sites, and a surface reconnaissance of all accessible parts of the project areas to locate any visible signs of potentially significant historic or prehistoric cultural deposits, features or isolated artifacts that might be adversely impacted by the proposed project. The water treatment plant and golf course properties were found to be moderately sensitive, although no previously known sites are present within close proximity to them. Although prehistoric/aboriginal resources might be found in their vicinity, the Archaeological Resource Service survey of the water treatment site and the proposed tanks sites at the golf course did not encounter any surface evidence of Native American utilization in any of the examined areas. No adverse effects are foreseen if the new expanded structure and the new reservoir at the existing facility and the two tanks in the western hillside are built as planned. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels based on the Cultural Resources Evaluation by Archaeological Resource Service: In the event that major grading or underground excavation uncovers what appears to be archaeological material, particularly within the existing treatment facility, a temporary work shutdown in that immediate area should be enforced until the discovered materials can be evaluated. · If archaeological materials are found in concentration and therefore deemed to be potentially important, formal documentation should occur before work is allowed to resume. If it appears likely that the discovcrcd material could bc further disturbed by the proposed project, subsequent activity should be performed under thc supcr¥ision of an archaeological monitor. An cxamplc of standard procedures for monitoring and spot checks as attached to thc Archaeolomcal Resource Service cultural resources evaluation should act as guidcline in thc event that potcntially important archaeological materials arc cncountcrcd VI. (;EOI,()GY AND SOIi~S. \Vould the prqjcct: Expose people or slruclurcs to porch/iai substantial adverse cf feets, including thc risk of Ir)ss. in)ur).', or death invoJvirlt.~ P~lentiallv .qi~nifican! Polenlially l'nless l~'ss l'han Sil~nifi('az~t Miligalion Sil~nifican! lmpacl lncorporaled Impac! ! m pac! 24 b) c) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact NO Impact [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on [] · the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [] · iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? [] · iv) Landslides? [] · Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? [] · Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or [] · that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B [] C ~ · of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ~ ~ ~ · septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk o floss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a b~own earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist.for the area or based on other substantial evidence ora known fault; ii) strong seismic ground shaking; ilo seismic-related gro~nd_failure, including liquefaction: or ix,.) lan&tides ? A preliminary rcport of thc geotechnical investigation of thc site and proposed prOject was completed by Miller Pacific Engineering Group. The purpose of their work was to conduct a gcotcchnical investigation, evaluate geologic hazards, identit\' gcotechnical constraints and develop recommendations to aid in thc design and construction of thc water system improvcracnts. Their investigation included thc following: a site reconnaissance to obscrx'c existing conditions, subsurfacc exploration utilizing soil borings at the three tank sites and treatment plant site conducted on October 1 and 2. 2002, laboratory testing to evaluate engineering properties, a description of thc geologic and site conditions, a determination of thc depth to competent foundation material, an assessment of thc geologic hazards and seismic design criteria, recommended foundation type and design criteria. recommendations for site grading, and a geologic investigation report. Miller Pacific indicated that pursuant to thc Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act ot' 197'=. thc California Geological Survey produccd !:24.000 maps showing all known active faults and delineating boundaries to either side of these faults called "special study/.ones." Within these zones, thc act 25 requires that a fault investigation be untaken to ensure that structures for human habitation are not located on an active fault trace. The Miller Pacific review of the Special Studies maps and their aerial photography interpretation indicate that although the Maacama Fault trace runs closely to the east of the water treatment site, active faulting is not present through any of the three tank sites. For that reason, the potential for surface fault rupture through the property is low and, therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary related to earthquake faults. Miller Pacific further concluded that the sites will experience seismic ground shaking similar to other areas in the seismically active California Coast region. Earthquakes along active faults in the region could produce moderate to strong shaking at the treatment plant and storage tank sites. The intensity of ground shaking will depend upon the characteristics of the causative fault, the distance from the fault, the earthquake magnitude, duration and site-specific geologic conditions. The potential for strong seismic shaking at the sites is high, particularly from the Maacama fault. Strong seismic shaking may result in adverse impacts such as potential damage to structures and related improvements. Ground shaking could lead to slope failures affecting the two proposed hillside tanks. Miller Pacific recommended the following mitigation measures relative to this potential impact: · Site development shall comply with the seismic design factors recommendations of Section V. of the Miller Pacific Geotechnical Investigation dated November 1, 2002. · All improvements and structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic provisions of the most-recent version of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the American Water Works Association (AWWA). · The design base shear of the new construction shall comply with the seismic coefficients and site values included in Table C of the Miller Pacific report, which are based on interpreted subsurface conditions at the site and the closest fault type and distance to the site. · The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications prior to the commencement of construction to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Miller Pacific indicated that landsliding is most extensive above thc southern hillside tank. They identified numerous landslides during their field reconnaissance. However, the cut slopes behind the existing concrete tank arc performing well and none of the slides appear to have developed into deeper bedrock fractures, nor affected the structure or stability of the tank. One landslide was identified at the northern tank site, however, they do not anticipate that thc slide will intercept the new tank or new cut slopo and should not require mitigation. Miller Pacific recommended thc tbllowing slope stabilitx mitigation measures at thc southern hillside tank silo: Slope stability mitigation options, such as slabilizatlon or repair of anx' slides that intercept thc ncxv tank sites or cut slopes behind thc tanks, shall bc implemented, suhicct to gcot~hnical engineer approval. (I f any unidentified zones of instability arc encountered during grading operations al thc no,hem hillside tank site, they shall be stabilized or repaired. Benches should be constructed in the cut slopes at thc soil/rock transition that arc wide cnough to allow equipment to clear any debris that sloughs ~d accumulates on them. The upper five fcct at thc top of cut slopes should bc no sleeper than 2:1 and rounded lo conform to ~c cxisling terrain. Benches shall be regularly maintained to keep them clear of debris 26 · A concrete lined v-ditch shall be provided across the top of cut slopes. All cut slopes shall be revegetated. These mitigation measures are consistent with City of Ukiah General Plan Policy SF-2.2: "Pr,'~tcct people and property from landslide danger." Miller Pacific has completed a geotechnical evaluation of this project consistent with General Plan Implementation Measure SF-2.2(a.) Miller Pacific further concluded that ground shaking could induce settlement of loose granular soils above the water table. Exposed bedrock conditions are anticipated at foundation levels for the hillside tank sites. Therefore, the potential for structural damage from seismic induced settlement is low at these sites. Loose granular soils exist in the upper ten feet of the treatment plant site. These soils may experience settlement during seismic events, therefore, mitigation to reduce the potential for structural damage to the tank will be required. No mitigation measures related to seismic induced ground settlement are required for the hillside tanks. The following mitigation measures are required to mitigate potential impacts for the treatment plant and softball field sites: The treatment plant shall be supported on a shallow foundation system that bears on properly compacted fill. The depth of over excavation and recompaction should be at least 10 feet. The upper ten feet of soils should be removed and recompacted in the area beneath the tank and pump s!ation at the softball field site prior to foundation construction. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Severe erosion can occur on slopes underlain by soil and soft, weathered, fractured bedrock. The potential for such erosion is greatly increased where the slope is subjected to concentrated runoffby outfall from drainage facilities onto areas where vegetation is removed by construction activities. There is some potential for accelerated erosion in soil deposits at the top of the cut slope behind the proposed hillside tanks. The following mitigations measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to erosion to less than significant levels: The required Stormwatcr Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified enginccr and shall include thc usc of straw waddles and sediment traps during and immediately after site grading and erosion control blankets or other standard erosion control practices to prevent damage from erosion caused by slope runoff. Erosion from increased nmoff from hardscape and other site improvements shall be mitigated by conveying discharges from tl~c water tank. roads and other site improvements into a silo drainage system. l~iqucfaction roi'ers It) the sudden, tcmp()ra~_x' loss of soil shear during strong groundshaking. l_lquct~ction-rclatcd phenomena ~ncludc liquefaction-reduced settlement, flow fiulurc and lateral spreading. These phenomena can occur where there arc saturated, loose, granular (non-claycy) deposits Subsurface conditions at thc hillside tank sites did not indicate thc presence of such deposits. For fl~c treatment plant site. Miller Pacific's prcliminaU evaluation of liquefaction potential indicates liquctk~ction may occur during a 0.67 sc~smic event on thc nearby Maacama Fault. 27 Miller Pacific concluded that no mitigation measures related to liquefaction arc necessary at thc hillside tank sites. The following mitigation measure is necessary to reduce potential impacts at the treatment plant site to less than significant levels: Treatment Plant construction shall incorporate the detailed recommendations for liquefaction remediation Miller Pacific Engineer Group develops in their final geotechnical report. Plant construction shall include a soil modification technique, such as compaction grouting or stone columns to densify the loose granular layer below the water table, or other appropriate remediation as determined necessary by the project geotechnical engineer. Miller Pacific determined that settlement caused by compression of loose soils at the main treatment plant site will result in the gradual lowering of the elevation of new structures and improvements. Differential settlement could also cause damage to buildings, tanks and pipelines. In order to mitigate this impact to less than significant levels, the following mitigation measures were recommended: · In order to mitigate the potential for damage due to differential settlement, the treatment building shall be constructed with either the use of shallow footings combined with over excavation and recompaction of soils within the new building footprint, or, the use of drilled pier foundations excavated into a uniformly firm soil strata. · The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications when they near completion to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Expansive soil conditions occur when clay particles interact with water, causing volume changes in the clay with a resultant reduction in strength. The clayey soils swell when saturated and shrink when with the resulting physical changes capable of damaging lightly loaded foundations, flatwork and pavement. Expansive soils problc~ns generally decrease in magnitude with increased confinement pressure at depth. The Miller Pacific report concluded that their observations indicate that expansive soils arc not present at any of thc proposed tank sites. As such. there is no substantial risk to life or property from this project and no mitigation is required. ~!.~',J~icq~alc/y xWV~orlinjj thc u.vc of sc?tt'c tanks or allcrnalivc wasle water art' no! ~v~ilab]e.fi : ibc dis?r~sa! of wa.vic water? No septic tanks or a]tcrnalix'e waste water disposal systems arc proposed as part of this project. As st~c}~, no impact or mitigation measures arc ncccssap,'. 28 Potentially Sisnificant Potentially I ~nless l,css Than Significant Mitigation Signifi..~mt Impact Incorporated Impact VII. HAZARDS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency rcsponsc plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Exposc pcoplc or structures to a significm~t risk of loss, injuo' or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands arc adjacent to urbanized areas or xvhcrc residences arc intermixed with wildlands? [_] · [] · [] · [] · [] · !i · Impact Create a x~',g~(/icat~! /~azar~] to lik' p~ih/ic or t/7~' c.,~x'~ronmct~l t/Tro~i.gh l]~e r(~t~t' Ira~?.s'/~orl. z~xc. ~r dixpoxal o./'/~azardot~x malcrt~-J/x ? q'his prqjcct will not result in a significant hazard to thc public or to thc cnviromncnt through thc routine transport, usc or disposal of hazardous materials. Ncithcr thc proposed addition ~o thc treatment plant to allow for thc ~nstallation of two additional modules nor thc construction of three additional water storagc tanks will require thc usc of ha;,.ardous materials. As such, there will bc no impact rclalcd to hazardous material transport, usc or disposal. 29 c) e) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? The improvement of three water storage tanks and the proposed treatment plant improvements do not involve any hazardous materials which could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. As such, the proposed expanded water treatment facility will not create a reasonably foreseeable upset accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile o fan existing or proposed school? This project will not emit any hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing school. No hazardous materials will be located at the tanks sites at the golf course. There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the water treatment plant. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Neither the softball field/treatment plant site nor the golf course is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and therefore would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ~4'here such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of apublic airport orpublic use airport, would the project resuh in a safe~, hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Both the golf course and the water treatment plant are located slightly less than two miles away from the northern boundary of the Ukiah Municipal Airport, a public airport. However, neither the proposed water treatment plant improvements nor the three water storage tanks would result in any safe~ hazard for people or residing in the project area. No hazards arc associated with water storage tanks. This project is consistent with thc Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan, adopted 1996. For a project located within the vicinity ()fa private airstriP, would the £roj'ect result in a sq~,ty hazard for pcople residing or working in the project area? This project is not located within thc vicinity of a private airstrip and would thcrcforc not rcsult in any safety hazard related to this issue for pooplc residing or working in thc project area. Impair implcmcntation (for t~hvsicallv inn'rl'-crc with an ndo?tcd emcr,gcn~3' rc.~'ponse plat~ (~r emergent? CVtJCIIdlIIOn p]atl ') This project would not impair thc imt)lcmcntation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan Thc proposed improvements to thc cxisling water treatment facility cast of Itighxvay 101 in Ukiah and thc proposed addition ofm'o water stora,qc tanks at thc municipal golf course will no! have any ilnpacl related to emergency response or emergency evacuation. This pro_jeer is consistent with thc Ukiah F. mcrgcncy Plan, adopted 2(/02. 3O Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands ? This project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. The upgrading of the existing water treatment facility and the addition ,::,f i!~rcc ~.,..:~,:~ storage tanks does not pose a significant risk due to wildland fires. Any potential impact from this project related to wildland fires would be positive, as the provision of adequate water storage would provide water capacity to fight any wildland fires adjacent to the urbanized areas of the city. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through thc alteration of thc course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surt'ac¢ runoff m a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? c) Create or contribute runoff water which would cxcccd thc capacity of existing or planned stonnxvater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runolT' f) Othenvise substantially degrade xvatcr quality') g) Place housing x~ ithin a l()()-ycar tlood hazard area mapped on a t~cdcral Flood l tazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rat~' Xlap or other tlood ha/.ard delineation map? h) Place within a l(t()-vear llood hazard area structures which would impede or ~cdircct flood Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact 31 i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Le~ Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] [] · [] [] [] [] · a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? c) This project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The proposed expansion of the existing water treatment plant and the construction of three water storage tanks will not require any waste discharge or any discharge which would violate any water quality standards. No negative impacts to water quality will result from the proposed improvements. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The water used by the existing and proposed treatment facility is supplied from the Russian River and from wells. This project x~511 not increase the amount of water which the City of Ukiah is permitted from the Russian River. This project will allow for the construction of three additional water storage tanks in order to provide enhanced reliability and redundancy at the water treatment plant and for City of Ukiah residents and water users. This project will not involve any use of groundwater supplies and will therefore not have any impact upon grotmdwater recharge or upon nearby wells. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course ora stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? This project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through thc alteration of thc course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Biological resources mitigation measures also require that a stormxvatcr pollution prevention plan prcparcd by a qualified enginccr utilizing best management practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. These mitigation measures ensure that erosion impacts will be less than significant. Iht' cxlxlinX dratnc(h,c flallern of'l/lc Xile or area. it2c'h~din~ lhr(,ugh the alieralion .s'lrcatn (~r myer, or Xl~h.vlanlia[[i' t'ncreaxe the role' or amolinl of'x~irface runQff in a This prs¥cct will not substanlially alter thc existing drainage pattern of thc site or area as discussed in ilclll C. above. It will not alter thc course of a stream or river--thc project would only potentially rcquirc Ibc addition of culverts to allow tile continued seasonal flow of existing ephemeral drainagcways at tile golf course site. Thc proposed improvements will not Icad to a substantial incrcasc in runoff that would significantly affect thc rate or amoun! of surface nmoff and result in on- or off-site flooding. 32 e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. This project will not create or contribute runoff water which will exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Site runoff from the treatment plant improvements and the water tanks will be controlled through preparation of a grading and drainage plan prepared by the project civil engineer. Drainage will not flow into any areas such that it becomes tainted with any sources of pollution to create polluted runoff. The amount of runoff generated from the proposed water tanks and treatment plant expansion will not lead to an increase above the area's drainage capacity. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? This project will not result in any other conditions resulting in a substantial degradation of water quality. No other issues related to otherwise substantially degrading water quality have been identified in either the biological or geotechnical assessment conducted for this project. The project will not result in any conditions which could degrade water quality except those identified above related to site construction and new runoff and drainage patterns. Place housing within a 100-yearflood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map ? This project does not involve the creation of any housing. It will therefore not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? This project will not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard that would impede or redirect flood flows. While treatment plant improvements, including the softball field improvements, are located within the 100 year floodplain, they are located outside of the floodway. They therefore will not affect impede or redirect the flow of floodwaters. Land areas around these improvements, however, will experience flooding during 100-year storm events. City of Ukiah General Plan Goal SF-4 states to "strive for a flood-safe community" and Gcncral Plan Policy Fl-4.1' states to "avoid critical public facilities in areas subject to flooding." Implementation Measure SF-4.1 (a) further states "to the extent feasible, thc public agencies shall avoid constructing new critical facilities--public safety, public health, water and sewer treatment facilities--within areas subject to one hundred 5,'car floods. It is recognized that certain facilities must be sited to meet other development or rcgulatory criteria, and as such arc not precluded from building within a flood plain il' thc flood-prone location is a feasible site." Because thc existing water treatment plant is located within thc 100-vcar flood plain, any plant expansion, such as this project, must therefore be sited in thc same location and will also be within thc 100-year flood plain. Because the facility draws its water from thc Russian River, it must bc located proximate to thc river and thereby is sited within thc 100-year floodplain. Rccogni/mg these factors, thc proposed expansion at thc treatment plant site is consistent with language related to flood protection. ]::x?oxe ?co[~le or xtruclurcx ~o a .¥,:4nijic~w,t rt.¥k q['loxx, ml'ury or dcoth inuoh, mT, floodm,g. ~nciudmgfloodin,~ o. fax a rt'xldl of the?i~i;,ure o./'a levee or dam? h) This project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. According to Miller Pacific Engineering Group, the treatment plant site elevation is at approximately 602 feet, while the FEMA flood insurance rate maps for the area indicate the site is within the 100-year flood zone with a base flood elevation of between 601 and 599 feet. New construction will therefore be required to comply xvith FEMA requirements, related to raising habitable space above 100-year floodplain levels. With this requirement, the risk of loss, injury or death from flooding is less than significant. j.) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? This project does not place any people or structures at risk due to tsunami or mudflow. Seiches and tsunamis are short duration earthquake-generated water waves in large, enclosed bodies of water and the open ocean, respectively. The extent and severity of a seiche would be dependent upon the ground motion and the fault offset from nearby active faults. Neither the water treatment plant nor the golf course property is located adjacent to the ocean or near significant bodies of water. The potential hazards by seiche or tsunami are therefore not significant. The Miller Pacific Geotechnical investigation for the treatment plant expansion and the proposed water tanks did not identify any conditions which would create a hazard from mudflow, therefore, no mitigation is required. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact a) Physically divide an established community? [5 L~ ~ · b) Conflict x~4th any applicable land use plan, policy, or [] [] · [] regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? NO Impact c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ,:; l>hysicat{v divide an established comnm~t'tv? This project will not physically divide an established community. Thc proposed improvements to thc x~'atcr treatment plant and thc proposed addition of two water storage tanks at the Municipal Golf ('ourse will not have any physical impacts off the site and will not physically divide an established community pla~L ?~dic3', or re,gtc/alien ~/'~:~ a,genc? with_/'urisdicliot~ over thc .general plo,..vwcific/;hm, local c'o~:xtal program, or ]'}lis pr°Jeer xvill n()t toni]ici \vilh land usc plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over thc project adopted for thc pt,pose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. 34 Section IV., Biological Resources, includes mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to a less than significant level. The project design has been amended to avoid the ephemeral drainages at the golf course site. No activity could occur which would affect the ephemeral drainage without advancc authorization from representatives of the Army Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This project is consistent with the City of Ukiah General Plan adopted December 1995 by the Ukiah City Council. Consistency with some general plan goals, policies and implementation measures are discussed throughout initial study sections. This overall project is specifically consistent with the following general plan language: 3.02 Overall General Plan/Growth Management goals and policies 3.02.01 Sound, stable community-based economy We envision a creative, mixed economy with both large and small employers, jobs that attract and satisfy our children and citizens, and businesses that retain and create new dollars within the community. We envision development that provides a mix of housing ~pes and prices. We envision that development of adequate water, sewer and utility resources to support the future of our valley... (General Plan page 3.) Goals CF-I' Maintain a safe and adequate water system to meet the needs of existing and proj ected development. Implementation Measure CF-I.I(b): Determine water needs and demands for the end of the short-term, during the intermediate-term, and for the long-term planning period. Policy CF-1.2: Protect and expand existing sources for water storage. c.) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communiO, conservation plan? This project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural conserxation plan. No such conservation plans have been adopted encompassing the project vicinity and no impact is therefore anticipated. MINERAl, RESOURCES. Would thc project: a) Result in thc loss of availability of a known mineral rcsourcc that would bc of value to the region and thc residents of thc state'? b) Result in thc loss of availability of a locally-m~ponant mineral rcsourcc rccovcr¥ site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land usc plan'? Potentialh' Significant Potentialh' Unless l ~.ess Than Sif/nificant Mitigation Si~onificant Impact Inc,~rpopalcd Impaci III pact x '41AI'IY BI~I)^IP4)N(~)IN(; W',)RK- (i,~.~YXlIKI^PI 1'/'4TI'IAI ~11~1)'I' IINAI I)l~^l] 12 I I ol DOt' { I Z i~ ~ i) 35 a) Result in the loss of availability o fa known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? This project will allow the construction of an additional 1.5 and a .3 million gallon water storage tank in the foothills above the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. It will also allow for the construction of a 1.5 mg water storage tank, a pump station, generator and diesel tank at the soft ball fields adjacent to the water treatment plant and for an expansion of the water treatment plant. These proposed water system improvements will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the state. No known mineral resources of such value are known to exist at these sites. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan ? XI. This project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. This project will allow for the development of additional City water storage capacity and an expanded water treatment plant. No locally-important mineral resource recovery sites are delineated at these parcels. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporaD' or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in thc project vicinity above levels existing without the project'? c) For a project located within an airport land usc plan or. where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles ora public airport or public usc airport, would thc project cxposc people residing or working m thc project area to excessive noise lcvcls? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would thc project expose people residing or working in thc project area to excessive noise levels'! Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact !i · [] · lfx?oxur¢ o./'perxot~.~' to or,generatlo~ o/'~ot.~'c lcvcl.v m cxccx.v ~{/'standards extahii.,'i:cd m thc local jTt't~cra] [)[~m ~)r t~ol.s'c ordinance, or ~qq~lt'cahl¢ .s'~a~d~.'d.v ~¢'other axencic.s' ') 36 The 1995 Ukiah General Plan identifies the significant noise sources in the city as being transportation noise from major roadways, railroad operations, industrial plants and airports. The water treatment plant is not identified as a significant generator of noise. Water storage tanks, in fact, generate no noise, nor does the operation of a water treatment plant generate any significant noise activity. Additionally, the treatment plant is not located in any area of sensitive receptors--the noise generated from vehicular traffic along nearby Highway 101 would greatly exceed any minor noise associated with operation of the treatment plant. This project will therefore not expose people to noise levels in excess of standards established in the Ukiah noise ordinance or general plans, nor generate noise levels in excess of such standards. The process of treating water to deliver potable water for residential and agricultural use does not involve processes generating excessive noise that would exceed applicable local standards. Most of the equipment related to the treatment is located within the treatment buildings and the pump station. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? This project will not expose people to excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels, nor generate excessive ground borne vibration or noise. The upgrading of the existing water treatment facili~, and the construction of three additional water tanks will not produce ground vibrations or ground borne noise. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? This project will not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity, above levels existing vdthout the project. The proposed improvements at the water treatment plant and adjacent softball fields will not generate additional noise beyond existing levels. The addition of two storage tanks at the golf course x~411 not produce any increase in ambient noise levels. A substantial temporary or periodic increase m ambient noise levels in the project viciniO, above levels existing without the project? The on-going operation of the expanded water treatment plant and its additional storage tanks will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels above present levels. Neither thc treatment plant nor xvatcr storage tanks generate any noise of a temporary or periodic nature which would raise existing levels. Thc actual construction of thc plant and tanks will result in temperaO' construction noise which will raise noise levels in thc project vicinity above existing lcvcls. This noise will include typical noiscs associated with construction activitx---noisc from hcaw equipment operation during site preparation, noise from other equipment, noise t¥om thc removal of trees and worker and vehicle noises. While construction-related noises may bca source of annoyance to surrounding sensitive receptors, because they arc tcmporaD' in nature and last for a limited duration, they arc considered to bc less than significant in impact. Nevertheless. site construction must comply with thc requirements of City of Ukiah Nlunicipal Code Section 6053 as folloxvs 37 It shall be unlawful for any person to operate any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air conditioning apparatus, or similar mechanical device in any manner so as to create any noise which would cause the noise level at the property line of any property to exceed the ambient base noise level by more than five (5) decibels between seven o'clock (7:00) p.m. and (7:00) a.m. On-site site preparation and construction at both the treatment plant/softball field sites and the golf course site would be required to comply with this regulation. While the 300,000 gallon tank will be constructed of metal, the 1.5 million gallon storage tanks will be constructed of concrete. If construction occurs during the summer months, the work would have to start early to avoid the concrete curing too quickly. This would require concrete pours to begin at 6 a.m. with the first concrete trucks traveling through residential neighborhoods to amve at the golf course prior to 6 a.m. Section 6053 of the Ukiah Municipal Code requires the following: It shall be unlawful for any person within a residential zone, or within a radius of five hundred feet (500') therefrom, to operate equipment of perform an outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures or projects or to operate any pile driver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist or any other construction t'3loe device (between the hours of seven 7:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day) in such a manner that a reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area is caused discomfort or annoyance unless beforehand a permit therefore has been duly obtained from thc Director of Public Works. Work at the site could commence prior to 7 a.m. with Director of Public Works approval. Concrete trucks would be traveling from the concrete plant to the site to begin a 6 a.m. pour. The City Engineer/Director of Public Works has recommended that they use Walnut Street when the concrete mixing trucks are full and Grove Street for the return trip. The following mitigation measure would still be recommended to reduce this substantial, but temporary, increase in ambient noise levels to less than significant levels: All site preparation work and construction activity at thc golf course site shall comply with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements restricting equipment operation between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Thc Director of Public Works may approve concrete pours at 6 a.m. subject to the following restrictions: a.) a construction management plan shall be submit!cd outlining thc full schedule for concrete work at the site; b.) a traffic management plan for access to and from the site shall bc submitted for approval; c.) selected routes shall distribute early morning construction traffic impact onto multiple streets and neighborhoods to thc maxinmm degree feasible; and d.) all other site work shall comply xk'ith Municipal Code noise:construction ordinance regulations. w2~hl~ l~'o mi]cx ora puhh'c ~tT~ot't or pub]it ~,~'c ~r?(~rl. wo~/d thc [~r(?/cc'l CXDOXe people rcxidi~7.~, or wt~rkin,ff i~ the proj'ect (~t'c,~ 1o execs.vive t~oi.s'c ]c~'c[,x''~ l?,oth thc water treatment pl~mt and thc Municipal GolI' Course arc located slightly less than txvo ,niles l?om thc Ukiah Municipal Airport. Thc proposed addition to thc water treatment plant and lhc construction of three water storage tanks will not expose people residing or working in thc projccl arc:~ to excessive noise levels. No employees will bc working at thc storage tanks at thc golf course. Thc proposed expansion to thc xvalcr treatment plant is not anticipated Io result in any increase in staffing levels at thc plant. 38 For a project within the vicinity ofa private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? This project is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip and would therefore not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels due to airport-related noise. Potentially Significant Potentially U~e~ L~ ~n Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either [] directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, [] necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the [] construction of replacement housing elsewhere? [] · [] [] [] · [] [] · Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? This project will not induce substantial population growth, either directly or indirectly. The proposed water treatment plant expansion and the proposed three water tanks do not include any direct development, such as new homes or businesses, which would lead to substantial population grov4h in the Ukiah area. As discussed in the project description, this project is being undertaken to provide additional water storage capacity as required by thc Department of Health Sen, ices in order to meet peak water demands for thc existing City of Ukiah residents and water users. In addition, the proposed water treatment plant module additions will increase the treatment plant's capacity to its design capacity and allow for repair and maintenance work to be completed on thc existing two modules without having to shut down treatment plant operations. As the city is close to built-out, and water usc has historically bccn increasing at a rate of only 1.2% a year, thc additional storage capacity and treatment capacity will not induce a substantial population growth in thc area. Thc plant presently operates far below its design capacity and would ncc_d to develop enhanced methods of water extraction prior to any substantial increase in treatment plant production. ,h ) This proiccl will allow tk~ Ul)g~ ading an existing water treatment facility and thc construction of additional water storage capacity in order to meet I)cpamncnt of ttealth Services mandates. There arc no housing units at thc water treatment site~ the adjacent softball fields or at thc golf course. Thc improvemcnls necessary for this project will not displace any existing housing, nor necessitate thc constmcli(m of any replacement housing units. 39 Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? This project will not result in the displacement of any people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. There is no residential use at the water treatment plant, the adjacent softball fields or the Municipal Golf course. As such, the proposed water tank and plant improvements will not result in any displacement of people, nor require any replacement housing elsewhere. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact [] [] [] · Fire protection? [] [] [] · Police protection? [] [] [] · Schools? [] [] [] · Parks? [] [] [] · Other public facilities? [] [] [] · No Impact Would the project result in substantial adverse physic~¥ impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered 7, overnmental facilities, need/br new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause sign(/icant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or otherperformance obj'ectives for any of the public xet~'ices: Fire protection, police protection, sci',ools, parks, otherpublic facilities? Upgrading thc existing water treatment facility by adding two modules and three additional water tanks to provide enhanced xvatcr capacity will not result in an,,- adverse physical impacts associated with thc provision of fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or other public facilities. To thc contrary, as previously discussed, thc proposed upgrades are required to meet State Department of Health Services mandates for water storage. This project will allow thc City of Ukiah to continue to provide the 15.500 people depending on water for fire protection, for potable water at schools and public facilities, and for irrigation at parks and other public facilities. Any impact rclatcd to public scrviccs would be positive, as the City has already experienced x~ atcr shortages in 2002 which affected its ability to supply water tbr domestic purposes and is likely to continue to experience additional shortages in future years without this project 40 XIV. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing [] neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require [] the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [] 0 · [] [] · No Impact Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? This project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that a substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The upgrading of the existing water treatment facility and the provision of additional water storage capacity will not generate additional demand for the use of recreational facilities. The addition of the 1.5 million gallon water storage tank, diesel tank, generator and pump station at the existing softball fields will continue to provide for long-term use of the existing two softball fields. Any impact of this project on existing parks and recreational facilities would actually be positive as the existing shortage of water storage capacity has required on-going interruptions in irrigation of city facilities in order to conserve water during critical periods. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed additional water storage capacity and water treatment building improvements do not include, or require thc construction or expansion of any recreational facilities. No impact will result. TRANSPORTATION/I'RAFFIC. Would thc project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to thc cxisting trafi3c load and capacity of thc strcct system (i.e., result m a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, thc volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion a! intersections)? b) Exceed. either individually or cunmlativclv, a level of service standard established bv thc county congestion managcmcnt agency or designated roads or highways? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless l~ess Than Significant Mitigation Significant No hnpac! lnc,,rporatcd Impact hnpac~ 41 x ~(;~d~Y t~I~OAi)~(IN<,IlIN(, WOI(I': (iAR'i'XlrKL~H [NrI1AI .'ITUDY tINA[ 1_)1~-'1- 17 I I O1 DOC Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either [] [] an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature [] [] (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [] [] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [] [] g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs [] [] supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Less Than Significant No Impact Impact [] · [] · [] · [] · [] · Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i. e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? The proposed upgrades to the existing water treatment plant and the proposed additional water storage tanks will not result in any increases in staffing levels, nor any resulting increase in daily traffic, that would create an,,' adverse traffic consequences. The water treatment facility and thc adjacent softball fields are readily accessed from Highway 101 and can readily accommodate any increase in staffing levels and associated daily trips that occur. The addition of two water tanks at the Municipal Golf Course will not result in any permanent traffic increase and will not impact existing traffic load, nor the capacity, of the street system. Highway 101 has adequate capacity to accommodate the additional construction-related traffic increase during project construction at the treatment plant and softball fields. The local network of streets which would provide construction traffic access to thc Municipal Golf Course could handle the additional short-term traffic increase, including concrete trucks for tank construction. It will bc necessaD' to install a temporaD' vehicular access across thc golf course grass to the tank sites, however, this would be a driveway for construction traffic only with no public usage and would be removed at project completion. As has bccll previously discussed, project cut and fill will bc balanced with thc spoils from tank construction retained on-site in two fill arcasl There will tbcrctbrc not be any removal of spoils from the site, not any associate truck traffic for such removal. /';xceed, either mdividua//x' ~r cumu/alivch'. con34e.¥lion mana,gemenl a,gcnc?,' or dexugnalcd Thc proposed expansion to thc water treatment building and increased water storage capacity will not result in daily trips exceeding designated road or highway service standards. No additional daily traffic will be generated fi'om thc three water storage tanks. Thc proposed treatment plant c×pansion will not rcsuh in any increase in employees and will therefore not result m any additional traffic generation. 42 × ~ ,Ag Y taKOadO~)N(KIlN(; WOKK ('~d~ Y~gqqLad4 INITIAl. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The proposed upgrades to the existing water treatment plant and the proposed three additional water storage tanks will not result in any change in air traffic patterns, levels or locations that/x euld constitute a substantial safety risk. dj Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections,) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipmenO ? This project will not substantially increase hazards due to project design features. No new roadways or intersections are proposed for this project. Access to the softball fields, the water treatment plant and the golf course will not be changed by this project. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed improvements to upgrade the existing water treatment facility and the proposed additional water storage capacity will not result in any conditions which would result in inadequate emergency access. The proposed improvements will not affect access to any of the sites and they will continue to be readily accessible to emergency vehicles. f) Result in inadequate par]cing capaciO,? This project will not result in inadequate parking capacity. Neither the proposed water treatment plant expansion nor thc proposed storage tanks will result in any additional staffing levels and will not create any additional parking demand. The treatment plant site and the adjacent softball fields contain extensive flat areas which can be used for construction-related traffic and for project staging areas. Parking for construction-related traffic can be accommodated on city streets adjacent to the golf course. X) Conflict with adopted policcs, plans, or projgrams supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus tt~r~oulx, bio,cie rack.s) ? This project will not conflict with any adopted programs, plans or programs supporting altcrnativc transportation. Thc proposed upgrades to an existing water treatment facility and thc provision of additional water storage capacity, will no! affect the provision of alternative transportation. XVI. IITll,ITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. \Vould the ImZjccl: a) Exceed waslcxvatcr treatment requirements of thc applicable R%ional Water Quality Control Board'~ Potentially Significant Potcnfialh' llnless l,ess Than ."ii~2nificant Mitigation Significant Impact incorpo~lcd Impact No I m pacl b.) Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact b) Require or result in the construction of new water or [] [] wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water [] [] drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the [] [] project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment [] [] provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f') Be served by a landfill ~4th sufficient permitted capacity [] [] to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and © [] regulations related to solid waste? No Impact [] · [] · · [] [] · [] · [] · Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The proposed improvements to an existing water system to meet existing peak water demand will not result in the creation of any new wastewatcr. As such. this project x~411 not lead to the creation of any wastcwater exceeding any applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. Require or resuh in thc con.s'ttn~ction of new water o.; wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of exix~inx facih'lie.v, thc con.wruction of which cou]d cause sign(ficanl environmental effects? This project will upgrade thc existing City of Ukiah xx ater treatment facility and provide additional required water storage. It will not require the construction of an5, other new waste\rater trcatlncnt facilities or the expansion of the existing facilities..As such. it will not create any significant environmental effects related to waste\rater treatment facilities construction l?equirc c,r rc.vu[t in Ibc c'{,tl.vlrl~6'liot? ot'tlcw .riot/Il ~ ~;&'r drainajge fi~cilities or c.Y/;atl.s'iotl /iTCI/I[I't'N. I/lC C(~t?,S'IFltC[I~ 01 ~{/'wl?ich C'O~[d c'a~.ve .w,k'.*: :.'~c¥~lt environmenla! eJfi.'cl.v ? 'l'hc upgrading of thc existing water treatment system x~ ill not result in the need for significant i1c\v storm water facilities resulting in significant environmental eftccts. \~,qfile thc additional drainage generated from thc proposed system improvements should bc limited to on-sitc improvements, thc pro_jeer ellgil/ccr will dcx'clop a drainage plan for thc proposed improvements m conjunction with 44 overall project design. No off-site improvements will be required. The provision of local drainage improvements will not cause significant environmental effects. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No new or expanded entitlements are required to provide the additional storage capacity for this project. The City of Ukiah is permitted for Russian River underflow up to a maximum of 20 cubic feet per second (12.9 mgd), but is presently using less than half this permitted amount. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatmentprovider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? The proposed water treatment system improvements will expand the storage capacity of the system, rather than increase the water demand and therefore increase the wastewater treatment capacity. There is therefore no impact to a wastewater treatment provider's capacity. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? No solid waste will be produced from the additional water tanks. The amount of solid waste generated by the existing water treatment pond at its dewatermg basins is small, estimated to be less than 100 cubic yards a year, and can be disposed of on-site without requiring the use of a landfill. Any incremental increase in the solid waste produced by the proposed treatment plant expansion can be similarly accommodated without the services of a landfill. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The project will comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. XVII. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES A.) Ahernatives for Each Ma/or Phase or Component of the Project The 1992 water treatment plant was specifically designed to be able to operate at a maximum capacity of 12 mgd with four modules. Thc plant was designed initially with two modules and a 6 mgd capacity--this project would allow for the addition of two modules in order to bring its ultimate capacity up to 12 mgd. There is no available method to continue to operate the existing plant and its txvo existing modules and provide for thc treatment of 6 mgd on a continuous and reliable basis. Thc project also includes thc construction of 3.3 million gallons of additional xvatcr storage capacity. Thc City of Ukiah has rcccivcd notification from thc Dcpamncnt of Health Scr¥iccs that it must provide this additional capacity. The Department of Health Services did not off'ct au}' alternatives to thc city instead of providing this additional storage capacity, nor is thc city aware of anx5 altcrnativc methods to provide additional storage. Thc tanks arc the most efficient means of pr~)viding additional storage, as no land area exists which would allow for thc creation of a man-made body of water to bc used as a reservoir. ]~) A]Icrnaliv¢ .S'ilm,g Ix>c~ti<m.v. X KDkR¥ IAROAI)~ONC~IIN(} WOI~K. (~iR'~%l*},I,~}! INrll/kl SlltI)Y--I-'[NAI. D~LA]-I I1 I I o1 Il,R? 45 As outlined in the Department of Health Service letter, the City of Ukiah must specifically add approximately 3,000,000 gallons of water storage to its Zone 1 and 260,000 gallons of water storage to Zone 2. The existing water treatment plant is located east of Highway 101 and to the west of the Russian River. Because the plant was constructed in this location in 1992, it would not be feasible to expand the plant at an alternative location to add the two additional modules to increase potential treatment to the plant's design capacity of 12 mgd nor would it be feasible to construct the 1.5 million gallon water tank at an alternative site. Similarly, in light of the existing location of the 2.3 million gallon and the 100,000 gallon tanks at the golf course, the proposed addition of a 1.5 million gallon and a .3 million gallon tank at the same site are more efficient from an operational perspective and concentrate improvements within an already disturbed site. In addition, the location of the tanks at the golf course site allows for gravity flow of stored water as necessary during periods of peak demand to serve the city's residents and water users. The location of the tanks at a lower altitude would require pumping water throughout the distribution network, increasing operational costs, the potential for necessary maintenance and repair, and the risk of interruption of service due to power outages. C) Alternative Projects That Could Accomplish the Project Objectives The City of Ukiah water system fails to have enough storage capacity to meet DHS requirements. It also lac-ks adequate modules to allow it to perform repair and maintenance to its two existing units. The 1992 water treatment plant was specifically designed for an ultimate capacity of 12 mgd with an initial capacity of 6 mgd. No other alternative projects are known that could meet DHS requirements and allow for necessary, plant upgrades for reliability, and redundancy. D) No project Alternative: The no project alternative would result in the development of no additional treatment or storage capacity for the City of Ukiah water system. The City of Ukiah would continue to be faced with regular water shortages during peak periods due to an inadequate amount of storage capacity to meet peak demands. City residents and system users would continue to worry about not having adequate water to meet their needs and to receive warnings that low water supply situations required a limitation in the use of water for non-essential purposes. Even if demand continued to grow at only the historically Iow rate of 1.2% a year, over time demand would further outstrip supply and water shortages would become more routine and more severe. Identification of the Environmentally &~periorAlternative (if the "no project" alternative is not the environmentally superior alternative. Thc environmentally superior approach is thc proposed City of Ukiah Water System Improvcmcnt Project. This project will ensure that Ukiah residents and xvatcr users arc provided with a critical public service, potable water. Thc project design, both in terms of total proposed additional water storage capacity and storage capacity per zone, is consistent with the 2001 mandates of thc Department of ttcalth Scrx'iccs. Thc environmental review for this project has dctcrmmcd that thc potential impacts from thc xvatcr treatmcn! cxpansion and thc storage tanks arc rclativclx, minor--and all can bc reduced to less than significant levels through thc incorporation of thc proposed Initigation measures. 46 XVIII. a) Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality [] [] of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or resthct the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually [] [] · [] limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will [] [3 · [] cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Does the project have the potential to degrade the qualiO, of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range ora rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? This project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce thc habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal communi~', reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important cxamples of thc major periods of California histor',' or prchistou'. An archaeological review of this project failed to identify any important examples of major period of California history or prehistou, and included mitigation measures to protect any such resources which might bc discovered during project construction. A biological inventor3' of thc sitc failed to discover any rare or endangered plants or animals. Biological mitigation mcasures have been identified to ensure that the project will not reduce thc habitat or a fish or wildlife species, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal co~nmunity, or cause a fish or xvildlifc population to drop below self- sustaining levels. Mitigation measures have been included throughout the Initial Study to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels to ensure that thc quality of thc cnvir-onmcnt will not be degraded l)~;c.v t/~c pro/'c~'t h~,vc ittt/;acts that arc ,~dividt,~[lx' /zm;zcd. hut c'uttm/att'vc(? G-/~mt~lativc~v c'(.~.vidcrahlc mc~.v [/~a~ t/lc l'tlc'rt'ttlt'Hl~l[ t'~/~'C/S (~/'a [~rql'eC't are c'onxidcrable ef/bc/.~' ~{/'proba31c tizlzzrc This project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. There have been no past projects at these sites, or in the area of the sites, which would increase the identified impacts to a level of significance above that discussed in the text of this Initial Study. There are no known effects of current or probable future projects which would raise any of the analyzed impacts to a significant level. No impacts have been identified for this proposed upgrade of an existing water treatment facility and addition of storage capacity which would be affected by past, current or future development on these sites or in their vicinity. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? This project does not have any environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. As evidenced by this Initial Study, all potential impacts of this water treatment plant and storage expansion can be reduced to less than significant levels through the recommended mitigation measures and ensure that no substantial adverse effects to humans will result. Specific mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to less than significant levels are included in the following sections: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils and Noise. XIX. SUMMARY OF PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures have been incorporated into this project to reduce identified impacts to less than significant levels: Aesthetics Mitigation Measures: · Existing vegetation outside of the area of project grading, filling and construction shall be protected and retained to protect views to the site. · Finished grading for fill areas shall, as feasible, attempt to leave areas in a natural looking hillside condition. · A landscape plan shall be prepared, subject to Planning Department review and approval, including the following: 1) the addition of native trees to fill-in any views to the tanks from off-site vantage points; and 2.) the provision of native vegetation, to the maximum extent possible, along cut and fill slopes to provide a natural-looking hillside environment. · Any metal tanks shall bc carthtone in color and blend into the surrounding environment. · Mitigation measures included in Section IV., Biology, shall be incorporated into the project design in order to also mitigate potential aesthetic impacts related to loss of vegetation and tree protection. · If thc proposed water tank at thc softball field is to be constructed from metal, it shall be carthtonc to blend it into the natural colors of the site. · A landscape plan shall bc prepared and implemented providing screen vegetation between proposed softball field improvements and }tighxvay 101. as necessary, to soften vicxvs from the highxvay to proposed site ~mprovcments Air Quality Mitigation Meaures: Maintain construction equipment m accordance with manufacturers' specifications. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers and bulido/,crs shall bc used tbr earth moving operations. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, parlicularlx' during windv days. 48 X ~i^l~y BI~O^II~ON(~INt; W(*RK- (i~l~Y~l~.~b~ll INTIlP. I .qII'DY }IN^I DI~A}~I I 2 I ] 0t I)( ,( ( I 2 l e~ ,,1 ~ · All construction debris, including dirt and mud, shall be promptly cleaned and cleared from all roadways. · All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. · Trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. · Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. · Hydroseed or apply soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas prior to project completion. · To the extent feasible, construction equipment shall be left idling for not more than 10 minutes. Biological Resources Mitigation Measures: · A pre-construction nesting survey shall be conducted for tree nesting raptors if grading and construction is to be initiated during the months of April through August. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading. If any raptor nests are found within the construction area after April and before August, grading and construction in the area shall either stop or continue only after the nests are protected by an adequate setback approved by a qualified biologist. If permanent avoidance of nests is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by avoiding disturbances to the birds during the nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the juveniles from those nests are foraging independently and capable of independent survival at an earlier date. · The proposed project shall avoid the ephemeral drainages in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites to the maximum extent practicable. If complete avoidance is not feasible, the proposed improvements shall be coordinated with representatives of the Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB, and any required authorization obtained prior to any modification to jurisdictional waters. Additional conditions ma3' be required by jurisdictional agencies to minimize disturbance and provide appropriate mitigation. These include restrictions on construction activities dtLring the low flow summer months, prohibition on placement of fill or equipment maintenance within the ephemeral drainages, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. · A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing Best Management Practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. · A Tree Protection and Revegetation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect or certified arbonst, which provides for protection of trees to be retained, re-establishment of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and replacement of trees removed as part of the projcct. Thc plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning department prior the issuance of any building or grading pernuts or any site preparation and construction activity. The following requirements and restrictions shall be incorporated into the plan: · Tree removal shall be minimized with valley oaks and other mature trees avoided to thc maximum extent practicable. All trccs shall be avoided on the softball field site. Thc mature valley oaks on the golf course sites shall also be avoided, specifically including thc 32-inch diamctcr valley oak south of thc existing 150-foot diameter tank and thc scattered mature valley oaks at tile western fringe of thc golf course faire, ay just down slope from thc proposed central soil disposal area. · Detailed guidelines shall bc prepared to control possible damage to trees to be preserved. Thc location of trees to be retained within 50 feet of proposed grading shall be identified in thc field through llagging or other obvious marking method prior to any grading. · Tcmporat_x' fencing shall be provided along tile outcm~ost edge of thc driplinc of each trcc or group of trees to bc retained in thc vicinity of grading to avoid compaction of thc root zonc and mechanical damage to trunks and limbs. 49 · Storage of construction equipment, materials, and stockpiled soils shall be prohibited within the tree dripline of trees to be preserved to prevent possible damage. · A program shall be developed which provides for replanting of trees removed on graded slopes. Trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as feasible, for all trees with mink diameters greater than 12 inches removed as part of the project. Suitable species which shall be used in the tree replacement shall include: valley oak (Quercus lobata), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). · Replacement tree plantings shall be irrigated during the dry summer months as necessary to ensure establishment, typically for a minimum of two years. · Replacement tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a minimum of five years. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on an annual basis. · A program to remove French broom shall be incorporated into the Revegetation Plan to eliminate this species and prevent its reestablishment. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent reestablishment and spread of broom. The removal and monitoring program shall include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants when soils are saturated, and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April. Monitoring and routine removal shall be provided on an annual basis for a minimum of five years to prevent reestablishment. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures: · In the event that major grading or underground excavation uncovers what appears to be archaeological material, particularly within the existing treatment facility,, a temporary work shutdown in that immediate area should be enforced until the discovered materials can be evaluated. · If archaeological materials are found in concentration and therefore deemed to be potentially important, formal documentation should occur before x¥ork is allowed to resume. · If it appears likely that the discovered material could be further disturbed by the proposed project, subsequent activity should be performed under the supervision of an archaeological monitor. An example of standard procedures for monitoring and spot checks as attached to the Archaeological Resource Service cultural resources evaluation should act as guideline in the event that potentially important archaeological materials are encountered. Geology and Soils Mitigation Measures: · Site development shall comply with the seismic design factors recommendations of Section V. of the Miller Pacific Gcotcchnical Investigation dated November 1, 2002. · All improvements and structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic provisions of thc most-recent version of thc Uniform Building Code (UBCI or thc American Water Works Association (AWW^). · Thc design base shear of thc new construction shall comply with the seismic coefficients and site values included in Table C of thc Miller Pacific report, which are based on interpreted subst, rfacc conditions at thc site and thc closest fault t_-,-pc and distance to the site. · Thc project gcotcchnical engineer shall rex'iow thc plans and specifications prior lo thc commencement of construction to confirm that the intent of their gcotcchnicai recommendations has bccn incorporated and to provide supplcmcmal recommendations? if needed. · During construction, thc project g¢ot¢chnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading. compaction of fill material and foundatiot~ excavations to confirm that subsurface conditicms arc :is expected and a4iust foundation depths and other clemcms of thc design, if warranted. · Slope stability mitigation options, such as stabilization or repair of any slides that intercept the ncxv tank sites or cut slopes behind the tanks, shall bc implemented, subject to gcotcchnical engineer 50 approval. (If any unidentified zones of instability are encountered during grading operations at thc northern hillside tank site, they shall be stabilized or repaired. · Benches should be constructed in the cut slopes at the soil/rock transition that are wide enough to allow equipment to clear any debris that sloughs and accumulates on them. The upper five feet at the top of cut slopes should be no steeper than 2:1 and rounded to conform to the existing terrain. Benches shall be regularly maintained to keep them clear of debris · A concrete lined v-ditch shall be provided across the top of cut slopes. All cut slopes shall be revegetated. · The treatment plant shall be supported on a shallow foundation system that bears on properly compacted fill. The depth of over excavation and recompaction should be at least 10 feet. The upper ten feet of soils should be removed and recompacted in the area beneath the tank and pump station at the softball field site prior to foundation construction. · The required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and shall include the use of straw waddles and sediment traps during and immediately after site grading and erosion control blankets or other standard erosion control practices to prevent damage from erosion caused by slope runoff. Erosion from increased runoff from hardscape and other site improvements shall be mitigated by conveying discharges from the water tank, roads and other site improvements into a site drainage system. · Treatment Plant construction shall incorporate the detailed recommendations for liquefaction remediation Miller Pacific Engineer Group develops in their final geotechnical report. Plant construction shall include a soil modification technique, such as compaction grouting or stone columns to densitS:, the loose granular layer below the water table, or other appropriate remediation as determined necessary by the project geotechnical engineer. · In order to mitigate the potential for damage due to differential settlement, the treatment building shall be constructed with either the use of shallow footings combined with over excavation and recompaction of soils within the new building footprint, or the use of drilled pier foundations excavated into a uniformly finn soil strata. · The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications when they near completion to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions arc as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Noise Mitigation Measures: · All site preparation work and construction activity at thc golf course site shall comply with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements restricting equipment operation between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Thc Director of Public Works may approve concrete pours starting at 6 a.m. subject to thc following restrictions: a.) a construction management plan shall be submitted outlining thc full schedule concrete work at the site: b. ) a traffic management plan tbr access to and from the site shall be submitted for approval: c. ) selected routes shall distribute carl.,,, morning construction traffic impact onto multiple streets and neighborhoods to thc maximum degree feasible; and d.) all other site work shall comply x¥ith Municipal Code noise/construction ordinance regulations. XX. RESOllRCES USED T() I'REPARE I NITI.-\I, STUI)5' 'l'hc City of [.Jkiah Emergency Plan. 2002. Thc City of l. Jkiah General Plan Growth Management Program. Dcccmbcr 1995. 51 The Ukiah Airport Master Plan, Shutt Moen Associates, July, 1996. The following Technical Studies prepared in conjunction with this imtial study: A Cultural Resources Evaluation of the City of Ukiah Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Project, Ukiah, Mendocino County, California submitted by Katherine Flynn, Archaeological Resource Service, December 2003. LOMS Package for the Treatment Facility in the City ofUkiah, Winzler & Kelly, December 30, 2002. Preliminary Report Geotechnical Investigation, City of Ukiah Water System Improvements, Ukiah, California, November 1, 2002 prepared by Miller Pacific Engineering Group City of Ukiah Water System Improvements Biological Resource Assessment, Jim Martin, ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATIVE, December 2002, Updated in August 2003. The following technical drawings: Zones I and II Water Storage System Expansion Project, Ukiah Utilities, SPH Associates, January 2003. Discussions and correspondence with the follox~dng City staff: Charley Stump, City of Ukiah, Planning Director Ann Burke, City of Ukiah, Project Engineer/Manager 52 APPENDIX A. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST--UKIAH WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT The following mitigation measures were incorporated into the mitigated negative declaration for the City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of less than significance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure will indicate that the mitigation requirement has been complied with and implemented. Ao . . . Aesthetics Mitigation Measures: Existing vegetation outside of the area of project grading, filling and construction shall be protected and retained to protect views to the site. Finished grading for fill areas shall, as feasible, attempt to leave areas in a natural looking hillside condition. A landscape plan shall be prepared, subject to Planmng Department review and approval, including the following: 1) the addition of native trees to fill-in any views to the tanks from off- site vantage points; and 2.) the provision of native vegetation, to the maximum extent possible, along cut and fill slopes to provide a natural-looking hillside environment. Any metal tanks shall be earthtone in color and blend into the surrounding environment. Mitigation measures included in Section IV., Biology, shall be incorporated into the project design in order to also mitigate potential aesthetic impacts related to loss of vegetation and trc protection. If the proposed water tank at the softball field is to be constructed from metal, it shall be earthtone to blend it into the natural colors of the site. A landscape plan shall be prepared and implemented providing screen vegetation between proposed softball field improvements and Highway 101, as necessary, to soften views from the highway to proposed site improvements. Aesthetics Mitigation Monitoring ~ Approved Implementation Remarks Mitigation Responsibility Schedule '~ during Plan Verification Measure !Check A. 1 Planning/Building ' - A.2 Utility/Contractor Daily A.3 Planning Dept. Daily A.4 Planning Prior to , permits A.5. See section C. See section C A.6. Planning Prior to permits ---~77 ...... Planning Prior to ! J il. Air Quality Mitigation Meaures: 1. Nlaintam construction equipment in accordance xvith manufacturers~ specifications. . o . . Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. All construction debris, including dirt and mud, shall be promptly cleaned and cleared from all roadways. All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. Trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Hydroseed or apply soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas prior to project completion. To the extent feasible, construction equipment shall be left idling for not more than 10 minutes. Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Measure Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Check Air Quality B. 1 Utility/Contractor Daily B.2 Utility/Contractor Daily B.3. Utility/Building Daily Dept. and Contractor B.4. Utility/Building After Dept. and grading Contractor B. 5. Building Dept. Daily B.6. Building Dept. Daily B.7. Planning, Building, Post Pub. Works grading B.8 Building/Pub. Post gradin~ Works construction B.9 Building/Contractor Daily _ Co Biological Resources Mitigation Measures: A pm-construction nesting survcy shall bc conducted for trcc ncsting raptors if grading and construction is to bc initiatcd during thc months of April through August. Thc surveys shall bc conductcd by a qualificd biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading, if any raptor nests arc found within thc construction arca aficr April and bctbrc August. grading and construction in thc arca shall cithcr stop or continuc only aflcr thc nests arc protcctcd bv an adcquatc setback approvcd bv a qualificd biologist, lfpcrmancnt avoidancc of nests is not fcasiblc, impacts shall bc minimizcd by avoiding disturbances to thc birds during thc nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies that thc birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that thc juveniles fi-om those nests arc tbraging independently and capable of independent survival at an carlicr date Thc proposed project shall avoid thc ephemeral drainages in thc vicinity of thc golf course tank sites to thc maximum cxtcnt practicable. If complete avoidance is not fcasiblc, thc proposed . . improvements shall be coordinated with representatives of the Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB, and any required authorization obtained prior to any modification to jurisdictional waters. Additional conditions may be required by jurisdictional agencies to minimize disturbance and provide appropriate mitigation. These include restrictions on construction activities during the low flow summer months, prohibition on placement of fill or equipment maintenance within the ephemeral drainages, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing Best Management Practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. A Tree Protection and Revegetation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect or certified arborist, which provides for protection of trees to be retained, re-establishment of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and replacement of trees removed as part of the project. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning department prior the issuance of any building or grading permits or any site preparation and construction activity. The following requirements and restrictions shall be incorporated into the plan: · Tree removal shall be minimized with valley oaks and other mature trees avoided to the maximum extent practicable. All trees shall be avoided on the sot~ball field site. The mature valley oaks on the golf course sites shall also be avoided, specifically including the 32-inch diameter valley oak south of the existing 150-foot diameter tank and the scattered mature valley oaks at the western fringe of the golf course fairway just down slope from the proposed central soil disposal area. · Detailed guidelines shall be prepared to control possible damage to trees to be preserved. The location of trees to be retained within 50 feet of proposed grading shall be identified in the field through flagging or other obvious marking method prior to any grading. · Temporary fencing shall be pro¥ided along the outermost edge of the dripline of each tree or group of trees to be retained in the vicinity of grading to avoid compaction of the root zone and mechanical damage to trunks and limbs. · Storage of construction equipment, materials, and stockpiled soils shall be prohibited within the tree dripline of trees to be preserved to prevent possible damage. · A program shall be developed which provides for replanting of trees removed on graded slopes. Trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as feasible, for all trees with trunk diameters greater than 12 inches removed as part of the project. Suitable species which shall be used in the tree replacement shall include: valley oak (Quercus lobata), interior live oak (Q. wistizenii), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). · Replacement tree plantings shall be irrigated during the dry summer months as necessary to ensure establishment, typically for a minimum of two years. · Replacement trcc plantings shall bc monitored and maintained for a minimum of five years. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall bc replaced at a 1:1 ratio on an annual basis. · A program to rcmoxc }:rcnch broom shall bc incorporated into thc Rcvcgctation Plan tc~ eliminate this Species and prevent its reestablishment. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of thc pro. leer shall bc monitored to prevent reestablishment and spread of broom. Thc removal and monitoring pro, ram shall include annual late wintfzr removal of any rooted plants xvhcn soils arc saturated, and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in thc spring before sccd begins to set in late ..\pnl. Monitonng and routine removal shall bc p~ovidcd on :m 3nnual basis t'~r a minimum ~t'fix'e x'cars to prevent reestablishment. Biological Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring Approved Implementation Remark- Resources Schedule during Verification Mitigation Plan Measure Check C. 1. Project Before permit, Biologist/Planning/Utility grading or construction C. 2. ArmyCorps/CDFG Before permit Proj. Engineer RWQCB grading or construction C.3 Project Engineer, Public Before permit - Works, Building grading or construction C.4. Project arborist or Before permit, landscape architect, before and planning, building, during grading and construction D. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures: 1. In the event that major grading or underground excavation uncovers what appears to be archaeological material, particularly within the existing treatment facility, a temporary work shutdown in that immediate area should be enforced until the discovered materials can be evaluated. 2. If archaeological materials are found in concentration and therefore deemed to be potentially important, formal documentation should occur before work is allowed to resume. 3. If it appears likely that the discovered material could be further disturbed by the proposed project, subsequent actMty should be performed under the supervision of an archaeological monitor. An example of standard procedures for monitoring and spot checks as attached to the Archaeological Resource Sen'icc cultural resources evaluation should act as guideline in the event that potentially important archaeological materials are encountered. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring Schedule Approved during Plan Implementation Verification Remarks construction l)urino construction During construction Check Uo . . . . . . 10 11 15 Geology and Soils Mitigation Measures: Site development shall comply with the seismic design factors recommendations of Section V. of the Miller Pacific Geotechnical Investigation dated November 1, 2002. All improvements and structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic provisions of the most-recent version of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The design base shear of the new construction shall comply with the seismic coefficients and site values included in Table C of the Miller Pacific report, which are based on interpreted subsurface conditions at the site and the closest fault type and distance to the site. The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications prior to the commencement of construction to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Slope stability mitigation options, such as stabilization or repair of any slides that intercept the new tank sites or cut slopes behind the tanks, shall be implemented, subject to geotechnical engineer approval. (If any unidentified zones of instability are encountered during grading operations at the northern hillside tank site, they shall be stabilized or repaired. Benches should be constructed in the cut slopes at the soil/rock transition that are wide enough to allow equipment to clear any debris that sloughs and accumulates on them. The upper five feet at the top of cut slopes should be no steeper than 2'1 and rounded to conform to the existing terrain. Benches shall be regularly maintained to keep them clear of debris A concrete lined v-ditch shall be provided across the top of cut slopes. All cut slopes shall be revegetated. The treatment plant shall be supported on a shallow foundation system that bears on properly compacted fill. The depth of over excavation and recompaction should be at least 10 feet. The upper ten feet of soils should be removed and recompacted in the area beneath the tank and pump station at the softball field site prior to foundation construction. The required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and shall include the use of straw waddles and sediment traps during and immediately after site grading and erosion control blankets or other standard erosion control practices to prevent damage from erosion caused by slope runoff. Erosion from increased runoff from hardscapc and other site improvements shall be mitigated by conveying discharges from the water tank, roads and other site improvements into a site drainage system. Treatment Plant construction shall incorporate thc detailed recommendations for liquefaction rcmcdiation Miller Pacific Enginecr Group dcvclops in their final gcotcchnical rcport. Plant construction shall include a soil modification tcchniquc, such as compaction grouting or stone columns to dcnsify the loose granular laver below thc water table, or other appropriate rcmcdiation as dctcrmincd necessary by thc projcct gcotcchnical cnginccr. In ordcr to mitigate thc potcntial for damagc duc to diffcrcntial scttlcm?nt, thc trcatmcnt building shall bc constructed with either thc usc of shallow footings combincd with over excavation and rccompaction of soils within thc new building footprint, or thc usc of drilled pier foundations excavated into a uniformly firm soil strata. Thc project gcotcchnical engineer shall review thc plans mid specifications when they near completion to confirm that thc intent of their gcotcchnical recommendations has bccn incorporated and to provide supplcmcnt:fl recommendations, it' nccdcd. 14. During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Measure Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Check Geology/Soils El. Building, During Geo. Engineer construction E.2. Building, Plan Geo. Engineer development & prior to permit E.3 Project eng. Plan Geo. engineer development & prior to permit E.4. Geotechnical Prior to engineer construction E.5. Geotechnical During engineer construction E.6. Building, During Geo. engineer construction E.7. Building, During Geo. engineer construction E.8. Building During construction E.9. Building, During Geo. engineer construction E. 10 Building, Before Geo. engineer permit, during construction E. 11. Building, Before Geo.__e___n~j n?!-__. ~permitti E. 12 Building, geo. Before engi neet perm itt i ng E. 13 Building, geo. Before final engineer approval E.14 -- P, uilding, geo. During . ~ ~!lgillC¢l' COI1SIrtlCtiO~I il I !1 F. Noise Mitigation Measures All site preparation xvork and construction activity at thc golf course site shall comply with Ukiah lXlunicipal Code rccluircmcnts restricting equipment operation bctxvccn 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. Thc Director of Public Works may approve concrete pours starting at 6 a.m. subject to the following restrictions: a.) a construction management plan shall be submitted outlining the full schedule for concrete work at the site; b.) a traffic management plan for access to and from the site shall be submitted for approval; c.) sclcctcd routes shall distribute early morning construction traffic impact onto multiple streets and neighborhoods to the maximum degree feasible; and d.) all other site work shall comply with Municipal Code noise/construction ordinance regulations. Noise Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Mitigation Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Measure Check F.1. Public Works Prior to permit PREDESIGN REPORT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKiAH SPH Associates Consulting Engineers 3420 Coach Lane, Suite 10 Cameron Park, California 95682 February 6, 2004 associates Consulting Engineers February 3, 2004 Ukiah Utilities City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Attention: Ann Burck Subject: Final Design Report Submittal Water System Improvements City of Ukiah Ladies and Gentlemen, Transmitted herewith is our predesign level report identifying required improvements to the City of Ukiah water supply system. As requested five (5) copies are being provided at this time. The final document has been prepared following revisions and modifications made by the City to the preliminary draft submitted in August 2003. The estimated project costs have been updated to reflect the additions made to the project. The "Recommended Project" section has been added to the document. The overall project involves upgrading and increasing the capacity of the water treatment plant, constructing a new high service finished water pumping station and building three new storage reservoirs to overcome distribution system storage deficiencies identified by the State of California Department of Health Services. At this time it appears that the total cost of the project will be around $10,950,000. Treatment plant improvements are projected to cost about $5,000,000 and construction of distribution system storage reservoirs are estimated to cost about the same. Note that treatment plant improvements needed to increase the supply of treated water and improve plant reliability may be eligible for low interest loan funding available through the State Revolving Fund program. Distribution system storage reservoirs however will not qualify for funding under this program. As you have directed we are proceeding with final design of the improvements in accordance with the recommendations of the predesign report and as descr/bed in our agreement with the City. c:\..\02101 qtrs\burck-021 3420 Coach Lane, Suite 10 · Cameron Park, CA 95682 · (530) 677-0935 · Fax [530) 677-2237 · Email: sphassoc@innercite, com The City has directed SPH Associates to phase the project separating the final design and construction of the three storage reservoirs from the treatment plant expansion project. Accordingly, we will prepare two sets of bidding documents for the proposed improvements. We are prepared to meet with the City to discuss all aspects of the predesign report if required before continuing with detailed design work. Thank you for retaining SPH Associates for this important and challenging project. Very truly yours, Sigurd P. Hansen, P.E. President SPH:bh 0:\..\02101 qtrs\burek-021 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREDESIGN REPORT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKIAH Table of Contents TITLE SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND PURPOSES AND OBJECTIVES SCOPE OF STUDY ASSUMPTIONS AND CRITERIA SECTION 2 - TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS APPLICATION OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS IMPACT OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS ON UKIAH TREATMENT FACILITIES Surface Water Treatment Rule Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) Total Coliform Rule (TCR) Information Collection Rule (ICR) PROPOSED DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) Imerim Enhanced Surface Water Treatmem Rule (IESWTR) FUTURE DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Final (Long-Term) Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (ESWTR) and Stage 2 - Disinfectants/Disinfectant By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) SOURCE WATER QUALITY Regulatory Impact on Treatment Facilities PLANT CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS SECTION 3- WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL RAW WATER PUMPING FACILITIES TREATMENT FACILITIES WASHWATER RECOVERY SYSTEM STANDBY POWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS SODIUM HYDROXIDE STORAGE TANK ALUM STORAGE TANK TREATMENT BUILDING EXPANSION FILTRATION FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIA FILTERED WATER TRANSFER PUMPS PAGE 1-1 1-1 1-2 1-2 2-1 2-4 2-4 2-5 2-5 2-6 2-6 2-6 2-9 2-10 2-10 2-10 2-12 2-12 3-1 3-1 3-2 3-9 3-10 3-10 3-11 3-11 3-11 3-16 020403 TOC-1 e :\..\02101 \predesign report\TOC Table of Contents (Con't) TITLE FINISHED WATER PUMPING STATION ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS FACILITY IMPROVEMENT COSTS SECTION 4- DISTR~UTION SYSTEM STORAGE FACILITIES INTRODUCTION ZONE 1 RESERVOm Site Selection Evaluation of Zone 1 Reservoir Design Alternatives Welded Steel Reservoirs' Glass Lined and Coated Bolted Steel Tanks Prestressed Concrete Reservoir Siting Considerations Comparative Cost Analyses Bolted Steel Tank Costs Welded Steel Tank Costs Prestressed Concrete Tank Costs Zone 1 Reservoir Alternatives Comparison Zone 1 Reservoir Construction Cost Recommended Zone 1 Reservoir Design ZONE 2 RESERVOIR Zone 2 Reservoir Siting Zone 2 Reservoir Costs Recommended Zone 2 Tank Design FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR Volume Requirements Finished Water Disinfection Requirements Proposed Design CT Compliance Spreadsheet Computation Finished Water Reservoir Design Alternative Recommended Reservoir Design Finished Water Reservoir Costs StJMMARY SECTION 5- RECOMMENDED PROJECT Proposed Improvements Projected Project Costs Implementation Schedule PAGE 3-16 3-17 3-20 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-3 4-3 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-8 4-8 4-8 4-12 4-12 4-14 4-14 4-14 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-19 4-19 4-19 4-23 4-23 4-24 4-24 5-1 5-2 5-2 020403 TOC-2 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\TOC TITLE Table of Contents (Con't) PAGE TABLES Table Table Table Table 2-1 - Total Trihalomethane (TTHM) And Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) 2-2 - Raw Water Quality Data, Ranney Collector Source 3-1 - Design Criteria 3-2 - Estimated Construction Costs 2-7 2-11 3-14 3-21 Table 4-1 - Comparative Estimated Installed Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Glass Lined Bolted Steel Storage Tank 4-7 Table 4-2 - Comparative Estimated Installed Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Welded Steel Storage Tank 4-9 Table 4-3 - Comparative Estimated Installed Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Prestressed Concrete Tank 4-10 Table 4-4 - Material Comparison of Storage Reservoir Alternatives 4-11 Table 4-5 - Estimated Construction Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Prestressed Concrete Reservoir 4-13 Table 4-6- Estimated Construction Cost, 297,000 Gallon Glass Lined Bolted Steel Tank 4-16 Table 4-7 - CT Compliance Verification 4-21 Table 4-8- CT Compliance Verification 4-22 Table 4-9 - Estimated Construction Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Prestressed Concrete Reservoir 4-25 Table 4-10 - Summary of New System Storage Facilities 4-26 Process Flow Schematic Hydraulic Profile Treatment Building, Modified Floor Plan Site Plan Dry Polymer Batching/Feed System Treatment Building Exterior Elevations Treatment Building Sectional View High Service Pump Station, Mechanical Floor Plan High Service Pump Station, Exterior Elevations Existing Zones 1 and 2 Storage Reservoirs Site Layout, Zones 1 and 2 Storage Reservoirs Site Layout, Zone 2 Storage Tank Finished Water Storage Reservoir Finished Water Storage Reservoirs FIGURES 3-1- 3-2- 3-3- 3-4- 3-5- 3-6- 3-7- 3-8- 3-9- 4-1- 4-2- 4-3- 4-4- 4-5- APPENDICES 020403 TOC-3 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\TOC Introduction SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The City of Ukiah's water treatment and distribution system storage facilities must be expanded to provide additional supply to reliably meet the current and anticipated future water demands of the community. These improvements have been mandated by the California Department of Health Services (DHS) as a condition of maintaining and renewing the operating permit for the facilities. The DHS has established that the capacity of the water treatment facilities is insufficient to satisfy peak demands normally encountered in July and August. Further, based upon guidelines established by DHS, the distribution system storage is deficient by 3,260,000 gallons. The additional storage capacity is needed in both pressure zones. The existing treatment facilities constructed in 1991-92 have a capacity of 6 mgd and process water obtained from the Russian River. The water is pumped to the treatment plant from a specialized intake structure known as a Ranney collector. The Ranney collector involves vertical concrete caisson installed on the bank of the river that has horizontal perforated pipe laterals radiating outwardly in a spoke-like pattern. Water enters these laterals passing downward through overlaying sand and gravel. The most productive laterals extend beneath the Russian River accessing the underflow of the river. Under the City's present water right the City is limited to the diversion of no more than 20-acre foot per day (12.8 mgd) from the underflow of the river. The City must retain and continue to limit their diversion to the underflow, which places some limitations in the water availability from this source. The question of adequate raw water source capacity and where additional supply will be developed to meet future needs is not addressed in this study. Rather, this report addresses improvements, related solely to treatment and storage facilities. PURPOSES AND OBJECTIVES The primary purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate needed modifications or additions to the existing facilities and establish the extent and cost of the identified modifications. A secondary purpose is to prepare a predesign document identifying the proposed improvement modifications or additions in sufficient detail to support preparation of detailed plans and specifications for construction. The objective through this preliminary planning phase is to review and evaluate production, performance and operating records, consider input of ideas of City staff for facility improvements, factor in requirements imposed by new regulations, and investigate the best and most appropriate technology for implementation into an expanded and upgraded facility. The recommended plan must meet the needs of the community, be cost effective and should qualify for funding through the SRF program. 020304 1-1 c:\..\02101\predesign reportksection 1 Introduction SCOPE OF STUDY The scope of the study involved completion of the following major elements or tasks · Evaluate existing production and water quality records. · Estimate needed treatment plant capacity to address present water supply needs. · Identify any treatment process modifications needed to meet new water quality standards. · Review of alternative distribution system storage reservoir designs and select best alternative for three sites. · Incorporate additional treatment units into the existing facility and develop a building floor plan. · Prepare cost analysis of proposed improvements and additions to the treatment and distribution system facilities. Oversee conduct of an environmental evaluation of the impact of the proposed projects on the environment focusing specifically on the sites selected for additional storage tanks. · Complete a technical and cost feasibility report including the results of the study and providing the design basis for preparing detailed construction documents. ASSUMPTIONS AND CRITERIA The basic assumptions and criteria followed in this study are as described below: · The existing treatment facilities will be expanded using the adsorption clarification treatment process that has performed satisfactorily over the last 10 years. · The existing plant clearwell is inadequately sized to meet disinfection detention requirements and a larger clearwell is necessary to support the expanded plant capacity. Providing redundancy in treatment equipment is a requirement to permit system reliability. Meeting this standard requires a separate dedicated modular treatment unit over and above that needed to meet peak capacity demands. · New distribution system storage reservoirs would be located on property owned by the City adjacent to existing reservoirs. 020304 1-2 e:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 1 Introduction Reservoir designs would be selected to be compatible with existing structures and be consistent with aesthetic requirements of the specific site. 020304 1-3 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 1 Treatment Requirements SECTION 2 TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS Within this section of the predesign study, requirements that impact the expansion of the treatment facilities and the selection of the proper water treatment processes are addressed. Drinking water regulations applicable to the facilities, considering both current and proposed future water quality standards, are presented. A discussion of current raw and finished water quality experienced at Ukiah is provided. The DHS has regulations and requirements, which must be met to insure that the City's water supply is safe. Plant capacity requirements, based upon projections of current and future water use, are also addressed. APPLICATION OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was enacted by the U.S. Congress and signed into law in 1974. Through the SDWA, the federal government gave the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) the authority to set standards for contaminants in drinking water supplies. In California, the state's DHS has the primary responsibility of enforcing drinking water regulations. To maintain California's primacy, the state's drinking water regulations can be more but not less stringent that those established by the USEPA. In 1986 and 1996, Congress passed two sets of amendments to the SDWA. The provisions of these amendments currently govern the process through which the USEPA develops drinking water regulations and sets compliance dates. Under these provisions, the USEPA has published a Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). The contaminants on this list are not currently regulated; and every five years, the USEPA is charged with selecting five contaminants from this list to determine whether to regulate their concentration in drinking water. Drinking water regulations in the United States are undergoing significant revisions because of increasing contamination of water sources, coupled with more precise identification of health risks associated with waterborne contaminants. The proposed water treatment facilities will recognize the impact of these evolving regulations and incorporate provisions to meet these requirements to a practical extent. The revisions are being driven by the federally enacted Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments of 1986 (PL 99-339) and 1996 (PL 104-182), by a Reg-Neg process of health, environmental and economic issues involving the USEPA and by DHS. 101303 2-1 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportksection 2 Treatment Requirements Key elements of the 1986 SDWA Amendments, as amended by the 1996 SDWA Amendments, include: A list of chemical contaminants requiring regulation. The 1986 SDWA identified an initial list of 83 chemical contaminants which the USEPA promulgated as national primary drinking water standards, to which additional contaminants for regulation will be added when they become known as to specific degree of health risk. The 1996 SDWA Amendment modified this policy and requires USEPA to establish Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) and promulgate National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for contaminants (1) that may have an adverse effect on human health, (2) that are likely to occur in public water systems at a frequency and concentration of significance to public health, and (3) offers a meaningful opportunity to reduce health risk for people served by public water systems. . . . . Drinking water priority lists of additional contaminants initially published by USEPA in February 1998, and at five-year intervals thereafter, that may require regulation in the future. A proposal to regulate at least five contaminants is expected by August 2001. A revised list will be issued in 2003. Surface W~t Rule (SWTR) for protection against Giardia lambliafd~ysts..(Gi~dia) Jand pathogenic enteric viruses. Filtration is require~/or all surtace/Water supplies and groundwater supplies under the influenc~q.f~urface~ters. Exemptions to filtration are given only when the utility has control of the source watershed and the watershed produces a pristine water supply that meets rigid water quality standards. There are also requirements that no Cryptosporidium oocysts, Legionella, or other bacteria be in the finished treated water although the method of treatment is~ime. /Lead and Copper /Rule (LCR) for regulation of excessive corrosion 1.~.~.hing~xic metals from pipe materials that can pose a health Tot C~oliform DRule~(CR) which provides more stringent control and red/~ion of all path~nic bacteria in distributed water. o Information Collection Rule (ICR) to assess the risk level of microorganisms present in the source water and provide information on water treatment plant design performance. This is the initial stage of obtaining data for setting criteria for Cryptosporidium removal from 101303 2-2 c :\..\02101 \predesign report\section 2 Treatment Requirements surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water as well as balancing the needs for disinfection byproducts. , Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) to regulate chemical compounds formed when disinfectants used for microbial control in drinking water react with organic and inorganic compounds in the source water. Disinfectants include chlorine, chlorine dioxide, chloramines and ozone. a. Stage 1 D/DBPR b. Stage 2 D/DBPR o Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (ESWTR) which will include protection against Cryptosporidium oocysts and reduction of disinfection byproduct precursors such as total organic carbon (TOC). a. Interim ESWTR b. Final (long-term) ESWTR Additional DHS requirements mandated by Title 22 include: , An average filtered water turbidity goal of 0.2 nephlometric turbidity units (NTU) at new and modified water treatment plants. ° A Cryptosporidium Action Plan to Cryptosporidium and other pathogens including: a. b. C. d. e. protect against A settled water turbidity goal of less than 2 NTU. A filtered water turbidity goal less than 0.3 NTU following backwash. A treated water turbidity goal of 0.1 NTU. A reclaimed filter backwash water goal of 2 NTU. A disinfection system for the reclaimed backwash water system. ° Chemicals used for potable water treatment must have National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) Standard 60 approval or similar approval fi.om Underwriters Laboratory (UL) for a purity that is no risk to health fi.om introduced chemicals. The Agency must ensure that the chemicals added to the water have the required NSF or UL approval and that these chemicals are used in concentrations below the NSF designated maximum concentration limits. The following presents the relevant features of current and proposed regulations and discusses their potential impacts to the Ukiah water treatment plant. 101303 2-3 c :\..\02101 \predesign reporfisection 2 Treatment Requirements IMPACT OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS ON UKIAH TREATMENT FACILITIES Surface Water Treatment Rule The Department of Health Services has indicated that the undertow from the Russian River because it is classified as groundwater under the influence of surface water (GWUSW) is subject to the full regulations imposed by the SWTR. For relatively high quality water sources, the SWTR requires that the overall treatment process achieve a minimum of 99.9 percent (3-log) removal and/or inactivation of Giardia cysts and 99.99 percent (4-log) removal and/or inactivation of enteric viruses to be accomplished through a combination of filtration and disinfection. This requirement has been placed on Ukiah's source water. Because frequent measurement of Giardia, Cryptospotidium and entetic viruses is difficult and costly, the USEPA and DHS have developed functional criteria for determining the effectiveness of surface water treatment processes. A multi-barrier (complete) treatment process is required for surface water treatment that usually includes a combination of filtration for particle removal and disinfection for inactivation of organisms. The present plant employs treatment processes that comply with all current and future anticipated regulations associated with the SWTR. designed and operated~can usually achieve at least 99.7 percent (2.5-long) and 99 perEent (2-log) removal of Giardia cysts and enteric viruses, respectively. Guidance criteria developed by USEPA will allow a 99.7 percent (2.5-1og) removal of Giardia cysts and a 99 percent (2-log) removal of enteric viruses if the filtered water turbidity is equal to or less than 0.5 NTU for 95 percent of the time. DHS has regulatory primacy in California and requires these USEPA criteria be met, but also requires compliance with a daily average treated water turbidity of 0.2 NTU for new or recently upgraded water treatment plants. Disinfection is to be used to achieve the remainder of the removal/inactivation requirement, of usually an additional 68 percent (0.5-log) reduction of Giardia cysts and 99 percent (2-log) for enteric viruses. Appropriate disinfection is based upon the product of Disinfectant Residual Concentration and Effective Disinfectant Contact Time (CT). The CT required is a function of the type of disinfectant, residual concentration, water temperature, and pH. CT requirements for chlorine disinfection at 10°, 15° and 20°C that are the range of temperatures encountered during seasonal low-demand and high-demand periods are listed in Appendix E of the USEPA Guidance Manual. The capacity of the existing finished water clearwell of approximately 135,000 gallons does not provide sufficient detention time to meet the CT requirements. The Department of Health Services has mandated that additional plant clearwell capacity be provided to achieve the required CT values for the plant. The SWTR also requires that systems demonstrate, by continuous monitoring and recording, that a disinfectant residual of at least 0.2 mg/L is continuously maintained in water delivered to the 2-4 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 2 Treatment Requirements distribution system. Chlorine is presently applied at a dosage of about 1 mg/L (range 0.8 - 1.3 mg/L) to satisfy this requirement. The City has experienced no difficulty meeting residual chlorine requirements in the distribution system. Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) Lead solder and copper tubing are the predominant materials used in household plumbing, customer service connection pipes and solders. These metals can be soluble in water and can be leached from the pipe and/or solder under certain corrosive water quality conditions. The presence of these metals in drinking water, especially lead, cause adverse impacts on health, especially in children. Lead is associated with retarding physical development and interfering with mental development. The LCR is intended to protect the public from the water delivered to each service connection and after it has flowed through household pipes to consumers. The LCR establishes action levels (AL) to be _<0.015 mg/L for lead and _<1.3 mg/L for copper in at least 90 percent of the most likely consumer tap samples. Sampling must also be conducted at points of entry (POE) to the distribution system to verify that lead and copper in the supply source does not exceed the USEPA criteria. In addition, the water supplier must develop methods to treat the water to reduce its corrosivity to minimize leaching lead and/or copper. If the lead and/or copper levels, after optimum treatment technology and/or corrosion control techniques have been implemented, are still above action levels, the water supplier must take appropriate action. These actions include implementing further additional corrosion control strategies such as lead service line replacement program (LSLRP) if lead services are present and/or implementing a public education program to minimize exposure to these toxic metals. Testing conducted in July 1998 by the City for lead and copper found levels to be well below action limits. Accordingly, DHS reduced the sampling frequency to every 3 years and results similar to those obtained in 1998 were found in 2001. The source has a tendency toward moderate corrosivity, which can be exacerbated by the addition of acids such as alum and/or chlorine which lower pH and reduce alkalinity during treatment. The Langelier Index, which provides a measure of the water's corrosivity as measured by the ability to dissolve or to deposit calcium carbonate film, is in the slightly negative range. These index values usually indicate a moderate corrosion potential for this water. Adding sodium hydroxide for corrosion control through pH adjustment should be continued to control the corrosivity of the water especially if alum is to be used as a primary coagulant. Total Coliform Rule (TCR) Coliform bacterial organisms are found in human and animal fecal material as well as soils, and are used as a surrogate for detection of all potentially pathogenic bacteria in a water supply. The presence of coliforms, which may not be necessarily disease-causing, could indicate that potentially pathogenic organisms may be present in the water supply. The TCR establishes monitoring and sanitary survey requirements for surface and groundwater systems. ~o~3o3 2-5 c :\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 2 Treatment Requirements Current regulations require that each supplier monitor water quality in their distribution systems through a routine sampling program which must have been approved by DHS. If coliform organisms are detected, additional sampling and testing is required until no coliforms are detected. Those tests are based strictly on presence or absence of coliform organisms. If a sample is positive, a repeat sample must be analyzed for fecal coliform or E. Coli, which are more precise indicators of fecal contamination. The Ukiah water supply is in compliance with all regulations pertaining to the TCR. Information Collection Rule (ICR) The ICR is a key element in the USEPA's Reg-Neg process and is intended to provide definitive information on specific source water quality of microorganism contaminants and treatment plant performance including disinfection byproduct generation. This regulation will require public water systems serving more than 100,000 people to collect data on their source and treated water and provide data to the USEPA for evaluation of all public water systems. Since the Ukiah water treatment facilities serve less than 100,000 people, this regulation is not applicable. PROPOSED DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) The proposed Stage 1 - D/DBPR was published in the Federal Register on July 29, 1994. The final Stage 1 rule was published December 16, 1998 but will not be applicable to systems under 10,000 customers prior to January 2004. The Stage 2 D/DBPR was promulgated on December 12, 1998. The Stage 2 rule was proposed in 2002 and will be finalized by summer 2003. USEPA is required by Congress to issue new proposed MCLGs and MCLs for D/DBPRs. The Stage 1 and Stage 2 - D/DBPRs set new MCLs for selected disinfection by-products, established maximum residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs), and treatment techniques for control of Disinfection By-Product Precursors (DBPPs). Revisions to the original total trihalomethane (THM) MCL, a new haloacetic acid (HAA5) MCL and MCLs for bromate and chlorite were included in these new regulations. On the basis of the Reg-Neg rulemaking process, in which the USEPA participated, the THM MCL was reduced initially from 100 ~tg/1 to 80 ~g/1 (in Stage 1) and reduced to 64 ~tg/1 and HAA5 to 48 ~tg/1 in regulations requiring implementation no later than July 1, 2003. Limited data acquired in 1999 for THMs and HAA5s in treated water from the Ukiah plant are presented in Table 2-1. As noted in Table 2-1 the treated water is of extremely high quality with respect to contamination by organics. The average TTHM value for the four quarters of 1999 averaged only 16.7 /~g/1 against the standard of 64 ~tg/1, and supplemented by more recent analyses, indicate that the City of Ukiah treatment plant meets the 80 ~tg/1 Stage 1 - D/DBPR THM MCL at all times and also average less than the 64 ~tg/1 Stage 2 - D/DBPR, THM MCL. 101303 2-6 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 2 Treatment Requirementa TABLE 2-1 TOTAL TRIHALOMETHANE (TTHM)~ AND HALOACETIC ACIDS (HAA5)2 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ANALYSES CITY OF UKIAH Location Despina @ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages AVERAGE 1 st QUARTER 13.2 TTHM,/~g/1 14.1 11.3 11.5 10.3 10.7 10.9 12.7 11.4 12.3 AVERAGE 2nd QUARTER Location Despina ~ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages 15.7 TTHM,/~g/1 28 10.8 18 21.6 35 6.3 13 13.6 23.5 AVERAGE 3~a QUARTER Location Despina @ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages HAA5,/~g/1 10 TTHM, ~g/1 15.9 7.7 12 16.8 28.2 6.9 10.3 10.4 16.6 AVERAGE 4th QUARTER Location Despina @ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages HAA5,/~g/1 9.8 TTHM, ~g/1 16.7 12.5 21.6 5.6 10.3 4.7 9.3 8.2 14.5 101303 2-7 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 2 Treatment Requirements 2000 Quarterly Trihalomethanes (2.5 MG Reservoir) 1 st qtr 2nd qtr 3rd qtr 4th qtr Total Average Bromodichloromethane 5.3 7.3 3.7 6.6 22.9 5.7 Bromoform 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Chloroform 11.3 11 13 18 53.3 13.3 Dibromochloromethane 2.1 3.1 0.96 2.1 8.26 2.1 Total 18.7 21.4 17.66 26.7 84.46 21.1 2001 Quarterly Trihalomethanes (2.5 MG Reservoir) 1 st qtr 2nd qtr 3rd qtr 4th qtr Average TTHM Bromodichloromethane 6 8.7 6.6 5.1 6.6 Bromoform 0 1.6 0 0 0.4 Chloroform 11 13 21 18 15.8 Dibromochloromethane 3 5.2 2.4 1.7 3.1 Total 20 28.5 30 24.8 25.8 · Average TTHM's over the four quarters of 1999 · Average HAA5's over the four quarters of 1999 · Average TTHM's over four quarters of'2000 · Average TTHM's over four quarters of 2001 16.7 ~tg/1 vs. MCL (~ 64~tg/1 10.9 ~tg/1 vs. MCL ~ 48/~g/1 25.8/.tg/1 101303 2-8 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 2 Treatment Requirements Data available on the other proposed DBP contaminant concentrations (i.e., five haloacetic acids [HAA5]) are also included in Table 2-1 taken from numerous locations in the distribution system. It appears from these data that concentrations of the HAA5 contaminants which averaged 10.9 ~g/1 are well below the Stage 2 MCL standard of 48 ~g/1. Enhanced Coagulation (EnCoag) to reduce DBPPs, measured as TOC, is also a part of the Stage 1 - D/DBPR. TOC water quality data is unavailable but it is expected that based on raw water alkalinity data and other parameters, the proposed standards will not be exceeded. In addition, an exemption from the EnCoag requirement is anticipated for WTPs where either 1) the treated water TOC is less than 2 mg/L, or 2) the raw water TOC is less than 4 mg/L, alkalinity is greater than 60 mg/L and the THM/HAA5 are below 40/30 k~g/1, respectively, using free chlorine as the only disinfectant. It is expected that enhanced coagulation will not be required because it is anticipated that TOC will be below the action level of 2 mg/L. Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) The proposed IESWTR was published in the Federal Register on 29 July 1994. The Interim ESWTR was promulgated on December 11, 1998. A final revision was published January 16, 2001 and expected to apply to small systems after January 1, 2004. Based on information released during and after the Reg-Neg process, the IESWTR is likely to include a Cryptosporidium MCLG; may require more frequent watershed sanitary surveys; and could establish new log reduction criteria for these pathogens. A stringent MCLG for Cryptosporidium oocysts may be set at zero oocysts as part of the ESWTR. The proposed ESWTR includes an optional Cryptosporidium MCLG of zero. The "Partnership for Safe Water," prepared jointly by USEPA, American Water Works Associates (AWWA) and other water industry stakeholders, recommends an average filtered water turbidity of 0.1 NTU or less to provide protection of the public. This filtered water turbidity goal is recommended to maximize Cryptosporidium oocyst and other pathogenic organism removal as the requirements for disinfection inactivation and are much more extensive and costly than for Giardia. The SWTR requires that the City conduct sanitary surveys every five years. The IESWTR (presently applicable only to systems with more than 10,000 connections) may reduce the interval between sanitary surveys to as few as three years. The log reduction requirements for pathogens, such as Giardia and enteric viruses, may change from criteria based on coliform levels in the raw water to criteria based on cyst concentrations in the raw water. In addition, a minimum 2-log Cryptosporidium oocyst removal requirement and both a 0.5-log Giardia and a 4-log enteric virus minimum inactivation requirement may be included in the IESWTR. It is doubtful whether the IESWTR will have significant impact on the proposed treatment facilities in that source water quality analyses have never revealed the presence of Cryptosporidium oocysts in the City's water supply. 101303 2-9 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 2 Treatment Requirements FUTURE DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Final (Long-Term) Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (ESWTR) and Stage 2 - Disinfectants/Disinfectant By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) The final (long-term) ESWTR and Stage 2 - D/DBPR are currently scheduled for implementation as listed in the TCR. Under the 1996 SDWA Amendments, delays by USEPA implementing either of the rules may impact implementation of the other rule. USEPA will be responsible for developing a revised schedule that is as expeditious as practical. These two regulations will be based on data that will be collected as part of the ICR and experience with both the interim ESWTR and Stage 1 - D/DBPR. Construction of the proposed WTP is planned to be completed by 2005. It is currently anticipated that these two regulations will become effective after 2004. SOURCE WATER QUALITY Current raw water quality characteristics are summarized in Table 2-2. The Russian River is an extremely ~ood potable water source. _The water is generally of low turbidity, averaging about 2.5 NTU over the entire year. During 2002, the last year of complete water quality records, source water turbidity was less than 2.5 NTU, about 95 percent of the year. Turbidity during the winter may reach 50-75 NTU but drops to 1.8 - 2.5 NTU during summer months. The mineralogical quality of the water is exceedingly good as is demonstrated by compliance. ~vith the inorganic constituent standards. Many of the metals for which MCLs have been established were at or below the detection limit of the analysis used to measure these contaminants. Regulated organic chemical contaminants were not reported on drinking water analyses obtained from DHS. Crih..alomethane~for which a THM standard of 64 ~g/1 is now the MCL are expected to be below 20-25/~g/1 in treated water. Even at the Stage 2 THM MCL level of 48 ~g/1, treated water will meet the standard. No specialized treatment other than chlorine preoxidation will be required to maintain the THM level beneath the present standards. If future requirements further reduce the THM standards eliminating the use of chlorine as a predisinfectant it will reduce the concentration of THMs in treated water. Use of potassium permanganate or perhaps chlorine dioxide as preoxidants could be considered if future THM standards are lowered. Potassium permanganate is the City's preferred method of slime and bacterial growth control. Facilities to apply potassium permanganate will be installed during the proposed improvements. 101303 2-10 c :\..\02101 \predesign report\section 2 Treatment Requirements TABLE 2-2 RAW WATER QUALITY DATA RANNEY COLLECTOR SOURCE WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES CITY OF UKIAH Constituent Alkalinity as CaC03 Hardness as CaC03 Calcium Iron Manganese Magnesium Total Dissolved Solids Turbidity Specific Conductance Temperature pH Arsenic Barium Cadium Chromium Lead Selenium Regulated VOCs Total Trihalomethanes! Total Haloacetic Acids2 ~ After treatment with chlorine 2 After treatment with chlorine Concentration 55-65 mg/L 60-64 mg/L 10-16 mg/L 0.05 - 0.22 mg/L <0.01 mg/L 4.8- 7.3 mg/L 85 - 120 mg/L 0.5 - 50+ NTU (ave < 2.5 NTU) 115 - 14 micromhos/cm 45°F- 60°F (50°F ave) 7.0- 7.5 < 0.003 mg/L <0.1 mg/L < 0.005 mg/L < 0.05 mg/L < 0.01 < 0.003 None detected 16.7 - 26/xg/1 8.2- 13.6/~g/1 101303 2-11 c :\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 2 Treatment Requirements Regulatory Impact on Treatment Facilities In the June 22, 1995, Cryptosporidium Action Plan, DHS recommends limiting the spent filter backwash recycle flow to less than 5 percent of treatment plant flow and processing the recycle stream so that a turbidity standard of 2 NTU can be maintained in the return flow at all times if the recycle stream is to be discharged directly into the incoming raw water line. Further, provision must be included to add a disinfectant to this return flow if this practice is to be followed. The existing facilities for reclamation and recycle of treated backwash water should meet these requirements. Accordingly, the following design provisions will be included in this phase of facility improvements. . Include a flow control system monitoring facilities to limit the recycle flow to no more than 5 percent of incoming flow. If recycle flows are to exceed more than 5 percent of the incoming water flow, the flow should be diverted to one of the onsite percolation basins. . Clarify the waste backwash recycle flow in the existing washwater recovery ponds to remove particles and possible pathogens concentrated in the waste stream and monitor turbidity continuously with a dedicated turbidimeter to comply with the 2 NTU standard. . Incorporate provisions to disinfect the recycle flow to inactivate pathogens that may possibly be present in this stream if reclaimed backwash water is to be injected directly into the incoming raw water line. Practicing pre-chlorination with the recycle flow applied ahead of the application point for chlorine should comply with these requirements. It is anticipated that instituting the above three design measures will enable a treatment plant to comply with proposed ESWTR regulations implemented in 2002. PLANT CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS The City of Ukiah constructed a Ranney well collector, a type of{i-n-filtration l~i~ery] adjacent to the Russian River in--to obtain ~iversio_n(6f up to 20 cfs (12.9 mgd) limited3, to the underflow of th-~river. Initial t ve--gled that'at floWs appro'aching'"~h~ :d'eSign capacity of 12 mgd drawdown was excessive and turbidity levels were unacceptable for a water supply that received no additional treatment other than chlorination. In 1965 the turbidity standard was 5 NTU. Consequently, the capacity was downrated to substantially less than the desired 12 mgd. In 19_91 a_filtration olant was ~lled with .a capacity of 6 mgd. Existing raw water pumps were replaced With new pumps capable of matching the 3-~sign ~aiSacity of the proposed treatment plant. For several years the output of the Ranney collector exceeded the plant design capacity but in recent years~he_colleCtor capac~ .t7 has dropped to ..,about 4 mgd? An analysis prepared by Layne Chfisteffsen COmpany, a Ranney Division in 2001: regaled that the safe yield during summer conditions had declined to~.~ss than3 mgd (2.78 m~d-d'~) Subsequent remedial measures 101303 2-12 c:X..\02101 \predesign report\section 2 Treatment Requirements employed by Ranney Division in the s~_~g of 2002 resulted in some additional increase in raw water source capacity up to about(~.5 mgdJbut still far below the neede~ ~eet summer peak daily_demands. According to a survey conducted by the Department of Health Services in July 2001 (see letter of September 14, 2001 from DHS in Appendix),, the reduced capacity of the R.anney. Collector, (in addition to continuing capacity loss of the c~he city has a current ~stimated~rnaxi/nur~_ source capacity (wells and treatment plant)t(gf 6.55 mgc]~ The maximum day demand (from 1993 through 2002 during the peak months is 7.1"3 mgd. Refer to plant production records in the Appendix. According to DHS, reciting Section 64564 of the California Code of Regulations, a public water system's ~-~ded ~o~ce ~aPacity3rshall not be l~S~/0aan the peak day demand. At i~ast 20 percent rese-'-"~'~e.~ capaci-- ty fb~res-'~p-ond-i_n~ tc;-~te' i: use situati~o'ns, a majo~ fir-~ fo-"-~ ~ exampl-'---'--~ should be considered in sizing water treatment facilities. Using the above parameters, ~representative of sound engineerin_v._p_ractice for water source development, would result in 9 mgd as the firm source capacit.__y to i_nsure_~ adequate supply 0fwater for the City of Ukiah. Meeting these requirements from the existing Ranney Collector is~possible considering_th..at ~ty is limited to about 3,350 gp~m. The backup wells c~ onI..y provide about 1,200 gpm:_ The total reliable source capacity is therefore limited to about.4,550 gpm or.~;55 meal'} Th___e~e deficit of 2.5 mgd (9 mgd - 6.5 mgd) must be provided by a new water source. The City is undertaking a separate investigation of the various alternatives (second Ranney collector or additional wells) to increase the source capacity. To enable the existing water treatment facilities to proces~____~ition~the addition of a third 3 mgd capacity factory-built Trident treatment moclul~ to expand the capacity ~ would be need~. ~Further~ to enhance capacity and improve reliability, it is desirable to pfovlde ia I_Ourth 'unit_to permR_un.i, nte~..pted prod.uctipn if one unit breaks down or must be rer3_ oved~_ from service for routine~aintenance. An additional advantage of upgrading the water treatment ~capacity to 8,400 gpm (12 mgd) is that it will allow the plant to operate for fewer hours eac. h day to meet system demand thereby reducing- operational labor requirements. Also, it can be operated at reduced capaci _ty_~which improves performance reliability and reduces the potential _for improperl_y treating the water during difficult treatment conditions. __ 101303 2-13 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 2 SECTION 3 }VA TER TREATMENT FA CILITIES IMPR 0 VEMENTS }Vater Treatment Facilities Imiarovements SECTION 3 WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL The existing water treatment facilities designed around U.S. Filter Trident Model TR840S units has a maximum design capacity of 6 mgd. Each modular unit can be operated independently producing 3 mgd at a filtration rate of 6 gpm per square foot. This higher filtration rate is permissible under the Department of Health Services operating permit stipulations because pretreatment is provided by natural filtration of Russian River water through the Ranney collector intake. Based upon favorable performance achieved with the existing facilities it is proposed to expand the plant using the U.S. Filter Trident factory-built modular treatment unit. To meet the expanded water supply needs of the community it is proposed to install two additional modular Trident units to provide the reliability and redundancy necessary to effectively meet the water supply needs of the community. As indicated in Section 2 of the design report the treatment facilities need to have a continuous reliable capacity of about 7 mgd to meet peak demand flows during the months of July and August. It is clear that this demand exceeds the present maximum 6 mgd capacity of the existing plant. Adding a third 3 mgd capacity module will meet current peak demands but will not provide the required capacity and the necessary reliability if one unit is down for maintenance. Consequently the proposed expansion will include a fourth Trident unit which will vrovide the necessary redundancy and ~(~ roguce up to~2 mgd Under condit'i°n~-o~extreme dem-~n~-~d~LFurther, a treatment capacity of 12 mgd matches the City's water fight e-ntitlement to the underflow of the Russian River. RAW WATER PUMPING FACILITIES The existing Ranney collector has two 2,800 gpm (4 mgd) vertical turbine pumps that were installed in 1991 that supply raw water to the treatment facilities. The firm pumping capacity of the raw water pumps is about 7 mgd during the summer season when water levels in the Ranney collector are at seasonal minimums assuming that inflow through the collection laterals will match pumping capacity. As noted below the current capacity of the Ranney collector is far below 7 mgd. The capacity for this expansion will be limited by the production capability of the existing Ranney collector. The production capacity was about 6 mgd when the treatment plant was first placed in service in 1991. Since that time the output was dropped to about 4.5-4.7 mgd. Recent (March 2003) cleaning procedures to the Ranney collector laterals had resulted in some increase in capacity but the City's present estimate of 4.8 mgd is deficient by about 2.0 mgd over the anticipated present needs of the community and the capacity of the proposed treatment facility improvements. The City will be implementing 'a separate program to identify and evaluate alternatives to increasing the raw water supply to match the capacity of the proposed treatment plant improvements. 102403 3-1 c :\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Raw water pumping reliability is a concern with the existing facilities. The two existing pumps are approximately 12 years old and based upon observations by plant operating personnel of pump conditions and the declining output in recent years they need to be rebuilt. With the pending proposed improvements the existing pumps should be removed from the intake structure and rebuilt to restore original design capacity. There is also a problem with redundant pumping capability with the existing two pump system. During flushing of the clarifier when higher incoming flow rates are required the existing two pump system cannot respond to the treatment plant needs because of inadequate capacity. Installation of a third pump of 2,800 gpm capacity would alleviate this problem and facilitate more effective and efficient operation of the treatment facilities. Consequently, it is recommended that a third raw water pump be included in the project. Additionally, the existing 12-year-old pumps need to be overhauled or replaced. TREATMENT FACILITIES The existing as well as the proposed new facilities associated with the expansion of the water treatment plant is presented schematically in Figure 3-1. The major changes in the existing plant other than installing two new Trident treatment units, involves the construction of a new finished water clearwell/storage reservoir, a new high service pumping station, conversion of the existing clearwell to a filtered water transfer basin and replacement of two high service pumps to low head transfer pumps. Further definition of the treatment facilities illustrating the new features to be added with this expansion are shown on the plant hydraulic profile provided as Figure 3-2. Additionally, a mechanical floor plan at the proposed expansion is provided as Figure 3-3. A site plan showing the orientation of the building expansion is provided as Figure 3-4. Installation of two modular treatment units including valves, piping, electrical, etc. associated with the modular units and the associated building expansion represents the major work at the treatment plant. The existing coagulant chemical feed system is adequate to serve the expanded facility. There is concern whether the static mixer provides adequate dispersion of coagulating chemicals with the incoming raw water. Installation of an inline mechanical mixer in place of the static device, which will perform more efficiently over a wider range of plant flow rates is proposed. The chemical feed system requires a larger capacity day tank for the nonionic polymer (filter aid material). Because of space limitations within the chemical feed area it is planned to supplement the existing 400 gallon capacity day tank with a second 500 gallon tank equipped with a recirculation mixer. The proposed additional storage tank and mixer assembly is shown in Figure 3-5. There are several manufacturers of inline mechanical mixers which would be appropriate for this installation. The unit would be used to replace the existing static mixer. A typical unit is illustrated in one manufacturer's information is provided in the Appendix. 102403 3-2 c:X..\0210 l\presdesign report\section 3 -< ~c~. m~ ~ SAMPLE TAP m NaOH '"021f~l-~kmh\'.Prel~e~icjnFio~re~\FIG--"~-7--hyd-pr°.dwt3, (Id/ 17/'200.~ (~1:4R:.34 PM, ~dminl~tr~lor 4~ Cfi 0'~ ",4 O0 ~ 0 ---' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F- r--0 71:11:=2 m .--.q OO 0 m~_o :'x. OP101_t}kir~h\,C. on~tr~mlionDrawings\,.,~-1_bldg_flr_plan.dwg, 0R/'07/'200'~ 04' 57: OR PM, ,~dmini.~tr(~for ELECiRICAL ROOU 22'-0' ~ ~o'-o' BUILDING NX)IllON ~X,O?lQl-Ilkir~hX',PreDesignFio~re~X,,.Flfi_,3-4 trentment fr]cilities.dw9' 01B/12/' 2003 10:32:76 ,~t../I, Adminislrntor X~ ./ ~X / i//' ~ /// / /I,;, / /!II / ///// Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Presently, each of the Trident treatment modules has a filter effluent turbidimeter. The new units will also be provided with individual effluent turbidimeters. For improved overall treatment plant performance monitoring and to meet requirements of the Department of Health Services a separate plant effluent turbidimeter will be included as part of this project. Further to enhance filter performance and improve performance monitoring, total particle counters will be installed on each of the two existing filters and the two proposed new filters. An additional improvement will involve integrating the signal from the total particle count analyzers into the plant performance monitoring system. A technical brochure describing one manufacturers total particle count analyzer is included in the Appendix. For improved mixing of sodium hydroxide with finished water applied for pH control, improvements will include provisions to add sodium hydroxide to the finished water at the discharge from the treatment plant clearwell. To insure complete dispersion and adequate mixing of the sodium hydroxide with filtered water, a static mixer will be added to the pipeline downstream of the point of application. The flow schematic for the upgraded treatment facility provided in Figure 3-1 and the building floor plan Figure 3-3 indicates the proposed application point for sodium hydroxide. Another major improvement that will contribute to improving operational reliability and safety involves replacement of the existing wet chlorine scrubber with a more reliable dry pellet type system. The existing caustic based scrubber is approximately 12 years old and the extreme corrosive environment associated with use of sodium hydroxide has resulted in serious deterioration in the equipment and a heightened concern for safety and reliability. The scrubber is required to perform flawlessly on demand in the event of an unplanned release of chlorine gas from the disinfection facility. The improvements will involve removal of the existing chlorine gas scrubber and replacement with a dry pellet based unit similar in design to the equipment described in manufacturers technical brochures included in the Appendix. The proposed replacement equipment can be installed within the space occupied by the present scrubber. There are other improvements proposed to the water filtration facility needed to improve reliability as well as maintainability of the facility. These are as follows: o Relocation of the treatment operations performance monitoring laboratory space within the treatment plant building. The current laboratory area occupies space within the treatment plant control room and the requirements for the two different functions are incompatible. Consequently, all laboratory operations will be moved into a new dedicated area in the southeast comer of the building expansion. The location of the new laboratory facilities is shown on Figure 3-3. e Access to the roof for maintenance of the building ventilation equipment is required. Improvements will involve installation of a roof hatch and a permanent ladder from the mezzanine floor to the roof. 102403 3-8 c:\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements . . Improved access to the treatment units for proper maintenance and cleaning is needed. It is requested to provide access walkways on all sides of the two new Trident units. Also, similar walkways on the existing two units will be provided. The air compressors in the mechanical room will be relocated for improved access. This particular modification will be addressed during the design phase of the project. WASHWATER RECOVERY SYSTEM The Department of Health Services is more aggressively enforcing standards limiting the amount of recovered waste backwash water that is returned to the process and the quality of the return flow. The Filter Backwash Rule limits the return water flow to 10 percent of the incoming raw water flow and the maximum turbidity to 2 NTUs. However, the State of California advocates limiting the return flow to 5 percent of the incoming flow. The existing recovered washwater return facilities consist of a single 420 gpm vertical turbine pump. This pump has the capability to deliver water to three different locations. These locations include the incoming raw water line, the baseball diamonds for irrigation water or into the sanitary sewer. According to operating personnel the present washwater handling system is deficient especially during periods of high raw water turbidity and/or high treatment plant demand. Returning only 5 percent of the flow for example when one unit is being operated at two-thirds of its capacity (2 mgd), requires in excess of 48 hours to recycle the recovered water back to the process. Presently any excess water that cannot be returned to the process is discharged to the percolation beds or the sanitary sewer. This method of handling excess water is certainly effective during summer months but has limitations during the winter when percolation rates are substantially lower. The option remains of course to discharge excess recovered water to the sanitary sewer but this practice taxes the capacity of the wastewater treatment facilities and is only used if the other two options are unavailable. Improving the washwater recycling facilities appears to be one task that should be made during this phase of expansion. The addition of a second washwater return pump would be the obvious solution to expanding the recycle capability. A second 420 gpm pump would increase the return flow capability to 840 gpm or 10 percent of the expanded 8,400 gpm (12 mgd) capacity of the treatment plant. Also with a second pump, it would be possible to dedicate each pump to returning recovered washwater to separate locations. For example, depending upon plant operating flow, the season of the year, etc., one pump could return water to the plant inlet whereas the other could discharge to either the irrigation field or to the sanitary sewer. The advantage of having two pumps would permit drawing down the washwater recovery basins more quickly. Under the present situation these basins are unavailable to process waste backwash water if the recycle pump system is still recovering reclaimed water and recycling it to the treatment plant. Another recently adopted water quality standard is that the recycle stream turbidity should not exceed 2 NTU. In order to meet this more stringent standard additional detention time for 102403 3-9 c:\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Imjgrovements settling solids in the backwash water is required. Consequently it is recommended that a second reclaimed backwash water recycle pump be installed within the existing collection sump. This pump can be installed adjacent to the existing pump simply by relocating the base plates that support the pump, reconfiguring the discharge piping system and adding new checkered plate covers to the pump sump basin. Another recommended improvement associated with the backwash water recovery and recycle system involves disinfecting the retum flow before it is introduced into the treatment facilities for reprocessing. The present DHS standard requires disinfection of this return stream. Simple chlorination of this stream would be effective but chlorine produces chlorinated by- products that are regulated contaminants. Use of potassium permanganate to provide inactivation of microbial contaminants and assist with taste and odor control is the preferred means of treating this stream. A chemical feed pump to apply the required dosage of 1-2 mg/1 to the return stream along with a mixing/storage tank and a mixer will be included for the potassium permanganate feed system. It is planned to place this assembly in the chemical feed area and extend a feed line to the reclaimed water pumping station connecting it to the return pump discharge header. STANDBY POWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The existing 750 kw standby generator must be able to operate the entire water treatment plant. Presently it is wired such that only one of the existing 350 hp high service pumps is connected to the emergency power supply bus. It is desired that the plant electrical system be reconfigured so that all pumps, motors and electrical equipment associated with the treatment plant be operated off the emergency bus. Meeting this requirement with the existing generator will be possible since the two 350 hp high service pumps are to be removed from the treatment plant and replaced with smaller pumps. The high service pumps will be relocated to the new finished water pumping station. This relocation will free up additional emergency generator capacity that will be available for operating all facilities within the existing treatment plant building. The backwash pump will be added to the emergency bus as well. The low head filtered water transfer pumps will have an aggregate horsepower of probably less than 150 hp, compared to the 350 Hp high service pump that will be replaced insuring that there will be sufficient power available from the existing generator to operate the entire plant. SODIUM HYDROXIDE STORAGE TANK The existing 6,000 gallon sodium hydroxide storage tank has deteriorated badly and needs to be replaced. The exterior surface is showing signs of delamination in certain areas and leakage is occurring at many of the fittings. Further, although the earthquake restraints are designed for Seismic Zone 4, piping connections to the tank do not have the flexibility that would be required to withstand horizontal movement during an earthquake. To insure reliability and safety to operating personnel the existing tank will be replaced. 102403 3-10 c:\..\0210 l\presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Associated with tank replacement is the installation of a dividing wall within the chemical spill containment basin to separate the new caustic storage tank from a new dry pellet type chlorine gas scrubber. ALUM STORAGE TANK The existing alum storage tank is presently out of service because a polyaluminum chloride (PAC) coagulant purchased in totes is currently being used in place of alum. The tank is in poor condition and must be replaced if bulk shipments of PAC will be obtained for use in the future. Coagulant cost savings may be possible if larger quantities of PAC are purchased. Additionally, purchasing the coagulant in bulk would eliminate the handling requirements associated with use of totes. Consequently, it is recommended that the alum tank be replaced with a new tank during the planned improvement project. TREATMENT BUILDING EXPANSION The existing treatment plant was designed to accommodate a future expansion involving the addition of two identical Trident units. The filtered water clearwell was designed so that it would accommodate the addition of two additional treatment units and it was sized such that it could be incorporated into the new building addition. Also, piping within the clearwell was designed so that new piping would connect to a blind flange located at floor level between two future treatment units. Figure 3-3 is a floor plan of the proposed treatment plant expansion showing the building addition as well as the location of the two new treatment units. A building elevation view provided in Figure 3-6 illustrates how the two units planned for this phase of expansion would be situated within the extended building. Figure 3-7 is a sectional view through the building showing the orientation of the two new units. The building has been designed such that the exterior panels on the eastside of the building can be removed permitting extension of access catwalks connecting the new and the existing treatment units. The building addition would be essentially similar in design to the existing pre-engineered steel building. Peripheral footings will provide support for the building columns. Two equipment pads for the new Trident units will be installed on the prepared subbase located within the building addition outline. The 6-inch thick slab floor will be extended into the addition matching the elevation of the floor in the existing building. The style and color of the exterior building siding will be selected to match the existing siding. FILTRATION FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIA Table 3-1 provided below lists the design criteria that applies to the improvements to be added during this facility expansion phase. 102403 3-11 c :\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 ,O?lf' nh",,P .gnFiL ,FIG_ trt_i ~.levn. (3R/'1 I.-~ 12 S PM ini.~h "FI 0 ,~216, ....... rih',,P ........ gnFi9 ...... xFIC, ..... bldg ........ onn.f,,,u, ,~R/12/ ...... '~ 01'. ...... PM, ,- ...... ni.~tr( ..... Water Treatment Facilities Improvements TABLE 3-1 DESIGN CRITERIA WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION CITY OF UKIAH Plant Capacity Existing Nominal Design Peak Raw Water Pumps (existing) Number Capacity each Horsepower Speed Raw Water Pump (new) Number Capacity Horsepower Speed Package Treatment Units Existing Number Capacity (each) Total Capacity New Number Capacity (each) Total Capacity Design Characteristics Length Width Height Filter Area (each) Adsorption Clarifier Area (each) Filter Hydraulic Design Rate Filter Media Filter Type 6 mgd 9 mgd 12 mgd 2 2,800 gpm 60 Hp 1 constant, 1 variable speed 1 2,800 gpm 75 Hp Constant 2 3 mgd 6 mgd 2 3 mgd 6 mgd 49ft. 10in. 11 ft 11 in. 10~ 1 in. 350 sq. ft. 175 sq. ft. 6 gpm per sq. ft. Gravity Tri-mixed media 102403 3-14 c :\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Backwash Flow Rate Clarifier Rise Rate Filtered Water Transfer Pumps (new) Number Type Capacity Rated Discharge Head Horsepower Speed High Service Pumps (new) Number Type Capacity Rated Discharge Head Horsepower Speed Clarified Backwash Return Pumps Number Type Capacity Rated Discharge Head Horsepower Speed Sodium Hydroxide Tank (replacement) Number Volume Dimensions Diameter Height Material Alum Tank (replacement) Number Volume Dimensions Diameter Height Material 15 gpm per sq. fi. 12 gpm per sq. ft. 3 Vertical Turbine Two ~ 2,100 gpm, one ~ 4,200 gpm 45ft. Two ~ 30 Hp, One ~ 60 Hp One Constant (2,100 gpm) and Two Variable (2,100 gpm and 4,200 gpm) 3 Vertical Turbine, Can-Style 2,800 gpm 363 fi. 350 Hp VFD Controlled 2 (1 existing, 1 new) Vertical Turbine 420 gpm 125 fi 20 Hp Variable (new pump) 1 6,500 gallons 10ft. 11 ft. 11 in. High Density Polyethylene 1 6,500 gallons 10ft. 11 ft. 11 in. High Density Polyethylene 102403 3-15 c :\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements FILTERED WATER TRANSFER PUMPS In this expansion phase the existing backwash basin/filtered water clearwell will be converted into a backwash basin/filtered water transfer pump basin. The existing high head service pumps will be removed. These pumps will be replaced by relatively low head filtered water transfer pumps which will pump water into the 1.5 million gallon finished water storage reservoir. Three filtered water transfer pumps will be provided. Two pumps will have a capacity of 2,100 gpm matching the design capacity of an individual Trident treatment unit. The third pump will have a capacity of 4,200 gpm. One 2,100 gpm capacity pump will be constant speed whereas the other two pumps will have variable frequency drives (VFD). The total combined capacity of the pumping system will be 8,400 gpm, which will match the full 12 mgd capacity of the four modular treatment units. These pumps will be controlled by level in the filtered water transfer basin. The flow rate through the treatment plant will be selected based upon overall distribution system demand. Once the raw water flow into the plant is established filtered water flow rate into the transfer basin will match the pumping rate of the transfer pumps controlled by basin level. In general, plant flow rate will be established either manually by operator selection or it can be changed automatically through control signals from the finished water storage reservoir where level will fluctuate as distribution system demands varies. In other words, increased system demand coupled with dropping water levels in the finished water storage reservoir will generate a signal indicating that flow into the treatment facility must be increased to keep up with demand. All of the upgraded control features will be incorporated into an upgraded SCADA system. A more detailed description of plant control is provided in a technical memorandum prepared by HDR Engineering and included in the Appendix. This memorandum addresses the process and instrumentation provisions applicable to the proposed improvements. The filtered water transfer pumps will also provide filter backwash water in the event the dedicated backwash pump is inoperable. Two pumps with capacities of 2,100 gpm and 4,200 gpm respectively will be operated simultaneously to provide the required 6,300 gpm of washwater for a Trident unit. The current design relies on the output of the high service pumps and requires a pressure reducing valve between the pumps and the Trident units. This pressure reducing valve is not required with the low head filtered water transfer pumps and will be removed. FINISHED WATER PUMPING STATION The process flow schematic in Figure 3-1 illustrates the relative position of the new finished water pumping station in the treatment process. New high service finished water pumps are required with the conversion of the existing plant finished water clearwell to a filtered water transfer basin and the construction of a new 1.5 million gallon reservoir. It is proposed to install these pumps in a dedicated building located adjacent to the finished water storage reservoir. The proposed location is shown on the water treatment plant site plan illustrated on Figure 3-4. 102403 3-16 c:\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements A mechanical floor plan for the pump station is provided on Figure 3-8. The initial facility will include three high service pumps matching the general performance characteristics of the existing pumps. The three pumps to be installed during this plant improvement phase will have an individual capacity of 2,800 gpm. To satisfy the distribution system pressure requirements these pumps will have a rated total head of around 365 feet. Three pumps will be provided initially with two pumps being controlled by variable frequency drive and the third pump will be constant speed. As noted on Figure 3-8 space is provided for a possible future fourth pump. At 2,800 gpm each the total capacity of the finished water pumping system is 8,400 gpm or 12 mgd. The design features of the building match those incorporated into the main treatment plant building. The building will be a pre-engineered steel structure with exterior ribbed siding and a standing seam roof. Elevation views of this building are provided in Figure 3-9. The most efficient and cost effective type of pump for this application is a can style vertical turbine pump. Using this style of pump, retrieval for maintenance or replacement is facilitated through removable access skylights placed on the building roof. An emergency standby electric generator will be required to operate the high service pumps in the event of a power failure. A generator similar in size (750 kw) to that at the existing treatment facility would have the capability of operating two of the high service pumps which would deliver the equivalent of around 5,600 gpm or 8 mgd into the distribution system. This delivery capacity coupled with that available from several of the City's wells (assuming they have standby power) would represent the supply available to the community during a power outage. ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS A specific preliminary design memorandum has been prepared by HDR Engineering addressing the recommended modifications to the existing electrical and plant control facilities as well as describing the new facilities needed to support the construction of a separate high service pump station. The complete memorandum can be found in the Appendix. The highlights of this memorandum are as follows. The existing treatment plant service is adequate to provide power for the planned modifications. Relocating the finished water pumps to the new high service pump station reduces the electrical load substantially. The existing 750 kw standby diesel generator is adequate to handle the full power load for the treatment plant. The emergency bus will be eliminated and all powered equipment will be on the emergency generator. Inverter VFD bypass provisions will be added to existing speed control equipment. The new high service pump station with a connected load of 1533 KVA will be required to power 3-350 Hp high service pumps. All three pumps will be equipped with VFD's. A 1200 KW generator will be provided to power all three pumps. 102403 3-1 7 c :\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 i I I I I _..I I I I I F- .x.- 'x~aq',..~re',~eslgnF 9 res\FIG_:, Sa_h.~ps__el~,/sd~vcj 1¢)/'0.~/2(1Q.~ 12:.%a:Q4 PI/I, /~dn~inlslrator 14'-0' APPROX EAVE ~3:> r-- Z Water Treatment Facilities Improvements A Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) will be provided to serve the water treatment facilities, the high service pump station, two storage reservoirs, three distribution system booster pumping stations, five well sites and include limited spares for future facilities. The SCADA system will be either 900 MHz spread spectrum unlicensed radio or telephone or a combination of both. A full description of the composition of the SCADA operation and control facility can be found in the Appendix. Raw water flow rate to the treatment plant is maintained by a pressure control based, VFD speed controller that with one fixed speed and one variable speed pump causes difficulties when sudden increases in raw water pump output are needed such as during a clarifier flush cycle. The addition of a third raw water pump of probably constant speed design will circumvent this problem. Also, software changes will be considered that could overcome the present identified problems achieving satisfactory raw water flows when required. Additional explanation of the proposed raw water pump control provisions can be found in the Appendix. FACILITY IMPROVEMENT COSTS The following paragraphs present the estimated costs to complete improvements to the water treatment facilities and the finished water pump station. The costs are based upon installing two new 3 mgd capacity modular Trident units in an extension of the existing building. Also, costs are provided for the finished water pump station and interconnecting pipelines between facilities. Excluded from the estimate are any costs for expanding the capacity of the raw water source with the exception of addition of a new raw water pump. The existing Ranney collector pump station will not be modified in this phase of the project. Note that the costs presented in this document are to be regarded as preliminary design level estimates that have an accuracy range of plus 20 percent to minus 15 percent of expected contractor's bid prices developed from detailed construction drawings and specifications. The estimated cost for the 6 mgd expansion is presented in Table 3-2. The probable cost to expand and upgrade the treatment facilities including constructing a new high service pumping station is $4,049,000. This estimate excludes the cost of contractor markup and mobilization and engineering, administrative and legal services. The component costs used to develop the projected construction cost are supported by material takeoffs, equipment cost estimates from vendors and from cost records maintained by SPH Associates from previous similar projects. It should be noted that this is a predesign phase estimate and refinements following completion of detailed plans and specifications may reveal that the estimate must be adjusted to reflect better definition of this project and bidding conditions at the time. 102403 3-20 c:\..\0210 l\presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements TABLE 3-2 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKIAH Component Demolition Site Preparation Excavation and Embankments Yard Piping Landscaping Paving and Surfacing Concrete Masonry Miscellaneous Metal Treatment Plant Building Finished Water Pump Station Building Trident TR-840S Treatment Units Install Treatment Units Raw Water Pump Rebuild Existing Raw Water Pumps Chemical Feed Facility Improvements In-line Mechanical Mixers Dry Media Scrubber Low Head Filtered Water Transfer Pumps High Head Finished Water Pumps Caustic Storage Tank Alum Storage Tank Recycle Pump Process Instrumentation Process Piping Butterfly Valves Valves, Cocks and Hydrants HVAC Standby Generator/Fuel Tank Painting Electrical and Instrumentation Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency ~ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST Estimated Cost 37,000 5,000 18,000 183,000 18,000 90,000 173,000 4,000 41,000 73,000 64,000 800,000 200,000 95,000 30,000 14,000 32,000 165,000 72,000 156,000 12,000 12,000 30,000 27,000 144,000 38,000 28,000 29,000 178,000 39,000 567,000 3,374,000 675,000 $4,049,000 102403 3-21 c:\..\02101 \presdesign report\section 3 SECTION 4 DIS TRIB UTION S YS TEM S TORA GE FA CIL I TIES Distribution System Storage Facilities SECTION 4 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM STORAGE FACILITIES INTRODUCTION The City's treated water distribution system does not have adequate storage to satisfy requirements established by the California Department of Health Services (DHS). In a letter dated July 11, 2001, DHS advises that based upon their storage capacity assessment, Zone 1 (lower zone) has 2,635,000 gallons of available storage. The required storage volume is 5,600,000 gallons yielding a deficiency in Zone 1 of 3,000,000 gallons. Their inspection also revealed that Zone 2 (upper zone) has about 100,000 gallons of usable storage versus a required storage volume of 360,000 gallons. By their assessment Zone 2 is 260,000 gallons deficient in finished water storage volumes. In order to comply with DHS regulations, additional storage must be added to each zone. Zone 1 has an existing 2.3 million gallon concrete storage reservoir that was constructed in the 1950's. This reservoir located above the City's golf course has provided good service and after completion of a recent cleaning and leak repair project should be expected to provide many additional years of service. However, the lack of a second reservoir at this location near the existing reservoir to provide system redundancy is an operational deficiency, which must be corrected to comply with DHS regulations. Both reservoir locations are shown on Figure 4-1. The sites are situated on a steep hillside and access is difficult to both tanks. Because of' the constrained site and difficult access the size of the storage reservoirs is limited. ZONE 1 RESERVOIR Site Selection Selecting an appropriate location for additional storage reservoirs in Zone 1 to provide 3 million gallons of needed storage was influenced by property available to the City on which to place these reservoirs. An obvious location for the Zone 1 reservoir would be adjacent to the existing 2.3 million gallon reservoir. However, this site does not provide sufficient space for a full 3 million gallon capacity reservoir. Consequently, it was decided to place 1.5 million gallons at this site and locate the remaining 1.5 million gallons adjacent to the treatment plant, which is also in Zone 1. At this location the reservoir would provide system storage as well as satisfy the requirement for additional detention time to meet disinfection process requirements. The development and selection of a design for this reservoir is discussed later in this section of' the report. 101603 4-1 c :\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 ',.02101_llkinh\PreDesionFioures\FIG_~l-1 exis! site.dwg, 08/'12/200.3 02: 1.5:26 PM, ~dminislrntor /, Distribution System Storage Facilities Evaluation of Zone 1 Reservoir Design Alternatives Once it was decided that it would be possible to locate a 1.5 million gallon reservoir adjacent to the existing 2.3 million gallon reservoir, an evaluation of possible tank designs was initiated. For this site, materials of construction that would be consistent with this location included the following: · Welded steel · Glass lined bolted steel · Prestressed concrete Welded Steel Reservoirs Welded steel reservoirs are constructed using welded steel plates with interior columns. These reservoirs require protective coating systems for both the interior and exterior surfaces as well as cathodic protection to prevent corrosion. Welded steel reservoirs are commonly used for reservoirs under 5,000,000 gallon capacity. In this size range welded steel is typically the least expensive material based upon initial capital cost. However, repainting the reservoir is an added maintenance requirement increasing to the overall life-cycle cost. A major problem associated with welded steel tanks is that site conditions and weather play a major role in the proper preparation of the interior and exterior surfaces and painting of the reservoir. Because climatic and seasonal weather conditions (depending upon location) for painting and coating reservoirs are not always optimum, and inspection to confirm adequacy of the paint system is difficult, there is always a chance for premature coating failure. We have had specific experience with paint system failures on welded steel tanks within the first year of service. If this failure occurs the reservoir must be taken out of service for recoating which can significantly disrupt operations and substantially add to facility maintenance cost. Recoating of the tank interior generally is needed every 15 to 20 years, impacting the lifecycle cost of a welded steel tank. Glass Lined and Coated Bolted Steel Tanks The glass lined bolted steel tank represents a competitive option to the welded steel alternative because it does not need to be entirely repainted within the anticipated 40 to 60 year life of the tank. The steel panels for this type of reservoir are coated with a factory applied silica glass coating which through a thermal baking process forms a hardened barrier on both the interior and exterior surfaces of the reservoir sidewall panels. The steel panels are assembled at the jobsite by the manufacturer's construction crew using specialized equipment. As with welded steel reservoirs cathodic protection is recommended to provide additional protection against corrosion. Glass lined bolted steel tanks have several unique features. One advantage is that the exterior surface of the panels never require any recoating or repainting and is easy to clean and repair. 101603 4-3 c :\..\02101 \predesign report\section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities The manufacturer claims that most graffiti can be removed from the surface of these reservoirs with solvents and any holes due to vandalism can be easily repaired. As noted in our economic evaluation later in this section, bolted steel tanks have a higher initial capital cost than welded steel reservoirs but require less maintenance. This feature contributes to essentially the same lifecycle cost for both alternatives. The roof of bolted steel reservoirs is generally a geodesic dome that has a higher profile than the low cone roof system used on a standard welded steel tanks. The standard design uses an unpainted aluminum dome but they can be provided with a baked-on, powder coat paint system of various muted colors. The painted surface eliminates the glare concern from the aluminum dome cover. One disadvantage of the glassed lined bolted steel reservoir concept is there is only one major manufacturer active in this area. However, in developing our cost estimate we have received a proposal from the manufacturer with a guaranteed not-to-exceed price under the conditions of the offer stated in their proposal. A copy of this proposal for the bolted steel tank alternative is provided in the Appendix. Prestressed Concrete Reservoir Reservoirs constructed of prestressed concrete represent a very low maintenance alternative to welded steel and bolted steel tanks. They are superior to steel tanks in having no paint systems that must be maintained and eventually repaired. A major advantage for this project is that the Zone 1 tank of the golf course can be partially backfilled to reduce the amount of excavated material and resultant "scar" on the hillside. Resistance to vandalism and potentially sabotage are also superior advantages of prestressed concrete tanks. These reservoirs can be provided with flat concrete roofs or domed aluminum roofs commonly used with bolted steel tanks. The costs of the unpainted aluminum domed roofs are less than concrete but for this analysis it was assumed that the flat concrete, low profile roof will be used for this project primarily for appearance and maintenance considerations. Structurally prestressing of concrete tanks is very efficient in that it combines high strength concrete in pure axial compression where concrete offers the best properties for use in water storage reservoirs. High strength steel reinforcing and strengthening members assume all tension loads to prevent cracking and possible leakage. The manufacturing process involves machine wrapping the concrete structure with galvanized prestressing wires and protecting these wires with an exterior coating of concrete. The specialized design and construction features of a prestressed tank require that it be erected onsite by the manufacturer. A technical brochure describing one manufacturer's prestressed concrete tanks is provided in the Appendix. 101603 4-4 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Siting Considerations Each of the above alternatives offered advantages and disadvantages that were considered in a subsequent evaluation. For each alternative a site layout was developed considering principally the excavation and foundation requirements for each design option. Of concern was the amount of excavation needed for each design and the disposition of the material to be removed from the hillside. The excavated material would either have to be disposed onsite or hauled to a remote disposal area. A preliminary siting analysis (Figure 4-2) for a 1.5 million gallon bolted or welded steel tank was prepared to determine the quantity of materials that would have to be excavated to construct the tank on the site. The analysis revealed that about 46,000 cubic yards of material would have to be excavated to prepare a satisfactory site. Using existing site topographic maps, spoils disposal locations in proximity to the reservoir were identified and the potential volume of excess materials that could be placed at these sites was computed. As shown on Figure 4-2 the major amount (28,000 cubic yards) could be placed in an area below the existing tank access roadway above an adjacent fairway. However, 18,000 cubic yards must be transported from the site and disposed of elsewhere. In the cost feasibility analysis it was assumed that it would be hauled to a city owned landfill site adjacent to the airport. Comparative Cost Analyses A comparative cost analysis was prepared from each of the three different reservoir design alternatives to assist with selection of the most appropriate for the Zone 1 site. This analysis considers site development (cleating, excavation, excess spoils disposal, etc.) as well as tank construction material costs. In the following paragraphs installed costs for the glass lined bolted steel, welded steel and prestressed concrete design alternatives are presented. Bolted Steel Tank Costs The projected cost for the glass lined, bolted steel tank alternative is presented in Table 4-1. A proposal from Aquastore Pacific for a 1.3 million gallon tank at an installed price of $599,433 was received from their representative. A copy of this proposal is included in the Appendix. Incorporating the tank cost with the projected costs for site development resulted in a total estimated installed cost of $1,495,433 for this alternative. Note that this cost assumes that excess excavation is wasted as spoils through construction of an access roadway connecting the Zonel with the Zone 2 tank. As is noted later in this section environmental concerns associated with hillside disturbance and tree removal caused this alternative to be rejected in favor of a less disruptive variation of this first alternative. 101603 4-5 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 4 121f r~hX, F ignFiL ,.FIG_ prnp, -~il~ , .dwg, , 4/?(' ): 16: I, Ad ..... rotor -,,, \& \\ /// Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-1 COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON GLASS LINED BOLTED STEEL STORAGE TANK ZONE 1 LOCATION Component Site clearing and preparation~ Excavation2 Onsite Spoils Disposals Offsite Transportation to Disposal Site4 Tank Cost Erected5 Annual Investment for Furore P ainting/Maintenance6 Total Estimated Cost7 Estimated Cost $ 45,000 460,000 280,000 108,000 599,433 3,000 $1,495,433 1 Projected cost to clear site for excavation and spoils wasting 2 Cost based upon 46,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Cost based upon transportation and placement 0£28,000 cubic yards in onsite disposal area 4 Projected cost at $6.00 per cubic yard to haul 18,000 cubic yards of excavated material to city owned disposal site near airport 5 Proposal for glass coated steel tank from Aquastore Pacific Tank capacity 1,269,705 gallons, 111.9 ft. diameter by 19.26 ft tall. 6 Annual investment in sinking fund for future tank maintenance 7 Estimated total installed cost of' tank less site piping, fencing, landscaping, contractor's overhead and profit, etc. 101603 4-7 c:\..\0210 l\predesign report\section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Welded Steel Tank Costs The cost of an alternative based upon an AWWA welded steel tank was also prepared. This analysis revealed that the first cost of the welded steel tank would be the least. Site preparation and excavation costs would be essentially identical to the bolted steel tank alternative. The ring- wall foundation would be prepared by a general contractor with the tank erected and painted by a tank manufacturing finn. An estimated cost of $426,000 from CBI Incorporated for a 1.5 million gallon tank including the paint system was obtained. The cost estimate included an annual investment amount for a sinking fund to cover repainting of the tank in 20 years. As noted in Table 4-2 the total estimated installed cost at the Zone 1 reservoir site for the welded steel storage tank is $1,390,000. Prestressed Concrete Tank Costs A similar cost analysis was prepared using a prestressed concrete tank alternative manufactured by DYK Incorporated. Their proposal priced a 1.5 million gallon tank at $940,000. A copy of their proposal is provided in the Appendix. Zone 1 Reservoir Alternatives Comparison As indicated in Table 4-3 the total projected comparative cost of a prestressed concrete tank at the Zone 1 tank site is $1,654,000. Following completion of the cost analysis of the three alternative reservoir designs a design comparison matrix was prepared and is presented in Table 4-4. This matrix lists the advantage and disadvantage of each reservoir construction material considering factors other than first cost. The glassed lined bolted steel tank alternative would offer advantages over the less expensive conventional AWWA welded steel tank related to reduced life time maintenance cost because the welded steel tank will likely require repainting within 15-20 years and corrosion is always a lingering concern. Because of the above disadvantage and the additional requirement for disposal of excess excavated material the welded steel tank alternative was not deemed to be appropriate for this location. Rather a more appropriate selection would be the glass lined bolted steel design or the prestressed concrete tank alternative. 101603 4-8 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-2 COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON WELDED STEEL STORAGE TANK ZONE 1 LOCATION Component Site clearing and Preparation~ Excavation 2 Onsite Spoils Disposal 3 Offsite Transportation to Disposal Site4 Foundation Ring-wall Tank Cost Erected5 Annual Investment for Future Painting/Maintenance6 Total Estimated Cost7 Estimated Cost, $ 45,000 460,000 280,000 108,000 65,000 426,000 6,000 $1,390,000 1 Projected cost to clear site for excavation and spoils wasting 2 Cost based upon 46,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Cost based upon transportation and placement of 28,000 cubic yards in onsite disposal area 4 Projected cost at $6.00 per cubic yard to haul 18,000 cubic yards of excavated material to city owned disposal site near airport 5 Proposal for AWWA welded steel tank fi.om CBI tank fabricators. Tank capacity 1,496,000 gallons. 110 fi diameter by 21.0 fi. tall. 6 Annual investment in sinking fund for furore painting and tank maintenance 7 Estimated total installed cost of tank less site piping, fencing, landscape, contractor's overhead and profit, etc. 101603 4-9 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-3 COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE TANK ZONE 1 LOCATION Component Site Cleating and Preparation~ Excavation2 Onsite Spoils Disposal3 Offsite Transportation to Disposal Site4 Tank Cost Erected5 Annual Investment for Future Maintenance6 Total Estimated Cost7 Estimated Cost, $ 45,000 380,000 286,000 940,000 3000 $1,654,000 1 Projected cost to clear site for excavation and spoils disposal 2 Cost based upon excavating about 38,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Cost based upon transportation and placement of 28,000 cubic yards in spoils disposal area onsite using $10.00 per cubic yard 4 No excess material for transportation from site 5 Proposal for concrete tank from DYK. Tank capacity 1,496,000 gallons, 120 ii diameter by 20 feet tall 6 Annual investment in sinking fund for future tank maintenance 7 Estimated total installed cost of tank less site piping, fencing, landscaping, contractor's overhead and profit, etc. 101603 4-10 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-4 MATERIAL COMPARISON OF STORAGE RESERVOIR ALTERNATIVES WATER FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKIAH Reservoir Construction Material Bolted Steel and Glass Lined Welded Steel Prestressed Concrete Advantages Second lowest lifecycle cost · Easy to clean and repair · Damaged panels can be removed · Corrosion resistant · Color does not fade · Minimal maintenance required · Rapid erection time - second to welded steel · Lowest initial cost · Fastest erection time · Least neighborhood construction disruption at Zone 1 and Zone 2 sites · More competition insures best possible price · Lowest lifecycle cost · Corrosion resistant · At Zone 1 site eliminates need to transport 10,000 cyds of excavated material offsite to disposal · At Zone 1 site design will match existing reservoir and blend with surrounding environment · Minimal maintenance · No interior painting required Disadvantages · Aluminum dome roof may be aesthetically unappealing · Requires export of site excavated material to offsite disposal area · Limited number of vendors reducing price competition · Height of domed roof detracts from appearance · Cathodic protection required · Highest corrosion potential · Frequent interior repainting estimated at once every 15- 20 years · Requires export of site excavated material to offsite disposal area · Cathodic protection required · Successful application of paint systems sensitive to climatic conditions · History of coating failures · Longest construction time · Highest initial capital cost · At Zone 1 site construction disturbance from noise may be the greatest · Limited competition impacts pricing 101603 4-11 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 4 Distribution S;vstem Storage Facilities The prestressed concrete tank is advantageous over both steel tank alternatives in that it can be partially buried after construction. This advantage is factored into the preparation of the preliminary design for this alternative. By partially burying the tank the quantity of material to be excavated can be reduced and a significant amount of the excavated material (approximately 2000-3000 cubic yards) can be used to backfill the tank after construction, reducing the amount of material that must be transported to the spoils disposal area. The costs presented in Table 4-3 reflect the reduced quantity of excavated material associated with this alternative. The prestressed tank design offers a further major advantage of potentially less environmental impact due to elimination of the need to transport 10,000 cubic yards (400 truckloads) over city streets to a disposal site. Also, the visual impact is substantially reduced because less material and fewer trees need to be removed to create the site for the tank. As noted later in this section of the report a revised site layout eliminated the need to construct the interconnecting access road between the Zone 1 and Zone 2 tanks to produce a disposal site for excess spoils from the excavation. A further advantage of the prestressed concrete alternative relates to the superior longevity of concrete tanks over painted steel tanks. Corrosion is not a concern with a concrete tank. The visual impact on the hillside will be reduced because the concrete tank will match the exterior appearance of the existing concrete tank. Back filling the up slope side to further integrate it into the site. will reduce the disturbance to native vegetation and match the muted appearance of the existing tank. Zone 1 Reservoir Construction Cost Previously presented cost estimates for the Zone 1 reservoir were for comparative purposes only and excluded certain costs that are common to each alternative considered for this site. A more complete projection of estimated cost is presented in Table 4-5. Including costs for site paving, piping, valves, contractor's overhead and profit, etc., the projected total construction cost exclusive of design engineering and administrative and legal services is $2,053,000 including a 20 percent cost estimating contingency. Recommended Zone 1 Reservoir Design For the Zone 1 tank, all factors considered, including the projected cost of each alternative, a 1.5 million gallon prestressed concrete tank constructed adjacent to the 2.3 million gallon tank would be the best selection. Based upon the favorable cost analysis and in consideration of the environmental compatibility of a concrete tank with the existing 2.3 million gallon concrete tank, we recommend that the City of Ukiah construct a prestressed concrete reservoir at the hillside Zone 1 location. Since it is about only 10 percent greater in expected cost than the least cost alternative welded steel tank, the enhanced durability and serviceability of a concrete tank which translates into maintenance cost savings, offsets the slightly higher initial construction cost. 101603 4-12 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-5 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE RESERVOIR ZONE 1 LOCATION Component Estimated Cost $ Site Preparation, Final Grading and Paving~ Excavation/Foundation Preparation2 Spoils Disposal3 Tank Cost Erected4 Yard Piping and Valves5 Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency ~ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST6 $70,000 380,000 286,000 940,000 35,000 1,711,000 342,000 $2,053,000 1 Include paving of existing access road and area around new and existing reservoirs 2 Cost based upon excavation of 38,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Transportation and placement of' 28,000 cyds at $10.00 in disposal area 4 Installed cost of 120 ft. diameter by 20 foot tall prestressed concrete tank 5 Piping and valves for connection to inlet and outlet pipeline 6 Total installed cost eXcluding design engineering, administrative and legal service costs 101603 4-1 3 c :\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities ZONE 2 RESERVOIR The existing Zone 2 storage reservoir is a 100,000 gallon capacity welded steel tank 25 feet in diameter by 30 foot tall. It does not provide adequate storage to meet the needs of Zone 2 service connections. According to DHS a minimum of an additional 260,000 gallons of storage is needed in Zone 2. Zone 2 Reservoir Siting The preferred location for the additional storage is adjacent to the existing tank, which is on property owned by the City of Ukdah. Figure 4-3 is a preliminary site plan illustrating the proposed location of a 39 foot diameter by 35 foot tall tank with a side water depth of 2 feet on the available site that will provide about 297,000- 298,000 gallons of storage capacity exceeding the 260,000 gallons required by DHS at this location. As noted on Figure 4-3 site and foundation preparation for this tank will involve the excavation of about 900 cubic yards of material. Most of the 900 cubic yards can be wasted by spreading it over the hillside adjacent to the tank. Any additional materials could be deposited in the dedicated excess materials disposal spoil fill area. For this relatively small tank the most economical design would be based upon either a welded steel or a bolted steel tank. A prestressed concrete tank of this small volume would be considerably more expensive and offer no major advantages since with the addition of a second tank at the Zone 2 site, storage redundancy is now provided permitting removing the existing tank from service for maintenance. Zone 2 Reservoir Costs A proposal for a 297,000 gallon (nominal capacity) glass lined bolted steel tank was obtained from Aquastore Pacific, a copy of which is included in the Appendix. A verbal cost estimate was also obtained for a welded steel tank of similar volume. The 297,000 gallon glass lined bolted steel tank was selected over a smaller 260,000 gallon tank because the larger tank provides a better height to diameter ratio critical to foundation design for storage tanks constructed in Seismic Zone 4. Table 4-6 provides a listing of the other components of the installation that result in a total construction cost of $448,601 for a 297,000 gallon glass lined bolted steel tank at the Zone 2 reservoir site. This cost applies to a complete installation including the tank, site preparation, interconnecting piping and valves, electrical and level instrumentation, finished grading and security fencing around both the new and the existing tank. 101603 4-14 c :\~.\02101 \predesign report~section 4 zone q'(s.d q/!4 , r)?: PM, listro - Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-6 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 297,000 GALLON GLASS LINED BOLTED STEEL TANK ZONE 2 LOCATION ,Component Estimated Cost $ Site Cleating and Final Grading~ Excavation2 Onsite Spoils Disposal3 Tank Cost Erected4 Yard Piping and Valves5 Security Fencing6 Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency ~ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST7 $14,000 10,800 3,000 313,031 18,000 15,000 373,831 74,770 $448,601 1 Projected cost to clear trees from site and final grade/pave with gravel around tank 2 Cost based upon removal of 900 cyds ~ $12.00 per cyd 3 Cost based upon transporting 300 cyds ~ $10.00 per cyd to onsite spoils disposal site 4 Proposal for glass lined steel tank from Aquastore Pacific, Tank useable capacity 297,000 gallons 5 Interconnecting piping between new and existing tanks 6 Chain link fencing of both tanks 7 Cost excludes contractor's profit, design engineering fees, administration and legal service 101603 4-1 6 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Recommended Zone 2 Tank Design It is recommended that the design for the Zone 2 reservoir be based upon the use of a glass lined, bolted steel tank because of numerous advantages including competitive cost, favorable long- term maintenance requirements, compatibility with the site and the surrounding environment and anticipated easier installation and erection at the difficult-to-access Zone 2 reservoir site. The Zone 2 tank location is such that it is well above the City's residential area and there appears to be little concem for any glare that might be an issue with a non-coated aluminum dome. FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR Volume Requirements The existing treatment plant has a combination backwash storage/finished water clearwell with a capacity of only 139,000 gallons. This represents the only other storage in Zone 1. This volume is only sufficient to barely meet the disinfection contact time requirements at the current capacity of 6 mgd. Additional storage of finished water after the addition of chlorine is necessary to meet the disinfection regulations. This requirement coupled with the DHS mandated requirement to provide additional finished water storage in Zone 1 requires construction of a new finished water storage reservoir at the treatment plant site. This reservoir must make up the difference between the 3 million gallons of needed storage in Zone 1 and the 1.5 million gallons to be provided by the new reservoir above the golf course. The principal purpose of a finished water storage reservoir is to provide storage volume for a supply of filtered backwash water and to provide contact time for disinfection plus provide a limited amount of system storage. The backwash water requirements can be satisfied by the existing 139,000 gallon finished water clearwell. However, the additional disinfection contact time requirements associated with the expansion of plant capacity must be satisfied in a new finished water storage reservoir. It is proposed to meet these requirements through construction of a new 1.5 million gallon capacity finished water clearwell to supplement the Zone 1 distribution system storage reservoir. The new finished water storage reservoir will be located in the general vicinity of the existing treatment plant as illustrated on Figure 4-4. A new finished water pump station to deliver the water from the reservoir into the distribution system will be a feature of this expansion project. 101603 4-17 c :\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 4 // ~x Distribution System Storage Facilities Finished Water Disinfection Requirements Following a conventional water treatment process additional treatment through disinfection is required under the Surface Water Treatment Rule to provide the full 3.0 log contaminant removal or inactivation through the entire treatment process. Traditionally, the Microfloc Trident process has received 2.5 logs of treatment credit in applications where the surface water supply is of reasonably good quality and is free of any major contamination through contact with traditional contamination sources. The Russian River water from Lake Mendocino is a reasonably well protected water source. Since the water supply is derived from the underflow of the Russian River after the water passes through several feet of sand and gravel, the Department of Health Services recognizes this additional level of treatment and after filtration through the Trident plant requires that the disinfection process achieve only 0.5 logs of inactivation credit. Proposed Design The proposed clearwell design is illustrated in Figure 4-5. The 120 foot diameter tank with an overall height of 20 feet with a side water depth of 18.5 feet will be compartmentalized by 5 baffle walls with 20 feet separation between adjacent walls. These baffle walls with a total length of about 580 feet will form a serpentine pattern maximizing the distance the finished water must travel through the storage reservoir before it reaches the outlet. This baffling arrangement provides an overall length to width ratio of 30:1. This length to width ratio more than complies with parameters established by DHS. At width to length ratios beyond 16:1 to 17:1, the T~0/T factor can be as high as 0.5. At a ratio of 30:l the baffling factor could be as high as 0.7. Typically unbaffied tanks in which the outlet is placed as far away from the inlet as possible receive a T~0/T factor of only 0.1-0.3. A T~0/T factor of 0.5 indicates that the effective contact time is 50 percent of the theoretical hydraulic detention time of the reservoir. CT Compliance Spreadsheet Computation To confirm clearwell design criteria and CT compliance capability, a spreadsheet has been developed to evaluate the specific conditions and water characteristics for various plant operating situations. Inputs for specific process parameters are entered in the colored highlighted cells on the spreadsheet. Example printouts (Table 4-7 and 4-8) are included at the end of this section. They have been produced for both the maximum expected present day plant flow of 9 mgd and the future maximum day operating flow rate of 12 mgd. These example printouts show a CT credit of greater than 0.5 log can be achieved at a maximum plant flow of 12 mgd. 101603 4-19 c :\..\02101 \predesign report\section 4 c: 'C Distribution System Storage Facilities The CT compliance computation spreadsheet can be used to determine the required volume in the finished water storage reservoir to meet disinfection requirements at any given operating condition. Assuming a T10 value of 0.5 and a CT value of 25 mg/1 per minute representative of worst case treatment conditions and a maximum flow of 8,400 gpm, with an applied chlorine dosage of 1 mg/1 the analysis reveals that 210,000 gallons of effective contact time is required to achieve the disinfection standards. At a T10 value of 0.5, 420,000 gallons of the 1.5 million gallon capacity finished water storage reservoir must be dedicated to meeting disinfection requirements. The remaining 1.1 million gallons is then fully available for meeting storage requirements within Zone 1 of the distribution system. Finished Water Reservoir Design Alternative The materials of construction that could be considered for the 1.5 million gallon capacity storage reservoir include welded steel, glass lined bolted steel and prestressed concrete. These materials have been previously evaluated for the Zone 1 storage reservoir. All the advantages and disadvantages of these various tank materials apply similarly to the proposed finished water storage reservoir. One major disadvantage of either the bolted steel or the welded steel tank at this location is that it would eventually have to be removed from service and repainted. Unfortunately, without the availability of the finished water storage reservoir the disinfectant CT requirements cannot be met. Also, the additional storage provided by this reservoir would be unavailable to meet City supply requirements. Consequently, this finished water storage reservoir cannot be removed from service without jeopardizing the capability of meeting distribution system demand. The City's limited groundwater resource is not adequate if the finished water storage reservoir must be removed from service for maintenance. Because of these limitations the finished water storage reservoir should be constructed of a material that will be essentially maintenance free over its entire service life. Such a requirement points to the use of a prestressed concrete tank as the favored design alternative for the finished water storage tank to be located at the treatment plant. Recommended Reservoir Design For this project a ground level prestressed concrete reservoir similar in design and size as that to be constructed above the golf course is recommended. It will be located near the City Recreation Department baseball diamonds as shown on Figure 4-4. A prestressed concrete structure combines high strength concrete with a prestressing process using machine wrapped galvanized circumferential prestressing to develop the full strength of the structure. Manufacturers such as DYK and others are fully responsible for the design and construction of prestressed concrete reservoirs. There are several design options available with prestressed concrete tanks. The standard design utilizes a low profile flat roof supported by columns placed within the reservoir. The advantage of this option is that the concrete roof does not require painting or coating hence minimizing maintenance requirements. A slightly less expensive roof alternative involves an aluminum dome. These aluminum domes (similar to those used with the glass lined bolted steel tanks) can 101603 4-2 3 c :\..\02101 \predesign report\section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities be provided in bare aluminum or can be coated with a paint system. One disadvantage of the aluminum dome roofs is the height of the dome arch that adds substantially to the overall height impacting the visual appearance of the reservoir. At greater cost a low profile aluminum dome can be offered as an option. However, because of concem for long-term maintenance that impacts life-cycle cost and the aesthetics of the installation due to its proximity to the city recreation area and U.S. 101, it is recommended that the prestressed concrete tank be fumished with a fiat concrete roof. Finished Water Reservoir Costs A cost proposal for the 1.5 million gallon finished water storage reservoir was obtained from DYK Incorporated. As detailed in their proposal of July 24, 2003, they estimate the cost to design and construct the reservoir complete with Hypalon internal baffle walls to be $1,090,000. The tank would match the dimensions of the golf course tank, which facilitates more efficient construction and results in savings in both engineering and construction costs. A copy of the DYK proposal is provided in the Appendix. The total projected construction cost of the finished water storage reservoir is provided in Table 4-9. Exclusive of design engineering, administrative and legal costs the estimated construction cost is $1,470,000. SUMMARY New storage reservoirs will be constructed during this treatment facility expansion phase to provide adequate distribution system storage to satisfy health and safety provisions of the State of California Water Code. These reservoirs will overcome a Department of Health Services identified deficit of 3,260,000 million gallons needed to comply with appropriate regulations. Listed below in Table 4-10 are the design parameters of the additional three new storage reservoirs. 101603 4-24 c :\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-9 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR TREATMENT PLANT SITE Component Estimated Cost $ Site Preparation and Final Grading~ Excavation/Foundation Preparation2 Tank Cost Erected3 Yard Piping and Valves4 Landscapings Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency ~ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST6 $42,000 18,000 1,090,000 55,000 20,000 1,225,000 245,200 $1,470,000 1 Removal of topsoil and final access paving around tanks 2 Preparation for tank foundation 3 Proposed cost to furnish and install a prestressed concrete tank 4 Inlet, outlet, overflow and drain piping and valves around tank 5 Landscaping using trees to screen or soften tank appearance from view from US 101 6 Estimated cost of reservoir excluding design engineering fees, administrative or legal services 101603 4-25 c :\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-10 SUMMARY OF NEW SYSTEM STORAGE FACILITIES Design Parameter Volume, gallons Dimensions Diameter, ft. Height, ft. Sidewater depth, ft. Type Base elevation, ft Max water surface elevation, ft Zone 1 Golf Course 1,500,000 Reservoir Locations Zone 2 Upper Residential 297,000 120 20 19 Prestressed concrete 820.0 839.0 39 35 33 Glass lined bolted steel 880.0 918.0 Zone 1 Treatment Plant 1,500,000 120 20 19 Prestressed concrete 600.0 620.0 The estimated construction costs of the three new storage tanks are as follows: · Zone 1 Golf Course Reservoir $2,053,000 · Zone 2 Upper Residential 448,601 · Zone 1 Treatment Plant 1,470,000 Total Distribution Storage Reservoir Cost $3,971,601 The total cost of $3,971,601 represents the incremental cost of additional distribution system storage capacity. It is likely that construction of the storage reservoirs will be combined with a project to complete the mandated expansion of the water treatment facilities. Costs presented in another section of this report for treatment facilities would be combined with the above costs supplemented with such costs as contractor's mobilization, insurance, bonds, overhead, profit, etc. to provide a total overall project cost. 101603 4-26 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~seetion 4 SECTION 5 RE COMMENDED PR OJE C T Recommended Pro/ect SECTION 5 RECOMMENDED PROJECT PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS In previous section of this report the new components and facility improvements required to bring the treatment plant into compliance with State of California Public Health Standards and provide a safe and reliable water supply to residents of Ukiah have been defined. These improvements are regarded to be the minimum to achieve the stated goals. The recommended project will consist of the following new facilities: Storage Tanks Nominal Material of Location Volume Dimensions Construction Zone 1 - Golf Course 1.5 million gallons 120 fi. dia. x 20 fi. tall Prestressed concrete Zone 1 - Finished Water 1.5 million Reservoir gallons 120 fi. dia. x 20 fi. tall Prestressed concrete Zone 2 - Storage Tank 0.3 million gallons 39 fi. dia x 35 fi. tall Glass lined bolted steel or welded steel 2. Treatment Plant · One new 2,800 gpm raw water pump · Rebuild two existing raw water pumps · Two, 3 mgd capacity Trident modular treatment units · New filtered water transfer pumps · Chlorine gas containment system improvements · Building addition with laboratory · SCADA based control and instrumentation improvements · Potassium permanganate raw water feed system · New clarified backwash water return pump · Numerous plant chemical and electrical facility improvements 3. High Service Pump Station · Three 350 Hp, 2,800 gpm finished water pumps · Pre-engineered 1,950 square foot building · 1200 kw standby generator · Supporting mechanical, electrical and control features 020304 5-1 c:\..\02101 \predesign reporfisection 5 Recommended Pro/ect PROJECTED PROJECT COSTS The expected total project cost of upgrading the treatment facilities and constructing the needed additional distribution system storage facilities is as follows: Component Contractor's Mobilization, Bonds, Insurance, etc. Estimated Cost, $ 635,000 Water Treatment Facilities Storage Reservoirs Zone 1 Golf Course Site Zone 2 Upper Residential Site Zone 1 Treatment Plant Site 4,049,000 2,053,000 449,000 1,470,000 Contractor's Overhead and Profit ~ 15% Engineering, Administrative, Environmental and Legal ~ 10% 1,298,000 . .995,000 TOTAL PROBABLE PROJECT COST $10,950,000 The above cost estimate presumes that the listed facilities improvements will be constructed under one 12-month project contract. Costs are projected to the 3rd quarter of 2004. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE Following completion of the preliminary design report and the environmental documents and acceptance of the project by the City of Ukiah detailed design work can continue and construction can be initiated. The City has decided to separate the reservoir and the treatment c facilities construction projects. Accordingly, SPH Associates will schedule the project in the following manner. At this time we foresee the following schedule as reasonable in light of the expected time required by the City to certify the environmental work and approve the project. Storage Reservoirs: Initiate Detailed Design Activities Complete Design Documents and Receive Construction Bids Award Construction Contract Complete Construction January 1, 2004 May 1, 2004 June 31, 2004 January 31, 2005 020304 5-2 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 5 Recommended Pro,/ect Treatment Facilities: Initiate Detailed Design Activities Complete Design Documents and Receive Construction Bids Award Construction Contract Complete Construction April 1, 2004 August 1, 2004 September 1, 2004 September 1, 2005 020304 5-3 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 5 APPENDIX CT COMPLIANCE TABLE USEPA 311 312 Z 313 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES SRF APPLICATION AND WATER SYSTEM INSPECTION REPORT LETTER Ukiah Utilities 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Telephone: 707-463-6295 Fax: 707-463-6204 A Departmenl: of the OL'y of Uldah September 14, 2001 Mr. Bruce H. Burton District Engineer Department of Health Services Ddnking Water Field Operations Branch 50 D Street, Suite 200 Santa Rosa, California 95404 Subject: Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Pre-Application Dear Mr. Burton: . Enclosed please find a completed pre-application for the City of Ukiah, relative to the State of Califomia Safe Ddnking Water Revolving Fund loan. The City of Ukiah has determined, based on the results of the attached inspection results by the Department of Health Services, that major up-grades to the water filtration system will be required. The inspection suggests that major improvements relative to source capadRy and storage capacity will be needed to provide an adequate supply of water and redundancy of production capability for our current customers. Consideration of this request would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely; Director of Public Utilities ~tate ot r~alifomia - Health and Welfare Agency SAFE DRINKING WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND LOAN PRE-APPLICATION For the placement of a water system on the Priority List See instructions on back of sheet.' Official Water System Name:... ~/7"z/ O/.~ / Population Served: / .~'..~ . . . Project No.: Ra~e~. Deparlment of Health Services _FOR DHS USE ONLY ' Category:. Date Received: 1 Est. MH! ~~ County (where physically iocated):_,#/,~,.F~ ~ 7, . State Revolving Fund loans are intended to be used to fund improvements to community water systems, both public and private, and' nonprofit noncommunity water systems. Federally owned systems or for-profit noncommunity water systems are ineligible for SDWSRF assistance. Check the box which best describes the ownership of your water SYStem: ~. Community (Publicly owned) !"3 Community (Private Ownership) r-'i Non-community Non-profit Identify your system's problem(s). (Attach documentation if available; refer to instructions.) Describe your project.to correct the problem(s) noted above. Project involves: i"! Refinance of I'-I StudY to determine i~ Design to projects started after 7/1/93 cause of problem solve problem (Public WS only) ~.<~/~ Estimated amount of SRF funding requested $ ?,~z~ ,~ J~'. Construction p Other Total other funding required:' $..-~-~,'~., ~ Will this project involve a consolidation With another water system? r"l Yes r"l Physical consolidation r"l Managerial/Financial [~ No Desired fiscal year (FY) of project initiation' 01/02 i-I 02/03 r"l, 03/04 r"! 04/05 Please type or print legibly. individual named below. pre.~applicafion. ' Signature of P~presentative Mailing Address: (sffeet) Phone Numben (area code) All correspondence regarding this pre-application will be sent to the You will receive a written acknowledgement of the receipt of the Printed Name of Representative Name of~0mpany.or Water System (city) (state) (zip code) ~' ?- ~/~r'-~ 2~ 5z .~/~?~1 ' FAX Number:. (area code) . D~e/ SEND TO: - ' OR FAX TO: · .,.%~'ATE OF CAUFORNIA--HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH' SERVICES . DRINKING WATER FIELD OPERATIONS BRANCH 50 D STREET, SUITE 200 SANTA ROSA, CAUFORNIA 95404 (707) 576-2145 FAX (707) 576-2722 July 11,2001 Mr. George Bomcky Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482. RE: 2001 Water System Inspection Dear Mr. Borecky: On May 22, 2001, this Department conducted ad inspection of the City of Ukiah domestic water system (water system). System facilities appear to be well operated and maintained. Listed below am items that should be addressed to ensure compliance with'the California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) and the California Code of Regulations (CCR). ,,Wells 2~ 3~ and _6 · . Wells 2, 3, and 6 may be.influenced by surface water during the winter months. If the City would like to use the wells during the winter months, a monitoring murine must be implemented to prove that the. sources are not being surface water influenced. The water system must determine a monitoring mu. tine and submit the plan to the Department for approval prior to implementation. If the City determines that the wells are only hecessary during the summer months, it may complete the monitoring program given below on each well prior ~ to the well being placed into service instead of conducting a yearlong, study to determine if it is under the direct influence of surface water. .. a) Flush and disinfect each well; b) Operate each well to waste until a bacteriological sample.collected from the raw waterindicates the number of total coliform is less than 23; c) Collect a sample for microscopic particulate analysis (MPA); d) Submit the.results of the MPA and bacteriological sample(s) to the Department; " · . e) Receive approval from the Department to put the well on-line. · , Please notify the Department of the City's intent with respect to these wells by September 1, 2001. The Department will then amend the City's water supply permit to reflect the course of action it has chosen. July 11, 200I Page 2 of 4 Raw Water Bacteriolo icai MonitoHn In order to determine the bacteriOlogical water quality of the water system's surface water source, please.begin collecting a minimum of one raw water · bacteriological sample per month. The samples must be analyzed by a laboratory that has been certified by the Department to perform coliform analyses pursuant to CHSC Section 116390. Each of these samples must be analyzed by an approved method that enumerates bacteria density up to 2,400 organisms per 100 milliliters of sample. ReSults for each month shall be submitted to the Department before the 10w day of the following month. ' .Lead and Copper Monitoring Section 64685(d) of the CCR states that after 3 years of sampling with no exceedance of the lead or copper action level, the frequency of sampling can be reduced to once every 3 years. In July 1998, the City of Ukiah collected 30 'tap samples in compliance with the regulations. The next lead and copper sampling period must be completed in June, July, August, or September 2001. After each sampling period, you are required to submit the following' items: 1. Completed Form 141-AR (included in the enclosed Lead and copper Sampling Guidance).. 2. Completed "Lead and Copper'Results Worksheet" (also included in the Lead and Copper Sampling Guidance). 3. Laboratory copies of all sampling results. .Clearwell Design_ The water system's clearwell currently does not have an adequate method 'of draining the tank to waste-if contamination occurs, it was determined during the inspection that the only method of emptying the clearwell without allowing water to enter the distribution system is to continue the backwash process until the Water is drained from the clea~ell. The City must add a system to empty the. clearweil to waste without going through the treatment plant backwash system so that if contamination of the clearwell water occurs, it can be directly emptied to waste. Please submit a plan and time schedule for making the necessary drainage system changes to the clearwell. The plan and time schedule must be submitted to the Department no later than December 14, 2001. .. ,Source Chemical MOnitorin~ According to Department records, the water system is almost up-to-date on all of the chemical monitoring for it's sources. Please review the enclosed chemical monitoring schedules that reflect current sampling results On file with the Department. If any monitoring data has been collected recently and is not Shown ~age 3 of 4 on the attached monitoring schedule, please submit the data to this office so that we can update our records. ' ,Source Capacit~ Due to changes in. the Russian River. water course, many of the Ranney Collector's laterals are no longer located directly under the river bed. This change, as well as possible damage and plugging of the laterals, has caused the Collector's production to decrease'significantly. The Ranney Collector currently has an estimated capacity of 4 MGD rather than the design capacity of 13 MGD. The problems with the Ranney Collector in addition to decreased capacity of the wells gives the City a current estimated maximum source capacity of 7.42 MGD. · The average.peak day demand (from 1994 through 2000) is 7.18 MGD. The peak day demand to source capacity ratio is 0.97. Therefore, the City's peak demands are essentially equal to th'e water system's physical source capacity. Section 64584 of the California Code of Regulations requires that a public water system's needed source capacity shall not be i~ss than the maximum day demand. it is our understanding that the City is Pursuing steps to increase its physical source capacity including an evaluation of the existing Ranney Collector system and consideration of a direct Russian Riverintake. To'stay informed of the progress the City is making in this area we must request that the City begin submitting quarterly reports to the Department documenting steps it is taking to add additional source capacity. The first quarterly report must be received no. later than October'15, 2001 to report on the third 2001 quarter (July, August, September 2001). Storaoe Capacity The Department has completed a storage capacity assessment for the water system. Two of the system's zones lack the necessary storage capacity. These Zolles are: 1. Zone 1 currently has 2,635,000 gallons of available storage. The storage necessary is 5,600,000 gallons. Therefore, Zone 1 is deficient in water storage by approximately 3,000,000 ga!ions. 2. Zone 2 currently has 100,000 gallons of available 'storage while the necessary storage is 360,000 gallons. Therefore, Zone 2 is deficient in storage by 260,000 gallons. The City must submit a plan and time schedule for bringing the storage capacity in Zones 1 and 2 into comPliance.. The plan and time scheduie must be submitted by December 31, 2001.' ' July 11, 2001 Page 4 of 4 The Department would like to .extend our appreciation to Mr. Alan Jamison who was very helpful to Department staff in the completion of this inspection: If you have any questions, please contact Wendy Gjestland at (707) 576-2511. Sincerely, District Engineer Mendocino District 'Enclosures: · ' (1) Lead and Copper Sampling Guidance. (2)Source Chemical Monitoring SChedules Cc: Mr. Alan Jamison Water Treatment Plant Supervisor City of Uldah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Mr. John Rogers Mendocino County Division of Environmental Health 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1328 Ukiah, CA 95482 23100031 InspeclJon file 0107II-Inspection Itr / wcg TREATMENT PLANT OPERATING RECORDS ~T 'd :::.;,:--'] il- ..:: ~. . j ..... r,.~ ,,. ,..-, ,.:..:, ~ ~..,,...:, m, ~ m,, m, ~ ~ p~ ~ ~, :,.~ m, ,.,-.,, u:::, ~ .~ :.r, ~ i ,_l ~ ::.'1~'.: J ' ' ' ~ ~ I ' / I.i::.' ,- ......... ,, ~:, ,., , , I , : /t .... ..... ,l:::. ..... ~ . _, - - - _, .... 1 I ...... o. .: . o. ~ m.,~0r-..lm o,~' ...... · .... ;: :;:.:t F..,D i ::':? · ..... ' , ~ i i : : ' ~ : k,:'!::! n- , ~ I [ I ! I',H - : :::'l~ , i I ':: ~ .~ l:l;~?,, ' ' ~ ~ : : · · ]" I "i I t:::1"''' ' I I : i iIl/il .. ............................. i~._ [8__,_ _ . ...... ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' i ' : / , ~:i .i![i: l~ ; i ! ' ' '~i.b'::i :i I ~ , l / I:i: ,~ :" :: ' ': --- (Z:: i I I : , ~ ' I / IF";! ~ i,-- L. O! ::':: !! : ~ .... ~ .... ;::.., ~' ~ .... .::~: ill I!11 · ':': i i... ....... 01010101010101~1010 0 0 0 0 0 = .~.~?~:~ ~o o,o o o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ Ol~l~l~i~lOl~ ~lo o ~ o o o ~ I~1 . ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ . ~ ~l~l~l~l~t~ ~i-i-!~ _ ~,~ ~,, ~ ~ ~ ~~--0~--~,~'~ . '.: :: I ............... ~~ ..... ~oooooo, oooo,ooooo ~~ ~: .:.:..: ..:l . ~'~:~:~ . :::~ . · .:: ,.. :. ............ ;.: '[ : ' : .' · · .i .! .I -I .iml~l~l~l~lh~~ ..I i!111 - 0000000000000000'0~ ~> ~ /.'d ~'l?B~-/_..9't:.'-/.O,,'. 4e~lA .,,4-0 R~.~3 e01~ :BO I~0 L~ unl'- i DRY MEDIA CHLORINE GAS SCRUBBER versus Gaustic Scrubbers 'Purafil ESD's dry chemical Emergency Gas Scrubber (EGS) offers higher removal capadties I:or C~i~/SOc) and' fewer maintenance requirements. The EGS removes more than one-ton o~ acddentally released CI2/SO2 gas at up to 800 lbs/rain, while maintaining discharges less than 10 parts per BILUON. Because no hazardous caustic is required, the EGS is safer to operate and easier to maintain. Other benefits over we~ caustic scrubbers are addressed in the chart below. FACT'OR DRY SCRUBBER WET ~*_~JSTIC: SCRUB_R_~ i Contains liquid toxic chemicals No Yes Secondary containment required No Yes liquid plumbing joints with leak potential No Yes Caustic recirculation pumps with mechanical seals None 1 Exhaust Fan Yes Usually Media reacts with other gases in air to cause depletion oF capacity No (Chiorosorb) Yes-CO2, SO~, HaS Media is fully functional in cold dirnates (.40°F) without insulation or heating Yes (Chtorosorb) No Requires a complex control panel to automatically integrate multJple functions No Yes Requires mate,~ais which are corrosion-resistant to both wet Ci2 and causticNo Yes Has the potential to release NaOCI No Yes Has the potential to predpitate salts and plug nozzles No yes Spent media is landfill disposable Yes i No Requires periodic sampling to ensure optimum chlorine removal capacity Yes Yes Discharge concentrations less than 5 pa~ per BILLION Yes No ........ ,,.,,,.~ ........ ..IL~,,~"m,..~.~,,.,.li.~ ................ ~L-_,.,.~z ............. ~, ............... ~--'~i (Fax) 770-263-6922 purafilc~purafil.com · www. purafil.com ~/V~aintmnance ~Os'ts ~ontinued- Dry ~J~=mica! °12,500 lbs of media @ $1.35/Ib = $16,875 °Freight @ $0.1 5/1b -- $1,875 °Total of $1 8,750 divided by 20 years = $938/yr Operation & Maintenance cost analysis. Total annual O&M costs [~r the Dry Chemical Scrubber: WITH an accidental release: $1,538 Also, if v~ take into consideration that a worst-case release is unlikely, the above $938/yr can be subtracted ~rom the total NO accidental release: $600. Equipment Concrete I~d Equipment Installation Duct Wo~ Electrical & Instrumentation Contractor OH&P (1596) ~.ontingency (2 096) Construction Cost Engineering & Administration (20°~ Estimated Project Subtotal Capital Depreciation Cost Operation & Maintenance Costs Total 20-Year Costs Purafll ESD Dr). Scrubber $127,000 $1,500 $24,000 $10,O00 $ 8,000 $25,575 $34,1 O0 $230,175 $46,035 $276,210 $276,210 ($1 3,8 lO/yr) $306,960 ($15,348/yr) , Purafil ESD Dr), S=mbbmr NO Accidental Release $127,000 $10,000 $8,000 $25,575 $34,100 $230,175 $46,035 $276,210 $276,210 ($13,810/yr) $12,000 ($600/yr) $288,200 ($14,4 lObr) Wet Caustic Scrubber $ 90,000 $1,200 $36,0O0 $15,000 $14,OOO $23,430 $31,240 $210,870 $42,174 $253,044 $253,040 ($1 2,652/yr) $152,400 ($7j620/yr) $405,440 ($20,272/yr) CONCLUSION The Purafil F_SD dry chemical, Emergency Gas Scrubber is approximately $100,0(KI. $120,01Xl less in cost than the Wet Caustic Scrubber. For ~urther information or test data about Purafil ESD's Dry Chemical Scrubber, please contact Purafil at 1-800-222-6367. econom~clxlf ~ Z ~ ~~ ' "'~"~'.,':,-"';;;*...' · / ~ ~ ~ - ~;.: ,.....' :;.~; 0 I . ~f X~'. · ~~, i:;.,,t'.2.- ~-- i© ~{ . j~ o I -~-+':f;~-~~-~- '~~ ~ ,.,..,.~' ...,. Z ~ ~ ~ --~- Z~ ~ 4 i . HACH TOTAL PARTICLE COUNTER On-Line Instrumentation Particle Counting 2200 PCX Particle Counter Optimize your filter analysis. Features and Benefits · . For filter analysis optimization Volumetric--all particles pass through the sensing area · Supports up to 32 size channels and 8 analog inputs (turbidity, pH, etc.) Operates stand-alone or as part of a networked system For maximum flexibility in an on-line particle counter, the "~odel 2200 PC..X is the most versatile counter available. he 32-channel 2200 PCX offers se_vial connection to powerful ~oftwaxe, simultaneous 4-20 mA SCADA serial connection, serial comaection to SCADA using optional Hach driver, inputs for ~-bidity, flow amd other analog information, arid inputs for filter ~ode from valve controls. Just about any measurement and data uo,nmunication configuration can be built with the 220O PCX. fista Software or medium to large systems, up to to,32 sensors, ~ista offers 'int. ellige~at monitoring.' intelligent monitoring minimizes total .,_dam stood, but mastoid, es useful information. Important hanges in measurements are always saved, but insignificant alues are saved less frequently. You decide what constitutes an important change - just point and click. Inte_tligent monitoring ~usures that you capture critical information about filter-to- 'aste, impending filter breakthrough, or unexpected excursions. vista is a high-performance package for Windows 95]98]2000[XP computers. Each provides clear tabular and -mphical displays to assess plant performance with a glance. OPC Explorer Software t¢ you x~ant a direct RS-485 connectio= betwc~_a our particle )u~ters a~d your SCAD,a, system, use the 2200 ?C.X Tc~cplorer. is an 0LE for Process Co=tro! (07£) driver £or Microsoft~ V¢i~ctows® designed to easily connect particle counters to 07£ ~.[e=ts (such as SC_ADA software or data !oggers). HOW TO Order ';ODEL 2200 POX PARTICLE.COUNTER - 115V VERSION t050-O0 2200 PCX Particle Counter with ANALOG with WATER WEIR ~7040-00 2200 PCX Particle Counter with WATER WEIR ODEL 2200 PCX' PARTICLE COUNTER - 230V VERSION 57050-O1 2200 PCX Particle Counter with ANALOG with WATER WEIR '040-01 2200 Particle Counter with WATER WEIR MODEL PCT PARTICLE COUNTER TRANSMITTER ~'020-00 PCT Particle Counter Transmitter with 2 ANALOG OUT 115 Vac ~/020-O1 PCT Particle Transmitter with 2 ANALOG OUT 230 Vac $4,650.00 3,950.00 , 4,650.00 3,950.00 2,950.00 2,950.00 MODEL WGS 267 GRAB SAMPLING INSTRUMENT 57030-00 WGS 267 Grab Sampling Instrument ~)ATA ACQUISITION SOFTWARE - 2200 PCX $9,750.00 57015-01 Vista Software - Windows 2000/XP VI.2 57025-00 CPC Software - 2200 POX DATA ACQUISITION SOFTWARE - WGS 267 2,700.00 785.00 57005-00 PortAII Software 57005-01 PortAII Software with Modem 750.00 945.00 For more detailed information about this product, please request the followinff FREE Hach Literature: #4599 rder online et www. ha~h.~om or call toll-free 1-e00.2~7.4224 BOLTED STEEL TANK PROPOSAL AQUASTORE PACIFIC, INC. [ I~E.E,J. Ev£D LP_'Ec 18 ~.guZ AOUASTORE PACIFIC INC December 17, 2002 Sig Hansen SPH Associates Consulting Engineers 3420 Coach Lane, Suite 10 Cameron Park, CA 95682 RE: City of Ukiah Water Storage Tank Proposals and Preliminary Submittals Dear Sig: Enclosed with this letter are three proposals and submittal documents for the storage tank system for the City of Ukiah. In addition to the proposal packet I have included the Installation, Commissioning, and Inspection Procedure manuals for the cathodic protection system, and embedded starter sheet diagrams for your review. You can notate comments as they may pertain to alterations or changes to any of the tanks on these submittal documents. If you do wish to make changes, send me a copy of the submittal document with specific notations. I will then forward a copy to ESPC and they will revise the submittal document and return a finalized submittal package for your approval. In summary the three tanks we specified in these proposals are: 1. Zone 1 - 112 Ft Diameter x 21 Ft. Eave Height, 2 Ft. freeboard with 1,385,908 US Gallon holding capacity- $882,453 2. Zone 2 -45 Ft Diameter x 26 Ft. Eave Height, 2Ft. freeboard with 279,890 US gallons holding capacity- $322,659 3. Treatment Tank- 112 Ft. Diameter x 19 Ft. Eave Height, 2 Ft. freeboard with 1,269,705 US gallon holding capacity - $839,520 It may be of interest to you that we are beginning field erection for two replacement tanks for East Bay Municipal Utility District. These tanks will be in the construction phase over the next several months. I would be very please to take you and/or City of Ukiah officials on a tour of the sites. One tank (Las Trampas Site) is located on a hillside in a residential area. The other tank is on a hilltop in the Berkeley Hills. Both tank sites required extensive seismic design requirements not unlike the ones for Ukiah. Sincerely, David Hauser Enclosures P.O. Box 1180, Alamo. California 94596 Sales Office: (207) 53H-7415 / Cell: (B25) 2HU-9215 EmaiJ: davidhauserL~aquastorepacific.com PROPOSAL FOR CONCRETE STORAGE RESERVOIRS ADDRESS: 351 CYPRESS LANE · EL CAJON, CA 92020 · MAILING: P.O. BOX 696 · EL CAJON, CA 92022-O696 PHONE: (619) 440-8181 · Fax: (619) 440-8653 · WEb: WWW. DYK.Com · EmAIL: DYkINC@DYK.COm December 16, 2002 Sigurd P. Hansen, P.E. SPH Assoc. Consulting Engineers 3420 Coach Lane, #10 Cameron Park, CA 95682-8406 Subject:. Two 1.5 Million-Gallon Prestressed Concrete Tanks Ukiah, California Dear Sig, Thank you for the opportunity to prepare a tank estimate for your project in Ukiah, California. I have estimated $900,000 for the design and construction of each of the 1.5 million-gallon tanks. The estimate includes work on the floor, wall footing, wall, roof and columns and the prestressing operations as well as the complete tank structural design stamped by a registered Civil Engineer. The estimate assumes ample site access and that the site soils are not subject to liquefaction and does not include an allowance for any earthwork, over excavation and re-compaction of the site subgrade or other miscellaneous subgrade preparation, piping, fencing, roadways, etc. The estimate is based on the current ENR Construction Cost Index and recent bid results in the area. The tank is designed in accordance with AVWVA Dl10 and ACI 350, incorporates state-of-the-art features such as close tolerance electro-servo controlled wrapping, galvanized circumferential prestressing, automated shotcrete and utilizes flexible connections at the wall base and wall top to improve seismic performance. The estimate is also based on a l-month design period. Following the approval of the tank design, the tank construction will begin and last for approximately 4.5 months. The estimated tank construction duration does not account for unforeseeable delays. Below please find our tank design assumptions based on the preliminary geotechnical investigation by Miller Pacific Engineering Group: Parameters: Inside diameter: 110.0 FT. Distance from floor to top of wall: 23.5 FT. Water depth near wall: 21.0 FT. (above floor) Maximum water depth for overload: 21.0 FT. (above floor) Free-board below top of wall: 30.0 IN. Floor and flat roof slope: 1.5% (high point in center of tank) Live load on roofi 16.0 PSF. Dead load on roofi 10.0 PSF. Maximum backfill height: 23.0 FT. (above floor) December 16, 2002 Mr. Sig Hansen, P.E. Page 2 Minimum backfill height: 13.0 FT. (above floor) Equivalent liquid at-rest pressure: 60.0 PCF. Backfill pressure on wall under seismic excitation: 18 H (PSF) Equivalent liquid passive earth pressure: 350.0 PCF. Backfill soil density: 135.0 PCF. Downward drag coefficient of backfill on wall: 0.4 NOTE: Backfill shall not contain sulfides or expansive material. Gross soil bearing' capacity including backfill soil and liquid loads: 4,500 PSF (Hillside Tank Site) 3,000 PSF (Water Treatment Plant Tank Site) Anticipated total settlement of tank structure: 0.5 IN. Anticipated differential settlement across tank diameter: not to exceed 1/4" in 50' with over excavation and recompaction. No groundwater concerns Coefficient of friction, soil to concrete interface: 0.40 (Hillside Tank Site) 0.35 (Water Treatment Plant Tank Site) NOTE: Subgrade shall not contain sulfides or expansive material Seismic zone: 4 Importance factor: 1.25 Site specific effective horizontal acceleration in percent of gravity: 0.3681% (Hillside Tank Site) 0.4167% (Water Treatment Plant Tank Site) Site specific effective vertical acceleration in percent of gravity: 0.3313 % (Hillside Tank Site) 0.3750% (Water Treatment Plant Tank Site) Spectral velocity as determined at the probable tank sloshing period with 1/2% damping: 16.0 IN/SEC (assumed - Hillside Tank Site) 24.0 IN/SEC (assumed- Water Treatment Plant Tank Site If you have any questions on the above or if I may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me at 800-227-8181. Regards, D YK incorp,,orated Thomas W. Bloomer II Engineer/Marketing Department Prestressed, Maximum Efficiency. MinimaJ MeJrrtenance. , industry and businesses specifying on investment, fewer health concerns opportunities make DYK .concrctc areas, or high DYK to pre- water for: treatment ton effluent management ..energy storage process tanks DYK's two-way flat slab roof is designed to meet stringent code requirements such as AC1350 a DYK concrete tank can be built with a flat the tank a natural Iow profile. The concrete building .also allows the tank to be.adorned with architectural .. '~en fially buried, the land above DYK ranks for playgrounds, parks, nature preserves, and :Over ~time, DYK tanks more by losing · ..,.~. through leak- maintenance .planning, technolog3~ ' has led to stronger, tanks that store more for longer periods of greatly to the bet- on investment over other Roof slab reinfbrcing is designed to rapport snow, vehicles, pedestrians, soil or any other loads specified DYK tanks: · Use proven technology, engineering and quality construction · Easily withstand environmental conditions--heat, Cold, and earthquakes m above and below ground · Set the standard for durable and reliable liquid storage · Are built to last over i00 years with little maintenance · Can be fully buried and topped with gardens, playgrounds, tennis courts, cul-de-sacs, or other community needs · Can be architecturally disguised See how a reliable, Iow maintenance DYK tank can hold more for you. Call (800) 227-8181 or visit our Web site at www. dyk. com. Landscaping is installed over the completed tank PROPOSAL FOR ZONE 2 STORAGE TANK _. iJASTORE® WATER RESERVOIR TANK QUOTE Thank you foz your ~XlUe~ for quotation. Aquasto~S~ (ASW) & Engineen~cl Storage Produc~s Company (ESPC) are pleased to offer the following_ Aquastore® Imgc .quotalion for the Cioj of Ukiah, Reservoir ProjecL Desip En~i~eeriug Firm: SPH Associates Contact: Sig Haasen 3935SS~gT [ 1 Size ! Volume 39335 - 297,320.gal Useable Capacity Glass fused ~ steel bolted tank Product Stored · Water This quotation is based on information supplied by the engineer. ESPC has not received any drawings or speeiflealions smd reserves the right to review and comment on both As a producing member of AVtrV~A ])-103 with three in-house professional ~egineers on design review committees, F. SPC will guarantee the design, fabrication and erection of the Aquastore tank as described in the following quotation. A. Model 3935SSW'f Aguastot~ G-lass Fused to .Steel Bolted Tank wivh concrete floor Diameter. 39.16 Ft Tank Sidewall Height: 35.01 Ft Capacity: 297,320 useable gallons with 2' freeboard Coating Malcrial: Glass Fused To Steel E,x'uaior Color. Forest Or~ Color Interior:. White Vitrium Deelc Aluminum, Geodesic Dome-Forest Green Color Foundation Type: Embedd~ Stat~ Sheet with concrete floor ~ Criteria AW~rA D103-97 allowable Seismic zone 4 per AWWA D103-97 (P~ Dyn~c) tank & foundation design Im~ce Factor 1~25 Site Amplification 1.5 Wind Design: 100 mph ~ AWWA D103 Wind stiffener analysis AWWA D 103 S~.fic gravity of 1.0 Snow load of 25 pounds get ~ foot Soil ~ capacity loading of 2500 psf C, Coatin~ The factory applied, inert glass-fused-to-steel coating provides excellent intm-tud and extmmal corrosion and. abrasion resistance and as,nur~ continuous ~-vice by minimizing tank maiutenaa~ requiremems and eliminates any need for sandblas6'ng and repainting. This coating remains in service year-in, year- out; inztuing prcntuct quali~ by crm:finalixlg thc potmtial contamination of the product stored inside. D~ gtsmdatd coatin~ thickness is a minimum of 10 mils on the interior sidewalls and a mlninram of 7 mils :~u me cxzenor ~aaewms, '.ruth a bonding strength of 5,000 to 6,000 psL Coating warranty is one year, · a,~.t_B an edclitional nine yeats added for factory al~toved cal~odic proemtio~ Each edge of thc sidewall steel sheet is protected by the Edg~gTM process which fully encapsulates sheet edges prior to the glass applicon. Destinafic~: FOB job site, Ulciah, California Note: Custom~ will be responsible for providing suitable equipment for unloading materials. Equip~ must be capable of off loadi~ 8000~ skids. Aquastom~SCO personnel will be z~onsible for the unloading and placement of tank ma~'ials. Fe Schedule ESPC w~ll provide sulxnittaL~ within 2 weeks of~t of authorized t~k order. Estimated co--on schedule is as follows: 6-8 weeks delivery of tank maxerials to job site 2-4 weeks foundation work 3-4 weeks erection of tank !_-2_w~e_ks testine and disinfeciion of tank, 12-18 weeks completion of projezt If this zchedule is not satisfactory, every effort will be made to meet your requirements. ASW and ESPC ~re eot responsible for dehys due to poor weather condition, delays due to hctory or shipping ismea, local building permi~ or any other type of delays out of the immediate control of ASW and ESPC. G~ Inml]ation _ Aquastore/WESCO will cruet the tank, utilizing factory cezxified personneL Ew. ction will be l~'formed in a workman like mariner in acco~c~ with contract document. This project was quoted using prevailing; non-union erection labor rotes with no restrictive wage or'work hour rules. ~o~!r..~: Union erection labor or erection labor using prevailing labor rates are optional at an .~amuonm charge. For union work, ~he cu,~omer'Snau proviae ,ne cos~ ot .supplying a umon ~r for crane, ~r or air tugg~. Tank disinfection and final tank servicing .(leak testing) are included in this quotaxion required_ Fillingthe tm~k is the responsibility of Buyer. Upon 24 hours prior notice for water l~t to begin, Buyer will provide ~i~r for th~ i~jtial filling nd for ~ny sub~lm~Xt re.fflings requited for wa~6r testing and fill each tank of~t'nt quantity and lxessure Io lhe mquin~ level in 24-hour continuous perk)d_ Buy~ must bih~d flange sll nozr. k's,. furnish pumps, hoses, and all equipment requirtd for filling tank Buy~ is responsible for emptyhxg and disposing of waist, afferzesting of~ank. Should wnmr not be avm'lable i~. sufficient qunnlity to fill tank within 24 hours of completion ofii~¢ ~--tion, requiring our ~ lo i~ave the site, nn additional chnr~ of $1,S0~00 will be added for Wavel expenses to mmm to the tnnk sit~ at & lair date. Ciarffimtio~ Ex _ce~ · Tank ~o be e~ct~ on customer prepared site to grade Customer responsible for excavation of_mnlr area Custome~ responsible for providing access to job site via passable road · Designs for rt,~ea~oir and foundation are stamped by a California engineer · Aquastor~/W'ESCO requires the following: Sanitary facilities, dumpstex and. ad~uate storage space adjacent to foundation for storage of mamrials. · Customer will be responsible for filling and testing the reservoir under th~ supervision of A~CO penonnel. Aqua.~orrdWE$CO will service the tank. Water for filling must be available for filling within 24 hours of compk'tion of erection. + Bacterioto~ _~m~pling and testing by oxh~r.s. + Do~s not include any site work nor rock excavation defined as not diggable by a CAT 41.6 Backhoe * Does not include local license, permits, any taxes or bonds_ · Includes piping out to a point not to exceed 5 feet from foundation or first fitting., whichever is closer · Price is based upon labor rates paying prw~iling wages using non-union labor. NOTE: Any items or specifications not specifically mentioned abo~ are nora part of this quoratior~ This quotmion represents our cornldcte offering. Governing Codes: ESPC utilizes tho~e standards, specifications and/or interpretstions and recomm~xlatiom of professionally reoognized agencies and groups ~,h as AWWA, APt, ACk. AISL AWS, ASTM, Factory Mutual, U.S. Gov~nmenr, etc., as the basis in establishing its own design,. fabrication and quality criteria, standards, practi~ meth~ and tolerances. We trust thai our pricing and delivery ,will me.~ with your approval. Qty. 1 - 39'x35' Glass Fused to Steel Aquastore Tank- 297,000 Dome, Accessories, Materials and Ereetlon Freight to Job Foundafion/Mmerials and Labor: $229~~-~ 54,125.00 Total: Pricing is for quantifies shown. Prices are firm for 60 days and do not include any fees, permits, dutiesg bonding or applicable taxes. Signed by Bob R~ledge- Aquastore/WESCO AQUIla- TORE ® DYK PROPOSAL FOR FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR AUG - 'I 2003 ADDRESS: 351 CYPress LANE · EL_ CAJON, CA 92020 · MAiliNg: P.O. BOX 696 · EL CAJON, CA 92022-0696 PHONE: (619) 440-8181 · FAX: (619) 440-8653 · WEB: WWW. DYK.COm · EmAil: DYKINC@DYK.COM July 29, 2003 Sigurd P. hansen, P.E. SPH Assoc. Consult. Engrs. 3420 Coach Lane, #10 Cameron Park, CA 95682-8406 Subject Two 1.5 Million-Gallon Prestressed Concrete Tanks Ukiah, California Dear Sig, Per your request, I have reevaluated the estimates for the 1.5 million-gallon tanks for the City of Ukiah using an inside wall diameter of 120 feet and a water depth of 19 feet. The revised estimate is still based on the information discussed in the preliminary geotechnical investigation by Miller Pacific Engineering Group and the parameter assumptions stated on my December 6, 2002 letter. I have estimated $940,000 for the design and construction of the Hillside Tank and $1,090,000 for the design and construction of the Water Treatment Plant Tank. The estimates include work on the floor, wall footing, wall, roof and columns, prestressing operations and the complete tank structural design stamped by a registered Civil Engineer. Please note that the Water Treatment Plant Tank estimate includes 550 feet of hypalon baffles and the Hillside Tank does not have internal baffles. The estimates assume ample site access and that the site soils are not subject to liquefaction. Also, the estimates do not include an allowance for any earthwork, over excavation and re-compaction of the site subgrade or other miscellaneous subgrade preparation, piping, fencing, roadway, etc. The estimate is based on the current ENR Construction Cost Index and recent bid results in the area. The tanks are designed in accordance with AWWA D110 and ACI 350, incorporate state-of-the-art features such as close tolerance electro-servo controlled wrapping, galvanized circumferential prestressing, automated shotcrete and utilizes flexible connections at the wa!! base and wa!! top to improve seismic performance. The estimate is also based on a l-month design period. Following the approval of the tank design, the tank construction will begin and last for approximately 4.5 months. The estimated tank construction duration does not account for unforeseeable delays. Should you have any questions on the above information or if I may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me at 800-227-8181 or tombl~,dyk.com. Regards, Thomas W. Bloomer II, P.E. Associate Sales Engineer ELECTRICAL, SCADA AND CONTROL hDR Technical Memorandum ELECTRICAL, S[ADA AND CONTROL City of Ukiah Prepared by: Water System Improvements William F. Ettlich September 16, 2003 Introduction The existing water treatment plant electrical service is 277/480 volt, 3 phase, 4 wire, 2000 ampere. The main switchboard bus feeds two buses; one 1200 ampere feeder to MCC-E through a 1200 ampere automatic transfer switch and 750 KW standby diesel generator and one 1200 ampere feeder to MCC-N which is not served by standby power. One 350 I-IP finished water pump is served by MCC-E with standby power and one 350 H~ finished water pump is served by MCC-N. The high service pump station is to be moved to the new reservoir site and these pumps will be replaced with much smaller filtered water transfer pumps at the plant. Because of these pumping changes the load on the plant electrical system will be reduced considerably. The existing plant electrical switchboard will remain as is at 2000 amperes. A power monitor will be installed in place of the existing voltmeter and ammeter. This service switchboard is adequate for the expanded plant with the finished water pumps relocated. The existing standby generator and transfer switch is to remain. The existing 750 KW generator is adequate to serve the entire expanded plant load without the finished water pumps. The existing high service pump will be removed from MCC-N, a second Backwash Return Pump will be installed and MCC-N will be rewired to be served from MCC-E through a 400 ampere feeder breaker so MCC-N is served by standby power. The existing 1200 ampere MCC-N breaker in the switchboard becomes a spare. New plant load will be added to MCC-E. A simplified single line diagram of the proposed plant electrical system is shown in Figure 1. City of Uklah Water System Improvements EtectrlcaI, SCADA and Contra[ 1 073797123.001 September 16, 2003 UKIAH WATER TREATMENT PLANT PLANT ELECTRICAL SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM Figure 1 }DR Technical Memorandum The plant loads are as follows: KVA Demand, Load Connected Demand Amps Main Service 918 753 905 MCC-N 240 190 228 MCC-E 678 563 677 S£ADA A new 2500 ampere service will be installed to serve the new high service pump station. Connected load is 1533 KVA and demand is 1493 KVA (1,796 amps). A 800 KW standby diesel generator will be installed to run 2-350 I-n) high service pumps or a 1200 KW unit to nm 3-350 HP high service pumps. The difference in cost is approximately $70,000. Variable frequency drives (VFD's) will be installed to' provide variable speed operation of the following drives: Drive High Service Water Pump 1 High Service Water Pump 2 High Service Water Pump 3 Filtered Water Transfer Pump 1 Filtered Water Transfer Pump 2 Filtered Water Transfer Pump 3 Backwash Return Pump 1 (exist) Backwash Return Pump 2 H...~P Twe VFD 350 18 pulse with output reactors 350 18 pulse with output reactors 350 18 pulse with output reactors 25 6 pulse with input and output reactors 25 6 pulse with input and output reactors 50 18 pulse with output reactors 20 6 pulse with input and output reactors 20 6 pulse with input and output reactors The 18 pulse VFD's are used for drives 50 I-IP and larger to mitigate the harmonics. Output reactors will be installed for all VFD's and input reactors will be installed for 6 pulse VFD's to help mitigate harmonics for the smaller drives. The City recently experienced a FVD failure. We have used reduced voltage soft starters in conjunction with VFD's so if the VFD fails the drive can still be used at fixed speed. It is proposed to use backup soft starters with VFD's for critical drives. A new Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) will be installed to serve selected water facilities including the water treatment plant, high service pump station and reservoir, two storage reservoirs, three pump stations, five wells and provisions for future facilities. Communications for the SCADA system will be either 900 MHz spread spectrum unlicensed radio or telephone or a combination depending on terrain. City of Ukiah :~ Water System Improvements Electrical SEADA and Control 073797123.001 September 16, 2003 I-DR Technical Memorandum The wastewater treatment plant SCADA system consists of Wonderware SCADA software, Dell computers, and Allen Bradley programmable logic controllers. We would propose to specify these same products for the water system SCADA as they have been successful at the wastewater treatment plant and at other projects we have designed. The wastewater treatment plant staff are very satisfied with the control system integrator who installed their SCADA system, KBL. Presently KBL does all of the maintenance and upgrade work on the wastewater treatment plant SCADA system. It would be possible to sole-source KBL to be the water treatment plant control system integrator in order to maintain consistency with the system at the wastewater treatment plant if desired by the City or we can develop a more open specification regarding control integration. The SCADA system will consist of two operator terminals, a historic data server (HDS) which can also serve as an operator terminal, printers, a telephone modem for dial out alarms and a telephone modem for dial in to access the SCADA system from outside the plant. Color graphic screens with plant process diagrams and active data on the screens will be developed for each plant process, each remote facility and for utilities such as communications status, flow totalization, reservoir levels, and drive running time. The SCADA central will communicate with programmable logic controllers (PLC's) located out in the plant processes and at each remote facility. These PLC's will provide local control and monitoring of each process or facility. The SCADA will acquire data from and send data such as setpoints to these PLC's and will provide complete monitoring of each facility. Plant Control Treatment Units The treatment traits are packaged plants with integral controls for filtering, backwash and level control. The flow into each unit is controlled individually by a flow meter and throttling valve based on a user set flow setpoint. The flow from each treatment unit is controlled by an effluent valve positioned by a float transmitter which senses and maintains f'flter level. Raw Wafer Flow The raw water pump discharge is controlled by a pressure control based on maintaining a setpoint pump discharge pressure to the treatment units. One raw water pump is operated variable speed by a VFD and the other is a constant speed pump. Normally, the VFD will be the base pump in order to control the discharge pressure by variable speed operation. When higher flows are needed the constant speed pump is started. It is also possible to operate at lower flows using the constant speed pump, but the'added efficiency of variable speed operation would be lost. City of Uklah Water System Improvements Electrical. SCADA and Control ~' 073'/97123.001 Septeeber 16, 2003 I-DR Technical Memorandum Chemical Feed The existing chemical feed control will not be changed. In Line Mixer The mechanical in line mixer will mn when one or both raw water pumps are running. Backwash Return Pumps The backwash return system will be activated when any treatment units are on line and when the level in the backwash clarification ponds is above a setpoint level. When activated, the pump(s) will mn at variable speed to provide a return flow equal to a preset percentage of the sum of the flow to all treatment units. Filtered Water Transfer Pumps The filtered water transfer pumps will mn at variable speed to match the filtered water discharge to the flow from the treatment units into the transfer pump wetwell. This control will be a proportional only level control to maintain the wetwell level within a controlled level band of about 12 to 20 inches. High Service Pumps The high service pumps are variable speed and will be controlled by a proportional only level control to maintain the 1.5 mg finished water reservoir level within a preset control band of about 12 to 20 inches. Planf Operation The plant will be stopped if the finished water storage reservoir reaches a preset high level and will be started ff the reservoir drops to a preset level. The rest of the plant controls will be the same as existing. City of Uklah 5 Water System improvements Electrical, SCADA and Control O~13-f97123.001 September 16, 2003 CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 February 18, 2004 6:30 p.m. lw ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATION a. Adoption of Resolution Supporting Retention of the California Conservation Corps Residential Center in Ukiah b. Presentation By Mendocino County Youth Project 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting of January 7, 2004 b. Regular Meeting of January 21,2004 Sm RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. 1 CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Approval of Disbursements for Month of January 2004 b. Rejection of Claim for Damages Received from Toni Hoag, Michael E. Lane and Teresa J. Girelli, and Elise L. Vecchia, and Referral to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund c. Award of Bids for Various Pole and Pad Mount Transformers in the Amount of $57,504.24 to Western States Electric and Wesco d. Adoption of Resolution Requiring Use of City of Ukiah Claim For e. Report of Emergency Purchase of Contractual Services for the Repair of Electrical Distribution Cable f. Report of Expenditure for Professional Services Costing Between $5,000 and $10,000 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 8. PUBLIC HEARING (6:45 P.M.) a. Public Hearing to Consider Increases in Sewer Connection Fees to Finance Improvements at the Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant b. Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project and Approval of SPH Associates' Design Recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and Authorization to Proceed with Final Design 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Approval of Revisions to the Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement Between the City of Ukiah and County of Mendocino 10. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Direction Regarding the City of Ukiah Sphere of Influence Boundary b. Set Date for City Council Priorities Session for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 c. Set Date for a Workshop with the Citygate Associates 10. COUNCIL REPORTS 11. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 12. CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with Legal Counsel- Anticipated Litigation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 case) b. Conference with Legal Counsel- Anticipated Litigation Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 case) c. Conference with Legal Counsel- Existing Litigation Subdivision (a) of Government Code Section 54956.9, Potter Valley Project (FERC No. 77-110) 13. ADJOURNMENT The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. af ll iah UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING CiViC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 SEMINARY AVENUE FEBRUARY 18, 2004 Please be advised that the Regular Meeting of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency scheduled for February :t8, 2004 is CANCELLED. The next regular meeting is scheduled for March 17, 2004 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 Phone# 707/463-6200 Fax'# 707/463-6204 Web Address: www. cityofukiah.com ITEM NO. 3a DATE: FEBRUARY 18, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION SUPPORTING RETENTION OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS RESIDENTIAL CENTER IN UKIAH The proposed State budget includes significant reductions to funding for the California Conservation Corps (CCC). These cuts, anticipated to be 64% over the current three year period, will result in the closure of the Corps residential Center in Ukiah. This will severely compromise CCC's ability to meet the needs of Ukiah and provide valuable services to the North Coast. The City Council has been requested to support the retention of the facility. The attached resolution addresses the value of this local presence and its adoption is recommended. Also attached is a draft letter being considered by the Board of Supervisors. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Supporting Retention Of The California Conservation Corps Residential Center In Ukiah. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine resolution is to be modified and adopt revised resolution. 2. Determine CCC Ukiah residential Center is not to be supported and do not adopt resolution. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A California Conservation Corps Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for adoption, page 1; 2. Draft letter of support, pages 2-3. APPROVED: ~"g ~,--~-'~"~ Candace Horsley, CikMana§er mfh:asrcc04 0218CCCreso RESOLUTION NO. 2004- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH SUPPORTING THE RETENTION OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION CORPS RESIDENTIAL CENTER IN UKIAH WHEREAS, the current proposed State of California budget imposes significant reductions to the California Conservation Corp (CCC) equating to a cumulative three-year budget cut of 64%; and WHEREAS, if this cut is implemented Ukiah's CCC Residential Center will be closed, severely compromising the CCC's ability to meet the needs of the Ukiah community in particular and the North Coast in general; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah is acutely aware of the significant budget constraints and calls for funding from many directions, but realizes the CCC is a program that has substantial value, completing those tasks demanded of it in a most cost-effective manner, not wasting tax payer's dollars; and WHERAS, the Ukiah Residential Center is one of the most efficient centers throughout California returning 75% of its operational costs through outside work assignments, including erosion control, fire suppression, river restoration, search and rescue operations, and regional emergency responses; and WHEREAS, young adults who join the CCC are taught work ethic, assisted in completion of basic education, receive job skills training, and encouraged to become responsible citizens; all factors which positively impact this state through self sufficiency and individual success; and WHEREAS, the Ukiah CCC corps members and staff volunteer thousands of off duty hours in the community donating to blood drives, assisting fire department operations and fund raising events such as the American Cancer Society, Boy's and Girl's Club, VFW, American Legion, and public festivals; and WHEREAS, this program keeps young adults off of public assistance and out of correctional institutions, improves future employment opportunities, and provides support for local activities in a real and effective manner. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah, strongly urges the Governor and the Legislature to realize the California Conservation Corps is a fiscally responsible program essential to our community's well being and restore appropriate funding to the Corp to preclude closure of the Residential Center in Ukiah. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of February 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Eric Larson, Mayor Marie Ulvila, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No. 2004-CCC Page 1 of 1 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 Governor: We are writing to voice our opposition to the severe budget cuts being imposed on the California Conservation Corps. The proposed Fiscal Year 04/05 budget calls for a 36% cut to the CCC, resulting in a cumulative three-year budget reduction to the Corps of 64%. If this cut occurs the CCC will close Ukiah's residential CCC Center. The CCC will be left with only five residential centers and only 1000 corpsmembers statewide. The closure of the Ukiah facility will severely compromise the CCC's ability to meet the needs of Ukiah residents. We realize that California is experiencing serious financial problems, and that unpopular decisions must be made. We earnestly hope that in your efforts to develop California's budget for next fiscal year you are able to distinguish between programs that waste taxpayer's dollars and those that have value. The CCC is one part of State government that actually does what it is supposed to, and does it in a cost-effective manner. As the members of the Ukiah City Council and as tax-payers we appreciate that. The young adults who join the CCC are taught work ethic, are assisted with completing their basic education, receive job skills training that enhances their employability, and are encouraged to become more responsible citizens. Many of the Ukiah Center's corpsmembers attend our City Council meetings. Just recently several Ukiah Center corpsmembers graduated from the CCC's Charter High School. Because of the CCC these young adults are starting down the path to self sufficiency and success. Ukiah CCC corpsmembers and staff volunteer thousands of off duty hours in the community assisting with blood drives, fire department operations, fund raising events for the American Cancer Society, Boy's and Girl's club. The corpsmembers assist the VFW and American Legion with Memorial Day and Fourth of July events. They assist the City of Ukiah with parades, Cinco de Mayo, and other public festivities. We value and depend on the work the Ukiah CCC Center does to protect the local natural environment. We are also comforted to know that they are there to respond in case of emergencies, such as local wildland fires, flooding on the Russian River and its tributaries, search and rescue operations, and earthquakes. We know California is in a critical budget situation, but cutting a program that keeps people off of public assistance, out of correctional institutions, and that is designed to improve young adult's future employment opportunities does not make fiscal sense. Please restore full funding to the California Conservation Corps, so that the Ukiah Center will not have to close. CC Donna Arduin, Director, Department of Finance Mike Chrisman, Secretary, Resource Agency Wes Chesbro, State Senator 1st District Patty Berg, Assemblywoman 1 st District Donna Arduin, Director Department of Finance 915 L Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Mike Chrisman, Secretary Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 Senator Wesley Chesbro State Capitol Room 5100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Assemblywoman Patty Berg, State Capitol P.O. Box 942849 Sacramento, CA 94249-0001 ITEM NO. 3~ DATE: February 18, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PRESENTATION BY MENDOCINO COUNTY YOUTH PROJECT SUMMARY: Karin Wandrei from the Mendocino County Youth Project (MCYP) and Charlie Seltzer from Alcohol and Other Drug Programs will be attending the City Council meeting to make a presentation regarding the status of Crossroads, the youth drop-in center located in downtown Ukiah. The Mendocino County Youth Project is a joint powers agency established by Mendocino County Office of Education, county school districts and city governments (including the City of Ukiah). MCYP provides counseling, social work, and advocacy services to school age at-risk youth and their families. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. City Council to receive presentation. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Karin Wandrei, Executive Director of Mendocino County Youth Project and Charlie Seltzer, Alcohol and Other Drug Programs Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager and Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director None APPROVED: ~ '~'~'~~ Candace Horsley, City ~ager MEMO Agenda Item: 4a TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Deputy City Clerk Marie Ulvila ~-~'/~..~** ~! ~' ~ ~ ~,~ ~'~,,'',.~t~'~' SUBJECT: City Council Minutes: Regular Meeting of January 7, 2004 DATE: February 13, 2004 The Draft Minutes of the January 17, 2004 Cit,~ Council regular meeting will be delivered to Council for review on Tuesday, February 17"' since City Hall will be closed on Monday, February 16th in observance of Presidents' Day. Memos: CC021304 - minutes MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL 4b REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21,2004 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on January 21, 2004, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:30 p.m. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Rodin, Andersen, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. Councilmember absent: Smith. Staff present: Community Services Director DeKnoblough, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Harris (sitting in for City Manager Horsley), Interim Public Utility Director Kennedy, City Attorney Deputy City Clerk Ulvila. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Students from St. Mary's School led the Pledge URGENCY ITEM Mayor Larson stated that there is a need action came to the attention of the City Urgency Item concerns: Approve budc authorize payment of Water Riqht Fees Control Board for water diversions .rized immediate the need for uent to enda bei The the amount 607 to the State Water Resources A025691. M/S Rodin/Andersen adding Age~ carried by the following roll call Baldwin, and Mayor NC Councilmember Smit ,nder Business to the Agenda, Rodin, Andersen, : None. ABSENT: 3. PRE~ 3a. Pr~ Jeff Davis, City's prow~ has compel coverage, ~MIF ~nd health ~ded and · ' Insurance Fund (REMIF) his annual presentation regarding the self-insure~ o1. This self-insured pooled effort has loss coverages, risk management, safety oversight, members. The City of Ukiah's insurance coverage general and auto liability coverage, workers' coverage, fidelity insurance, boiler/machinery le coverage. 4. APPR( 4a. Ad ourned Rt of November 177 2003 Councilmember Rt in inquired about language at the bottom of page 1 that shows $75,000 instead of $150,000 for the Fire Department. Council discussed the matter and felt that the amount of money needed by the Fire Department was clarified elsewhere in the minutes to be $150,000. Councilmember Rodin noted a correction to page 3, second to last paragraph, that the second sentence should read, "The City can't use those tax proceeds to displace the amount of General Fund revenues budgeted for public safety in 2003/2004." Regular City Council Meeting January 21,2004 Page 1 of 5 She also noted on page 5, the last paragraph, and on page 6 in the fifth paragraph, she voted "Aye", not "Abstained". City Attorney Rapport advised that the minutes could be approved subject to the Deputy City Clerk verifying the vote on pages 5 and 6. M/S Rodin/Baldwin approving the minutes of the Adjourned Regular Meeting of November 17, 2003, as corrected, carried by the following, roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Andersen, Baldwin, and Mayor Don. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Councilmember Smith. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4b. Re_~ular Meeting of December 37 2003 Councilmember Andersen noted the misspell noted that the first sentence in the "Councilmember Andersen supported the implementation of a large tree in place of area". his name ~age 3. He also graph on pa! should read, of constructing ~tain, noting the vi~ the stage M/S Andersen/Baldwin approvin! 2003, as corrected, carried by Rodin, Andersen, Baldwin, and M ABSENT: Councilmember Smith. ~inutes of roll c~ ular Meeting of December 3, AYES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: None. 5. RIGHT TO Mayor Larson re~ appeal 6. CONSENT M/S follows: a. A b. Resolu! 2~ c. Awa rchase Amour~ 40,964 PI d. Approved h "d" of the Consent Calendar as Month Of December 2003; ~1 City Of Ukiah Qualified Bidders List For uid Sodium Hyprochlorite To Pioneer Americas LLC In The .ment With Jarvis & Kay, LLP. Motion carried bi Baldwin, and May Councilmember Smith. ~llowing roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Andersen, Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Alex Washington invited the City Council to the graduation ceremony for California Conservation Corp (CCC) and he distributed invitations to Council. Megan Covalin, Chas Williams, Cristina Lopez, and Emily Scaturro, students at St. Mary's School, each gave a short speech concerning St. Mary's School's educational curriculum, the importance of maintaining a student council, and the events scheduled Regular City Council Meeting January 21,2004 Page 2 of 5 in celebration of Catholics Schools Week. An Open House is planned for January 27th. They also noted this is the 35th year of Mardi Gras and encouraged the public to join them at the Fairgrounds for an evening of fun. 8. NEW BUSINESS 8a. Status Report And Discussion Regarding The Conduct Of A Community Design Forum And Workshop Planning Director Stump introduced the idea of conducting a Community Design Forum and public workshop. The Planning Commission was and recommended the plans focus on the desired out~ potential participants that could include developers, Councilmembers, County staff/County Board of Supe! community and County ........ of the concept focus, and ets, concerned citizens, other members of the Alan Nicolson, a Ukiah architect, stated effectively plan and apply architecturally complement other developments that help Valley. He recommended all interested profe: growth concepts and establish a context for desi like to Ukiah Valley n elements to and the natu of the blic members rr ~t to share goals. During discussion, the Councilm~ City Council meeting jointly to comments. They also favored having County Planning staff ,unty th~ es ~h Planning Commission and stimulate input and public design issues with Count (UVAP) and planning and growtl status of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan ~ity Design Forum could help shape the is document. Dir~ Elem in docuI seek o~ pleasing ur for non-singl how to improve provides cc addresses ure design se~ itionally, ! Ukiah General Plan Community Design City of Ukiah Commercial Design Guidelines adopted gn guidelines and standards. The General Plan for establishing design review programs, how to become "preservable" structures, providing aesthetically ~niform and application of attractive landscaping standards tial development throughout the Valley; and information on of the City "gateways". He stated that the could focus on community design issues to include guest speakers, video presentations, and other related land development and building design topics for discussion. The Housing Element Update addresses the issue of the use of vacant land and/or land that is underutilized. The Design Forum could identify specific properties where development opportunities could occur and effective design elements applied. Councilmember Andersen stated it is important that the design standards implemented for the Ukiah General Plan harmonize with those of the UV^P in order to Regular City Council Meeting January 21,2004 Page 3 of 5 preserve and maintain the beauty of the Valley without having design standards that do not complement one another. 8b. URGENCY ITEM Approve Budget Amendment In The Amount Of $2~607 To Authorize Payment Of Water Right Fees Assessed By The State Water Resources Control Board For Water Diversions Authorized By Permit Application A025691 Risk Manager/Budget Officer Harris advised that the payment prior to the next City Council meeting to avoid int~ The spending authorization is necessary to pay for State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for a to the Lake Mendocino Hydro Electrical Generatiof Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations from State legislation directing SWRCB to water rights holders and water rights appl Fund. The City has not budgeted for assessments and so an amendment is require required to make a :harges and penalties. fees assessed by the diversions related to Section 1066 of The imposed resulted et through' collected from rather than from th, :e's General the new right fee the expenditure". M/S Rodin/Andersen approving within the Water and Conservati~ #800.5536.630.007, in the amount the State Water Resources Control B Councilmembers Rodi ABSTAIN: None. Al ent of ~mith. tuthorizing additional expenses '.lectric Utility Fund, Account r Right Fees assessed by g roll call vote: AYES: Larson. NOES: None. 9. COUNCIL Councilmember initiative and ca~ issue,, and TS IS a and he anti be resolved and Co has been working on the sales tax educating/developing public support Housing lement Update Committee will meet next ~s committee. The Skateboard Park Committee meets ~ planning phase, site selection, and accompanying He briefly commented on the State budget crisis have been affected. Councilm~ eported on the recent Russian River Flood Control and Water Conser rict meeting. The meeting focused on the proposed management developed by a consultant. He also attended a Mendocino County Inland WatE and Power Commission subcommittee meeting to discuss the benefits associated with a reduction in the river flow and reserve water behind the dam. Mayor Larson reported he and Councilmember Baldwin attended a Martin Luther King event and stated various speakers were in attendance. He has been working on the sales tax measure and receives e-mails concerning the ramifications of this issue. 10. CITY MANGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS Deputy City Clerk Ulvila reported that the City has received Easy Voter Guides printed in both English and Spanish. These pamphlets are now available at the counter at City Regular City Council Meeting January 21,2004 Page 4 of 5 Hall. Also, the City Clerk's office received a binder from the IRS with 2003 forms that are available for copying. She reported that Kevin Cotroneo has submitted his resignation from the Traffic Engineering Committee. A Press Release was issued to solicit applicants for appointment to this vacancy. The deadline for submittal is January 30, 2004 at noon. FPPC form 700, Statements of Conflict of Interest, Councilmembers and City staff and the deadline for filing is 11. CLOSED SESSION No action taken. 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the City Marie Ulvila, Deputy City Clerk have been sent to City 2OO4. eting was adjo~ at 7:39 p.m. Cathy Elawadly, Transcriptionist Regular City Council Meeting January 21,2004 Page 5 of 5 ITEM NO.: 6a DATE: February 18, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2004 Payments made during the month of January 2004, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedule of Bills, representing the five (5) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 52369-52467, 52538-52640, 52643-52743, 52831-52973 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: 44165 Payroll check numbers: 52468-52537, 52751-52830 Payroll Manual check numbers: 52641-52642 Void check numbers: 52744-52750 This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the month of January 2004. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Kim Sechrest, Accounts Payable Specialist Coordinated with:Gordon Elton, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Report of Disbursements APPROVED: ~~----~ Candace Horsley, City Manag'~r KRS:WORD/AGENDAJAN04 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF JANUARY 2004 Demand Payments approved: Check No. 52369-52467, 52538-52640, 52643-52743, 52831-52921, 52922-52973, 44165 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $167,234.63 131 Equipment Reserve Fund $14,843.84 140 Park Development 141 Museum Grants $3,197.00 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant $1,900.52 150 Civic Center Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants $2,344.96 205 Sup Law Enforce. Srv. Fund (SLESF) $4,235.00 206 Community Oriented Policing 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant $1,666.66 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $3,198.62 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund $111.50 250 Special Revenue Fund $10,200.01 260 Downtown Business Improvement $1,280.21 290 Bridge Fund 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 310 Special Aviation Fund . $25,130.37 315 Airport Capital Improvement $26.90 330 Revenue Sharing Fund 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant $9,048.00 333 Comm. Development Block Grant $2,009.46 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan $29.64 335 Community Dev. Comm. Fund $35.08 341 S.T.P. $2,524.95 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief 345 Off-System Roads Fund 410 Conference Center Fund $10,180.46 550 Lake Mendocino Bond $1,673.75 575 Garage $2,959.67 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 52468-52537 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 19141-19297 PAYROLL PERIOD 12/21/03-1/3/04 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 52641-52642, 52751-52830 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 19298-19440 PAYROLL PERIOD 1/4/04-1/17/04 600 Airport 611 Sewer Construction Fund 612 City/District Sewer 615 City/District Sewer Replace 640 San Dist Revolving Fund 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 670 U.S.W. Bill & Collect 678 Public Safety Dispatch 679 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) 695 Golf 696 Warehouse/Stores 697 Billing Enterprise Fund 698 Fixed Asset Fund 699 Special Projects Reserve 800 Electric 805 Street Lighting Fund 806 Public Benefits Charges 820 Water 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) 900 Special Deposit Trust 910 Worker's Comp. Fund 920 Liability Fund 940 Payroll Posting Fund 950 General Service (Accts Recv) 960 Community Redev. Agency 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. 975 Russian River Watershed Assoc TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 52744-52750 $17,773.28 $98,914.22 $37,645.75 $21,160.51 $13,214.34 $2,416.58 $24,196.61 $5,2O3.94 $64,055.O4 $4,404.61 $3,933.8O $9,801.33 $27.5O $13,121.49 $588,798.48 $9,086.50 $5,789.79 $43,117.17 $1,573.34 $8,852.43 $86,842.20 $48O.95 $375,79O.59 $1,455.24 $2,109.01 $17,133.47 $43,662.4O $3,O37.4O $1,767,429.20 $65,007.95 $117,049.19 $348,648.59 $2,298,134.93 CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on Deputy City Clerk APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance 0 r.z.l E~o © > o cq . ODH~D~O~~ 0 0 i. m © > [13 o oo 0000 oooo oooo HHHH 0000 ~~0~ 00000000 00000000 00000000 ~~0~ 00000000 0 CO 0880 0000~ 8°88°~o oo 00000000 ~o~oo~~ ~ ~~o~o ~o ........ ~o~o2oo~ DDDDD~© ~~HHH~ © O0000000M 00 o 0088o 88© o 008 o 8 8 8 o o o o c) o o o o o · CDC) CD 0 c) CD CD ...... o o o ~ ~ o o ~ ~ ~ o o o ~~ 0 ~ 0 ~~0 H ~ ~ 000~ ~ ~ ~ oo°°8°o o rj~ o cq {Do 0 ~ > 0 ~ H ~ © o o o o o o o o o o o o c000 oooo oooo oooo 0 o o~o~ ~ ~ ~o~ o o~ ~0~ 00~0~ OoO H H 0 mm> o cq cq 0 ~ O~H~ 0 00~ o~ a.,oo o 0 ~ H 0 0 0,~ ~o > 000000 000000 000000 ?????? 000000 00 00 00 o o o o o o'~ o'~ c000 o o 0'~ o~ o~ o o 0000 0000 0000 0 0 H 88© 00 ~oo~~ 0000~0 0~ ~° ~8© ~0 o~8o oo o oooo ~o o ~ o cq 0 ~ n~ 0 n~ 0 0 O~ H Om ~o H ~0000 © 0 > ~ cq c'q ~ .-t oq cq O O O O O 0 O o o o H H O D D > o ~ 8 0 0 0 r'~ L~ 0~ ~ L~ 0 0 0 r'~ ~Y~ 0 ~ Oo ~o n~ O~ > Oo 0 OHH 0 H O~ 0 0 M H E~ E~ O~ E~o H ~ C~ · > O0 000 ~ 00000000000 o~oo~oo~o 0 O0 O0 0 60 O0 O0 0 00 0 0 00 0 00 [~ D~ o oog g gg o ~o~ 0000 0000 0000 HHHH 0000 OOOOO OOOOO OOOOO 00 ol ~ c~ o o o o o o o o o 0 0 g~oogosSooo S oo 000 0 000 O0 00000000000 0 O0 0 ~o~oo~o~ ~ ~  0~ 0~ ~0~ O0 o~o~~ o ~ .............. 0 H ~ 0 0 ~ H~HHHHHH~~~~ ~ ~ H H ~ ~ H H~HHHHOHHHH0 0 ~0 H ~oo~ 0~00 .... 0000 0000 O000ffi oo~o oo o oooo HHHH~ HHHH~0 ~-'-q cq oq ~ ~E~O 0 aa > 0 0 © 0 o ~o H ~1~ C) O H H 0'~ 0'~ O O ~O Ln Ln Ln L~ O O o oo o ooooooooooo o o o o o 0 0 o ~-t (Dh H D--] H ~H~ ~O H ~O HHHHHHHHHHH OOoO o oo o~ Ln Ln · · · CID ~ ~H~O DDD~ o ~ o cq 0 aa o ~g H H (.,.J 0 © o o o o o ,,~ c~ o/ ~ [.~ 000000000000 000000000000 000000000000 ~ 0 00 0 oSSS~oo 0000000 0 0 H H H H 0 0 00 . · 0 o~ H H © © H © © © 88°°88°°8°°8oooooo 8 88 000000000000 0 O0 °88°°88°88°° 8 o oo o oo ~NS°°88~82~~o~o ~ So°88 ~~0~0~0 S 000 oo~o~ o~8o~8 0088800 O0 O0 UUUU~UU cq O~ > ~H 000000000000 ~ ~ 0 HHHHHHH ~0000000 O~ > o o o o o [...~ [.~ [.~. 0000 0000 HHHH 0 0 ~o HH~ ~H ~0 HH~O o o o o c) o · . o o · o o LD o OHHH H~ o og o c'q 0 ~ > ~0000000 0 0 ~E~O O0 ~0 0 ~H ~ o ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0,'~ _~o H ~ r,.J 0 L.n O0 O0 00000000000 ~] 0 E~ ~ 0 o~g°~gg°g~°~gg°°go o oo oo 000000000~0000000 0~~0~~0~00~ ~000~00~00~~ oo~~o~~~o~ ................. ~ ~ ~<~H~H HH~HQH ~HHO o o 00000 ..... °~°~ H o oo oo ~0 00 ~H 0 ~] > m ~ ~0 ~ooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooo ~ 0 H ~ E~ 0 HO H IZl H~ ~:~ H ~i~ o ~o c) o o o o [~ [~.~ [.~ ~D o'~ br~ u~ Ln 0 0 0 o cD o o o o CD (D cq cq 0 ,44 ~ o H H ~-1 0 ~ > H O~ E~ 0,< Om H OO o ~ > r~ rj o ~1 H ~ rj , 0 ~o i ~ r..) · 0 co ~o ~ ~ E~o H ~ > ~r..~° Cq o o o o o Cxl oq ~0 CO CO co oo~ o~ o ,,~:~ L~ t"~ ,~--I ",~'~ cq o o o o o o cq co co O0 0 0 k~ ~0 O O ~° cq cq ~o co cq o o o o o o o ~°°~°oo o 000000 ~ ~ 0 ~~oo 000000 o°~°~o ~0 00000~ HHHHH~ ~o 000 HHH 0 ~oo o o ~ ~ o ~ ~ o . . . co ~ H 0 mm> Oo 0 Ot~ 0 ~~ ~ H 0 ~ H E~ H 0 H [.ti [.~.] 0 Dr..) Om ~o © 0 0,~ > 000000 000000 000000 00 c> o (D o o o o o o cq co (2o [i3 ~ co o o o o o o co ~0 0000 0000 0000 0 0 a~o a~a~o oo~ o o o ~o ~...o o o o o , cq o o o~ o ~H ~° 0 ~H O~ 0 H r.0 © E~ ~° O~ 0 O~ 0 ~ © r.,Q H H © ~00 0 © © H~ H 0000 0000 0000 O0 oo~ o DO oo8 ooo · . 0 0 , Oo ~o 0 0 u) ~000 00~ ~ ~oo~ ~~ o ~o ~~ M ~0 III HO00 0 C~ [.ti H 0 0 H © O~ H ~ ~D oo~°°~°~°°~°ooo oo o 000000000000000 000000000000000 00~00 O0 O0 00000 °°~° oo o 0 0 ~oo~g oo oo~ ~o~ o~ O~ o~o 0 ~~0 DDDD~ H · ~ H ~-~ H ~E) H ~r.~ 0 og~ 0000 ~H~ 0 D H O~ ~0 c~ > o o o o cq ¢q c0 c0 c0 0 0 oo · oo ~°° gg~o~ O0~m o o~ O0 0 ~ o~oo o oo o~o~ oo~ H~O 0 ~ > O~ ~o00 0 ~ ,'~0 0 © O,~ E~o > o~o~ o o o o o ~° 000000 000000 ~oo~o o~~o OOOOOO oo~oo gg~ggoo OO OO OOOOOOO o~oo~o O0 O0 ~-4 ~--~ O O O O O co ~0 E~ E~ o ~ ,-4 o o o o o co 120 00 o0 o o o o 0 0 omm> o~mD ~ ~~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~O~H~ ~goO~goo OOOOOO o~°~o~ o °~2~°~ o ~o ~H~O ~oogoo~ OOOOOOO ~oo~~ ~ OO OOO~O ....... ~oo~oo OO OO ~ > mooooom o o o o Oo ~o > 0 00000 HHHHHH O0 H ~ 0 H ~ ~ 0 ~0 H r. aOO ~OO O H 0 0~ H~H 0 0'~ H 0 0 0 0 0 °~ {20 CO 0 000 0 120(:0120 0'3 o~o ~oo ~o ~ 00000000000000 ~o~ 0 0 0 ~oo 00 CO 00 0 0 000 OOoO 00 000 . . 000 000 ~0 ~0 ~0 000> ~oo~ n~ n~ (J O~ ~ 0 0 ~° m ~ © ~H~H~H~H~H~H~H 0 ~ r-~ H > ~~~~~~~~~~oo oo o oo oo oo o o 000000000000000000000000000000 ~oooo~oo~oo~ooo~o~o~o~oo~ ~~o o 0 ~H IHD~ 00~ HH HHO~ oo-~ ~o Oo ~o o ~ > o o ~ ~ ~HHHH 0,~ E~o 0 · ~~~~~~~~~~~~~o oo oo oo o oo oo o o o o 000000000000000000000000000000000000000 o~o~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~o~o~o~oo~oo o ~ ooo oggoo goo ggo ggo gg~ooo gg 0 0 000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ~ ~ ~ ~ o o~ ~o ~ oo ~ o ~ ~ ~~ o ~ ~ O0 ~ ~0 O~ ~ ~ O0 ....................................... ~o~oo~oo~oo~o~oo~~~~oo~~o oo oo oo o oo ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ 0 0 O~ > 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 00 000 0,,~ > LD o o 0 0 o o o 0 o o o O~ > ~o ~ ~ ~o ~0 HI O~ X~ ~ oo ~ ~ ~ O0 ~ ~ HO HO Oo OE~ m~ 0 ~0 ~ 0 0 ~>m 0 0 0,~ > o ooooggooggoggg oZZoo ZZooZZoZ o o o cq co oo 0 0 0 O0 O0 0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 ~00~0~0~0~0~0 oo~~og~oo~~~ ~ ~ 0 O~ ~ ~ ~o~oo~o~oo~o~o ~ O0 0 O~ ~0 0 0000000000000000000 ~ ,.3 B] H H !~ Oo ~o O~ > ~0000000000000000000 OE-, 0 O~ E~o > cN 0 u~ ~ 0 ~ H O~ > r~ o ~a o~ H ~ H ~0 0 ~ H 0 0 0 0 ~ ~D > O~ ~o ~0 ~ 0 ~ H ~ , > © m O HHHHHH o g 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 oo oo cq o; o 0 O O O rj H 0 0 ~-4 0 · . . O~ 00~ og o ~ > 0 H~ ~H~ ~o~o ~ H~OU ~ 0 © o r~ 0 0 o8 o c> o o o o o o o~ o o o o 0 0 o o o o o o o · . o o . . ~ o o c~ . . 0'~ ~ H 0 00 · © o oo ~ ooo 000 H~O O~ ~H 0 ~ > 0 H~ ~ H~ ~ ~0 ~H ~ ~ 0 H © 0 E~ E~O 0 E~ © © ~0 > °°°~°°~°°~°°~°°~°° ~°~°~o~o o~oo ~o oo oo oo oo~ o o o o 0 000 0000000000000000 00000000000 ~oo~oo o ~°° o ~°o oo ggoo o ~ooggo o oooooo ogg°gg°gg°oo 0 oo ~ 000 O~~ 00~~ 00~~ 00~0 O O CD O O O 00 o0 o q-q ~ 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 O0 0 000 00000000000000000000000000000~0000 ~OO~OOOOO~OOO~O~O~OO~OOOOOOO~OO 0~000~~~0~0~0~00~0~~0~ ~~00000~0~0~0000~0000~0~~ 0000000000000~00~~0~~0000000 0000000000000~0~~~~00~~~ o ~ o m O~H, O~H~ H~H~HOHOH~HOQ~HHH~H HHO O~ ~o o c~ > H ~]~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 0000000000000000000000000000000000 ~0000000000000000000000000000000000 0 o o O~ ~o 0 · > 00 o o o o o o co 00 o o o o o O:)120120 O q-4 ~ O 88 o o8~ ~ 0 HH~O o o o o o o o o o o 00~ ~0 88© 0 E~ ~ H H ~ taDE~ 0 ~ H 0 o ~o 0 ca > O H ~ O n~ E~ 0 0~ 000 O~ E~o > o o o o o 120 ~0 0 0 ~0 0 o o . o ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ ° 0 O0 ~ ~ ....... 0 O0 ~ 0 0 O0 0 O0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 O0 ~ ~  0 ~ > ¥¥ ~ oooo O~ ~o 0 ~ ~0 r..gm © H E~ E~ 0 (Dm 0 E~ © 0 H H 0 :~0 H ~ o~ o o o o co oo oo o o o o o ["-.- o o ,,~;:~ ,m~ c0 oo o 0 o O~ 0 o~o OO8oo 8 o°8 8 2 8 ~ o ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 o~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ..... ~0 ~ ~0 ~ 0 H~O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ o o ~o o o O~ ~o n~ 0 ~ > 0 ~ © n~oo 0 0,~ ~o c~ > o o o o co {20 O0 O0 0000000 0000000000000 0 0 0 © ,-4 O~ 0 0 ,< © oo D~D~ ~0 ~HO 0 0 E~ E~ H ~ g~oggoo 0000000 °o~o~ o .... . . oo goggoggo~oOgo o o oo 0000000000000 0000000000000 o~o~o~~ 0 0 0 ~ ~ O~ ~o 0~ 0~0 H .E-] 0 I~0 0 On~ 0 ~ H ~ 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 r..~ H r.t)0 o O~ ~o 0 ~a 0 r..tl 0 E) E~O ,ri ~ 0 0 0 0 co o0 o o r~ ~ L~ L~ L~ LC) DD ~oh o o o ~.H ~ 0 ~~o ~o~ .... ~ D ~ ~o ~° H~H o r~ > o,~ o D 0 HO0 H ~ ~ ~HH ~ H HQ H~ H~ Hb ~ o o~ ~o H ~ C) · 0 0 0 O~ ot~ > ~ H o o © H ~ 0 ~ H '~ ~ 0 · > g 0 0 o ~ H ~ · o 0 0 ~ ~o 0 · o . m o ~ o ~ ~ O,~ > o o o o oo co o~ ~°°~°~oo o OOOOOOOOO O O O O [.~ co co co o o o o L-'- L"- O O °88 ~O O00M o o o · . 8© HHHHHHHHH O00000000M o°8 o o 00~0 00~ ~O 88 8 ~H O ~ E~ 0 H ~ H ~ ~ OO ~~ H~ ~ ~ H ~ HO~ ~H~ H H~ H H ~ O H ~ 0 a~ H H "~ rd > c~ o o o o o o 0~ i i co co o o o o o o o8 0000 0000 0000 0000 ~~o 0000 ~o~ ogoo°°8°°gg°°888o oo oo 0000000000000000 0 000000000000 0 u~ ~ 0 oo~o o o ~ g ~o ~ ~~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ......... 0~00 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~0~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ........ 0000 ~°°~ ~°°~ D©DD~ ~H~ 0~00~ go ~o 8oo oo gg o~o ~o o g o o OOO O 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 ~o~o~oo~oo~~ ~ ~ ~~ 000~0~00000000 000~0~00~000~0 ~0~0~00~000~0 HDHmDHmHH H HHH O~ ~o 0 ~ > 0 m © ~0 OI ~H © © D O~ ~o H ~ · ~o 0 o LA 0000 0000 0000 ~o~o 0000 0 ~H ~0 kO 00 00 00 co 150 o o o o co co cq 0'3 © o o o o o o o co co c'q c.,-3 0000 0000 0000 ~~o 0000~ o 0 ~ ~ · O0~J 000 c000 o . . . 0 H >© ~o ~J~JO o~o o o ~o 0 ~ 0 ~ ~J ~o~ ~D ~ 0 00 ,< 0 0 ~ E~ © © 0 o H 000 ©© 0,~ E~o > ~P 0000 0000 0000 0000000 o~oo~oo oo o 0 0 o8 00 H H ~~0 0000~ oo o 0~0~00 00~~0 ~H 0 c~ ~0 0 U ~HH~ ~00~ ~00~ © 0 0000000 ~H H © 0 0 m H ~ ~ H H ~ ~ 0 ~H 0 ~ o~ E~o o OOOOOOOOOOOO ~~0000~ 00000~~000 O0 O0 O0 0 o o o o o 0 °88 DDDO © ~ O00M oo8 ~o82oo oo20 · ~8~SS~°~S~~ o cpo o ~~00~0~~ S~8888°8~°8©o~o o MMMMH OOOO~ ~~H >>~ o ~ OH~H~HH OH~H~HHO o o~o o ~ o ~ o E~ ~ H o H ~ ~ H o H ~.~ H 0,~ o ~~o~ o oooooo o oooooo 000000000 o~oo~oo~ 000000000 o~oo~oo~ ?? 0 0 oggOOgoo o 000000 O0 0000~0~ o°~°~2~o ~ H H 0 H g~°°gg°° 000000~0 ~00~00~ 0~0~0 0 0 0 ~a > H Pa © HHHHHHHHH ~000000000 0 0 DDDDDDDD o o o o o co co co O0 O0 O0 O0 000000 0 000 000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 0 oo ~ ~ ~oo ~ 0 0 H DDD> 0 H 0 a~ ~ O~ ~o 0 ~ > 0 D D D E~ 0 ~ 0 ~ Bt1 H 0 E~ H H H ~ E~ ~ ~H H 0 ~o OOOO OOOO 0000 O O D D D O O O CO cO O o o o LN . © ~H ~H~ 00~ HH ~ HH0~ oo-~ ~o HHO0~ o o ~ > ~HHHH © 0~~ ~H ~ ~ooo o~ H ~ ~ o ~ o~ o~ o m o~ o~ om o ~ ~ ~ H o~ ~o H ~O O O Ln r.,.,0 oo8 O O c~ C~ OO OO OOOOOOO HH~HH~H DDDDDDDD 00000000 o o ~8© H~ ~H H~ H>mO H~ ~H0 O0 O0 0 0000000 ~0 O~ ~000~ ....... ~°888~8~~ ~ o ~ H HHHHHHO CO ~--~ Ln kO O0 O0 0 ~0~0~0~ O0 ~o88°888o H~ H~H~ O~ ~o o t~ o a~ H ~ ~ ~ O~ ~ HD H~ ~0000000 HHHHHHH ~HHHHHH~ 0 ~ Fd ,d~ L~ o ,r--i o o o o c~ oh L'--- ~-~ c~0 00 o 0 0 o ~g o 0 0 ~ H ~H ~ ~0 ~mO O~ ~ o~ ~ O~ E~o > i.-t H ~ (.) · > D.-1 ~ "~ ~ r.z.l o '~ ~uq 04 ~ o H f'q O0 O0 !.n [.t.] o 0 r'-- oo ,..--i ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO oo o o 0 0 0 0 0 CO oO (20(:0120 o 0 oo o o o 8 0 0 O0 ~ ~ ~ o~ o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o oo · · . .. 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 O0 H ~ H ~ 0 H~ ~[~ t~ 0 oo~ 0 0 . . , 0 O0 0 0 0 ,--t ~--I ,--I ~0 H ~ H~,'~ 0 OC~ ~o n4 O~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ~H ~ ~ H ~ ~ O~ ~ o HO0~ 0 o ~D © n~ o o o ~ E~ ~ E~ E~ o o~ > 0404 OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO O0 0 O OOOOOO O O ~oo~so o o ~~o o o~oo~o ~ 0 O0 0 ~ HHHHHHO H~ H~ © O~ C'q H ~ i 0,~ ~o H go ~D H 0 0 o ~o o o o ~ o o~ E~o > ~D 0 0 0 0 0 0 {20 OO O 000000 000000 000000 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I:D (20 u"l o 0 OC~ o~ H o H OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOO 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ CO 1.1'3 o~ oooo oooo oooo HHHH 0 0 ooSoo°SS°°SS°oo o 00000000000000 ~oo~oo~oo~o~ ~~ ~~O~OOO~~ ~ ~O ~ ~o ~o o ......... , o~oo~o~~o 0 O0 O~ ~ © © O O O O O O O c~ ,.,:, ,?, ,:g .. o o (*40 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ o ~0 M~o o o ~ ~ ; oo OC~ 0 ~ O~ ~00000000000000 © i O~ H ~ C} · 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 co ~0 O0 0000~ ~oo~oo~ O0 O0 0000000 o~oo~o 0 O0 0 0 O0 0 0 000 0 0 00 0 0 n~n~O H O0 O0 0000000 0000000 ~0~0~ 00000~0 00000~ H ~0 0 ~ o o · . , , o o H 0O4 ~0 O~ ~ O~m ~0 0~ ~ 0 > 0 0 © . m O~ 0 . > O0 O0 ~ ~ 000000000000 oo~oo~oo~o O0 O0 O0 0 00 00 00 ~ 0 o H HN HNN HN 8°888°88°888~o o H ~ 0oo 0 O~ o H ~ O~ ~ ~0 ~q H co > oo~ ~° ~~o~ ~ ~ · .~ . .~ . . · . ~oo~oo~oo ~0 ~0 O0 ~0~0~0~ OO~OO~OO~OO ~0~ > ~ O~ > ITEM NO. 6b DATE: FEBRUARY 18, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM TONI HOAG, MICHAEL E. LANE AND TERESA J. GIRELLI, AND ELISE L. VECCHIA, AND REFERRAL TO JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND The claim from Toni Hoag was received by the City of Ukiah on January 20, 2004 and alleges damages to a traffic collision at Sidney Street on January 5, 2004. The claim from Michael E. Lane and Teresa J. Girelli was received by the City of Ukiah on January 29, 2004 and alleges damages due to a traffic collision at the intersection of North State Street and Brush Street on July 27, 2003. The claim from Elise L. Vecchia was received by the City of Ukiah on January 29, 2004 and alleges damages a trip and fall at 1240 North Pine Street on August 4, 2003. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject the claims as stated and refer them to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject Claims For Damages Received From Toni Hoag, Michael E. Lane and Teresa J. Girelli, and Elise L. Vecchia and Refer Them To The Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Yes Claimants ~ Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Toni Hoag, pages 1-10; 2. Claim of Michael E. Lane and Teresa J. Girelli, pages 11-27; 3. Claim of Elsie L. Vecchia, pages 28-32. APPROVED' Candace Horsiey, City Ma'~ger mfh:asrcc04 0218CLAIM File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP CLAIM NO. A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. . . Name and address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: Address: ~2:}1 r) Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: Address: Telephone: q ~-- <~ ~ ;-~ q . . The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: l- ,.~'- Oq Time of Occurrence: Location: ~~ InP l J ~ ¢~ __ - Circumstances givin~ ;i~ this claim: General desc-~ r~pt~o% of the indebtedness, obligation, injuw, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. . The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. Page I of 3 If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim~ including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed. and basis for computation: (~~- !' ~r'~)_ _ .~ If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) ~-1 Limited Civil Case ~ Unlimited Civil Case IYou are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government CodeI §910. I , Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) . . Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted' 10. If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: 11. If applicable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.:~[-~-,~. Telephone: Address: Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: Telephone: Address: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.:' Vehicle Make/Year:~f~OO .~,~ ~'_,~ ~ Expiration: :~- ~- _~j-..~) 3 If applicable, please attach any repair b#ls, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 --'?-- -- READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B' location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-1" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-I" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB--.-3, Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not to have been brought in good faith and with reasonable cause. Date: Page 3 of 3 '01/20/2004 at 11:29 AM File# 28124-00099873 Claim# Appraiser: Richard Estevo 01/20/2004: EST01: 01/20/2004: EST01: 01/20/2004: EST0t: 01/2'0/2004 at 11-29 AM File# 28124~00099873 Claim# Appraiser- Richard Estevo IMAGE REPORT 01/20/2004- EST01' Pathways - A product of CCC Information Services Inc. 01/20/2004 at 11-32 AM File# 28124-00099873 Claim# Appraiser: Richard Estevo EUROPEAN AUTOWERKS/UKIAHBODY SHOP 51 KUNZLER RANCH RD Ukiah, CA 95482 Business: (707)468-9375 IMAGE REPORT 01/20/2004: EST01: Pathways - A product of CCC Information Services Inc. 1 '01/20/2004 at 11-29 AM File:,~~: 28124-00099873 Claim,~ Appraiser- Richard Estevo EUROPEAN AUTO WERKS/UKIAH BODY SHOP 51 KUNZLER RANCH RD Ukiah, CA 95482 Business: (707) 468-9375 01/20/2004- EST01- 01/20/2004' EST01: 01/20/2004: EST01' Date: Estimate ID: Estimate Version: Preliminary Profile ID: 1/20/2004 11:36 AM A051U9033801 0 CSAA-DRN European Auto Werks 61 KUNZLER RANCH RD UKIAH, CA 95482 (707) 468-9375 Fax: (707) 468-93;'9 Tax ID: 04-162225 BAR~. 069525 Appraised For: Nancy Gaudinier Condition Code: Date of Loss: Contact Date: Deductible: File Number: Claim Number: Ex~llent 116/2004 · 116/2~4 500.00 P A061Ug033801 Type of Loss: Accident Date: CollisiOn 116/2004 Insured: Address: Telephone: TONI HOAG 610 NORTH ORCHARD AVE#64 UIOAH, CA 95482 Home Phone: (707) 468.8634 Mitchell Service: 914164 Description: Body Style: VIN: Mileage: OEM/ALT: Color: Options: 2000 Mazda 626 LX Vehicle Production Date: 2/04 41) Seal Drive Train: 2.0L Inj 4 Cyl 4A 1YVGF22CgY5130418 License: 4NEJI$8 CA 33,708 A Search Code: B95402 GOLD ALUM/ALLOY WHEELS, AIR CONDITIONING, POWER STEERING, POWER WINDOWS POWER DOOR LOCKS, TILT STEERING WHEEL, CRUISE CONTROL, ELECTRIC DEFOGGER AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION, AM-FM STEREO/CDPLAYER(SINGLE) Line Entry Labor item Number Type I 400022 BDY 2 403131 BDY 3 400268 REF 4 400278 BDY 6 401169 REF 6 900600 REF * 7 401459 BOY 8 AUTO REF 9 401405 BOY 10 401467 BDY 11 403468 BOY 12 401625 BOY 13 4016O3 BDY 14 401736 BDY 16 AUTO REF 16 AUTO REF 17 403296 BDY 18 401879 BDY 19 401915 GLS Line item Part TypeJ Operation Description Part Number REMOVE/INSTALL FRT BUMPER ASSY REMOVEflNSTALL L HEADLAMP ASSY BLEND L FENDER OUTSIDE REMOVE/INSTALL L FENDER UNER Existing REFINISH L ROCKER PANEL REMOVE/REPLACE HAZMAT New REPAIR L FRT DOOR SHELL Existing REFINISH L FRT DOOR OUTSIDE REMOVE/INSTALL L FRT BELT MLDG REMOVE/INSTALL L FRT DOOR MIRROR REMOVE/REPLACE L FRT DOOR ADHESIVE MOULDING GG2A-50-692A-81 REMOVE/INSTALL L FRT DOOR TRIM PANEL REMOVE/INSTALL L FRT DOOR HANDLE REMOVE/REPLACE L REAR DOOR REPAIR PANEL GDTA-73-031A REFINISH L REAR DOOR OUTSIDE REFINISH L REAR ADD FOR JAMBS REMOVE/REPLACE L REAR DOOR ADHESIVE MOULDING GG2A-E0-693B-.21 REMOVE/INSTALL L REAR DOOR CHECK . Existing REMOVE/INSTALL L REAR DOOR MOVEABLE GLASS Existing ESTIMATE RECALL NUMBER: Mitchell Data Version: UltraMate Version: 116/2064 11:16:06 A051Ug033801 UltraMate is a Trademark of Mitchell International JAN_04_A CopyrigM (C) 1994 - 2000 Mitchell International 6.0.021 All Rights Reserved Dollar Labor Amount Units 1.6 # INC # C 0.8 0.4* C 1.6 1.61 * o.r 1.0'# c 1.8 0.$ # INC # 63.90 0~ INC 0.7 # 181.00 4.7 C 1.8 C 0.6 63.90 0.1 0.2*# 1.0' Page I of 3 20 21 22 23 24 26 26 27 28 29 3O 401945 4O3028 AUTO 4O?.282 402308 402310 AUTO AUTO 933006 933018 AUTO BDY REMOVE/REPLACE BDY REPAIR REF REFINISH BDY REMOVE/INSTALL BDY REMOVE/INSTALL BDY REPAIR REF REFINISH REF ADD1. OPR BDY ADDI. OPR REF ADD1- OPR ADD'L COST L ROOF MOULDING L QUARTER OUTER PANEL L QUARTER PANEL OUTSIDE L REAR COMBINATION LAMP REAR BUMPER ASSY REAR BUMPER COVER REAR BUMPER COVER CLEAR COAT RESTORE CORROSION PROTECTION MASK FOR OVERSPRAY pAINT/MATERIALS Date: Estimate ID: Estimate Version: Preliminary Profile ID: GDTA-50-gL0 Existing Existing 1/20/2004 11:36 AM A061U9033801 0 CSAA-DRN 17.06 0.3 1.0'# C 1.8 INC 1.2 # 0.5*# C 2.3 2.4 10.00' 0.1' 6.00' 0.1' 296.70 * * - Judgement Item # - Labor Note Applies C - Included in Clear Coat Calc III. Labor SuMotals 8ody Refinish Glass Units Rate 12.4 67.00 13.0 67.00 1.0 57.00 Non-Taxable Labor Labor Sun~ary 2SA Additional Costs Taxable Costs Sales Tax Total Additional Costs Add'l Labor Amount 10.00 6.00 0.00 Sublet Ammmt 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.260~ Totals 716.80 746.00 67.00 1,619.80 1,619.80 296.70 21.51 318.21 Part Replacement Sun=nary Taxable Parts Sales Tax Total Replacement Parts Amount IV. Adjustments Insurance Deductible Customer Responsibility I. Total Labor: II. Total Replacement Parts: IlL Total Additional Costs: Gross Total: 7.260% 327.36 23.73 361.09 600.00- 1,619.80 361.09 318~1 2,189.10 IV. Total Adjustments: Net Total: 600.00- 1,689.10 This is a preliminary estimate. Additional changes to the estimate may be required for the actual repair., Point(s) of Ifnpact 9 Left Side (P) Insurance Co: CSAA ESTIMATE RECALL NUMBER: Mitchell Data Version: UltraMate Version: 116/2004 11:16:06 A061U9033801 UltraMate is a Trademark of Mitchell International JAN_04_A Copyright (C) 1994 - 2000 Mitchell International 6.0.021 Ali Rights Reserved Page 2 Date: Estimate ID: Estimate Version: Preliminary Profile ID: 1/20/2004 11:36 AM A051U9033801 0 CSAA-DRN Body Shop: Address: Work Phone: Fax Phone: European Auto Works-Uldah 61 KUNZLER RANCH RD Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 468-9375 (707) 468-9379 Company Code: Drop Off Date: 1! 6/2004 Repair Dates: ESTIMATE RECALL NUMBER: Mitchell Data Version: UltraMate Version: 116/2004 11:16:06 A061ug033801 UltraMate is a Trademark of Mitchell International JAN_04_A CopyrigM (C) 1994 - 2000 Mitchell International 5.0.021 All Rights Reserved Page 3 of File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 AMENDED CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP dAN 29 2004 CITY OF UKIAH A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. 1. Name. and address of the Claimant: NameofClaimant: Michael E. Lane Teresa J. Girelli Address: 9301 Main Street 9301 Main Street Potter Valley, CA 95469 Potter Valley, CA 95469 . Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: c/o Pano Stephens, Esq. Telephone: (707) 462-1996 Address: P. O. Box 1548 Ukiah, CA 95482-1548 . The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date ofOccurrence: July 27, 2003 Time of Occurrence: approx. 2100 Location:North State Street intersection with Brush Street, Ukiah, CA Circumstances giving rise to this claim: See paragraph 4 of January 22, 2004, attached claim form received by which paragraph is incorporated City Of Ukiah on here by this referenc( 4. General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. Personal injuries incurred by each claimant, including pain, suffering, and disfigurement, broken bones, _of earnings and earning ca~_a_c, it_ff, physical and. emotional trauma, loss medical expensffs, property damage. Thename~rnames~fthepub~icemp~yee~remp~yeescausingtheinjury~dama~e~r~ss~ifkn~wn. Unknown. Page 1 of 3 . If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it tOtals less than ten thousand dollars .-' ($10,000) as of th'e date of presentation of the claim,, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with lhe basis of computation of the amount claimed. AmOunt Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) ~ Limited Civil Case ~ Unlimited Civil Case IYou are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government CodeI §910. I . Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) Decline . . Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: Lane' 8-16-63, Girelli' 9-24-58 Name, addressandtelephonenumberofanywitnessestotheoccurrenceortransacti°n whichgaverisetothe claim asseded: Cpl. D. Wo~cieszak, Ukiah Police Department; Robert M. Byers & Denise Byers, 6200 Eastside Calpella Road, Ukiah, CA, .485-7434; Amanda Byers, 1700 Lockwood Drive, Ukiah, CA, 463-6946; Daniel Arthur Peterson, 2320 10. Mill Creek Road, Ukiah, CA, 462-8827. · lfthe claim involves medicaltreatmentfora claimedinjury, please providethe name, address andtelephone numberofanydoctorsorhospitalsprovidingtreatment: Presently unknown except: University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, CA, (916) 734-9200; CALSTAR, 20876 Corsair Blvd., Hayward, CA, (800) 404-8226; Thomas Kilkenny, M.D., Ukiah, CA. 11. If applicable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim .relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: See copy of police Telephone: ............... Address: -"~c'~i-~ent rep-ort attach~-d--hereto Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: Address: Claimant'S Veh. Lic. No.: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Telephone: Vehicle Make/Year: Expiration: If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street comers. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-1" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. SEE PAGE 4 OF ATTACHED ACCIDEI~T REPORT CURB · SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB -- Warning' Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not~!;For'~/ght/~ood faith and with reasonable cause. Signature: '/ Date: January 27, 2004 Page 3 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 PANO STEPHENS (%42122) Attorney at Law P. O. Box 1548 Ukiah, CA 95482-1548 Telephone- (707) 462-1996 Facsimile- (707) 462-1999 Attorney for Claimants 5i dAN22 2004 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT CITY COUNCIL CiTY OF UKIAH Claim Of' MICHAEL E. LANE and TERESA J. GIRELLI, Claimants. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES [Govt. Code §910] Claimants present the following claim against the CITY OF UKIAH pursuant to Section 910 of the California Government Code. 1) Claimants' mailing address is 9301 Main Street, Potter Valley, California 95469. 2) The post office address to which Claimants desire notices regarding this claim be sent is: MICHAEL E. LANE and TERESA J. GIRELLI c/o PANO STEPHENS Attorney at Law P. O. Box 1548 Ukiah, CA 95482-1548 3) The date and location of the incident giving rise to this claim are: July 27, 2003, at intersection of North State Street and Brush Street, Ukiah, California. 4) The circumstances giving rise to this claim are as follows: CITY OF UKIAH created and maintained a dangerous and unsafe 1 CL,-\IM FOR D..\MA(iI':'."; 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 roadway at said location in that the lanes, lighting and lack of warning devices at said roadway intersection provided inadequate traffic control so that left-turning vehicles created a foreseeable risk of entering into the path of vehicles crossing the intersection, there was no protective left-turn phasing signals or devices to warn or protect against turning vehicles crossing the path of passing vehicles, and the dangerous condition of said roadway and intersection was known to CITY OF UKIAH by virtue of numerous other, prior and similar vehicular collisions at said location. The said roadway and intersection was dangerous due to negligent and improper design and maintenance of its characteristics and markings, and due to changed conditions at the location which rendered it dangerous following original design thereof; the intersection was further dangerous and unsafe due to failure to provide proper signs, markings or other protective devices. Claimants, while lawfully using the city street on the date above stated, were involved in a motor vehicle collision and seriously injured. 5) The names, capacities or other identifying information regarding any public employees/agents who negligently created, supervised, or maintained the intersection are unknown to Claimants. 6 As a direct and proximate result of the matters herein described, Claimants have sustained general and special damages in amounts which are in excess of the ~ic t limits of the DATED' January 21, 2004 PANO STEPHENS Attorney for Claimants MICHAEL E. LANE and TERESA J. GIRELLI CI.AIM FOR [')AMAGI~S 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 DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY CERTIFIED MAIL I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County of Mendocino, California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the above-entitled action. My business address is 201 North State Street, Ukiah, California. On this date I served a copy of the foregoing document by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, by certified mail with return receipt requested, in the United States post office mail box at Ukiah, California, addressed in the manner immediately below this declaration. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 21, 2004 at Ukiah, City Council City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 _[0 - 3 CLAIM FOR DAMAGI:iS .; Z ! ! I f ; .IC~ OT~~ ~ - P, JU.Y EJECT~ . ~ ~..,~5,,! ..:~yr_~. ~;~,,.,_--u_, , -, ..... o! .~/,,~'~... ,. ,,,-r'~_ ¢~Y, ~_:_. '*lq,,', ,~ l / l 14'z ' t ! Ukiah Police Department 300 SEMINARY AYENL~E TRAFFIC COLLISION REPORT: Cs. SE g03-2557 DATE: 07-27-03 Th-ME: 2102 WRS. NCIC82303 COLLISION TYPE: DUI COLLISION ~ of Poli~ OFC. ID~S NARRATIVE: FACTS: j' NOTIFICATION: i rex~ived ~ injury colli.don call at approx. 2102 hours. I ~nded from the Todd Grove Park and arrived on scene at approx. 21 !0 hottrs after UPD Ofc. Crook, several MC$O Deputies and the Ukiah Fire Dept. ambulance. Ail times_, stxaxts, and measurements are approxLmate. Me, asumments were taken with a rolatape. SCENE.: In this area,, the 900 block of N. State St. intersects with Low Gap R& on'the west side of N. State St. and Brush St. on the east side of N. State St. N. State St. is a fout4an¢ north/south roadway of paved asphalt ~ by raised c.,,,nnent sidewalks, .The two southbound lanes are separated by ~ marke~ and ~ ~vo southbotmd lanes are separated by the same type of markers. The north aad soutlabound lanes are separated by painted double yellOW lines. At thc ~texsection of N. State SL and Brash St./~w Gap Rd., there are painted ,turning lanes. These turning lanes are for left hand tums truly (~.-'B to ~e west and $/B to the east). The roadway markings were in good condition (see factual diagram for details) and the overtmad signal 'fights were in working order. The intersection also has !rested signs indicafiag be mm lanes are to ;field to an-coming Lmffic. 'PART~S: V-1 (Chevrolef) was moved prior to my .arrival onto the block of Brash St. V-2 (Harley Da~dson) {known as V'2 (I-ID) for the m~der cf ne tl-ds report) was at its portion of mst in Se roadway on aorrhcast comer of t;ae inters~tion of N. Seate St. '.and Bm~-t St. (see factual diagram). V-I (Chc'-,a'o!et) sustained minor darmge to hhe lef-t front fender and bmmper areas (see amadae, d photographs). V-2 (HD) sustained major damage to -t. he ~.. Ukiah Police Department I I I Illll Chief of Police fuel tank, fi'ont-forks, front fender, foot .pegs, and frame (see ailached photographs). D-! (Petemon) was located start ~ding on the north sidewalk of Bnmh St. D-2 (Lane) was located hying on the north sidewalk of Brash St. with UFD EMT staff ueating his injuries. D-1 (Peterson) identified hi__m~e_ !f as the driver of V-1 and also provided his California Driver's license to Ofc. D-2 (lame) identified himself as the driver of V-2 and later provided his California Driver's license to me at the Llldah Valley Mc~ticaI Center. P-2 (Gkelli) was also located at the scene near the north Brush St. sidewalk and was also being treated by the UFD EMT PI~/S~~ EVIDFaNCE: I lmmted scrape mar'~ on thc nmdway in the intersection that terminated at the mar tire of V-2 (HD). Ofc. Crook obtained a blood sample from D-! (Peterson). Oft. Crook *ag~ok photographs of ~e .scene and .both vehicles. ! tc~k photographs of the ~jufies of Lane and Gi~. STATEMENTS: D-1 0Pelerson) w~ con~_act_,'d and inter,owed by Ofc. Crook (see Ofc. Crook's repoa). i contacted 'Wimess #1 (Robert Byers) in the 100 block of Brash St. Robe-t.. identified Lane ~ the &-'iver of V-2 (P~) and Peterson as the driver of V-I (Chevrolet). Robert re'.~,ate, xt flat he was south~otmd on N. Stale St. nor*& the Low Gap RddBmsh St. intersection m the number two lane at about 25 MPH. Robert saw V-! southbound Lq Se number one lane next to his veh'..'_c!e. Rob. err saw that V-t had moved over to thc left turn lane as t~he two vehicles approached the ~ntersecfion. Robert saw V-1 mm eas~d into the inter~x:fion. Robert saw V-2 0tD) northbound south of the intersection and continue northbouM into the inters~tion as v-1 w~ making Robert ~d not behove that V-1 was ~avel~ng v~.~3, fast. Robert did not Cpi "Wojc5 Ukiah Police Department believe that V-2 had its head light on until it 'entea~ the inteam~on. Robert saw the ~_.nt of V-! ~mlli .& with the left side of the motorcycle. Robert saw diat both of the fi&rs on V-2 were cj~ned from thc mmorcycl¢ aad collided with the road way. c~nmct~ W'mxess .~ (~e. nise Byers). Denise was very upset and concun~ with Rotmn's account of thc incident, then wished ~o leave. had been ~/n the front fi~t mssenger ~ ~ Robert's vehicle. I coalacl~ W'fmess #3 (_Amanda Byes). Amanda reta'~ that she was seated in the right rear seat of ~'s vehicle. Amanda did not see ¥-2 until V-1 collided ~th R. 3manda stated that she did not see a head light of a motorcycle on tlm m~d. way at uhe intcme~on. i contactent 'D-2 (Lane) at the Ukiah Valley Medical Centex emm~ency room. ! learned Lane's injuries 0isted on page #3) from Dr. Franklin. i also learned _that Dine and Cdre~ were Bdng pr~~ to ~ flown ~ the Davis Med/ca/Center. for n' _ tmah-ne ~. due to their inimies. !2ne related that he was riding northbound in the number one lane of N. State S~. south of the Low Gap Rd.rBnmh SL intersec~on at approx.. 5 to 10 mph. Lane noticed that the ovexhe~ signal light was red -and was slowing for a stop. I _a_oe.explained that about 100 to 200 fe~ before he aniVed at thc ~ntersection, hhe signal light tum~ g~-,.en. Lane explained that a he was a few feet south o£ the intersect/on, in .~,~'oad gear, when he saw V-I mm imo the sound left arm lane. As Lane was entering the intersection, he saw ~at V-1 was not slow/ng down and was beginning to turn. Lane believed hhat V-I h~ad ~2m a red !/~ht, l-~cause he had a ~ si~mal and ~had the fight of way. Lane direcuxl his motorcycle to the fight and went into the number two lane in order to avoid a collision with V-i. Lane was unable to avoid V- I and ~e fi~nt of V-1 coil/tied wit.~ ~e !e~ side of his moWrcyc!e. Lane -~xn!.a~.~./~ hhat both he and GLmll/were ej~,.~ fi'om ~e motorcTc!e. Ukiah Police Department B~: UOT) 463-6262 Fax: (/07) ~ Jdm Chief of Police, -. Lane saw the driver of V-! pull hi~ vehicle ovm- and walk up to him- Thc driv~ of V-1 told Lane that he did not see him and that he did not have his head light on. Lane explained to me that he did have his Igad light on and that he flashed the' high beam at V-1 prior to thc inmm~on, ~ V-I had it's high beams on. Lane explained that his motorcycle head iigflat can be shut off but he did have the head !amp on, I a.skexl Lane if he had been drinking ~cohol~c bcvcragc.s earlier that evening. Lane s~at_e,d that he had a two sips from Girelii's margarita eaffier, but had nothing else. ! d¢~ no odor of an alcoholic t:~v~'age emitting from big_ breath or person. I detected no ~qrmp~oms of alcohol intoxication from Lane. i had i aqe sign a medical treatment release form and photographed his inj~es, ! att~mgted m speak :m P-1 (C~ire~). Gkelli was in great pain and was unable to articulate a complete account of the incident other than saying the vehicle pulled out in [rant of ~em and the vehicle was ax,. older wl-d~ -~hicle. OPinIONS .~"inD CONCLUSIONS: V-I (Chevrole0 was ~outhbotmd on N. S~ SI no~ of ~e ~w ~ ~~~h SL ~~on in ~e n~ one ~e ~d ~~ ~m ~e le~ mm l~e to ~ ~~~d onto Br~h St. V-2 ~) w~s no~~d on N. S~ Si ~ ~e n~'one l~e ~r~h~ng ~ ~w' G~ RddBr~h SC h~~on. V-1 (Chewoie0 en~t~ ~e ~~on ~ut sio~g m ~eld m on m~.ng n~~d mffic md ~gm !e~ mm ~~d ~ough ~e ~ecfion ~ ~pm~~ly 20 mph. D-t ~e) ha~Amg a ~n ~ ~d not ~ficSpa~g ~y ~~d ~fic pr~ mm ~e m~fion. C~e) n~~ ~at V-I h~ not ~eld~ to ~m md w~ ~nfin~g m ~ke a !e~ ~m ~~d ~eu~h ~he ~t~~on. D-2 q~e) ~mmp~ m avoid a col~cn w~ V-1 by ~c~g hz ~torcyc!e ~o aae right ~m ~c ~2 i~c. D-2 ~e) w~ ~ie m avoid ~e ~sion ~~ ~e le~ side of ~ v~cie ~d ~e ~nt end of V-1. D-1 (Pe~m~n) was ~nnoxiea~ ~ ~e ~ ef ~e co,hon. ~e to B_ 1 ~etemen's) ~to~ca~on, he f~i~ m" *'~ Cpl. D. Wo.k:'i.~z~t: #'2~ I$ U kiah.Police Department I I ,t3!D) proc~ding north~nd into the intemeefion and was unable to avoid the front of his vehicle from colliding with t~ left ~de of V-2 after hiling to yield to it while malOmg a left hand turn in thc intemecfion. h-NTOXICATION: Ref~ to Ofc. Crook's report for details, POINT OF IMPACT: The POI was determined by V-2's position of rest and statements as 8' west of ~e east cm'b line prolongation of N. State St_ and 12' south of the north curb line p~tongation of Brash SL CAUSE: D-1 (Peter-,on) caused this collision by being in violation of 23!52(a)(b) CVC- L-~iv;.ng while iatoxicat~ wSth the associated factor of 21§01(a) CVC - Failing m yield ~o oa coming traffic to complete a left hand mm until reasonably safe. The cause was determined by the damage betw~n lmth vehicle, statements, and Pe~-"xson displaying ob]ec~ve symptoms ~ alcohol intoxication and bis performance, ~e field sobriety test..s. Re~..~vnm-endatiom: Sabmit -:o ~e ~sffi~ ARomey's office for ~~afion of ~ei Pe~n for'~'~' ' ' ~e ~nd CdeV. r';:l D Woiciez, zak ~g By: CEDRIC L CROOK, On 7/29/2003 2:50:00 AJvl 'l-~e: CASE NUMBER 03-2557 CASE NUMBER 03-2557 * SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OFC. CROOK ~142 OFFENSE~. 23153(a)/(b) CVC OFFENSE DATE: 7-27-03 SUSPECT: PETERSON, DANIEL 11-,3-66 VICTIM: LANE, MICHAEL 8-!6-83 ADDITIONAL WITNESS: HE~ ~j. MAN, STEVEN 3-t3-52 PO BOX 613 W!LLITS, CA 95490 707-4.~3-1186 LOCATION: N. STATE ST. AT LOW GAP RD. TIME: 2102 HOURS NCt~303 On 7-28-03 at approx. 1900 hours, ! contacted Hellman via telephone regarding a voice mail message ,he had ~f{ me. Hetiman stated he had wit~,~ the tmfrm coll~. Hettman stated he was in a~ ~ lane cn Lu'w Gap Rd. at Stato St. He#man stated he was stopped for the red ligh[ for ~ Low Gap traffic at State St. Heilman stated V-1 was travelling S/13 on N. State St. just North of Low Gap Rd. Hetlman sated he thought V-1 had c, rigir~l~y possibly stopped prior to the intersection. H~man sta~ed he observed V-1 begin to make a ~ft. tam on -to Brunch SL As V-1 was makiag the left turn, He#man observed V-2 travaling NiB on State SL Hc-Ilman stated he heard either the passenger or driver of V-2 yeti "No= just prior to V-2 impacting V-l in ~6 intersection. Hellman stated V-2 glanced off the front bumper of V-i. The passenger ar~ dd~er of V-2 ~x~ roiled on to..the sidewalk after ~e collision. Heitman stated D-I iookecl "out of -;'t' after the c~~- Heilman st~-ted he ~hought D-~ wasn't paying at[emion at the iime of the coitision. Heilman stated he did nat b~ieve c3{~her yahid, e was speeding_ at the time of the coilision. Heiiman stated his light was ~ed at the ~me ~ ~he cc~.lis~oR ~nd believed b~h V-! and V-2 had green lig~.m at. the time of the collision. C'~p¥ to DA.. DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County of Mendocino, California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the above-entitled action. My business address is 121 South Main Street, Ukiah, California. On this date I served a copy of the foregoing document by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, by certified mail with return receipt requested, in the United States post office mail box at Ukiah, California, addressed in the manner immediately below this declaration. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 28, 2004 at Ukiah, California. Holland"- City Council City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP 2O04 CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. 1. Name and address of the Claimant: NameofClaimant: ELISE L. VECCHIA Address: 1240 North Pine Street, #14 (Walnut Village) Ukiah, CA 95482 . Addresstowhichthepersonpresentingtheclaimdesiresnoticestobesent: NameofAddressee: ELZSE L. VECCHIA Telephone: (707) 462-1996 Address: c/o PANO STEPHENS & MARIE T. MAIOLO MUCHOW Attorneys at Law . P. O. Box 1548, Ukiah, CA 95482-1548 The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: August 4, 2003 Time of Occurrence: Location: Common areas and sidewalk near Unit 21, at Walnut Village Circumstances giving rise to this claim: Premzses, 1240 North Pine Street, Ukiah, CA See attached. General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. Personal physical injuries, emotional and physical £_.r.auma, pain, suffering and disruption of life, present and future medical expenses, _general and special damages arising therefrom. The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. Unknown. Page 1 of 3 o If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim; including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) -] Limited Civil Case ~-~ Unlimited Civil CaSe IYou are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government codel §910. 7. Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: August 1, 1919 10. Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted' Herman Magdelano, Irma Magdelano, 1240 North Pine Street, Ukiah, CA 95482; (707) 462-4062 Ukiah Ambulance Service personnel, name unknown. 'If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: Ukiah Ambulance Service personnel (names presently unknown) Ukiah Valley Medical Center (and personnel therein, names presently unk' 11. Monita Green, M.D., Ukiah, CA; Brian Cable, M.D., Ukiah, CA; Bowen, M.D., Wiilits, 'CA; Richard Beddoe', RF'£, Ukiah, CA applicable, pleasea~achanymedicalb#~orrepo~sors~ilardocumentss~port~gyourclaim. William If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: Address' Telephone: Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: Telephone: Address: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.' Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: Expiration: If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of ~' ~:~ '" READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of aCCident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street comers. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location-of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-l" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB SIDEWALK z' PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB -- Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may recover all~,costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not..t? d .with reasonable cause. Signature: --...~_~_..~.~ .._..._%~__ Date: .Janua~':y 27, 2004 Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH ELISE L. VECCHIA, Claimant 3. CITY OF UKIAH created and maintained a dangerous and unsafe walkway/sidewalk in the area referred to in Paragraph 3, in that said walkway/sidewalk contained broken gaps, cracked and/or uneven elevations in the walking surfaces such that ordinary users of the walkway/sidewalk could be tripped by such hazardous conditions; the hazardous conditions were known to agent/employees of CITY OF UKIAH in that they previously made repairs to similar conditions in other common areas of the premises but failed to inspect, repair and/or make safe the subject area; accordingly, the subject walkway/sidewalk constituted a dangerous and unsafe Condition of public property, and was negligently maintained by agents/employees of in that deteriorating and changed conditions made it dangerous and unsafe following original design thereof, and said agents/employees failed to properly warn or guard against the hazards. Claimant, while lawfully and reasonably using the walkway/sidewalk at the subject area, was tripped as a result of the hazardous conditions aforesaid, and thereby sustained serious personal injuries and damages. DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY CERTIFIED MAIL I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County of Mendocino, California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the above-entitled action. My business address is 121 South Main Street, Ukiah, California. On this date I served a copy of the foregoing document by placing a tree copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, by certified mail with return receipt requested, in the United States post office mail box at Ukiah, California, addressed in the manner immediately.below this declaration. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January ~', 2004 at Ukiah, California. /Sheila Holland City Council City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6¢ DATE: February 18, 2004 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BIDS FOR VARIOUS POLE AND PAD MOUNT TRANSFORMERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $57,504.24 TO WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC AND WESCO The formal bid process was followed in sending a Request for Quotation (R.F.Q.) to five suppliers for 11 different size transformers. Four formal bids were opened by the City Clerk on February 3, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. These bidders were: I , 2. 3. 4. WESCO WESTERN STATES ELECTRIC G.E. SUPPLY COMPANY STEVENS, MCCAARTHY, LANDCASTER, LLC Bids were evaluated based upon price, delivery time, load losses, and availability of circuit protection. The bids are total cost, including tax and shipping. Based on staff's evaluation, the lowest compliant bidder for each unit, as summarized in the attached table, is recommended to receive a bid. The transformers will be placed in warehouse stock and will be charged out on a project-by-project basis. They have been budgeted in the 2003/04 Fiscal Year in Account Number 800.3646.690.000. Sufficient funds are available for these expenditures. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bids totaling $57,504.24 as follows: One 5 KVA and two 15 KVA pole mount transformers, three 25 KVA, one 50 KVA and two 75 KVA pad mount transformers to Western States Electric for $7,308.01; two 75 KVA, one 112.5 KVA, two 150 KVA 240V, one 150 KVA 480Y, one 300 KVA 208Y and one 300 KVA 480Y pad mount transformers to Wesco for $50,196.23. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and direct staff to re-advertise and re-solicit bids. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Bid Tabulation APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Ci't~Manager ~.o r./} DJ DJ HHH ©©© H ~ H H E-~ [-~ D~ H ~ ~ ITEM NO. 6d DATE: February 18, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution Requiring Use of City of Ukiah Claim Form SUMMARY: Effective March 30, 2003, Government Code Section 910.4, authorizes the City Council to require a claimant to use a claim form adopted by the City of Ukiah, when submitting a claim for damages to the City. Prior to the enactment of Government Code Section 910.4, the City could not require the use of a City form. As long as a claim submitted by a claimant "substantially complied" with the requirements of Government Code Section 910, the City Clerk was required to accept the claim for filing and process the claim. Determining of whether a claim "substantially complies" with state law requirements has lead to litigation and creates some uncertainty. Under Section 910.4, the governing body of the jurisdiction must require the use of a city form. Requiring the use of a standard form will reduce, if not eliminate, any uncertainty as to when a claim meets the requirements of state law and should result in more consistent treatment of similarly situated claimants. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution requiring use of standard City claim form ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Reject the proposed resolution and continue to allow claims as long as they substantially comply with state law requirements. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: None City Attorney David J. Rapport, City Attorney City Manager 1. Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Requiring Use of Standard City Claim Form Candace Horsley, City'~,anager ATT^CHMENTJ__ RESOLUTION NO. 2004- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADOPTING A FORM FOR PRESENTING DAMAGES CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY AND REQUIRING THE USE OF THE FORM BY CLAIMANTS WHEREAS, 1. Prior to the adoption of Government Code Section 910.4, which became effective on March 30, 2003, a claim for damages could be filed with the City as long as it substantially complied with Government Code Section 910 by containing the information required by that section; and 2. Effective March 30, 2003, Government Code Section 910.4 authorizes the City Council to require a claimant to use a claim form adopted by the City of Ukiah, when submitting a claim for damages to the City; and 3. It will improve the efficiency of the City in reviewing and acting on claims if a standard form is used by each claimant and will result in the equal treatment of all claimants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. The claim form attached hereto as Exhibit A is hereby adopted as the City of Ukiah's form for submitting damages claims to the City. 2. All claims for damages must be submitted on the adopted City claim form. The City Clerk is directed to refuse to file any claim that is not submitted using the adopted form. In notifying a claimant of this requirement, the City Clerk shall offer the claimant a copy of the adopted form for his or her use in submitting a claim. PASSED AND ADOPTED on February 4, 2004 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Eric Larson, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, Deputy City Clerk Resolution No. 2004- Page 1 of 1 File With: City Clerk's Office City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 EXHIBIT A CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP CLAIM NO. A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. 1. Name and address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: Address: . Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: Telephone: Address: . The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: Time of Occurrence: Location: Circumstances giving rise to this claim: . General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. 5. The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. Page I of 3 . If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as' it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) ~ Limited Civil Case ~ Unlimited Civil Case IYou are required to provide the information requested .above in order to comply with Government CodeI §910. I 7. Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) 8. Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: . Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted: 10. If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: 11. If appficable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: Telephone: Address: Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: Telephone: Address: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Expiration: If applicable, please attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim. Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY For all accident claims, place on the following diagram the name of streets, including North, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to street corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of accident by "A-l" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impact by "×." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB SIDEWALK PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB -- Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not to have been brought in good faith and with reasonable cause. Signature: Date: Page 3 of 3 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 6e DATE: Feb. 18, 2004 SUBJECT: Report of Emergency Purchase of Contractual Services for the Repair of Electrical Distribution Cable Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 6 of the City of Ukiah's Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to inform the City Council of the emergency purchase of contractual services for the repair of an underground electrical distribution cable located within Oak Manor Court. Contractors working for the franchised Cable TV Company had damaged the electrical distribution cable. During the installation of the cable service by others, an opportunity had arisen to take advantage of an existing open trench that could be utilized for the installation of the replacement electrical cable. The City hired VVipf Construction to perform the City's share of the joint trench. Overall costs to the City were reduced by sharing the trench work. The total cost paid by the City including the installation of cable and pull boxes was $11,730.00. The cost of the emergency service was assigned to budget account 800.3646.250.000. The Insurance Company who insures the Contractor that damaged the electrical cable will eventually reimburse the cost incurred by the City. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report of emergency purchase of Contractual services for the repair of electrical distribution cable ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Mary Horger, Purchasing Agent Rick Kennedy, Interim Public Utility Director Candace Horsley, City Manager A P PROVE D :';~:~. ;~~~~,.,_ Candace Horsley, City ~ager AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 6f DATE: Feb. 18, 2004 SUBJECT: Report of Expenditure for Professional Services Costing Between $5,000 and $10,000 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1522 of the City of Ukiah's Municipal Code, this report is being submitted to inform the City Council of an expenditure for professional services costing between $5,000 and $10,000. The legal services of Weatherford and Taafffe have been extended for the purpose of obtaining modifications to the City's water rights on file with the State Department of Water Resources. The modification process has been ongoing and the current effort has been advising the City regarding the environmental process related to the extension of time and the change in place of use. The services are billed on an hourly basis at rates that have been approved by the City. A purchase order authorizing an additional $10,000 of expenditure has been issued. Unencumbered funds within budget account 820.3908.250.000 have been encumbered for this purpose. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive Report of Expenditure for Professional Services Costing Between $5,000 and $10,000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Rick Kennedy, Interim Public Utility Director Rick Kennedy, Interim Public Utility Director Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manag"er,, ITEM NO. DATE: 8a FehnJary 18, 2004 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO FEES TO FINANCE TREATMENT PLANT CONSIDER INCREASES IN SEWER CONNECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT THE UKIAH WASTEWATER REPORT: At the January 7, 2004 meeting, staff presented a proposal to the City Council for a progressive residential connection fee based on the number of bedrooms in a residential living unit. The City Council directed staff to reduce the difference between the connection fees for one, two and three bedroom residential structures, research the projected growth rate and provide a cost analysis. Proposed Residential Connection Fees Residential ESSU values are assigned according the number of bedrooms and apply to all residential structures whether they are single-family homes, apartments, condominiums, or mobile homes. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION' After completion of the public hearing introduce by title only ordinance amending portion of Section 3731A, Article 12, Chapter 2, Division 4, of the Ukiah Municipal Code pertaining to sewer connection charges. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not accept Staff's recommendation and provide direction to Staff as to the desired method for establishing a progressive sewer connection for residential structures. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager and Rick Kennedy, Interim Utility Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Sewer Connection Charges Ordinance for introduction (Option A) 2. Sewer Connection Charges Ordinance for introduction (Option B) Ap p ROVE D:'i,.,,_~_,.~(~ Candace Homley, C~ Manager Public Hearing to Consider Increases In Sewer Connection Fees To Finance Improvements at the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant February 18, 2004 Page 2 of 4 The following is a comparison of the current and two proposal options for residential sewer service connection fees per ESSU. In Option A, a 2-bedroom residence is the "average dwelling unit" occupied by 2.5 people according to the 2000 U.S. Census. It is then assumed that one-bedroom units have 2 people (2/2.5 = 0.8) and three-bedroom units have 3 people (3/2.5 = 1.2) to determine ESSUs per bedroom. Option B presents a similar schedule to Option A; however, the difference between 1, 2, and 3 bedrooms is reduced to $1,000. Residential Schedule Si ngle/M ulti-Fa m ily/Mod/M H Option A Current Proposed Fee FP.~ FSRI I.~ 1. I bedroom $1,000 $7,007 0.8 2. 2 bedroom $1,000 $8,759 1.0 3. 3 bedroom $1,000 $10,511 1.2 4. Each additional bedroom no added cost $1,752 0.2 Option B Current Proposed F~.e FP.e ESSUs 5. 1 bedroom $1,000 $7,759 0.9 6. 2 bedroom $1,000 $8,759 1.0 7. 3 bedroom $1,000 $9,759 1.1 8. Each additional bedroom no added cost $1,000 0.1 A sewer connection fee in the amount of $3,504, which is equivalent to 40% of the sewer connection fee charged for one equivalent sewer service unit, shall be charged for each bedroom added to an existing residential structure as permitted under the provisions of Division 3 of the Ukiah City Code. The connection fee for each added bedroom shall be paid at the time the building permit is issued. The term "bedroom" shall include any room which can be used as a bedroom, no matter how designated on the building plans; provided, however, that a residential dwelling unit may have one living room, dining room, garage, kitchen, and family room which shall not be considered a bedroom. Bathrooms shall not be considered as bedrooms. Public Hearing to Consider Increases In Sewer Connection Fees To Finance Improvements at the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant February 18, 2004 Page 3 of 4 Commercial and Industrial Schedule The sewer connection fee per ESSU of $1,000 shall be increased to $8,759 for each commercial and industrial connection excluding hotels/motels. For hotels/motels, the sewer connection fee per ESSU of $1,000 shall be increased to $4,379.50 (50% x $8,759) for recognition of a 50% partial occupancy. The requirement for charges to be determined by the City Manager based upon biochemical oxygen demand removal requirements, other treatment requirements, and gallonage of flow, and any other sewage characteristics as the City Manager deems appropriate shall remain unchanged. Population and Commercial Connections Projections In the January 7, 2004 meeting, the City Council requested that staff investigate further the growth projections for the number of new sewer connections. Staff was able to obtain recently released growth projections for the Ukiah Valley area from the Mendocino County Planning Department. Population growth projections for the City were obtained from working notes of the City's Planning Department. The working notes from the City's Planning Department estimates Ukiah's annual growth rate to be 1% to build-out in 2015. The UVSD population growth projection is based on population projections in the Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan and estimates population growth from 2000 to 2020 to be 33% or a 1.65% annual growth rate. The 2000 population for the District was determined using 2000 U.S. Census block data. Growth rate in commercial connections was assumed to be the same as the population growth rate for both the City and the District. The total cost of the project due to growth is $20,574,729. The connection fee is determined by dividing the total cost of the project due to growth by the number of connections expected between now and the design year of the project (2025). The projected number of new connections based on the population growth rate data from the County and the City is 2,349 as shown in Table 1. The connection fee is $20,574,729 divided by 2,349, which equals $8,759. The projected number of new residential and commercial connections for the City and District, along with associated revenue requirements is shown in Table 2. According to the "March 2003 Sewer Statistics" report published by the City's Finance Department, 26% of the residential connections and 27% of the commercial connections within the City limits are District customers. If these percentages remain the same from 2004 through 2025, then 36.7% of the new connections will be added in the City and 64.3% in the District. Therefore, the cost to the City for the new connections is $7,550,925 (36.7% x $20,574,729) and the cost to the District is $13,229,551 (64.3% x $20,574,729). Public Hearing to Consider Increases In Sewer Connection Fees To Finance Improvements at the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant February 18, 2004 Page 4 of 4 Projected Connection Fee Revenues for the City The City's share of the cost for new connections is $7,550,925. According to the "March 2003 Sewer Statistics" report published by the City's Finance Department, 66% of the total number of the City customer connections are residential and 34% are commercial. If these percentages remain the same from 2004 through 2025, then connection fee revenue needed from new residential connections is $4,973,879 (66% x $7,550,925) and from commercial connections is $2,577,046 (34% x $7,550,925) as shown in Table 2. A breakdown of the City's dwelling units by number of bedrooms was obtained from the 2000 U.S. Census report and is shown in Table 3. For comparison, Table 4 provides the same information for the incorporated area of Mendocino County. Residential connection fee revenue projections were made by multiplying the percentage of the dwelling units with different numbers of bedrooms by the projected number of new residential connections (or ESSUs) and by the appropriate connection fee as shown in Table 5. Both options A and B are projected to meet residential revenue requirements to fund new connections. However, projected revenue for commercial connections is slightly less that the needed revenue. Summary Staff recommends adopting the progressive fee schedule, Option A to account for differences in sewage volume from residential structures based on the number of bedrooms and indexed to the base utilized for the adopted ESSU. Option A is recommended because it is projected to provide slightly more revenue, which would help, compensate for the projected under funding of the commercial connection fee revenue. Table 1 - Population and Commercial Connections Projections City City City UVSD City + Year % Build-out Build-out Commercial UVSD Commercial UVSD Population Population Connections Population Connections Population 2000 85% 15,497 5,000 2001 86% 15,652 1,731 5,072 1,326 2002 87% 15,808 1,747 5,145 1,345 2003 88% 15,967 1,764 5,218 1,364 2004 89% 16,126 1,781 5,293 1,383 21,420 2005 90% 16,288 1,798 5,369 1,402 21,657 2006 91% 16,450 1,815 5,447 1,422 21,897 2007 92% 16,615 1,832 5,525 1,442 22,140 2008 93% 16,781 1,849 5,604 1,463 22,385 2009 94 % 16,949 1,867 5,684 1,483 22,633 2010 95% 17,118 1,885 5,766 1,504 22,884 2011 96% 17,290 1,903 5,849 1,525 23,138 2012 97% 17,462 1,921 5,933 1,547 23,395 2013 98% 17,637 1,939 6,018 1,569 23,655 2014 99% 17,813 1,957 6,104 1,591 23,918 2015 100% 17,992 1,976 6,192 1,613 24,184 2016 17,992 1,995 6,281 1,636 24,273 2017 17,992 2,014 6,371 1,659 24,363 2018 17,992 2,033 6,463 1,682 24,455 2019 17,992 2,052 6,555 1,706 24,547 2020 17,992 2,072 6,650 1,730 24,642 2021 17,992 2,091 6,745 1,755 24,737 2022 17,992 2,111 6,842 1,779 24,834 2023 17,992 2,131 6,940 1,804 24,932 2024 17,992 2,152 7,040 1,830 25,032 2025 17,992 2,172 7,141 1,856 25,133 Additional Connections 746 391 739 473 2,349 2004-2025 Notes: 1. City population growth projection is based on population projections in working notes from the City's Planning Department and estimates a 1% annual growth rate to build-out in 2015. 2. UVSD population was determined using 2000 U.S. Census block data. 3. The UVSD population growth projection is based on population projections in the Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan and estimates population growth from 2000 to 2020 to be 33% or a 1.65% annual growth rate. 4. Growth rate in commercial connnections was assumed to be the same as the population growth rate for both the City and the District. 5. In 2003, 26% of City residential connections were in the UVSD and 27% of City commercial connections were in the UVSD. Table 2 -Connection Fee Analysis Total Construction Cost Total Cost ($) Cost AIIocetion~ Percent Con Fee Monthly Sewer Rates Capital Growth Permit Improvements $43,500,000 32% 32% Cost AIIocaflon~ Dollars Con Fee Monthly Sewer Rates Capital Growth Permit Improvements 36% $13,854,500 $13,906,500 $15,739,000 32% 32% 36% Growth Rate (City of Uklah) Growth Rata (Uklah Valley Sanitation District) Average Growth Rate of City + UVSD Plant Rated Capacity, MGD Plant Design Capacity, MGD (2025) Percentage of Project from Growth 0.60% 1.65% 1.00% 2.37 3.01 27% Construction Costs due to Growth $13,854,500 O~er Costs due to Growth $, 6~720~229 Total Cost of Project due to Growth $20,574,729 Other Costs Planning Costs Engineering Design Costs Office Engineering dudng Construction City Staff Time Construction Management Change Orders Miscellaneous Costs* Total Costs Portion due to Growth $3,600,0(X) ~- $6.6M $2,000,000..l Design Cost $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $7~000~000 $21 ,llXl,0~ $6,720,229 *Includes legal, additional EIR, permitting, funding, interest, etc. Connections Jan-01 Jan-e4 City of Ukiah Residential 4,632 4,773 City of Ukiah Commercial 1,298 1,300 Ukiah Valley Sanitation District Residential 3,657 3,794 Ukiah Valley Sanitation District Commercial 1,759 1,864 Total Connections 11,346 11,731 Total Connections Added For Project = Connection Fee (Capacity Charge) Current City in New % New District Ratios Connections Connections Maintained 2004 - 2025 2004 - 2025 Jan-25 5,325 552 66% 1,586 286 34% 4,727 933 62% 2,442 578 38% 14,080 2,349 (14,092 - 11,732) $8,759 ($20,574,729 / 2,349) 838 36.7% 1,511 64.3% City To~l District Total Total Cost of Project due to Growth % City of Ukiah New Connections Cost to City for New Connections Residential Commercial % UVSD New Connections Cost to District for New Connections Residential Commercial Connection Fee Revenue Needed $20,574,729 36.7% $7,550,925 $4,973,879 $2,577,046 64.3% $13,229,551 $8,168,875 $5,060,675 Connection Fee Spreadsheet (Revised5) Table 3 - City of Ukiah, U.S. Census 2000 I Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied ,, City Bedroom Size Number Percent Number Percent Total Percent I I 0- Bedroom 22 1% 1~ 6% 210 4% 1- Bedroom 14~ §% 947, 31% 1,09§ 19% 2- Bedroom ~9~ 31% 1,251 41% 2,149 36% 3- Bedroom 1,494 52% 606 20% 2,100 36% ,4- Bedroom 25~ 9% 30 1% 2~ 5% 5+ -Bedroom 37 1% 33 1% 70 1% Table 4 - Unincorporated Mendocino County, U.S. Census 2000 Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied County Bedroom Size Number Percent Number Percent Total Percent 0- Bedroom 275 2% 521 7% 796 4% , , 1- Bedroom 1,430 9% 1,746 25% 3,176 14% 2- Bedroom 5,007 33% 2,592 37% 7,599 34% , ~ 3- Bedroom 7,056 46% 1,879 27% 8,935 40%~ 4- Bedroom 1,324 9% 217 3% 1,541 7%1 , ~ 5+ -Bedroom 272 2% 30 0% 302 1% , Table $ - Potential Revenue from New Residential Connections in City of Ukiah Residential Connections Option A # New Connection Bedroom Size Total Percent Units Fee Generated O- Bedroom 210 4% 20 $7,007 $137,390 1 - Bedroom 1095 19% 102 $7,007 $716,392 2- Bedroom 2149 36% 201 $8,759 $1,757,501 3- Bedroom 2100 36% 196 $10,511 $2,060,953 4- Bedroom 288 5% 27 $12,263 $329,757 5+ -Bedroom 70 1% 7 $14,015 $91,600 Total 5912 100% 552 $5,093,593 Option B Revenue Connection Fee $7,759 $7,759 $8,759 $9,759 $10,759 $11,759 Revenue Generated $152,135 $793,276 $1,757,501 $1,913,504 $289,314 $76,855 $4,982,585 Commercial Connections # New Units Connection Revenue Fee Generated 286 $8,759 $2,505,074 Revenue Needed Residential $4,973,879 Commercial $2,577,046 Total $7,550,925 Revenue Generated Option A Option B $5,093,593 $4,982,585 $2,505,074 $2,505,074 $7,598,667 $7,487,659 ATTACHMENT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING PORTIONS OF SECTION 3731A, ARTICLE 12, CHAPTER 2, DIVISION 4 OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION ONE Section 3731A of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: {}3731 A: SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES: The following charges are hereby established for the connection of the plumbing of any building or structure which discharges to the sanitary sewer system of the City and said charges are separate from any other charges presently levied or which may be levied in the future: A. Residential Schedule: Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Nine Dollars ($8759.00) for equivalent sewer service unit (ESSU) per dwelling unit connected based on the number of bedrooms according to the following schedule: Single/Multi-Family/Modular Homes/Mobile Homes Connection Fee ESSUs 1. 1 bedroom $7,007 0.8 2. 2 bedroom $8,759 1.0 3. 3 bedroom $10,511 1.2 4. Each additional bedroom $1,752 0.2 Bo Commercial and Industrial Schedule: 1. Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Nine Dollars ($8759.00) per ESSU for commercial and industrial connections, except hotels and motels, together with the charge to be determined by the City Manager based upon biochemical oxygen demand removal requirements, other treatment requirements, and gallonage of flow, and any other sewage characteristics as the City Manager deems appropriate. For hotels and motels, the charge per ESSU shall be Four Thousand Three Hundred Seventy-Nine Dollars and Fifty Cents ($4,379.50) for recognition of 50% occupancy, together with the charge to be determined by the City Manager based upon biochemical oxygen demand removal requirements, other treatment requirements, and gallonage of flow, and any other sewage characteristics as the City Manager deems appropriate. Ordinance No. Dnn~ I nf "'4, 2. [Remains the same] SECTION TWO Section 3735 is hereby added to Article 12, Chapter 2, Division 4 of the Ukiah City Code {}3735: ADDITION OF BEDROOM TO EXISTING STRUCTURE. A sewer connection fee in the amount of $3,504, which is equivalent to 40% of the sewer connection fee charged for one equivalent sewer service unit, shall be charged for each bedroom added to an existing residential structure as permitted under the provisions of Division 3 of the Ukiah City Code. Said connection fee for each added bedroom shall be paid at the time the building permit is issued. The term "bedroom" as used herein shall include any room which can be used as a bedroom, no matter how designated on the building plans; provided, however, that a residential dwelling unit may have one living room, dining room, garage, kitchen, and family room which shall not be considered a bedroom. Bathrooms shall not be considered as bedrooms. SECTION THREE This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption, and will be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah. Except as specifically provided herein, any application for a sewer connection received by the City after November 5, 2003, shall be subject to the fee imposed by this Ordinance, to be collected on or after the effective date of this Ordinance. The fee imposed by this ordinance shall not apply to an application for a sewer connection and connection fee received by the City prior to the effective date of this Ordinance for a project consisting of five or fewer sewer connections which does not require extension of an existing sewer main, if, prior to November 6, 2003, the project has received all planning approvals required for issuance of building permits. "Planning approval" means approvals required by the Ukiah City Code or other law for the development or use of real property from the Ukiah Planning Commission or City Council, such as, but not limited to, parcel maps or final subdivision maps, site development permits, use permits, and variances. Nothing contained herein shall require the City to furnish a sewer connection, if the City lacks treatment capacity to accommodate the additional connection, as determined by the City Manager or City Council based on engineering analysis and recommendations. Introduced by title only on February 18, 2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ordinance No. Adopted on ,2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Eric Larson, Mayor Gordon Elton, City Clerk Ordinance No. /~TTACHMENT_._ ,'~ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING PORTIONS OF SECTION 3731A, ARTICLE 12, CHAPTER 2, DIVISION 4 OF THE UKIAH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION ONE Section 3731A of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended to read as follows: {}3731 A: SEWER CONNECTION CHARGES: The following charges are hereby established for the connection of the plumbing of any building or structure which discharges to the sanitary sewer system of the City and said charges are separate from any other charges presently levied or which may be levied in the future: A. Residential Schedule: Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Nine Dollars ($8759.00) for equivalent sewer service unit (ESSU) per dwelling unit connected based on the number of bedrooms according to the following schedule: Single/Multi-Family/Modular Homes/Mobile Homes Connection Fee ESSUs 1. 1 bedroom $7,759 0.9 2. 2 bedroom $8,759 1.0 3. 3 bedroom $9,759 1.1 4. Each additional bedroom $1,000 O. 1 B. Commercial and Industrial Schedule: 1. Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-Nine Dollars ($8759.00) per ESSU for commercial and industrial connections, except hotels and motels, together with the charge to be determined by the City Manager based upon biochemical oxygen demand removal requirements, other treatment requirements, and gallonage of flow, and any other sewage characteristics as the City Manager deems appropriate. For hotels and motels, the charge per ESSU shall be Four Thousand Three Hundred Seventy-Nine Dollars and Fifty Cents ($4,379.50) for recognition of 50% occupancy, together with the charge to be determined by the City Manager based upon biochemical oxygen demand removal requirements, other treatment requirements, and gallonage of flow, and any other sewage characteristics as the City Manager deems appropriate. Ordinance No. D~n~ I nf ~ 2. [Remains the same] SECTION TWO Section 3735 is hereby added to Article 12, Chapter 2, Division 4 of the Ukiah City Code §3735: ADDITION OF BEDROOM TO EXISTING STRUCTURE. A sewer connection fee in the amount of $3,504, which is equivalent to 40% of the sewer connection fee charged for one equivalent sewer service unit, shall be charged for each bedroom added to an existing residential structure as permitted under the provisions of Division 3 of the Ukiah City Code. Said connection fee for each added bedroom shall be paid at the time the building permit is issued. The term "bedroom" as used herein shall include any room which can be used as a bedroom, no matter how designated on the building plans; provided, however, that a residential dwelling unit may have one living room, dining room, garage, kitchen, and family room which shall not be considered a bedroom. Bathrooms shall not be considered as bedrooms. SECTION THREE This ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption, and will be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah. Except as specifically provided herein, any application for a sewer connection received by the City after November 5, 2003, shall be subject to the fee imposed by this Ordinance, to be collected on or after the effective date of this Ordinance. The fee imposed by this ordinance shall not apply to an application for a sewer connection and connection fee received by the City prior to the effective date of this Ordinance for a project consisting of five or fewer sewer connections which does not require extension of an existing sewer main, if, prior to November 6, 2003, the project has received all planning approvals required for issuance of building permits. "Planning approval" means approvals required by the Ukiah City Code or other law for the development or use of real property from the Ukiah Planning Commission or City Council, such as, but not limited to, parcel maps or final subdivision maps, site development permits, use permits, and variances. Nothing contained herein shall require the City to furnish a sewer connection, if the City lacks treatment capacity to accommodate the additional connection, as determined by the City Manager or City Council based on engineering analysis and recommendations. Introduced by title only on February 18, 2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ordinance No. Adopted on ,2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Eric Larson, Mayor Gordon Elton, City Clerk Ordinance No. PREDESIGN REPORT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKIAH SPH Associates Consulting Engineers 3420 Coach Lane. Suite 10 Cameron Park, California 95682 February 6, 2004 SP!! associates Consulting Engineers February 3, 2004 Ukiah Utilities City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Attention: Ann Burck Subject: Final Design Report Submittal Water System Improvements City of Ukiah Ladies and Gentlemen, Transmitted herewith is our predesign level report identifying required improvements to the City of Ukiah water supply system. As requested five (5) copies are being provided at this time. The final document has been prepared following revisions and modifications made by the City to the preliminary draft submitted in August 2003. The estimated project costs have been updated to reflect the additions made to the project. The "Recommended Project" section has been added to the document. The overall project involves upgrading and increasing the capacity of the water treatment plant, constructing a new high service fmished water pmnping station and building three new storage reservoirs to overcome distribution system storage deficiencies identified by the State of Califorma Department of Health Services. At this time it appears that the total cost of the project will be around $10,950,000. Treatment plant improvements are projected to cost about $5,000,000 and construction of distribution system storage reservoirs are estimated to cost about the same. Note that treatment plant improvements needed to increase the supply of treated water and improve plant reliability may be eligible for low interest loan funding available through the State Revolving Fund program. Distribution system storage reservoirs however will not qualify for funding under this program. As you have directed we are proceeding with final design of the improvements in accordance with the recommendations of the predesign report and as described in our agreement with the City. c:\..\02101 ~ltrs\burck-021 3420 Coach Lane, Suite 10 · Cameron Park, CA 95682 · (530) 677-0935 · Fax (530) 677-2237 · Email: sphassoc@innerclte.com The City has directed SPH Associates to phase the project separating the final design and construction of the three storage reservoirs from the treatment plant expansion project. Accordingly, we will prepare two sets of bidding documents for the proposed improvements. We are prepared to meet with the City to discuss all aspects of the predesign report if required before continuing with detailed design work. Thank you for retaining SPH Associates for this important and challeng/ng project. Very truly yours, Sigurd P. Hansen, P.E. Presidem SPH:bh c:~..\02101 ~itrs\burck-021 PREDESIGN REPORT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKIAH Table of Contents TITLE SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND PURPOSES AND OBJECTIVES SCOPE OF STUDY ASSUMPTIONS AND CRITERIA SECTION 2- TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS APPLICATION OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS IMPACT OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS ON UKIAH TREATMENT FACILITIES Surface Water Treatment Rule Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) Total Coliform Rule (TCR) Information Collection Rule OCR) PROPOSED I)RINKING WATER REGULATIONS Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) Imerim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) FUTURE DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Final (Long-Term) Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (ESWTR) and Stage 2 - Disinfectants/Disinfectant By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) SOURCE WATER QUALITY Regulatory Impact on Treatment Facilities PLANT CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS SECTION 3- WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS GENE10,L RAW WATER PUMPING FACILITIES TREATMENT FACILITIES WASHWATER RECOVERY SYSTEM STANDBY POWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS SODIUM HYDROXIDE STORAGE TANK ALUM STORAGE TANK TREATMENT BUILDING EXPANSION F! LTRATION FACILITY I)ESIGN CRITERIA FILTEREI) WATER TRANSFER PUMPS PAGE 1-1 1-1 1-2 1-2 2-1 2-4 2-4 2-5 2-5 2-6 2-6 2-6 2-9 2-10 2-10 2-10 2-12 2-12 3-1 3-1 3-2 3-9 3-10 3-10 3-11 3-11 3-11 3-16 020403 TOC-1 c:\ 502 ! 01 \predesign reportVl'OC Table of Contents (Con't) TITLE FINISHED WATER PUMPING STATION ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS FACILITY IMPROVEMENT COSTS SECTION 4- DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM STORAGE FACILITIES INTRODUCTION ZONE 1 RESERVOIR Site Selection Evaluation of Zone 1 Reservoir Design Alternatives Welded Steel Reservoirs Glass Lined and Coated Bolted Steel Tanks Prestressed Concrete Reservoir Siting Considerations Comparative Cost Analyses Bolted Steel Tank Costs Welded Steel Tank Costs Prestressed Concrete Tank Costs Zone 1 Reservoir Alternatives Comparison Zone 1 Reservoir Construction Cost Recommended Zone 1 Reservoir Design ZONE 2 RESERVOm Zone 2 Reservoir Siting Zone 2 Reservoir Costs Recommended Zone 2 Tank Design FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR Volume Requirements Finished Water Disinfection Requirements Proposed Design CT Compliance Spreadsheet Computation Finished Water Reservoir Design Alternative Recommended Reservoir Design Finished Water Reservoir Costs SUMMARY SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDED PROJECT Proposed Improvements Projected Project Costs Implementation Schedule PAGE 3c. 16 3-17 3-20 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-3 4-3 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-8 4-8 4-8 4-12 4-12 4-14 4-14 4-14 4-17 4-17 4-17 4-19 4-19 4-19 4-23 4-23 4-24 4-24 5~1 5-2 5-2 020403 TOC-2 c:\..\0210 lXpredesign report\T(K' Table of Contents (Con't) TITLE PAGE TABLES Table Table Table Table 2-1 - Total Trihalomethane (TTHM) And Haloacetic Acids (HAA5) 2-2 - Raw Water Quality Data, Ranney Collector Source 3-1 - Design Criteria 3-2 - Estimated Construction Costs 2-7 2-11 3-14 3-21 Table 4-1 - Comparative Estimated Installed Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Glass Lined Bolted Steel Storage Tank 4-7 Table 4-2 - Comparative Estimated Installed Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Welded Steel Storage Tank 4-9 Table 4-3 - Comparative Estimated Installed Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Prestressed Concrete Tank 4-10 Table 4-4 - Material Comparison of Storage Reservoir Alternatives 4-11 Table 4-5 - Estimated Construction Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Prestressed Concrete Reservoir 4-13 Table 4-6- Estimated Construction Cost, 297,000 Gallon Glass Lined Bolted Steel Tank 4-16 Table 4-7 - CT Compliance Verification 4-21 Table 4-8- CT Compliance Verification 4-22 Table 4-9 - Estimated Construction Cost, 1.5 Million Gallon Prestressed Concrete Reservoir 4-25 Table 4-10 - Summary of New System Storage Facilities 4-26 Process Flow Schematic Hydraulic Profile Treatment Building, Modified Floor Plan Site Plan Dry Polymer Batching/Feed System Treatment Building Exterior Elevations Treatment Building Sectional View High Service Pump Station, Mechanical Floor Plan High Service Pump Station, Exterior Elevations Existing Zones 1 and 2 Storage Reservoirs Site Layout, Zones 1 and 2 Storage Reservoirs Site Layout, Zone 2 Storage Tank Finished Water Storage Reservoir Finished Water Storage Reservoirs FIGURES 3-1- 3-2- 3-3- 3-4- 3-5- 3-6- 3-7- 3-8- 3-9- 4-1- 4-2- 4-3- 4-4- 4-5- APPENDICES 020403 TOC-3 c:\..\0210 l\predesign rcport\TOC Introduction SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The City of Ukiah's water treatment and distribution system storage facilities must be expanded to provide additional supply to reliably meet the current and anticipated furore water demands of the community. These improvements have been mandated by the California Department of Health Services (DHS) as a condition of maintaining and renewing the operating permit for the facilities. The DHS has established that the capacity of the water treatment facilities is insufficient to satisfy peak demands normally encountered in July and August. Further, based upon guidelines established by DHS, the distribution system storage is deficient by 3,260,000 gallons. The additional storage capacity is needed in both pressure zones. The existing treatment facilities constructed in 1991-92 have a capacity of 6 mgd and process water obtained from the Russian River. The water is pumped to the treatment plant from a specialized intake structure known as a Ranney collector. The Ranney collector involves vertical concrete caisson installed on the bank of the river that has horizontal perforated pipe laterals radiating outwardly in a spoke-like pattern. Water enters these laterals passing downward through overlaying sand and gravel. The most productive laterals extend beneath the Russian River accessing the underflow of the river. Under the City's present water right the City is limited to the diversion of no more than 20-acre foot per day (12.8 mgd) from the underflow of the river. The City must retain and continue to limit their diversion to the underflow, which places some limitations in the water availability from this source. The question of adequate raw water source capacity and where additional supply ~511 be developed to meet future needs is not addressed in this study. Rather, this report addresses improvements, related solely to treatment and storage facilities. PURPOSES AND OBJECTIVES The primary purpose of this study is to identify and evaluate needed modifications or additions to the existing facilities and establish the extent and cost of the identified modifications. A secondary purpose is to prepare a predesign document identifying the proposed improvement modifications or additions in sufficient detail to support preparation of detailed plans and specifications for construction. The objective through this preliminary planning phase is to review and evaluate production, performance and operating records, consider input of ideas of City staff for facility improvements, factor in requirements imposed by new regulations, and investigate the best and most appropriate technology for implementation into an expanded and upgraded facility. The recommended plan must meet the needs of the community, be cost effective and should qualify for funding through the SRF program. 020304 1-1 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 1 Introduction SCOPE OF STUDY The scope of the study involved completion of the following major elements or task~; · Evaluate existing production and water quality records. · Estimate needed treatment plant capacity to address present water supply needs. · Identify any treatment process modifications needed to meet new water quality standards. · Review of alternative distribution system storage reservoir designs and select best alternative for three sites. · Incorporate additional treatment units into the existing facility and develop a building floor plan. · Prepare cost analysis of proposed improvements and additions to the treatment and distribution system facilities. Oversee conduct of an environmental evaluation of the impact of the proposed projects on the environment focusing specifically on the sites selected for additional storage tanks. · Complete a technical and cost feasibility report including the results of the study and providing the design basis for preparing detailed construction documents. ASSUMPTIONS AND CRITERIA The basic assumptions and criteria followed in this study are as described below: · The existing treatment facilities will be expanded using the adsorption clarification treatment process that has performed satisfactorily over the last 10 years. · The existing plant clearwell is inadequately sized to meet disinfection detention requirements and a larger clearwell is necessary to support the expanded plant capacity. Providing redundancy in treatment equipment is a requirement to permit system reliability. Meeting this standard requires a separate dedicated modular treatment unit over and above that needed to meet peak capacity demands. · New distribution system storage reservoirs would be located on property owned by the City adjacent to existing reservoirs. 020304 1-2 c:\..\02101 \predesign rcT~rtksection 1 Introduction · Reservoir designs would be selected to be compatible with existing structures and be consistent with aesthetic requirements of the specific site. 020304 1-3 c:\..\02101 \predesign report\section 1 Treatment Requirements SECTION 2 TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS Within this section of the predesign study, requirements that impact the expansion of the treatment facilities and the selection of the proper water treatment processes are addressed. Drinking water regulations applicable to the facilities, considering both current and proposed future water quality standards, are presented. A discussion of current raw and finished water quality experienced at Ukiah is provided. The DHS has regulations and requirements, which muSt be met to insure that the City's water supply is safe. Plant capacity requirements, based upon projections of current and future water use, are also addressed. APPLICATION OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was enacted by the U.S. Congress and signed into law in 1974. Through the SDWA, the federal government gave the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) the authority to set standards for contaminants in drinking water supplies. In California, the state's DHS has the primary responsibility of enforcing drinking water regulations. To maintain California's primacy, the state's drinking water regulations can be more but not less stringent that those established by the USEPA. In 1986 and 1996, Congress passed two sets of amendments to the SDWA. The provisions of these amendments currently govern the process through which the USEPA develops drinking water regulations and sets compliance dates. Under these provisions, the USEPA has published a Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL). The contaminants on this list are not currently regulated; and every five years, the USEPA is charged with selecting five contaminants from this list to determine whether to regulate their concentration in drinking water. Drinking water regulations in the United States are undergoing significant revisions because of increasing contamination of water sources, coupled with more precise identification of health risks associated with waterborne contaminants. The proposed water treatment facilities will recognize the impact of these evolving regulations and incorporate provisions to meet these requirements to a practical extent. The revisions are being driven by the federally enacted Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Amendments of 1986 (PL 99-339) and 1996 (PL 104-182), by a Reg-Neg process of health, environmental and economic issues involving the USEPA and by DHS. 101303 2-1 c :\..\0210 ! \predesign rel~>rt\section 2 Treatment Requirements Key elements of the 1986 SDWA Amendments, as amended by the 1996 SDWA Amendments, include: o A list of chemical contaminants requiring regulation. The 1986 SDWA identified an initial list of 83 chemical contaminants which the USEPA promulgated as national primary drinking water standards, to which additional contaminants for regulation will be added when they become known as to specific degree of health risk. The 1996 SDWA Amendment modified this policy and requires USEPA to establish Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs) and promulgate National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for contaminants (1) that may have an adverse effect on human health, (2) that are likely to occur in public water systems at a frequency and concentration of significance to public health, and (3) offers a meaningful opportunity to reduce health risk for people served by public water systems. . Drinking water priority lists of additional contaminants initially published by USEPA in February 1998, and at five-year intervals thereafter, that may require regulation in the future. A proposal to regulate at least five contaminants is expected by August 2001. A revised list will be issued in 2003. o Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) for protection against Giardia lamblia cysts (Giardia) and pathogenic enteric viruses. Filtration is required for all surface water supplies and groundwater supplies under the influence of surface waters. Exemptions to filtration are given only when the utility has control of the source watershed and the watershed produces a pristine water supply that meets rigid water quality standards. There are also requirements that no Cryptosporidium oocysts, Legionella, or other bacteria be in the finished treated water although the method of treatment is not defined at this time. . Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) for regulation of excessive corrosion leaching of these toxic ~netals from pipe materials that can pose a health risk. o Total Coliform Rule (TCR) which provides more stringent control and reduction of all pathogenic bacteria in distributed water. o Information Collection Rule (ICR) to assess the risk level of microorganis~ns present in the source water and provide information on water treatment plant design performance. This is the initial stage of obtaining data for setting criteria for C~jptosporidium removal from !01303 2-2 c:\..\02101 \predesign relx)rtXsection 2 Treatment Requirements surface water or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water as well as balancing the needs for disinfection byproducts. o Disinfectants/Disinfection By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) to regulate chemical compounds formed when disinfectants used for microbial control in drinking water react with organic and inorganic compounds in the source water. Disinfectants include chlorine, chlorine dioxide, chloramines and ozone. a. Stage 1 D/DBPR b. Stage 2 D/DBPR o Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (ESWTR) which will include protection against Cryptosporidium oocysts and reduction of disinfection byproduct precursors such as total organic carbon (TOG). a. Interim ESWTR b. Final (long-term) ESWTR Additional DHS requirements mandated by Title 22 include: o An average filtered water turbidity goal of 0.2 nephlometric turbidity units (NTU) at new and modified water treatment plants. , A Cryptosporidium Action Plan to Cryptosporidium and other pathogens including: a. b. Co eo protect against A settled water turbidity goal of less than 2 NTU. A filtered water turbidity goal' less than 0.3 NTU following backwash. A treated water turbidity goal of 0.1 NTU. A reclaimed filter backwash water goal of 2 NTU. A disinfection system for the reclaimed backwash water system. . Chemicals used for potable water treatment must have National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) Standard 60 approval or similar approval from Underwriters Laboratory (UL) for a purity that is no risk to health from introduced chemicals. The Agency must ensure that the chemicals added to the water have the required NSF or UL approval and that these chemicals are used in concentrations below the NSF designated maximum concentration limits. The following presents the relevant features of current and proposed regulations and discusses their potential impacts to the Ukiah water treatment plant. 101303 2-3 c :\..\02101 \predesign report\section 2 Treatment Requirements IMPACT OF DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS ON UKIAH TREATMENT FACILITIES Surface Water Treatment Rule The Department of Health Services has indicated that the underflow from the Russian River because it is classified as groundwater under the influence of surface water (GWUSW) is subject to the full regulations imposed by the SWTR. For relatively high quality water sources, the SWTR requires that the overall treatment process achieve a minimum of 99.9 percent O-log) removal and/or inactivation of Giardia cysts and 99.99 percent (4-log) removal and/or inactivation of enteric viruses to be accomplished through a combination of filtration and disinfection. This requirement has been placed on Ukiah's source water. Because frequent measurement of Giardia, Cryptosporidium and enteric viruses is difficult and costly, the USEPA and DHS have developed functional criteria for determining the effectiveness of surface water treatment processes. A multi-barrier (complete) treatment process is required for surface water treatment that usually includes a combination of filtration for particle removal and disinfection for inactivation of organisms. The present plant employs treatment processes that comply with all current and future anticipated regulations associated with the SWTR. A well designed and operated "conventional filtration plant" can usually achieve at least 99.7 percent (2.5-long) and 99 percent (2-log) removal of Giardia cysts and enteric viruses, respectively. Guidance criteria developed by USEPA will allow a 99.7 percent (2.5-1og) removal of Giardia cysts and a 99 percent (2-log) removal of enteric viruses if the filtered water turbidity is equal to or less than 0.5 NTU for 95 percent of the time. DHS has regulatory primacy in California and requires these USEPA criteria be met, but also requires compliance with a daily average treated water turbidity of 0.2 NTU for new or recently upgraded water treatment plants. Disinfection is to be used to achieve the remainder of the removal/inactivation requirement, of usually an additional 68 percent (0.5-log) reduction of Giardia cysts and 99 percent (2-log) for enteric viruses. Appropriate disinfection is based upon the product of Disinfectant Residual Concentration and Effective Disinfectant Contact Time (CT). The CT required is a function of the type of disinfectant, residual concentration, water temperature, and pH. CT requirements for chlorine disinfection at 10°, 15 o and 20°C that are the range of temperatures encountered during seasonal low-demand and high-demand periods are listed in Appendix E of the USEPA Guidance Manual. The capacity of the existing finished water clearwell of approximately 135,000 gallons does not provide sufficient detention time to meet the CT requirements. The Department of Health Services has mandated that additional plant clearwell capacity be provided to achieve the required CT values for the plant. The SWTR also requires that systems demonstrate, by continuous monitoring and recording, that a disinfectant residual of at least 0.2 mg/L is continuously maintained in water delivered to the 101303 2-4 c:\..\0210 l\predesign report~section 2 Treatment Requirements distribution system. Chlorine is presently applied at a dosage of about 1 mg/L (range 0.8 - 1.3 mg/L) to satisfy this requirement. The City has experienced no difficulty meeting residual chlorine requirements in the distribution system. Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) Lead solder and copper tubing are the predominant materials used in household plumbing, customer service connection pipes and solders. These metals can be soluble in water and can be leached from the pipe and/or solder under certain corrosive water quality conditions. The presence of these metals in drinking water, especially lead, cause adverse impacts on health, especially in children. Lead is associated with retarding physical development and interfering with mental development. The LCR is intended to protect the public from the water delivered to each service connection and after it has flowed through household pipes to consumers. The LCR establishes action levels (AL) to be <0.015 mg/L for lead and _< 1.3 mg/L for copper in at least 90 percent of the most likely consumer tap samples. Sampling must also be conducted at points of entry (POE) to the distribution system to verify that lead and copper in the supply source does not exceed the USEPA criteria. In addition, the water supplier must develop methods to treat the water to reduce its corrosivity to minimize leaching lead and/or copper. If the lead and/or copper levels, after optimum treatment technology and/or corrosion control techniques have been implemented, are still above action levels, the water supplier must take appropriate action. These actions include implementing further additional corrosion control strategies such as lead service line replacement program (LSLRP) if lead services are present and/or implementing a public education program to minimize exposure to these toxic metals. Testing conducted in July 1998 by the City for lead and copper found levels to be well below action limits. Accordingly, DHS reduced the sampling frequency to every 3 years and results similar to those obtained in 1998 were found in 2001. The source has a tendency toward moderate corrosivity, which can be exacerbated by the addition of acids such as alum and/or chlorine which lower pH and reduce alkalinity during treatment. The Langelier Index, which provides a measure of the water's corrosivity as measured by the ability to dissolve or to deposit calcium carbonate film, is in the slightly negative range. These index values usually indicate a moderate corrosion potential for this water. Adding sodium hydroxide for corrosion control through pH adjustment should be continued to control the corrosivity of the water especially if alum is to be used as a primary coagulant. Total Coliform Rule (TCR) Coliform bacterial organisms are found in human and animal fecal material as well as soils, and are used as a surrogate for detection of all potentially pathogenic bacteria in a water supply. The presence of coliforms, which may not be necessarily disease-causing, could indicate that potentially pathogenic organisms may be present in the water supply. The TCR establishes monitoring and sanitary survey requirements for surface and groundwater systems. 101303 2-5 c:\..\0210 i \predesign report~section 2 Treatment Requirements Current regulations require that each supplier monitor water quality in their distribution systems through a routine sampling program which must have been approved by DHS. If coliform organisms are detected, additional sampling and testing is required until no ~:~;[ii~',~¥~ts are detected. Those tests are based strictly on presence or absence of coliform organi,~:~. ~! :1 sample is positive, a repeat sample must be analyzed for fecal coliform or E. Coil, which are more precise indicators of fecal contamination. The Ukiah water supply is in compliance with all regulations pertaining to the TCR. Information Collection Rule (ICR) The ICR is a key element in the USEPA's Reg-Neg process and is intended to provide definitive information on specific source water quality of microorganism contaminants and treatment plant performance including disinfection byproduct generation. This regulation will require public water systems serving more than 100,000 people to collect data on their source and treated water and provide data to the USEPA for evaluation of all public water systems. Since the Ukiah water treatment facilities serve less than 100,000 people, this regulation is not applicable. PROPOSED DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) The proposed Stage 1 - D/DBPR was published in the Federal Register on July 29, 1994. The final Stage 1 rule was published December 16, 1998 but will not be applicable to systems under 10,000 customers prior to January 2004. The Stage 2 D/DBPR was promulgated on December 12, 1998. The Stage 2 rule was proposed in 2002 and will be finalized by summer 2003. USEPA is required by Congress to issue new proposed MCLGs and MCLs for D/DBPRs. The Stage 1 and Stage 2 - D/DBPRs set new MCLs for selected disinfection by-products, established maximum residual disinfectant levels (MRDLs), and treatment techniques for control of Disinfection By-Product Precursors (DBPPs). Revisions to the original total trihalomethane (THM) MCL, a new haloacetic acid (HAA5) MCL and MCLs for bromate and chlorite were included in these new regulations. On the basis of the Reg-Neg rulemaking process, in which the USEPA participated, the THM MCL was reduced initially from 100/~g/1 to 80/~g/l (in Stage 1) and reduced to 64/~g/l and HAA5 to 48 /~g/1 in regulations requiring implementation no later than July 1, 2003. Limited data acquired in 1999 for THMs and HAA5s in treated water from the Ukiah plant are presented in Table 2-1. As noted in Table 2-1 the treated water is of extremely high quality with respect to contamination by organics. The average TTHM value for the four quarters of 1999 averaged only 16.7 /~g/l against the standard of 64 /~g/1, and supplemented by more recent analyses, indicate that the City of Ukiah treatment plant meets the 80/~g/l Stage I - D/DBPR THM MCL at all times and also average tess than the 64/~g/1 Stage 2 - D/DBPR, THM MCL. 101303 2-6 c:\..\0210 l\predcsign repo~l~section 2 Treatment Requirements TABLE 2-1 TOTAL TRIHALOMETHANE (TTHM)~ AND HALOACETIC ACIDS (HAAS)2 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ANALYSES CITY OF UKIAH AVERAGE 1st QUARTER Location HAA5, gg/1 Despina ~ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages TTHM,/xg/1 13.2 14.1 11.3 11.5 10.3 10.7 10.9 12.7 11.4 12.3 AVERAGE 2"a QUARTER Location HAA5, ~g/1 TTHM, ~g/1 15.7 28 Despina ~ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages 10.8 18 21.6 35 6.3 13 13.6 23.5 AVERAGE 3~d QUARTER Location Despina @ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages TTHM, 10 15.9 7.7 12 16.8 28.2 6.9 10.3 10.4 16.6 AVERAGE 4th QUARTER Location Despina @ Empire 1270 Elm Street 2.5 MG Reservoir 310 N. Main Street Averages HAA5, TTHM, ~g/1 9.8 16.7 12.5 21.6 5.6 10.3 4.7 9.3 8.2 14.5 101303 2-7 c:\..\02 ! 01 \predesign report~section 2 Treatment Requirement.,. 2000 Quarterly Trihalomethanes (2.5 MG Reservoir) l'~t qtr 2nd qtr 3~ qtr 4th qtr Total A ~ crasg__% Bromodichloromethane 5.3 7.3 3.7 6.6 22.9 5.7 Bromoform 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 Chloroform 11.3 11 13 18 53.3 13.3 Dibr°mochloromethane _ 2.1 3.1 0.96 2.1 8.26 2.1 - Total 18.7 21.4 17.66 26.7 84.46 21.1 2001 Quarterly Trihalomethanes (2.5 MG Reservoir) 1st qtr 2nd qtr 3ra qtr 4th qtr Average TTHM Bromodichloromethane 6 8.7 6.6 5.1 6.6 Bromoform 0 1.6 0 0 0.4 Chloroform 11 13 21 18 15.8 Dibromochloromethane 3 5.2 2.4 1.7 3.1 Total 20 28.5 30 24.8 25.8 · Average TTHM's over the four quarters of 1999 · Average HAA5's over the four quarters of 1999 · Average TTHM's over four quarters of 2000 · Average TTHM's over four quarters of 2001 16.7/ag/1 vs. MCL ~ 64/ag/1 10.9/ag/1 vs. MCL ~ 48/~g/1 21 tzg/1 25.8/ag/1 !01303 2-8 c:\..\02 ! 01 \predesign repo~lXsection 2 Treatment Requirements Data available on the other proposed DBP contaminant concentrations (i.e., five haloacetic acids [HAAS]) are also included in Table 2-1 taken from numerous locations in the distribution system. It appears from these data that concentrations of the HAA5 contaminants which averaged 10.9 tzg/1 are well below the Stage 2 MCL standard of 48 ~g/1. Enhanced Coagulation (EnCoag) to reduce DBPPs, measured as TOC, is also a part of the Stage 1 - D/DBPR. TOC water quality data is unavailable but it is expected that based on raw water alkalinity data and other parameters, the proposed standards will not be exceeded. In addition, an exemption from the EnCoag requirement is anticipated for WTPs where either 1) the treated water TOC is less than 2 mg/L, or 2) the raw water TOC is less than 4 mg/L, alkalinity is greater than 60 mg/L and the THM/HAA5 are below 40/30 ~g/1, respectively, using free chlorine as the only disinfectant. It is expected that enhanced coagulation will not be required because it is anticipated that TOC will be below the action level of 2 mg/L. Interim Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (IESWTR) The proposed IESWTR was published in the Federal Register on 29 July 1994. The Interim ESWTR was promulgated on December 11, 1998. A final revision was published January 16, 2001 and expected to apply to small systems after January 1, 2004. Based on information released during and after the Reg-Neg process, the IESWTR is likely to include a Cryptosporidium MCLG; may require more frequent watershed sanitary surveys; and could establish new log reduction criteria for these pathogens. A stringent MCLG for Cryptosporidium oocysts may be set at zero oocysts as part of the ESWTR. The proposed ESWTR includes an optional Cryptosporidium MCLG of zero. The "Partnership for Safe Water," prepared jointly by USEPA, American Water Works Associates (AWWA) and other water industry stakeholders, recommends an average filtered water turbidity of 0.1 NTU or less to provide protection of the public. This filtered water turbidity goal is recommended to maximize Cryptosporidium oocyst and other pathogenic organism removal as the requirements for disinfection inactivation and are much more extensive and costly than for Giardia. The SWTR requires that the City conduct sanitary surveys every five years. The IESWTR (presently applicable only to systems with more than 10,000 connections) may reduce the interval between sanitary surveys to as few as three years. The log reduction requirements for pathogens, such as Giardia and enteric viruses, may change from criteria based on coliform levels in the raw water to criteria based on cyst concentrations in the raw water. In addition, a minimum 2-log Cryptosporidium oocyst removal requirement and both a 0.5-log Giardia and a 4-log enteric virus minimum inactivation requirement may be included in the IESWTR. It is doubtful whether the IESWTR will have significant impact on the proposed treatment facilities in that source water quality analyses have never revealed the presence of Cryptosporidium oocysts in the City's water supply. 101303 2-9 c:\..\02 i 0 i \predesign report~section 2 Treatment Requirements FUTURE DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS Final (Long-Term) Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (ESWTR) and Stage 2 - Disinfectants/Disinfectant By-Products Rule (D/DBPR) The final (long-term) ESWTR and Stage 2 - D/DBPR are currently scheduled for implementation as listed in the TCR. Under the 1996 SDWA Amendments, delays by USEPA implementing either of the rules may impact implementation of the other rule. USEPA will be responsible for developing a revised schedule that is as expeditious as practical. These two regulations will be based on data that will be collected as part Of the ICR and experience with both the interim ESWTR and Stage 1 - D/DBPR. Construction of the proposed WTP is planned to be completed by 2005. It is currently anticipated that these two regulations will become effective after 2004. SOURCE WATER QUALITY Current raw water quality characteristics are summarized in Table 2-2. The Russian River is an extremely good potable water source. The water is generally of low turbidity, averaging about 2.5 NTU over the entire year. During 2002, the last year of complete water quality records, source water turbidity was less than 2.5 NTU, about 95 percent of the year. Turbidity during the winter may reach 50-75 NTU but drops to 1.8 - 2.5 NTU during summer months. The mineralogical quality of the water is exceedingly good as is demonstrated by compliance with the inorganic constituent standards. Many of the metals for which MCLs have been established were at or below the detection limit of the analysis used to measure these contaminants. Regulated organic chemical contaminants were not reported on drinking water analyses obtained from DHS. Trihalomethanes for which a THM standard of 64 ~tg/1 is now the MCL are expected to be below 20-25/~g/l in treated water. Even at the Stage 2 THM MCL level of 48/~g/1, treated water will meet the standard. No specialized treatment other than chlorine preoxidation will be required to maintain the THM level beneath the present standards. If future requirements further reduce the THM standards eliminating the use of chlorine as a predisinfectant it will reduce the concentration of THMs in treated water. Use of potassium permanganate or perhaps chlorine dioxide as preoxidants could be considered if future THM standards are lowered. Potassium permanganate is the City's preferred method of slime and bacterial growth control. Facilities to apply potassium permanganate will be installed during the proposed improvements. 101303 2-10 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~seclion 2 Treatment Requirements TABLE 2-2 RAW WATER QUALITY DATA RANNEY COLLECTOR SOURCE WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES CITY OF UKIAH Constituent Alkalinity as CaC03 Hardness as CaC03 Calcium Iron Manganese Magnesium Total Dissolved Solids Turbidity Specific Conductance Temperature pH Arsenic Barium Cadium Chromium Lead Selenium Regulated VOCs Total Trihalomethanesl Total Haloacetic Acids2 ~ After treatment with chlorine 2 After treatment with chlorine Concentration 55-65 mg/L 60-64 mg/L 10-16 mg/L 0.05 - 0.22 mg/L <0.01 mg/L 4.8 - 7.3 mg/L 85 - 120 mg/L 0.5 - 50+ NTU (ave < 2.5 NTU) 115 - 14 micromhos/cm 45°F- 60°F (50°F ave) 7.0 - 7.5 < 0.003 mg/L <0.1 mg/L < 0.005 mg/L < 0.05 mg/L < 0.01 < 0.003 None detected 16.7- 26/~g/1 8.2 - 13.6/~g/1 101303 2-11 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 2 Treatment Requirements Regulatory Impact on Treatment Facilities In the June 22, 1995, Cryptosporidium Action Plan, DHS recommends limiting the spent filter backwash recycle flow to less than 5 percent of treatment plant flow and processing the recycle stream so that a turbidity standard of 2 NTU can be maintained in the return flow at all times if the recycle stream is to be discharged directly into the incoming raw water line. Further, provision must be included to add a disinfectant to this return flow if this practice is to be followed. The existing facilities for reclamation and recycle of treated backwash water should meet these requirements. Accordingly, the follOwing design provisions will be included in this phase of facility improvements. Include a flow control system monitoring facilities to limit the recycle flow to no more than 5 percent of incoming flow. If recycle flows are to exceed more than 5 percent of the incoming water flow, the flow should be diverted to one of the onsite percolation basins. . Clarify the waste backwash recycle flow in the existing washwater recovery ponds to remove particles and possible pathogens, concentrated in the waste stream and monitor turbidity continuously with a dedicated turbidimeter to comply with the 2 NTU standard. o Incorporate provisions to disinfect the recycle flow to inactivate pathogens that may possibly be present in this stream if reclaimed backwash water is to be injected directly into the incoming raw water line. Practicing pre-chlorination with the recycle flow applied ahead of the application point for chlorine should comply with these requirements. It is anticipated that instituting the above three design measures will enable a treatment plant to comply with proposed ESWTR regulations implemented in 2002. PLANT CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS The City of Ukiah constructed a Ranney well collector, a type of infiltration gallery, adjacent to the Russian River in 1965-66 to obtain a permitted diversion of up to 20 cfs (12.9 mgd) limited to the underflow of the river. Initial testing revealed that at flows approaching the design capacity of 12 mgd drawdown was excessive and turbidity levels were unacceptable for a water supply that received no additional treatment other than chlorination. In 1965 the turbidity standard was 5 NTU. Consequently, the capacity was downrated to substantially less than the desired 12 mgd. In 1991 a filtration plant was installed with a capacity of 6 mgd. Existing raw water pumps were replaced with new pumps capable of matching the design capacity of the proposed treatment plant. For several years the output of the Ranney collector exceeded the plant design capacity but in recent years the collector capacity has dropped to about 4 mgd. An analysis prepared by Layne Christensen Company, a Ranney Division in 2001, revealed that the safe yield during summer conditions had declined to less than 3 mgd (2.78 mgd). Subsequent remedial measures 101303 2-12 c:\..\02101 \predesign report"~section 2 Treatment Re~[uirements employed by Ranney Division in the spring of 2002 resulted in some additional increase in raw water source capacity up to about 3.5 mgd but still far below the needed capacity of 6-7 mgd to meet summer peak daily demands. According to a survey conducted by the Department of Health Services in July 2001 (see letter of September 14, 2001 from DHS in Appendix), the reduced capacity of the Ranney Collector, (in addition to continuing capacity loss of the city's wells) the city has a current estimated maximum source capacity (wells and treatment plant) of 6.55 mgd. The maximum day demand (from 1993 through 2002 during the peak months is 7.13 mgd. Refer to plant production records in the Appendix. According to DHS, reciting Section 64564 of the California Code of Regulations, a public water system's needed source capacity shall not be le.ss than the peak day demand. At least 20 percent reserve capacity for responding to emergency water use situations, a major fire for an example should be considered in sizing water treatment facilities. Using the above parameters, representative of sound engineering practice for water source development, would result in 9 mgd as the firm source capacity to insure an adequate supply of water for the City of Ukiah. Meeting these requirements from the existing Ranney Collector is not possible considering that the capacity is limited to about 3,350 gpm. The backup wells can only provide about 1,200 gpm. The total reliable source capacity is therefore limited to about 4,550 gpm or 6.55 mgd. The deficit of 2.5 mgd (9 mgd - 6.5 mgd) must be provided by a new water source. The City is undertaking a separate investigation of the various alternatives (second Ranney collector or additional wells) to increase the source capacity. To enable the existing water treatment facilities to process this additional supply the addition of a third 3 mgd capacity factory-built Trident treatment module to expand the capacity to 9 mgd would be needed. Further, to enhance capacity and improve reliability, it is desirable to provide a fourth unit to permit uninterrupted production if one unit breaks down or must be removed from service for routine maintenance. An additional advantage of upgrading the water treatment capacity to 8,400 gpm (12 mgd) is that it will allow the plant to operate for fewer hours each day to meet system demand thereby reducing operational labor requirements. Also, it can be operated at reduced capacity, which improves performance reliability and reduces the potential for improperly treating the water during difficult treatment conditions. i01303 2-13 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 2 Water Treatment 'Facilities Improvements SECTION 3 WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL The existing water treatment facilities designed around U.S. Filter Trident Model TR840S units has a maximum design capacity of 6 mgd. Each modular unit can be operated independently producing 3 mgd at a filtration rate of 6 gpm per square foot. This higher filtration rate is permissible under the Department of Health Services operating permit stipulations because pretreatment is provided by natural filtration of Russian River water through the Ranney collector intake. Based upon favorable performance achieved with the existing facilities it is proposed to expand the plant using the U.S. Filter Trident factory-built modular treatment unit. To meet the expanded water supply needs of the community it is proposed to install two additional modular Trident units to provide the reliability and redundancy necessary to effectively meet the water supply needs of the community. As indicated in Section 2 of the design report the treatment facilities need to have a continuous reliable capacity of about 7 mgd to meet peak demand flows during the months of July and August. It is clear that this demand exceeds the present maximum 6 mgd capacity of the existing plant. Adding a third 3 mgd capacity module will meet current peak demands but will not provide the required capacity and the necessary reliability if one unit is down for maintenance. Consequently the proposed expansion will include a fourth Trident unit which will provide the necessary redundancy and produce up to 12 mgd under conditions of extreme demand. Further, a treatment capacity of 12 mgd matches the City's water right entitlement to the underflow of the Russian River. RAW WATER PUMPING FACILITIES The existing Ranney collector has two 2,800 gpm (4 mgd) vertical turbine pumps that were installed in 1991 that supply raw water to the treatment facilities. The finn pumping capacity of the raw water pumps is about 7 mgd during the summer season when water levels in the Ranney collector are at seasonal minimums assuming that inflow through the collection laterals will match pumping capacity. As noted below the current capacity of the Ranney collector is far below 7 mgd. The capacity for this expansion will be limited by the production capability of the existing Ranney collector. The production capacity was about 6 mgd when the treatment plant was first placed in service in 1991. Since that time the output was dropped to about 4.5-4.7 mgd. Recent (March 2003) cleaning procedures to the Ranney collector laterals had resulted in some increase in capacity but the City's present estimate of 4.8 mgd is deficient by about 2.0 mgd over the anticipated present needs of the community and the capacity of the proposed treatment facility improvements. The City will be implementing a separate program to identify and evaluate alternatives to increasing the raw water supply to match the capacity of the proposed treatment plant improvements. 102403 3-1 c:\..\02 i 01 \presdesign reportXseclion 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Raw water pumping reliability is a concern with the existing facilities. The two existing pumps are approximately 12 years old and based upon observations by plant operating personnel of pump conditions and the declining output in recent years they need to be rebuilt. With the pending proposed improvements the existing pumps should be removed from the intake structure and rebuilt to restore original design capacity. There is also a problem with redundant pumping capability with the existing two pump system. During flushing of the clarifier when higher incoming flow rates are required the existing two pump system cannot respond to the treatment plant needs because of inadequate capacity. Installation of a third pump of 2,800 gpm capacity would alleviate this problem and facilitate more effective and efficient operation of the treatment facilities. Consequently, it is recommended that a third raw water pump be included in the project. Additionally, the existing 12-year-old pumps need to be overhauled or replaced. TREATMENT FACILITIES The existing as well as the proposed new facilities associated with the expansion of the water treatment plant is presented schematically in Figure 3-1. The major changes in the existing plant other than installing two new Trident treatment units, involves the construction of a new finished water clearwell/storage reservoir, a new high service pumping station, conversion of the existing clearwell to a filtered water transfer basin and replacement of two high service pumps to low head transfer pumps. Further definition of the treatment facilities illustrating the new features to be added with this expansion are shown on the Plant hydraulic profile provided as Figure 3-2. Additionally, a mechanical floor plan at the proposed expansion is provided as Figure 3-3. A site plan showing the orientation of the building expansion is provided as Figure 3-4. Installation of two modular treatment units including valves, piping, electrical, etc. associated with the modular units and the associated building expansion represents the major work at the treatment plant. The existing coagulant chemical feed system is adequate to serve the expanded facility. There is concern whether the static mixer provides adequate dispersion of coagulating chemicals with the incoming raw water. Installation of an inline mechanical mixer in place of the static device, which will perform more efficiently over a wider range of plant flow rates is proposed. The chemical feed system requires a larger capacity day tank for the nonionic polymer (filter aid material). Because of space limitations within the chemical feed area it is planned to supplement the existing 400 gallon capacity day tank with a second 500 gallon tank equipped with a recirculation mixer. The proposed additional storage tank and mixer assembly is shown in Figure 3-5. There are several manufacturers of inline mechanical mixers which would be appropriate for this installation. The unit would be used to replace the existing static mixer. A typical unit is illustrated in one manufacturer's information is provided in the Appendix. 102403 3- 2 c :\.. \02 i 01 \presdesign report~section 3 J~ J ~ '1' [-Izl- Ol_l Ikinh\,.PrelbemgnFig~res~ FIG_' 5- ?_hyd_prn.dwg, OR/1 ?/?00'.3 01: 4R: .34 PM, /~dminintrntnr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I I ZZ · · OO4 --I rrl i-rI --I rtl 0 -- ~ I'rl ~ Z -- 0 -- Z m-.q m'W'l OO OO I~ O4 0 0 Cll_._llkinh\ C:,on~tr,mlionDrnwing~Xx,~-1;_hldg''flr_plnn.dwg, Oat'r)7/2~f).'¢ 04 5,7: OR Pt, J. ,~dmini~tr'htnr -rz ELEC'I'RICAL ~ I o~r~c~s c~ LABORATOIT( I ~Z 22'-0" 40'-0" BUILOINO /~]DrrloN ll_~kir~hX,,v, rel)e~ignF~o~re~\,FIG~,~- trentmen fncdlhes.dwo. ()~/'12/20().'~ l():3fl:2fi /~l'~I, ,~dministrntor x~ X X x~ x~ / ! Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Presently, each of the Trident treatment modules has a filter effluent turbidimeter. The new units will also be provided with individual effluent turbidimeters. For improved overall treatment plant performance monitoring and to meet requirements of the Department of Health Services a separate plant effluent turbidimeter will be included as part of this project. Further to enhance filter performance and improve performance monitoring, total particle counters will be installed on each of the two existing filters and the two proposed new filters. An additional improvement will involve integrating the signal from the total particle count analyzers into the plant performance monitoring system. A technical brochure describing one manufacturers total particle count analyzer is included in the Appendix. .- For improved mixing of sodium hydroxide with finished water applied for pH control, improvements will include provisions to add sodium hydroxide to the finished water at the discharge from the treatment plant clearwell. To insure complete dispersion and adequate mixing of the sodium hydroxide with filtered water, a static mixer will be added to the pipeline downstream of the point of application. The flow schematic for the upgraded treatment facility provided in Figure 3-1 and the building floor plan Figure 3-3 indicates the proposed application point for sodium hydroxide. Another major improvement that will contribute to improving operational reliability and safety involves replacement of the existing wet chlorine scrubber with a more reliable dry pellet type system. The existing caustic based scrubber is approximately 12 years old and the extreme corrosive environment associated with use of sodium hydroxide has resulted in serious deterioration in the equipment and a heightened concern for safety and reliability. The scrubber is required to perform flawlessly on demand in the event of an unplanned release of chlorine gas from the disinfection facility. The improvements will involve removal of the existing chlorine gas scrubber and replacement with a dry pellet based unit similar in design to the equipment described in manufacturers technical brochures included in the Appendix. The proposed replacement equipment can be installed within the space occupied by the present scrubber. There are other improvements proposed to the water filtration facility needed to improve reliability as well as maintainability of the facility. These are as follows: Relocation of the treatment operations performance monitoring laboratory space within the treatment plant building. The current laboratory area occupies space within the treatment plant control room and the requirements for the two different functions are incompatible. Consequently, all laboratory operations will be moved into a new dedicated area in the southeast comer of the building expansion. The location of the new laboratory facilities is shown on Figure 3-3. . Access to the roof for maintenance of the building ventilation equipment is required. hnprovements will involve installation of a roof hatch and a permanent ladder from the mezzanine floor to the roof. 102403 3-8 c:X..\02101 \presdesign report~section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements o , Improved access to the treatment units for proper maintenance and cleaning is needed. It is requested to provide access walkways on all sides of the two new Trident units. Also, similar walkways on the existing two units will be provided. The air compressors in the mechanical room will be relocated for improved access. particular modification will be addressed during the design phase of the project. This WASHWATER RECOVERY SYSTEM The Department of Health Services is more aggressively enforcing standards limiting the amount of recovered waste backwash water that is returned to the process and the quality of the return flow. The Filter Backwash Rule limits the return water flow to 10 percent of the incoming raw water flow and the maximum turbidity to 2 NTUs. However, the State of California advocates limiting the return flow to 5 percent of the incoming flow. The existing recovered washwater return facilities consist of a single 420 gpm vertical turbine pump. This pump has the capability to deliver water to three different locations. These locations include the incoming raw water line, the baseball diamonds for irrigation water or into the sanitary sewer. According to operating personnel the present washwater handling system is deficient especially during periods of high raw water turbidity and/or high treatment plant demand. Returning only 5 percent of the flow for example when one unit is being operated at two-thirds of its capacity (2 mgd), requires in excess of 48 hours to recycle the recovered water back to the process. Presently any excess water that cannot be returned to the process is discharged to the percolation beds or the sanitary sewer. This method of handling excess water is certainly effective during summer months but has limitations during the winter when percolation rates are substantially lower. The option remains of course to discharge excess recovered water to the sanitary sewer but this practice taxes the capacity of the wastewater treatment facilities and is only used if the other two options are unavailable. Improving the washwater recycling facilities appears to be one task that should be made during this phase of expansion. The addition of a second washwater return pump would be the obvious solution to expanding the recycle capability. A second 420 gpm pump would increase the return flow capability to 840 gpm or 10 percent of the expanded 8,400 gpm (12 mgd) capacity of the treatment plant. Also with. a second pump, it would be possible to dedicate each pump to returning recovered washwater to separate locations. For example, depending upon plant operating flow, the season of the year, etc., one pump could return water to the plant inlet whereas the other could discharge to either the irrigation field or to the sanitary sewer. The advantage of having two pumps would permit drawing down the washwater recovery basins more quickly. Under the present situation these basins are unavailable to process waste backwash water if the recycle pump system is still recovering reclaimed water and recycling it to the treatment plant. Another recently adopted water quality standard is that the recycle stream turbidity should not exceed 2 NTU. In order to meet this more stringent standard additional detention time for 102403 3-9 c:\..\02 ! 0 i \presdesign report~section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements settling solids in the backwash water is required. Consequently it is recommended that a second reclaimed backwash water recycle pump be installed within the existing collection sump. This pump can be installed adjacent to the existing pump simply by relocating the base plates, support the pump, reconfiguring the discharge piping system and adding new checkered covers to the pump sump basin. Another recommended improvement associated with the backwash water recovery and recycle system involves disinfecting the retum flow before it is introduced into the treatment facilities · for reprocessing. The present DHS standard requires disinfection of this retum stream. Simple chlorination of this stream would be effective but chlorine produces chlorinated by- products that are regulated contaminants. Use of potassium permanganate to provide inactivation of microbial contaminants and assist with taste and odor control is the preferred means of treating this stream. A chemical feed pump to apply the required dosage of 1-2 mg/1 to the return stream along with a mixing/storage tank and a mixer will be included for the potassium permanganate feed system. It is planned to place this assembly in the chemical feed area and extend a feed line to the reclaimed water pumping station connecting it to the return pump discharge header. STANDBY POWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The existing 750 kw standby generator must be able to operate the entire water treatment plant. Presently it is wired such that only one of the existing 350 hp high service pumps is connected to the emergency power supply bus. It is desired that the plant electrical system be reconfigured so that all pumps, motors and electrical equipment associated with the treatment plant be operated off the emergency bus. Meeting this requirement with the existing generator will be possible since the two 350 hp high service pumps are to be removed from the treatment plant and replaced with smaller pumps. The high service pumps will be relocated to the new finished water pumping station. This relocation will free up additional emergency generator capacity that will be available for operating all facilities within the existing treatment plant building. The backwash pump will be added to the emergency, bus as well. The low head filtered water transfer pumps will have an aggregate horsepower of probably less than 150 hp, compared to the 350 Hp high service pump that will be replaced insuring that there will be sufficient power available from the existing generator to operate the entire plant. SODIUM HYDROXIDE STORAGE TANK The existing 6,000 gallon sodium hydroxide sto'rage tank has deteriorated badly and needs to be replaced. The exterior surface is showing signs of delamination in certain areas and leakage is occurring at many of the fittings. Further, although the earthquake restraints are designed for Seismic Zone 4, piping connections to the tank do not have the flexibility that would be required to withstand horizontal movement during an earthquake. To insure reliability and safety to operating personnel the existing tank will be replaced. 102403 3-10 c:\..\0210 l\presdesign report~section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Associated with tank replacement is the installation of a dividing wall within the chemical spill containment basin to separate the new caustic storage tank from a new dry pellet type chlorine gas scrubber. ALUM STORAGE TANK The existing alum storage tank is presently oUt of service because a polyaluminum chloride (PAC) coagulant purchased in totes is currently being used in place of alum. The tank is in poor condition and must be replaced if bulk shipments of PAC will be obtained for use in the future. Coagulant cost savings may be possible if larger quantities of PAC are purchased. Additionally, purchasing the coagulant in bulk would eliminate the handling requirements associated with use of totes. Consequently, it is recommended that the alum tank be replaced with a new tank during the planned improvement project. TREATMENT BUILDING EXPANSION The existing treatment plant was designed to accommodate a future expansion involving the addition of two identical Trident units. The filtered water clearwell was designed so that it would accommodate the addition of two additional treatment units and it was sized such that it could be incorporated into the new building addition. Also, piping within the clearwell was designed so that new piping would connect to a blind flange located at floor level between two future treatment units. Figure 3-3 is a floor plan of the proposed treatment plant expansion showing the building addition as well as the location of the two new treatment units. A building elevation view provided in Figure 3-6 illustrates how the two units planned for this phase of expansion would be situated within the extended building. Figure 3-7 is a sectional view through the building showing the orientation of the two new units. The building has been designed such that the exterior panels on the eastside of the building can be removed permitting extension of access catwalks connecting the new and the existing treatment units. The building addition would be essentially similar in design to the existing pre-engineered steel building. Peripheral footings will provide support for the building columns. Two equipment pads for the new Trident units will be installed on the prepared subbase located within the building addition outline. The 6-inch thick slab floor will be extended into the addition matching the elevation of the floor in the existing building. The style and color of the exterior building siding will be selected to match the existing siding. FILTRATION FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIA Table 3-1 provided below lists the design criteria that applies to the improvements to be added during this facility expansion phase. 102403 3-11 c:\..\02 ! 01 \presdesign report~section 3 II r-I-! Water Treatment Facilities Improvements TABLE 3-1 DESIGN CRITERIA WATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION CITY OF.UKIAH Plant Capacity Existing Nominal Design Peak Raw Water Pumps (existing) Number Capacity each Horsepower Speed ' Raw Water Pump (new) Number Capacity Horsepower Speed Package Treatment Units Existing Number Capacity (each) Total Capacity New Number Capacity (each) Total Capacity Design Characteristics Length Width Height Filter Area (each) Adsorption Clarifier Area (each) Filter Hydraulic Design Rate Filter Media Filter Type 6 mgd 9 mgd 12 mgd 2 2,800 gpm 60 Hp 1 constant, 1 variable speed 1 2,800 gpm 75 Hp Constant 2 3 mgd 6 mgd 2 3 mgd 6 mgd 49 ft. 10 in. 11 tt 11 in. 10ft. lin. 350 sq. ft. 175 sq. ft. 6 gpm per sq. ft. Gravity Tri-mixed media 102403 3-14 c:\..\02101Xpresdesign reportXsection 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Backwash Flow Rate Clarifier Rise Rate Filtered Water Transfer Pumps (new) Number Type Capacity Rated Discharge Head Horsepower Speed High Service Pumps (new) Number Type Capacity Rated Discharge Head Horsepower Speed Clarified Backwash Return Pumps Number Type Capacity Rated Discharge Head Horsepower Speed Sodium Hydroxide Tank (replacement) Number Volume Dimensions Diameter Height Material Alum Tank (replacement) Number Volume Dimensions Diameter Height Material 15 gpm per sq. fi. 12 gpm per sq. fi. 3 Vertical Turbine Two ~ 2,100 gpm, one @ 4,200 gpm 45fi. Two ~ 30 Hp, One ~ 60 Hp One Constant (2,100 gpm) and Two Variable (2,100 gpm and 4,200 gpm) 3 Vertical Turbine, Can-Style 2,800 gpm 363 fi. 350 Hp VFD Controlled 2 (1 existing, 1 new) Vertical Turbine 420 gpm 125 fi 20 Hp Variable (new pump) 1 6,500 gallons 10ft. 11 ft. 11 in. High Density Polyethylene 1 6,500 gallons 10ft. 11 ft. 11 in. High Density Polyethylene 102403 3-15 c :\..\02 ! 01 \presdesign reportksect ion 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements FILTERED WATER TRANSFER PUMPS In this expansion phase the existing backwash basin/filtered water clearwell will be converted into a backwash basin/filtered water transfer pump basin. The existing high head service pumps will be removed. These pumps will be replaced by relatively low head filtered water transfer pumps which will pump water into the 1.5 million gallon finished water storage reservoir. Three filtered water transfer pumps will be provided. Two pumps will have a capacity of 2,100 gpm matching the design capacity of an individual Trident treatment unit. The third pump will have a capacity of 4,200 gpm. One 2,100 gpm capacity pump will be constant speed whereas the other two pumps will have variable frequency drives (VFD). The total combined capacity of the pumping system will be 8,400 gpm, which will match the full 12 mgd capacity of the four modular treatment units. These pumps will be controlled by level in the filtered water transfer basin. The flow rate through the treatment plant will be selected based upon overall distribution system demand. Once the raw water flow into the plant is established filtered water flow rate into the transfer basin will match the pumping rate of the transfer pumps controlled by basin level. In general, plant flow rate will be established either manually by operator selection or it can be changed automatically through control signals from the finished water storage reservoir where level will fluctuate as distribution system demands varies. In other words, increased system demand coupled with dropping water levels in the finished water storage reservoir will generate a signal indicating that flow into the treatment facility must be increased to keep up with demand. All of the upgraded control features will be incorporated into an upgraded SCADA system. A more detailed description of plant control is provided in a technical memorandum prepared by HDR Engineering and included in the Appendix. This memorandum addresses the process and instrumentation provisions applicable to the proposed improvements. The filtered water transfer pumps will also provide filter backwash water in the event the dedicated backwash pump is inoperable. Two pumps with capacities of 2,100 gpm and 4,200 gpm respectively will be operated simultaneously to provide the required 6,300 gpm of washwater for a Trident unit. The current design relies on the output of the high service pumps and requires a pressure reducing valve between the pumps and the Trident units. This pressure reducing valve is not required with the low head filtered water transfer pumps and will be removed. FINISHED WATER PUMPING STATION The process flow schematic in Figure 3-1 illustrates the relative position of the new finished water pumping station in the treatment process. New high service finished water pumps are required with the conversion of the existing plant finished water clearwell to a filtered water transfer basin and the construction of a new 1.5 million gallon reservoir. It is proposed to install these pumps in a dedicated building located adjacent to the finished water storage reservoir. The proposed location is shown on the water treatment plant site plan illustrated on Figure 3-4. 102403 3-16 c:\..\02101 \presdesign reportXsection 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvements A mechanical floor plan for the pump station is provided on Figure 3-8. The initial facility will include three high service pumps matching the general performance characteristics of the existing pumps. The three pumps to be installed during this plant improvement phase will i~w an individual capacity of 2,800 gpm. To satisfy the distribution system pressure requireme~',~ these pumps will have a rated total head of around 365 feet. Three pumps will be provided initially with two pumps being controlled by variable frequency drive and the third pump will be constant speed. As noted on Figure 3-8 space is provided for a possible future fourth pump. At 2,800 gpm each the total capacity of the finished water pumping system is 8,400 gpm or 12 mgd. The design features of the building match those incorporated into the main treatment plant building. The building will be a pre-engineered steel structure with exterior ribbed siding and a standing seam roof. Elevation views of this building are provided in Figure 3-9. The most efficient and cost effective type of pump for this application is a can style vertical turbine pump. Using this style of pump, retrieval for maintenance or replacement is facilitated through removable access skylights placed on the building roof. An emergency standby electric generator will be required to operate the high service pumps in the event of a power failure. A generator similar in size (750 kw) to that at the existing treatment facility would have the capability of operating two of the high service pumps which would deliver the equivalent of around 5,600 gpm or 8 mgd into the distribution system. This delivery capacity coupled with that available from several of the City's wells (assuming they have standby power) would represent the supply available to the community during a power outage. ELECTRICAL AND CONTROL SYSTEM MODIFICATIONS A specific preliminary design memorandum has been prepared by HDR Engineering addressing the recommended modifications to the existing electrical and plant control facilities as well as describing the new facilities needed to support the construction of a separate high service pump station. The complete memorandum can be found in the Appendix. The highlights of this memorandum are as follows. The existing treatment plant service is adequate to provide power for the planned modifications. Relocating the finished water pumps to the new high service pump station reduces the electrical load substantially. The existing 750 kw standby diesel generator is adequate to handle the full power load for the treatment plant. The emergency bus will be eliminated and all powered equipment will be on the emergency generator. Inverter VFD bypass provisions will be added to existing speed control equipment. The new high service pump station with a connected load of 1533 KVA will be required to power 3-350 Hp high service pumps. All three pumps will be equipped with VFD's. A 1200 KW generator will be provided to power all three pumps. 102403 3-17 c:\..\02101 ~presdesign report~section 3 ~ L x z c~ c) -11 o I I I \1/ ; , ... . io · ,1 I I I I I f)l_~Jkinh',,Prei')~icjnFIg~re~",FIG S.--f~_h~p~_elew~.dw9, 10/0.'S/2C)0.-~ l?:F~R:04 PM, ,~dminis~rntor -1-o 0 0 ---I -.~ i-1-1 z ---I "'o I Water Treatment Facilities Improvements A Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) will be provided to serve the water treatment facilities, the high service pump station, two storage reservoirs, three distribution system booster pumping stations, five well sites and include limited spares for future facilities. The SCADA system will be either 900 MHz spread spectrum unlicensed radio or telephone or a combination of both. A full description of the composition of the SCADA operation and control facility can be found in the Appendix. Raw water flow rate to the treatment plant is maintained by a pressure control based, VFD speed controller that with one fixed speed and one variable speed pump causes difficulties when sudden increases in raw water pump output are needed such as during a clarifier flush cycle. The addition of a third raw water pump of probably constant speed design will circumvent this problem. Also, software changes will be considered that could overcome the present identified problems achieving satisfactory raw water flows when required. Additional explanation of the proposed raw water pump control provisions can be found in the Appendix. FACILITY IMPROVEMENT COSTS The following paragraphs present the estimated costs to complete improvements to the water treatment facilities and the finished water pump station. The costs are based upon installing two new 3 mgd capacity modular Trident units in an extension of the existing building. Also, costs are provided for the finished water pump station and interconnecting pipelines between facilities. Excluded from the estimate are any costs for expanding the capacity of the raw water source with the exception of addition of a new raw water pump. The existing Ranney collector pump station will not be modified in this phase of the project. Note that the costs presented in this document are to be regarded as preliminary design level estimates that have an accuracy range of plus 20 percent to minus 15 percent of expected contractor's bid prices developed from detailed construction drawings and specifications. The estimated cost for the 6 mgd expansion is presented in Table 3-2. The probable cost to expand and upgrade the treatment facilities including constructing a new high service pumping station is $4,049,000. This estimate excludes the cost of contractor markup and mobilization and engineering, administrative and legal services. The component costs used to develop the projected construction cost are supported by material takeoffs, equipment cost estimates from vendors and from cost records maintained by SPH Associates from previous similar projects. It should be noted that this is a predesign phase estimate and refinements following completion of detailed plans and specifications may reveal that the estimate must be adjusted to reflect better definition of this project and bidding conditions at the time. 102403 3-20 c:\..\0210 l~presdesign report\section 3 Water Treatment Facilities Improvementa. TABLE 3-2 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF.UKIAH Component Demolition Site Preparation Excavation and Embankments Yard Piping Landscaping Paving and Surfacing Concrete Masonry Miscellaneous Metal Treatment Plant Building Finished Water Pump Station Building Trident TR-840S Treatment Units Install Treatment Units Raw Water Pump Rebuild Existing Raw Water Pumps Chemical Feed Facility Improvements In-line Mechanical Mixers Dry Media Scrubber Low Head Filtered Water Transfer Pumps High Head Finished Water Pumps Caustic Storage Tank Alum Storage Tank Recycle Pump Process Instrumentation Process Piping Butterfly Valves Valves, Cocks and Hydrants HVAC Standby Generator/Fuel Tank Painting Electrical and Instrumentation Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency ~ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST Estimated Cost 37,000 5,000 18,000 183,000 18,000 90,000 173,000 4,000 41,000 73,000 64,000 8O0,000 200,000 95,000 30,000 14,000 32,000 165,000 72,000 156,000 12,000 12,000 30,000 27,000 144,000 38,000 28,000 29,000 178,000 39,000 567,000 3,374,000 675,000 $4,049,000 102403 3-21 c:\..\02101 \presdesign report~seclion 3 Distribution System Storage Facilities SECTION 4 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM STORAGE FACILITIES INTRODUCTION The City's treated water distribution system does not have adequate storage to satisfy requirements established by the California Department of Health Services (DHS). In a letter dated July 11, 2001, DHS advises that based upon their storage capacity assessment, Zone 1 (lower zone) has 2,635,000 gallons of available storage. The required storage volume is 5,600,000 gallons yielding a deficiency in Zone. 1 of 3,000,000 gallons. Their inspection also revealed that Zone 2 (upper zone) has about 100,000 gallons of usable storage versus a required storage volume of 360,000 gallons. By their assessment Zone 2 is 260,000 gallons deficient in finished water storage volumes. In order to comply with DHS regulations, additional storage must be added to each zone. Zone 1 has an existing 2.3 million gallon concrete storage reservoir that was constructed in the 1950's. This reservoir located above the City's golf course has provided good service and after completion of a recent cleaning and leak repair project should be expected to provide many additional years of service. However, the lack of a second reservoir at this location near the existing reservoir to provide system redundancy is an operational deficiency, which must be corrected to comply with DHS regulations. Both reservoir locations are shown on Figure 4-1. The sites are situated on a steep hillside and access is difficult to both tanks. Because of the constrained site and difficult access the size of the storage reservoirs is limited. ZONE 1 RESERVOIR Site Selection Selecting an appropriate location for additional storage reservoirs in Zone 1 to provide 3 million gallons of needed storage was influenced by property available to the City on which to place these reservoirs. An obvious location for the Zone 1 reservoir would be adjacent to the existing 2.3 million gallon reservoir. However, this site does not provide sufficient space for a full 3 million gallon capacity reservoir. Consequently, it was decided to place 1.5 million gallons at this site and locate the remaining 1.5 million gallons adjacent to the treatment plant, which is also in Zone 1. At this location the reservoir would provide system storage as well as satisfy the requirement for additional detention time to meet disinfection process requirements. The development and selection of a design for this reservoir is discussed later in this section of the report. 101603 4-1 c :\..\02101 \predesign report~ection 4 / // Distribution System Storage Facilities Evaluation of Zone 1 Reservoir Design Alternatives Once it was decided that it would be possible to locate a 1.5 million gallon reservoir adjacent to the existing 2.3 million gallon reservoir, an evaluation of possible tank designs was initiated. For this site, materials of construction that would be consistent with this location included the following: · Welded steel · Glass lined bolted steel · Prestressed concrete Welded Steel Reservoirs Welded steel reservoirs are constructed using welded steel plates with interior columns. These reservoirs require protective coating systems for both the interior and exterior surfaces as well as cathodic protection to prevent corrosion. Welded steel reservoirs are commonly used for reservoirs under 5,000,000 gallon capacity. In this size range welded steel is typically the least expensive material based upon initial capital cost. However, repainting the reservoir is an added maintenance requirement increasing to the overall life-cycle cost. A major problem associated with welded steel tanks is that site conditions and weather play a major role in the proper preparation of the interior and exterior surfaces and painting of the reservoir. Because climatic and seasonal weather conditions (depending upon location) for painting and coating reservoirs are not always optimum, and inspection to confirm adequacy of the paint system is difficult, there is always a chance for premature coating failure. We have had specific experience with paint system failures on welded steel tanks within the first year of service. If this failure occurs the reservoir must be taken out of service for recoating which can significantly disrupt operations and substantially add to facility maintenance cost. Recoating of the tank interior generally is needed every 15 to 20 years, impacting the lifecycle cost of a welded steel tank. Glass Lined and Coated Bolted Steel Tanks The glass lined bolted steel tank represents a competitive option to the welded steel alternative because it does not need to be entirely repainted within the anticipated 40 to 60 year life of the tank. The steel panels for this type of reservoir are coated with a factory applied silica glass coating which through a thermal baking process forms a hardened barrier on both the interior and exterior surfaces of the reservoir sidewall panels. The steel panels are assembled at the jobsite by the manufacturer's construction crew using specialized equipment. As with welded steel reservoirs cathodic protection is recommended to provide additional protection against corrosion. Glass lined bolted steel tanks have several unique features. One advantage is that the exterior surface of the panels never require any recoating or repainting and is easy to clean and repair. 101603 4-3 c:\..\0210 l\predesign reportXsection 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities The manufacturer claims that most graffiti can be removed from the surface of these reservoirs with solvents and any holes due to vandalism can be easily repaired. As noted in our economic evaluation later in this section, bolted steel tanks have a higher initial capital cost than welded steel reservoirs but require less maintenance. This feature contributes to essentially the same lifecycle cost for both alternatives. The roof of bolted steel reservoirs is generally a geodesic dome that has a higher profile than the low cone roof system used on a standard welded steel tanks. The standard design uses an unpainted aluminum dome but they can be provided with a baked-on, powder coat paint system of various muted colors. The painted surface eliminates the glare concern from the aluminum dome cover. One disadvantage of the glassed lined bolted steel reservoir concept is there is only one major manufacturer active in this area. However, in developing our cost estimate we have received a proposal from the manufacturer with a guaranteed not-to-exceed price under the conditions of the offer stated in their proposal. A copy of this. proposal for the bolted steel tank alternative is provided in the Appendix. Prestressed Concrete Reservoir Reservoirs constructed of prestressed concrete represent a very low maintenance altemative to welded steel and bolted steel tanks. They are superior to steel tanks in having no paint systems that must be maintained and eventually repaired. A major advantage for this project is that the Zone 1 tank of the golf course can be partially backfilled to reduce the amount of excavated material and resultant "scar" on the hillside. Resistance to vandalism and potentially sabotage are also superior advantages of prestressed concrete tanks. These reservoirs can be provided with flat concrete roofs or domed aluminum roofs commonly used with bolted steel tanks. The costs of the unpainted aluminum domed roofs are less than concrete but for this analysis it was assumed that the flat concrete, low profile roof will be used for this project primarily for appearance and maintenance considerations. Structurally prestressing of concrete tanks is very efficient in that it combines high strength concrete in pure axial compression where concrete offers the best properties for use in water storage reservoirs. High strength steel reinforcing and strengthening members assume all tension loads to prevent cracking and possible leakage. The manufacturing process involves machine wrapping the concrete structure with galvaniZed prestressing wires and protecting these wires with an exterior coating of concrete. The specialized design and construction features of a prestressed tank require that it be erected onsite by the manufacturer. A technical brochure describing one manufacturer's prestressed concrete tanks is provided in the Appendix. 101603 4-4 c :\..\0210 i \predesign reportXsection 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Siting Considerations Each of the above alternatives offered advantages and disadvantages that were considered in a subsequent evaluation. For each alternative a site layout was developed considering principally the excavation and foundation requirements for each design option. Of concern was the amount of excavation needed for each design and the disposition of the material to be removed from the hillside. The excavated material would either have to be disposed onsite or hauled to a remote disposal area. A preliminary siting analysis (Figure 4-2) for a 1.5 million gallon bolted or welded steel tank was prepared to determine the quantity of materials that would have to be excavated to construct the tank on the site. The analysis revealed that about 46,000 cubic yards of material would have to be excavated to prepare a satisfactory site. Using existing site topographic maps, spoils disposal locations in proximity to the reservoir were identified and the potential volume of excess materials that could be placed at these sites was computed. As shown on Figure 4-2 the major amount (28,000 cubic yards) could be placed in an area below the existing tank access roadway above an adjacent fairway. However, 18,000 cubic yards must be transported from the site and disposed of elsewhere. In the cost feasibility analysis it was assumed that it would be hauled to a city owned landfill site adjacent to the airport. Comparative Cost Analyses A comparative cost analysis was prepared from each of the three different reservoir design alternatives to assist with selection of the most appropriate for the Zone 1 site. This analysis considers site development (clearing, excavation, excess spoils disposal, etc.) as well as tank construction material costs. In the following paragraphs installed costs for the glass lined bolted steel, welded steel and prestressed concrete design alternatives are presented. Bolted Steel Tank Costs The projected cost for the glass lined, bolted steel tank alternative is presented in Table 4-1. A proposal from Aquastore Pacific for a 1.3 million gallon tank at an installed price of $599,433 was received from their representative. A copy of this proposal is included in the Appendix. Incorporating the tank cost with the projected costs for site development resulted in a total estimated installed cost of $1,495,433 for this alternative. Note that this cost assumes that excess excavation is wasted as spoils through construction of an access roadway connecting the Zone l with the Zone 2 tank. As is noted later in this section environmental concerns associated with hillside disturbance and tree removal caused this alternative to be rejected in favor of a less disruptive variation of this first alternative. 101603 4-5 c:\..\0210 l\predesign report~section 4 III Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-1 COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON GLASS LINED BOLTED STEEL STORAGE TANK ZONE 1 LOCATION Component Site clearing and preparation~ Estimated Cost $ 45,000 Excavation2 460,000 Onsite Spoils Disposal3 Offsite Transportation to Disposal Site4 Tank Cost Erecteds Annual Investment for Future P ainting/Maintenance6 Total Estimated Cost7 280,000 108,000 599,433 3,000 $1,495,433 I Projected cost to clear site for excavation and spoils wasting 2 Cost based upon 46,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Cost based upon transportation and placement of 28,000 cubic yards in onsite disposal area 4 Projected cost at $6.00 per cubic yard to haul 18,000 cubic yards of excavated material to city owned disposal site near airport 5 Proposal for glass coated steel tank from Aquastore Pacific Tank capacity 1,269,705 gallons, 111.9 ft. diameter by 19.26 ft tall. 6 Annual investment in sinking fund for future tank maintenance 7 Estimated total installed cost of tank less site piping, fencing, landscaping, contractor's overhead and profit, etc. c 9,..X02101 \predesign ~ cport',scc!ion 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Welded Steel Tank Costs The cost of an alternative based upon an AWWA welded steel tank was also prepared. This analysis revealed that the first cost of the welded steel tank would be the least. Site prepart~tion and excavation costs would be essentially identical to the bolted steel tank alternative. The ring- wall foundation would be prepared by a general contractor with the tank erected and painted by a tank manufacturing firm. An estimated cost of $426,000 from CBI Incorporated for a 1.5 million gallon tank including the paint system was obtained. The cost estimate included an annual investment amount for a sinking fund to cover repainting of the tank in 20 years. As noted in Table 4-2 the total estimated installed cost at the Zone 1 reservoir site for the welded steel storage tank is $1,390,000. Prestressed Concrete Tank Costs A similar cost analysis was prepared using a prestressed concrete tank alternative manufactured by DYK Incorporated. Their proposal priced a 1.5 million gallon tank at $940,000. A copy of their proposal is provided in the Appendix. Zone 1 Reservoir Alternatives Comparison As indicated in Table 4-3 the total projected comparative cost of a prestressed concrete tank at the Zone 1 tank site is $1,654,000. Following completion of the cost analysis of the three alternative reservoir designs a design comparison matrix was prepared and is presented in Table 4-4. This matrix lists the advantage and disadvantage of each reservoir construction material considering factors other than first cost. The glassed lined bolted steel tank alternative would offer advantages over the less expensive conventional AWWA welded steel tank related to reduced life time maintenance cost because the welded steel tank will likely require repainting within 15-20 years and corrosion is always a lingering concern. Because of the above disadvantage and the additional requirement for disposal of excess excavated material the welded steel tank alternative was not deemed to be appropriate for this location. Rather a more appropriate selection would be the glass lined bolted steel design or the prestressed concrete tank alternative. 603 4- 8 c:\..\0210 ! \predesign rcpollLscclion 4 - Distribution System Stora~ TABLE 4-2 COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON WELDED STEEL STORAGE TANK ZONE 1 LOCATION Site clearing and Preparation~ Excavation 2 Onsite Spoils Disposal 3 Offsite Transportation to Disposal Site4 Foundation Ring-wall Tank Cost Erecteds Annual Investment for Future Painting/Maintenance6 Total Estimated Cost7 45,000 460,000 280,000 108,000 65,000 426,000 6,000 $1,390,000 1 Projected cost to clear site for excavation and spoils wasting 2 Cost based upon 46,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Cost based upon transportation and placement of 28,000 cubic yards in onsite disposal area 4 Projected cost at $6.00 per cubic yard to haul 18,000 cubic yards of excavated material to city owned disposal site near ai~ort 5 Proposal for AWWA welded steel tank from CBI tank fabricators. Tank capacity 1,496,000 gallons. 110 ti diameter by 21.0 It. tall. 6 Annual investment in sinking thnd for future painting and tank maintenance 7 Estimated total installed cost of tank less site piping, fencing, landscape, contractor's overhead and profit, etc. I 01603 4-9 c:\..\02 I01 \l'ncdesign ~'cporl\scclion 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-3 COMPARATIVE ESTIMATED INSTALLED COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE TANK ZONE 1 LOCATION Component Site Clearing and Preparationl Excavation2 Onsite Spoils Disposal3 Offsite Transportation to Disposal Site4 Tank Cost Erected5 Annual Investment for Future Maintenance6 Total Estimated Cost7 Estimated Cost, 45,000 380,000 286,000 940,000 3000 $1,654,000 1 Projected cost to clear site for excavation and spoils disposal 2 Cost based upon excavating about 38,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Cost based upon transportation and placement of 28,000 cubic yards in spoils disposal area onsite using $10.00 per cubic yard 4 No excess material for transportation from Site 5 Proposal for concrete tank from DYK. Tank capacity 1,496,000 gallons, 120 ft diameter by 20 feet tall 6 Annual investment in sinking fund for future tank maintenance 7 F, stimated total inst~lle,t cost of tank l~.~s site ~-.r...~, . ....... s, ,,-,~o,~ap.,~, contractor's overhead and profit, etc. i1}16(}3 4- l 0 c :\..\02101 \predesign rclx)~l\scclion 4 . Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-4 MATERIAL COMPARISON OF STORAGE RESERVOIR ALTERNATIVES WATER FACILITIES IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF UKIAH Reservoir Construction Material Bolted Steel and Glass Lined Welded Steel Prestressed Concrete Advantages · Second lowest lifecycle cost · Easy to clean and repair · Damaged panels can be removed · Corrosion resistant · Color does not fade · Minimal maintenance required · Rapid erection time - second to welded steel · Lowest initial cost · Fastest erection time · Least neighborhood construction disruption at Zone 1 and Zone 2 sites · More competition insures best possible price · Lowest lifecycle cost · Corrosion resistant · At Zone 1 site eliminates need to transport 10,000 cyds of excavated material oft~ite to disposal · At Zone I site design will match existing reservoir and blend with surrounding cllvirolllllellt · Minimal maintenance · No interiort~aintin__ g_, recl____uired Disadvantages · ' Aluminum dome roof may be aesthetically unappealing · Requires export of site excavated material to offsite disposal area · Limited number of vendors reducing price competition · Height of domed roof detracts from appearance · Cathodic protection required · Highest corrosion potential · Frequent interior repainting estimated at once every 15- 20 years · Requires export of site excavated material to offsite disposal area · Cathodic protection required · Successful application of paint systems sensitive to climatic conditions · History of coating failures · Longest construction time · Highest initial capital cost · At Zone 1 site construction disturbance from noise may be the greatest · Limited competition impacts pricing I l) 1603 4-I1 c:\..\02101 \predesign relmrt\section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities The prestressed concrete tank is advantageous over both steel tank alternatives in that it can be partially buried after construction. This advantage is factored into the preparation of the preliminary design for this alternative. By partially burying the tank the quantity of material to excavated can be reduced and a significant amount of the excavated material (approxin~t~ly 2000-3000 cubic yards) can be used to backfill the tank after construction, reducing the amount of material that must be transported to the spoils disposal area. The costs presented in Table 4-3 reflect the reduced quantity of excavated material associated with this alternative. The prestressed tank design offers a further major advantage of potentially less environmental impact due to elimination of the need to transport 10,000 cubic yards (400 truckloads) over city streets to a disposal site. Also, the visual impact is substantially reduced because less material and fewer trees need to be removed to create the site for the tank. As noted later in this section of the report a revised site layout eliminated the need to construct the interconnecting access road between the Zone 1 and Zone 2 tanks to produce a disposal site for excess spoils from the excavation. A further advantage of the prestressed concrete alternative relates to the sut~erior longevity of concrete tanks over painted steel tanks. Corrosion is not a concern with a concrete tank. The visual impact on the hillside will be reduced because the concrete tank will match the exterior appearance of the existing concrete tank. Back filling the up slope side to further integrate it into the site will reduce the disturbance to native vegetation and match the muted appearance of the existing tank. Zone I Reservoir Construction Cost Previously presented cost estimates t'or the Zone 1 reservoir were fi)r comparative purposes only ~ind excluded certain costs that are common to each aite~q~ative considered fi~r this site. A more complete projection of estimated cost is presented in Table 4-5. Including costs tbr site paving, imping, valves, contractt rs overhead an{t protlt, etc.. thc projeclcd total construction cost cxclusix'e oC design engineering and administrative and legal services is $2.()53,00/) including a . Reservoir l)esi~n Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-5 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE RESERVOIR ZONE 1 LOCATION Component .Estimated Cost Site Preparation, Final Grading and Pavingj Excavation/Foundation Preparation2 Spoils DisposaP Tank Cost Erected4 Yard Piping and Valves5 Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency @ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTs $70,000 380,000 286,000 940,000 35,000 1,711,000 342,000 $2,053,000 1 Include paving of existing access road and area around new and existing reservoirs 2 Cost based upon excavation of 38,000 cubic yards at $10.00 per cubic yard 3 Transportation and placement of 28,000 cyds at $10.00 in disposal area 4 Installed cost of 120 fi. diameter by 20 foot tall prestressed concrete tank 5 Piping and valves for connection to inlet and outlet pipeline 6 Total installed cost excluding design engineering, administrative and legal service costs 603 4-13 c:\..\02101 \predesign rcl~}~l\section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities ZONE 2 RESERVOIR The existing Zone 2 storage reservoir is a 100,000 gallon capacity welded steel tank 25 diameter by 30 foot tall. It does not provide adequate storage to meet the needs o connections. According to DHS a minimum of an additional 260,000 gallons of storage is needed in Zone 2. Zone 2 Reservoir Siting The preferred location for the additional storage is adjacent to the existing tank, which is on property owned by the City of Ukiah. Figure 4-3 is a preliminary site plan illustrating the proposed location of a 39 foot diameter by 35 foot tall tank with a side water depth of 2 feet on the available site that will provide about 297,000 - 298,000 gallons of storage capacity exceeding the 260,000 gallons required by DHS at this location. As noted on Figure 4-3 site and foundation preparation for this tank will involve the excavation of about 900 cubic yards of material. Most of the 900 cubic yards can be wasted by spreading it over the hillside adjacent to the tank. Any additional materials could be deposited in the dedicated excess materials disposal spoil fill area. For this relatively small tank the most economical design would be based upon either a welded steel or a bolted steel tank. A prestressed concrete tank of this small volume would be considerably more expensive and offer no major advantages since with the addition of a second tank at the Zone 2 site, storage redundancy is now provided permitting removing the existing tank from service for maintenance. Zone 2 Reservoir Costs A proposal for a 297,000 gallon (nominal capacity) glass lined bolted steel tank was obtained from Aquastore Pacific, a copy of which is included in the Appendix. A verbal cost estimate was also obtained for a welded steel tank of similar volume. The 297,000 gallon glass lined bolted steel tank was selected over a .qmaller 260,000 gallnn ~,,1: h~-~,,,~ ~1~ larger tank ,- .... ;a~,. better height to diameter ratio critical to foundation design for storage tanks constructed in Seismic Zone 4. Table 4-6 provides a listing of the other components of the installation that result in a total construction cost of $448,601 fora 297,000 gallon glass lined bolted steel tank at the Zone 2 reservoir site. This cost applies to a complete installation including thc tank, site preparati(m, interconnecting piping and valves, electrical and level instrumentation, finished grading and security fencing arotmd both thc new and thc existing tank. I{}1603 4- ! 4 c :\..\02 i01 \predesign rtl)mi \sec lion 4 Distribution S_),stem Storage Facilities TABLE 4-6 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 297,000 GALLON GLASS LINED BOLTED STEEL TANK ZONE 2 LOCATION Comt~onent - Site Clearing and Final Grading~ Excavation2 Onsite Spoils Disposal3 Tank Cost Erected4 Yard Piping and Valves5 Security Fencing6 Subtotal Construction Costs Construction Cost Estimating Contingency @ 20% TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST7 Estimated Cost $14,000 10,800 3,000 313,031 18,000 15,000 373,831 _74.770 $448,601 1 Projected cost to clear trees from site and final grade/pave with gravel around tank 2 Cost based upon removal of 900 cyds @ $12.00 per cyd 3 Cost based upon transporting 300 cyds ~ $10.00 per cyd to onsite spoils disposal site 4 Proposal for glass lined steel tank from Aquastore Pacific. Tank useable capacity 297,000 gallons 5 Interconnecting piping between new and existing tanks 6 Chain link fencing of both tanks 7 Cost excludes contractor's profit, design engineering fees, administration and legal service 101603 4-16 c:\..\02101 \predesign reportXsection 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Recommended Zone 2 Tank Design It is recommended that the design for the Zone 2 reservoir be based upon the use of a glass lined~ bolted steel tank because of numerous advantages including competitive cost, favorable lo~:- term maintenance requirements, compatibility With the site and the surrounding environment and anticipated easier installation and erection at the difficult-to-access Zone 2 reservoir site. The Zone 2 tank location is such that it is well above the City's residential area and there appears to be little concern for any glare that might be an issue with a non-coated aluminum dome. FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR Volume Requirements The existing treatment plant has a combination backwash storage/finished water clearwell with a capacity of only 139,000 gallons. This represents the only other storage in Zone 1. This volume is only sufficient to barely meet the disinfection contact time requirements at the current capacity of 6 mgd. Additional storage of finished water after the addition of chlorine is necessary to meet the disinfection regulations. This requirement coupled with the DHS mandated requirement to provide additional finished water storage in Zone 1 requires construction of a new finished water storage reservoir at the treatment plant site. This reservoir must make up the difference between the 3 million gallons of needed storage in Zone 1 and the 1.5 million gallons to be provided by the new reservoir above the golf course. The principal purpose of a finished water storage reservoir is to provide storage volume for a supply of filtered backwash water and to provide contact time for disinfection plus provide a limited amount of system storage. The backwash water requirements can be satisfied by the existing 139,000 gallon finished water clearwell. However, the additional disinfection contact time requirements associated with the expansion of plant capacity must be satisfied in a new finished water storage reservoir. It is proposed to meet these requirements through construction of a new 1.5 million gallon capacity finished water clearwell to supplement the Zone 1 distribution system storage reservoir. The new finished water storage reservoir will be located in the general vicinity of the existing treatment plant as illustrated on Figure 4-4. A new finished water pump station to deliver the water from the reservoir into the distribution system will be a feature of this expansion project. 101603 4-17 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities Finished Water Disinfection Requirements Following a conventional water treatment process additional treatment through disinfection is required under the Surface Water Treatment Rule to provide the full 3.0 log contaminant removal or inactivation through the entire treatment process. Traditionally, the Microfloc Trident proccss has received 2.5 logs of treatment credit in applications where the surface water supply is of reasonably good quality and is free of any major contamination through contact with traditional contamination sources. The Russian River water from Lake Mendocino is a reasonably well protected water source. Since the water supply is derived from the underflow of the Russian River after the water passes through several feet of sand and gravel, the Department of Health Services recognizes this additional level of treatment and after filtration through the Trident plant requires that the disinfection process achieve only 0.5 logs of inactivation credit. Proposed Design The proposed clearwell design is illustrated in Figure 4-5. The 120 foot diameter tank with an overall height of 20 feet with a side water depth of 18.5 feet will be compartmentalized by 5 baffle walls with 20 feet separation between adjacent walls. These baffle walls with a total length of about 580 feet will form a serpentine pattern maximizing the distance the finished water must travel through the storage reservoir before it reaches the outlet. This baffling arrangement provides an overall length to width ratio of 30:1. This length to width ratio more than complies with parameters established by DHS. At width to length ratios.beyond 16:1 to 17:1, the T~0/T factor can be as high as 0.5. At a ratio of 30:l the baffling factor could be as high as 0.7. Typically unbaffied tanks in which the outlet is placed as far away from the inlet as possible receive a T~0/T factor of only 0.1-0.3. A T~0/q' factor of 0.5 indicates that the effective contact time is 50 percent of the theoretical hydraulic detention time of the reservoir. CT Compliance Spreadsheet Computation To confirm cleam, ell design criteria and CT compliance capability, a spreadsheet has been developed to evaluate the specific conditions and water characteristics for various plant operating situations. Inputs for specific process parameters are entered in the colored highlighted cells on the spreadsheet. Example printouts (Table 4-7 and 4-8) are included at the end of this section. They have been produced for both the maximum expected present day plant flow of 9 mgd and the future maximum day operating flow rate of 12 mgd. These example printouts show a CT credit of greater than 0.5 log can be achieved at a maximum plant flow of 12 mgd. 101603 4-19 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~ection 4 1:: Distribution System Storage Facilities The CT compliance computation spreadsheet can be used to determine the required volume in the finished water storage reservoir to meet disinfection requirements at any given operating condition. Assuming a Ti0 value of 0.5 and a CT value of 25 mg/1 per minute representative of worst case treatment conditions and a maximum flow of 8,400 gpm, with an applied chlorine dosage of 1 mg/1 the analysis reveals that 210,000 gallons of effective contact time is required to achieve the disinfection standards. At a T~0 value of 0.5, 420,000 gallons of the 1.5 million gallon capacity finished water storage reservoir must be dedicated to meeting disinfection requirements. The remaining 1.1 million gallons is then fully available for meeting storage requirements within Zone 1 of the distribution system. Finished Water Reservoir Design Alternative The materials of construction that could be considered for the 1.5 million gallon capacity storage reservoir include welded steel, glass lined bolted steel and prestressed concrete. These materials have been previously evaluated for the Zone 1 storage reservoir. All the advantages and disadvantages of these various tank materials apply similarly to the proposed finished water storage reservoir. One major disadvantage of either the bolted steel or the welded steel tank at this location is that it would eventually have to be removed from service and repainted. Unfortunately, without the availability of the finished water storage reservoir the disinfectant CT requirements cannot be met. Also, the additional storage provided by this reservoir would be unavailable to meet City supply requirements. Consequently, this finished water storage reservoir cannot be removed from service without jeopardizing the capability of meeting distribution system demand. The City's limited groundwater resource is not adequate if the finished water storage reservoir must be removed from service for maintenance. Because of these limitations the finished water storage reservoir should be constructed of a material that will be essentially maintenance free over its entire service life. Such a requirement points to the use of a prestressed concrete tank as the favored design alternative for the finished water storage tank to be located at the treatment plant. Recommended Reservoir Design For this project a ground level prestressed concrete reservoir similar in design and size as that to be constructed above the golf course is recommended. It will be located near the City Recreation Department baseball diamonds as shown on Figure 4-4. A prestressed concrete structure combines high strength concrete with a prestressing process using machine wrapped galvanized circumferential prestressing to develop the full strength of the structure. Manufacturers such as DYK and others are fully responsible for the design and construction of prestressed concrete reservoirs. There are several design options available with prestressed concrete tanks. The standard design utilizes a low profile flat roof supported by columns placed within the reservoir. The advantage of this option is that the concrete roof does not require painting or coating hence minimizing maintenance requirements. A slightly less expensive roof alternative involves an aluminum dome. These aluminum domes (similar to those used with the glass lined bolted steel tanks) can 10 i 603 4-23 c:\..\02101 \predesign report~section 4 Distribution S)~stem Storage Facilitie.,. be provided in bare aluminum or can be coated with a paint system. One disadvantage of the aluminum dome roofs is the height of the dome arch that adds substantially to the overall height impacting the visual appearance of the reservoir. At greater cost a low profile aluminum dome can be offered as an option. However, because of concern for long-term maintenance that impacts life-cycle cost and the aesthetics of the installation due to its proximity to the city recreation area and U.S. 101, it is recommended that the prestressed concrete tank be fumished with a flat concrete roof. Finished Water Reservoir Costs A cost proposal for the 1.5 million gallon finished water storage reservoir was obtained from DYK Incorporated. As detailed in their proposal of July 24, 2003, they estimate the cost to design and construct the reservoir complete with Hypalon internal baffle walls to be $1,090,000. The tank would match the dimensions of the golf course tank, which facilitates more efficient construction and results in savings in both engineering and construction costs. A copy of the DYK proposal is provided in the Appendix. The total projected construction cost of the finished water storage reservoir is provided in Table 4-9. Exclusive of design engineering, administrative and legal costs the estimated construction cost is $1,470,000. SUMMARY New storage reservoirs will be constructed during this treatment facility expansion phase to provide adequate distribution system storage to satisfy health and safety provisions of the State of California Water Code. These reservoirs will overcome a Department of Health Services identified deficit of 3,260,000 million gallons needed to comply with appropriate regulations. Listed below in Table 4-10 are the design parameters of the additional three new storage reservoirs. 101603 4-24 c:\..\02 i 0 ! \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-9 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1.5 MILLION GALLON PRESTRESSED CONCRETE FINISHED WATER STORAGE RESERVOIR TREATMENT. PLANT SITE Site Preparation and Final Grading~ Excavation/Foundation Preparation2 $42,000 Tank Cost Erected3 18,000 Yard Piping and Valvesn 1,090,000 Landscaping5 55,000 Subtotal Construction Costs 20 000 Construction Cost Estimating Contingency @ 20% 1,225,000 245 200 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST6 $1,470,000 1 Removal of topsoil and final access paving around tanks 2 Preparation for tank foundation 3 Proposed cost to furnish and install a prestressed concrete tank 4 Inlet, outlet, overflow and drain piping and valves around tank 5 Landscaping using trees to screen or soften tank appearance from view from US 101 6 Estimated cost of reservoir excluding design engineering fees, administrative or legal services 1016{)3 4-25 c:\,.\02 i 0 ! \predesign report~section 4 Distribution System Storage Facilities TABLE 4-10 SUMMARY OF NEW SYSTEM STORAGE FACILITIES Design Parameter Volume, gallons Dimensions Diameter, ft. Height, ft. Sidewater depth, ft. Type Base elevation, fi Max water surface elevation, fi Zone 1 Golf Course 1,500,000 120 2O 19 Prestressed concrete 820.0 839.0 Reservoir Locations Zone 2 Upper Residential 297,000 39 35 33 Glass lined bolted steel 880.0 918.0 Zone 1 Treatment Plant 1,500,000 120 20 19 Prestressed concrete 600.0 620.0 The estimated construction costs of the three new storage tanks are as follows: · Zone 1 Golf Course Reservoir $2,053,000 · Zone 2 Upper Residential 448,601 · Zone 1 Treatment Plant 1,470,000 Total Distribution Storage Reservoir Cost $3,971,601 The total cost of $3,971,601 represents the incremental cost of additional distribution system storage capacity. It is likely that construction of the storage reservoirs will be combined with a project to complete the mandated expansion of the water treatment facilities. Costs presented in another section of this report for treatment facilities would be combined with the above costs supplemented with such costs as contractor's mobilization, insurance, bonds, overhead, profit, etc. to provide a total overall project cost. 101603 4-26 c:\..\0210 ! \predesign reportXsec!ion 4 Recommended Project SECTION 5 RECOMMENDED PROJECT PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS In previous section of this report the new components and facility improvements required to bring the treatment plant into compliance with State of California Public Health Standards and provide a safe and reliable water supply to residents of Ukiah have been defined. These improvements are regarded to be the minimum to achieve the stated goals. The recommended project will consist of the following new facilities: 1. Storage Tanks Nominal Material of Location Volume Dimensions Construction Zone 1 - Golf Course 1.5 million gallons 120 fi. dia. x 20 fi. tall Prestressed concrete Zone 1 - Finished Water 1.5 million Reservoir gallons 120 fl. dia. x 20 fl. tall Prestressed concrete Zone 2 - Storage Tank 0.3 million gallons 39 ft. dia x 35 ft. tall Glass lined bolted steel or welded steel 2. Treatment Plant · One new 2,800 gpm raw water pump · Rebuild two existing raw water pumps · Two, 3 mgd capacity Trident modular treatment units · New filtered water transfer pumps · Chlorine gas containment system improvements · Building addition with laboratory · SCADA based control and instrumentation improvements · Potassium permanganate raw water feed system · New clarified backwash water return pump · Numerous plant chemical and electrical facility improvements 3. High Service Pump Station · Three 350 Hp, 2,800 gpm finished water pumps · Pre-engineered 1,950 square foot building · 1200 kw standby generator · Supporting mechanical, electrical and control features O2O304 5-1 c:'x .\02101\predesign tctx~rtXsection 5 Recommended Project PROJECTED PROJECT COSTS The expected total project cost of upgrading the treatment facilities and constructing the needed additional distribution system storage facilities is as follows: Component Estimated Cost, $ Contractor's Mobilization, Bonds, Insurance, etc. 635,000 Water Treatment Facilities 4,049,000 Storage Reservoirs Zone 1 Golf Course Site Zone 2 Upper Residential Site Zone 1 Treatment Plant Site 2,053,000 449,000 1,470,000 Contractor's Overhead and Profit ~ 15% 1,298,000 Engineering, Administrative, Environmental and Legal ~ 10% 995,000 TOTAL PROBABLE PROJECT COST $10,950,000 The above cost estimate presumes that the listed facilities improvements will be constructed under one 12-month project contract. Costs are projected to the 3rd quarter of 2004. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE Following completion of the preliminary design report and the environmental documents and acceptance of the project by the City of Ukiah detailed design work can continue and construction can be initiated. The City has decided to separate the reservoir and the treatment c facilities construction projects. Accordingly, SPH Associates will schedule the project in the following manner. At this time we foresee the following schedule as reasonable in light of the expected time required by the City to certify the environmental work and approve the project. Storage Reservoirs: Initiate Detailed Design Activities Complete Design Documents and Receive Construction Bids Award Construction Contract Complete Construction January 1, 2004 May 1, 2004 June 31, 2004 January 31,2005 020304 5-2 c:\..\02101 \pr 'txlcsign rclx~lkseclion 5 Recommended Pro/ect Treatment Facilities: Initiate Detailed Design Activities Complete Design Documents and Receive'COnstruction Bids Award Construction Contract Complete Construction April 1, 2004 August 1, 2004 September 1, 2004 September 1, 2005 o2o3o4 5-3 c:\..\0210 l\p~'cdcsign reportkscction 5 CT COMPLIANCE TABLE USEPA Z 311 312 313 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES SRF APPLICATION AND WATER SYSTEM INSPECTION REPORT LETTER Ukiah Utilities 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California ~5482 Telephone: 707-463-6295 Fax: 707-463-6204 Jt l t es A Department of the Qb/of' Ukiah September 14, 2001 Mr. Bruce H. Burton District Engineer Department of Health Services Drinking Water Field Operations Branch 50 D Street, Suite 200 Santa Rosa, California 95404 Subject: Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Pre-Application Dear Mr. Burton: Enclosed please find a completed pre-application for the City of Ukiah, relative to the State of California Safe Drinking Water Revolving Fund loan. The City of Ukiah has determined, based on the results of the attached inspection results by the Department of Health Services, that major up-grades to the water filtration system will be required. The inspection suggests that major improvements relative to source capacity and storage capacity will be needed to provide an adequate supply of water and redundancy of production capability for our current customers. Consideration of this request would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely; Darryl L. Barnes Director of Public Utilities SAFE DRINKING WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND LOAN PRE-APPLICATION For the placement of a water system on the Pdodty List See instructions on back of sheet.' Project No.: Rater:. Depar'a-nent of Health Services EOR DHS USE ONLY - Category:. Date Received: Official Water System Name: ~/7'~ Population Served: .. / ..~,.~ System ID No.: .~_~- ~ .__/_~ .. ~) . ~). ~ . County (where physically located): . State Revolving Fund loans are intended to be used to fund improvements to community water systems, both public and private, and-nonprofit noncommunity water systems. Federally owned systems or for-profit noncommunity water systems are ineligible for SDWSRF assistance. . . Check the box which best describes the ownership of your water system: ~ Community (Publicly owned) ["'1 Community (Private Ownership) l'"1 Non-community Non-profit Identify your system's problem(s). (Attach documentation if available; refer to instructions.) . o . . . Describe your project to correct the problem(s) noted above. Project involves: r"l Refinance of projects started after 7/1/93 (Public WS only) I-'1 Study to determine cause of problem Estimated amount of SRF funding requested [] Design to ~ Construction p Other ~ solve problem ,'~'~,. Z.¢// ¢-z¢ Total other funding required:' $..-~-~/,-r~., ~ Will this project involve a consolidation with another water system? ["'] Yes r-] Physical consolidation [] Ma~,agerial/Financial L~ No Desired fiscal year (FY) of project initiation [~ 0',"'32 l"-] 02/03 I""] 03/04 r-I 04~05 Please type or print legibly. individual named below. Signature of Repr~'' esentative Mailing Address: (street) Phone Number: (area code) All correspondence regarding this pre-application will be sent to the You will receive a wri~en acknowledgement of the receipt of the Printed Name of RePresentative Name of'Company or Water System (city) (state FAX Number: (area code'! Date I (zip code) SEND TO' OR FAX TO' i 3:;~,T~ 0z CA'~FOU~NIA---HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH'SERVICES DRIHKkqG WATER FIELD OPERATIONS BRANCH 50 D STREET, SUITE 200 SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 954134 (707) 576-2145 FAX (707) 576-2722 July 11,2001 GRAY DAVIS, Governor Mr. George Borecky Water/Sewer Operations Superintendent City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 . RE: 2001 Water System Inspection Dear Mr. Borecky: On May 22, 2001, this Department conducted an' inspection of the City of Ukiah domestic water system (water system). System facilities appear to be well operated and maintained. Listed below are items that should be addressed to ensure compliance with'the Califomia Health and Safety Code (CHSC) and the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Wells 2, 3, and 6 -- Wells 2, 3, and 6 may be influenced by surface water dudng the winter months. If th.e City would like to use the wells during the winter months, a monitoring routine must be implemented to prove that the sources are not being surface water influenced. The water system muSt determine a monitoring routin.e and submit the plan to the Department for approval prior to implementatiOn. if the City determines that the wells are only ~ecessary during the summer mo,qths, it may complete the monitoring program given below on each well prior to the well being placed into service instead of conducting a yeadong study to determine if it is under the direct influence of surface water. a) Flush and disinfect each well; b) Operate each well to waste until a bacterioloqical sample collected from the raw water indicates the number of tectal coliform is less than 23; c) Collect a sample for microscopic particulate analysis (MPA); d) Submit the results of the MPA and bacteriological sample(s) to the Department; e) Receive approval from the Department to put the well on-line. Please notify the Department of the City's intent with respect to these wells by September 1, 2001. The Department will then amend the City's water supply permit to reflect the course of action it has chosen. City of U~h July 1], 2ool Page 2 of 4 .Raw Water Bacteriolo.qicai MonitorinR In order to determine the bacteriological water quality of the water system's surface water source, Please.begin collecting a minimum of one raw water bacteriological sample per month. The samples must be analyzed by a laboratory that has been certified by the Department to perform coliform analyses pursuant to CHSC Section 116390. Each of these samples must be analyzed by an approved method that enumerates bacteria density up to 2,400 organisms per 100 milliliters of sample. Results for each month shall be submitted to the Department before the 10t~ day of the following month. Lead and Copper Monitorinn ! Section 64685(d) of the CCR states that after 3 years of sampling with no exceedance of the lead or copper action level, the frequency of sampling can be reduced to once every 3 years. In July 1998, the City of Ukiah collected 30 'tap samples in compliance with the regulations. The next lead and copper sampling pedod must be completed in June, July, August, or September 2001. After each sampling period, you are required to submit the following' items: 1. Completed Form 141-AR (included in the enclosed Lead and CoPper Sampling Guidance).. 2. Completed "Lead and Copper'Results Worksheet" (also included in the Lead and Copper Sampling Guidance). 3. Laboratory copies of all sampling results. Clearwell Desig_Q The water system's clearwell currently does not have an adequate method of draining the tank to waste if contamination occurs. It was determined dudng the inspection that !he only method of emptying the clearwell without allowing water to enter the distribution system is to continue the backwash process until the water is drained from the clearwell. The City must add a system to empty the clearwell to waste without going through the treatment plant backwash system so that if contamination of the clearwetl water occurs, it can be directly emptied to waste. Please submit a plan and time schedule for making the necessary drainage system changes to the clearwell. The plan and time schedule must be submitted to the Department no later than December 14, 2001. Source Chemical Monitorin~q According to Department records, the water system is almost up-to-date on all of the chemical monitoring for it's sources. Please review the enclosed chemical monitoring schedules that reflect current sampling results on file with the Department. If any monitoring data has been collected recently and is not shown cio, of Uh'aa July 11, 2001 Page 3 of 4 on the attached monitoring schedule, please submit the data to this office so that we can update our records. SourCe Capacit~ Due to changes in the Russian River. water course, many of the Ranney Collector's laterals are no longer located directly under the river bed. This change, as well as possible damage and plugging of the lateralS, has caused the Collector's production to decrease'significantly. The Ranney Collector currently has an estimated capacity of 4 MGD rather than the design capacity of 13 MGD. The problems with the Ranney Collector in addition to decreased capacity of the wells gives the City a current estimated maximum source capacity of 7.42 MGD. The average peak day demand (from 1994 through 2000) is 7.18 MGD. The peak day demand to source capacity ratio is 0.97. Therefore, the City's peak demands are essentially equal to th'e water system's physical source capacity. Section 64564 of the California Code of Regulations requires that a public water system's needed source capacity shall not be I~ss than the maximum day demand. it is our understanding that the City is pursuing steps to increase its physical source capacity including an evaluation of the existing Ranney Collector system and consideration of a direct Russian Riverintake. To'stay informed of the progress the City is making in this area we must request that the City begin submitting quarterly reports to the Department documenting steps it is taking to add additional source capacity. The first quarterly report must be received no later than October'lS, 2001 to report on the third 2001 quarter (July, August, September 2001 ). Stora_~e Capacity The Department has completed a storage capacity assessment for the water system. Two of the system's zones lack the necessary storage capacity. These zones are: . Zone I currently has 2,635,000 gallons of available storage. The storage necessary is 5,600,000 gallons. Therefore, Zone 1 is deficient in water storage by approximately 3,000,000 gallons. 2. Zone 2 currentlY has 100,000 gallons of available storage while the necessary storage is 360,000 gallons. Therefore, Zone 2 is deficient in storage by 260,000 gallons. The City must submit a plan and time schedule for bringing the storage capacity in Zones 1 and 2 into compliance.- The plan and time schedule must be submitted by December 31, 2001.' duly 11, 2001 Page 4 of 4 The Department would like to extend our appreciation to Mr. Alan Jamison who was very helpful to Department staff in the completion of this inspectiom If you have any questions, please contact Wendy Gjestland at (707) 5 ~ . 76-2~.~11 Sincerely, District Engineer Mendocino Distdct 'Enclosures: (1) Lead and Copper Sampling Guidance. (2)Source Chemical Monitoring Schedules Cc: Mr. Alan Jamison Water Treatment Plant Supervisor City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Mr. John Rogers Mendocino County Division of Environmental Health 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1326 Ukiah, CA 95482 2310003 / Inspection file 01071 I-Inspection lb- / wc, g A{~I=NDA RUMMARY ITEM NO. DATE: 8b February 18. 2004 RI~p~3RT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF THE INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND APPROVAL OF SPH ASSOCIATES' DESIGN RECOMMENDATION FOR THE WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH FINAL DESIGN SUMMARY: SPH Associates has submitted the "Predesign Report" for the City of Ukiah's water system improvements and the "Environmental Review/Initial Study, which is the environmental impact evaluation of the proposed upgrades to the City's water treatment plant facilities and the additional water storage capacity. Staff is requesting adoption of Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project (WSIP) and approval of SPH Associates' design proposal for the water system improvement project and authorization to proceed with final design. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Adoption of Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project 2) Approval of SPH Associates' design recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of SPH Associates' recommended design for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager and Rick Kennedy, Intedm Public Utilities Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. "Environmental Review/Initial Study, City of Ukiah WSIP" (12/15/03) 2. "Predesign Report - Water System Improvements, City of Ukiah" (2/6/04) APPROVED: ~---~~~ Candace Horsley, City~anager Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project and Approval of SPH Associates' Design Recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design. February 18, 2004 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The consulting team for the project prepared an Initial Environmental Study to determine if it could potentially have adverse impacts on the environment. This comprehensive document concluded that while the project could have significant adverse impacts on the environment, those impacts could be successfully mitigated with a comprehensive mitigation program. As part of this Initial Study, several detailed environmental reports were prepared. A biological assessment of the project was completed because of the potential wildlife habitat value of the golf course site and the potential impacts of the water tanks, grading and filling activity. Recommended mitigation measures related to biological resources are contained within Initial Study Section IV. A cultural resources evaluation of the proposed plant expansion and water storage tanks was also completed. While no cultural resources were discovered, recommended mitigation measures related to the protection of any potential resources are contained within Initial Study Section V. A preliminary geotechnical investigation for the water system improvements was also completed. It was concluded that the most significant geologic hazards at the project site are strong seismic ground shaking, slope stability and erosion. Based on their research, geologic reconnaissance and initial investigation, the consultants concluded that the project is feasible and the sites are suitable for the planned improvements. Section VI. of this Initial Study, Geology and Soils, includes mitigation measures to reduce potential geotechnical impacts from the treatment plant expansion and water tank construction to less than significant levels. Additional potentially significant impacts were identified in the areas of aesthetics, air quality and noise. In all these areas, the Initial Study found that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project design to mitigate potential impacts to a less than significant level. The environmental review did not find any mitigation measures necessary in the following categories: agricultural resources, land use and planning, hydrology/water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, and utilities and service systems. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration was publicly noticed and distributed for public review and comment to local, State, and Federal agencies. After the required 45-day review period, the only comment received was from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, who indicated that a permit from their agency might be required. This comment is acknowledged for the record, and no formal response is required. Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project and Approval of SPH Associates' Design Recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design. February 18, 2004 Page 3 It is concluded that the City has prepared a comprehensive and legally adequate environmental document for the project pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff recommends adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. PROJECT NEED The City hired SPH Associates to provide engineering services for the City's Water System Improvement Project. SPH Associates has submitted the "Predesign Report" for the water system improvements for review by the City Council. As the City Council is aware through previous discussions, the City of Ukiah's (City) Water System is in need of improvement. Ukiah's water treatment and distribution system storage facilities must be expanded to provide additional supply to reliably meet the current and anticipated future water demands of the community. These improvements have been mandated by the California Department of Health Services (DHS) as a condition of maintaining and renewing the operating permit for the facilities. The DHS has established that the capacity of the water treatment facilities is insufficient to satisfy peak demands normally encountered in July and August. Further, based upon guidelines established by DHS, the distribution system storage is deficient by 3,260,000 gallons. The additional storage capacity is needed in both pressure zones. According to DHS, reciting Section 64564 of the California Code of Regulations, a public water system's needed source capacity shall not be less than the peak day demand. At least 20 percent reserve capacity for responding to emergency water use situations, a major fire for an example, should be considered in sizing water treatment facilities. Using the above parameters, representative of sound engineering practice for water source development, would result in 9 mgd as the firm source capacity to insure an adequate supply of water for the City of Ukiah. Meeting these requirements from the existing Ranney Collector is not possible considering that the capacity is limited to about 3,350 gpm. The backup wells can only provide about 1,200 gpm. The total reliable source capacity is therefore limited to about 4,550 gpm or 6.55 mgd. The deficit of 2.5 mgd (9 mgd - 6.5 mgd) must be provided by a new water source. The City is undertaking a separate investigation of the various alternatives (second Ranney collector or additional wells) to increase the source capacity. To enable the existing water treatment facilities to process this additional supply, the addition of a third 3 mgd capacity factory-built Trident treatment module to expand the capacity to 9 mgd would be needed. Further, to enhance capacity and improve reliability, it is desirable to provide a fourth unit to permit uninterrupted production if one unit breaks down or must be removed from service for routine maintenance. An additional advantage of upgrading the water Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project and Approval of SPH Associates' Design Recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design. February 18, 2004 Page 4 treatment capacity to 8,400 gpm (12 mgd) is that it will allow the plant to operate for fewer hours each day to meet system demand thereby reducing operational labor requirements. Also, it can be operated at reduced capacity, which improves performance reliability and reduces the potential for improperly treating the water during difficult treatment conditions. RECOMMENDED PROJECT The new components and facility improvements required to bring the treatment plant into compliance with State of California Public Health Standards and provide a safe and reliable water supply to residents of Ukiah have been defined in detail in the Predesign Report submitted by SPH Associates. These improvements are regarded to be the minimum to achieve the stated goals. The recommended project will consist of the following new facilities: 1. Storage Tanks Nominal Material of I nnntinrl VnlHrne lr3im~.n.~inr~ ~nn~tructinn Zone 1 - Golf Course 1.5 million 120 ft. dia. x 20 ft. tall Prestressed concrete gallons Zone 1 -Finished Water 1.5 million 120 ft. dia. x 20 ft. tall Prestressed concrete Reservoir gallons Zone 2- Storage Tank 0.3 million 39 ft. dia x 35 ft. tall gallons Glass lined bolted steel or welded steel 2. Treatment Plant · One new 2,800 gpm raw water pump · Rebuild two existing raw water pumps · Two, 3 mgd capacity Trident modular treatment units · New filtered water transfer pumps · Chlorine gas containment system improvements · Building addition with laboratory · SCADA based control and instrumentation improvements · Potassium permanganate raw water feed system · New clarified backwash water return pump · Numerous plant chemical and electrical facility improvements Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project and Approval of SPH Associates' Design Recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design. February 18, 2004 Page 5 3. High Service Pump Station · Three 350 Hp, 2,800 gpm finished water pumps · Pre-engineered 1,950 square foot building · 1200 kw standby generator · Supporting mechanical, electrical and control features PROJECTED PROJECT COSTS The expected total project cost of upgrading the treatment facilities and constructing the needed additional distribution system storage facilities is as follows: Com,n_ onp. nt F~tim~t~.d Cn.~t, $ Contractor's Mobilization, Bonds, Insurance, etc. 635,000 Water Treatment Facilities 4,049,000 Storage Reservoirs Zone 1 Golf Course Site Zone 2 Upper Residential Site Zone 1 Treatment Plant Site 2,053,000 449,000 1,47O,OO0 Contractor's Overhead and Profit @ 15% 1,298,000 Engineering, Administrative, Environmental and Legal @ 10% TOTAL PROBABLE PROJECT COST $10,950,000 The above cost estimate presumes that the listed facilities improvements will be constructed under one 12-month project contract. Costs are projected to the 3rd quarter of 2004. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE Following completion of the preliminary design report and the environmental documents and acceptance of the project by the City of Ukiah detailed design work can continue and construction can be initiated. The City has decided to separate the reservoir and the treatment facilities construction projects. Accordingly, SPH Associates will schedule the project in the Adoption of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Water System Improvement Project and Approval of SPH Associates' Design Recommendation for the Water System Improvement Project and authorization to proceed with final design. February 18, 2004 Page 6 following manner; however, every effort will be made to begin construction of the storage reservoirs before the end of June 2004. Storage Reservoirs: Initiate Detailed Design Activities Complete Design Documents and Receive Construction Bids Award Construction Contract Complete Construction Treatment Facilities: Initiate Detailed Design Activities Complete Design Documents and Receive Construction Bids Award Construction Contract Complete Construction January 1, 2004 May 1,2004 June 31, 2004 January 31, 2005 April 1, 2004 August 1, 2004 September 1, 2004 September 1, 2005 STAFF RECOMMENDATION The objective through this preliminary planning phase is to review and evaluate production, performance and operating records, consider input of ideas of City staff for facility improvements, factor in requirements imposed by new regulations, and investigate the best and most appropriate technology for implementation into an expanded and upgraded facility. Staff has completed an engineering review of SPH Associates' design recommendations and has determined that their proposed water' system improvements meet the needs of the community and is cost effective. Therefore, staff is requesting approval from the City Council of SPH Associate's recommended project and authorization to proceed with final design. Funding for the final design work has been budgeted. CITY OF UKIAH WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW/ INITIAL STUDY December 15, 2003 Gary Broad Land-Use/Environmental Planner Table of Contents Section 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Executive Summary Introduction--Purpose of the Initial Study Environmental Checklist/Evaluation Environmental Checklist Environmental Factors Potentially Affected Project Sponsors Incorporation of Mitigation Measures Evaluation of Environmental Impacts Ie II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XlI. XlII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVIL XVIII. XIX. XX. Aesthetics Agriculture Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and. Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Project Alternatives Mandatory Findings of Significance Summary of Project Mitigation Measures Resource Used to Prepare Initial Study Appendix A. Mitigation Monitoring Checklist Page 1. 1. 2. 3. 9. 9. 10. 11. 13. 15. 17. 23. 24. 29. 31. 34. 35. 36. 39. 40. 41. 41. 43. 45. 47. 48. 51. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document considers the environmental impacts of the proposed City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project. The project involves upgrades to the existing water treatment plant, including a treatment building expansion, a 1.5 million gallon (mg) water storage tank and pump station at the adjacent softball fields, and a 1.5 million gallon water tank and a.3 million gallon water tank at the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course in the foothills of western Ukiah. As part of this Initial Study, several detailed environmental reports were prepared. Environmental Collaborative completed a biological assessment of the project because of the potential wildlife habitat value of the golf course site and the potential impacts of the water tanks, grading and filling activity. Recommended mitigation measures related to biological resources are contained within Initial Study Section IV. Archaeological Resource Service completed a cultural resources evaluation of the proposed plant expansion and water storage tanks. While no cultural resources were discovered, recommended mitigation measures related to the protection of any potential resources are contained within Imtial Study Section V. Miller Pacific Engineering Group completed a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the water system improvements. They concluded that the most significant geologic hazards at the project site are strong seismic ground shaking, slope stability and erosion. Based on their research, geologic reconnaissance and initial investigation, Miller Pacific concluded that the project is feasible and the sites are suitable for the planned improvements. Section VI. of this Initial Study, Geology and Soils, includes mitigation measures to reduce potential geotechnical impacts from the treatment plant expansion and water tank construction to less than significant levels. Additional potentially significant impacts were identified in the areas of aesthetics, air quality and noise. In all these areas, the Initial Study found that mitigation measures could be incorporated into the project design to mitigation potential impacts to a less than significant level. The environmental review did not £md any mitigation measures necessary in the following categories: agricultural resources, land use and planning, hydrology/water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, utilities and service systems and mandatory findings of significance. 2. INTRODUCTION--PURPOSE OF THE INTIAL STUDY This Initial Study presents an environmental impact evaluation of the City of Ukiah's proposal to upgrade its water treatment plant facilities and to add additional storage capacity. The city is likely to finance the construction of improvements to its water treatment facilities through some type of public bond offering. The city will use its own funds for the proposed water tank improvements. The project involves the following: 1.) a water treatment building expansion to the existing water treatment plant; 2.) a 1.5 million gallon water storage tank, a pump station, a 1,000-gallon fuel tank and 24" finished water pipeline construction at the softball fields adjacent to the water treatment plant; and 3.) a 1.5 million gallon water tank and a .3 million gallon water tank construction adjacent to existing water tanks at the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course in the foothills of western Ukiah. This Initial Study provides the community with relevant information regarding the potential environmental effects of the proposed project and provides City of Ukiah and Department of Health Services decision-makers with information to use as the basis for determining whether to prepare a Negative Declaration (ND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA.) A Negative Declaration would be prepared if it could be conclusively demonstrated that the proposed project would not result in one or more significant effects on the environment. A Negative Declaration would also X:~.~,RY BROAD~ONC, O~G WORK- GARY~JKIAH INrI'[AL STUDY--FINAL DRAFt 12.11.~.DOC (12/1~3) be prepared if the Initial Study identified one or more potentially significant environmental effects, but modifications (mitigation measures) to the proposed project made by or agreed to by the applicant would reduce the effects to a less than significant level (referred to as a Mitigated Negative Declaration.) Altemately, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be prepared if, based upon the Initial Study, it could be determined that the amount or extent of information available during preparation of the Initial Study was insufficient to reach a determination with regard to potential environmental effects. An EIR would also be prepared if a potential impact identified in the Initial Study could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance or if two qualified and competent experts in the same field arrived at different conclusions about a potential environmental effect. The City of Ukiah originally intended to seek a grant from the Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SDWSRF) Program financial assistance administered by the Department of Health Services (DHS), Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management (Division) for construction of water treatment facilities improvements. The SDWSRF Program is partially funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and any projects so funded must be compliant with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA.) To comply with NEPA, the EPA established specific "NEPA-Iike" requirements in the Operating Agreement with DHS for administering the SDWSRF Program. Although the city no longer intends to seek this grant, this Initial Study was prepared to satisfy both CEQA requirements and "NEPA-like" requirements. This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21178.1)(CEQA) and the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (including the 1999 Update)(Chapter 3, Title 14, California Code of Regulations)(CEQA Guidelines.) This Initial Study considers all aspects of the proposed project as required by Section 15063(a)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST/EVALUATION The Environmental Checklist as contained in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines was used to focus this study on the physical, social and economic factors that may be impacted or further impacted by implementation of the proposed City of Ukiah Water Treatment Plant Improvement Project. The CEQA Checklist poses a series of questions across a wide range of environmental considerations that serve as the basis for research and analysis, leading to one of four conclusions: · The project, as proposed, will result in a "Potentially Significant Impact;" · The project, as proposed, will result in a "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporation;" · The project, as proposed, will result in a "Less Than Significant Impact;" or · The project, as proposed, will result in "No Impact." Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a significant effect on the environment as: "... a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social changes related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant." Following each of the topical areas addressed in the Environmental Checklist, a discussion is presented regarding the topical environmental setting, the relevance of the proposed project to the setting and any and all potential X:K~ARY BROADV3NGOING WORK- GARY~UIUAH 1NrI'IAL ST~DY--Y1NAL DRAFT 12. I 1.03.DOC ( 12/I 6/~J) impacts within the topical area. All mitigation measures necessary to reduce any identified potential significant impacts to a less than significant level are provided as appropriate. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST a. d. e. f. g. h. i. Project Title: City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Ukiah Contact Person and Phone Number: Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400, (707) 463-6286 Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 001-020-78, 001-030-01, 001-090-01 (Golf Course); 179-010-09 (Water Treatment Plant); and 179-010-09 (Softball Fields) Project Location: Water Treatment Plant, 935 City Well Road, Ukiah; Adjacent softball fields, east side Highway 101on City Well Rd.; and Ukiah Municipal Golf Course, 599 Park Blvd. Project Sponsor: City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 General Plan Designation: Public (P) Zoning: Public Facilities (PF) Description of Project: (Describe the whole action, including but not limited to later project phases, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for implementation.) On May 22,2001, the Department of Health Services conducted an investigation of the City of Ukiah's domestic water system In its July 11,2001 letter to the City of Ukiah, the Department listed items that must be addressed to ensure compliance with the California Health and Safety Code (CHSC) and the California Code of Regulations (CCR.) Based on its storage capacity assessment for the water system, the Department determined the following: Zone 1 currently has 2,635,000 gallons of available storage. The storage necessary is 5,600,000 gallons. Therefore, Zone 1 is deficient in water storage by approximately 3,000,000 gallons. Zone 1 consists of the portions of the city not in Zone 2 or the west end of Medocino Place or San Jacinto Drive plus 7 connections outside the city limits south of Jefferson Lane and on South State Street. Zone 2 currently has 100,000 gallons of available storage while the necessary storage is 360,000 gallons. Therefore Zone 2 is deficient in storage by 260,000 gallons. Zone 2 consists of the west end section of Maple Avenue west of Fairway Avenue, Fairway Avenue, the West end of Standley Street west of Anton Stadium, Standley Avenue, Giomo Avenue and the west end of Park Boulevard west of Todd Grove Park. Included in the department's list was a requirement that Ukiah submit a plan and time schedule for upgrading the water system's storage capacity. The department's conclusions proved to be prescient. In July 2002, Ukiah officials declared a water emergency in the middle of a heat wave, with record setting temperatures creating a sudden excessive water use in the city over an eight hour period. Imgation was suspended at all city facilities and other large irrigation users were asked to refrain from watering. Residents were asked to quit watering lawns, doing laundry and washing their cars until the tanks were back at a normal level. Additional water was obtained from the Millview Water District through a mutual agreement. City pumps were unable to keep up with the daily demand and could not replenish the city's 1.5 million gallon water tank overnight as usual. The tank, located in the foothills above the municipal golf course, provides back-up water supply when city demand exceeds the daily pumping capability at the city wells. 3 X:'~GA{tY BROAI3ONOO~6 WO{H(~- GAItY~,XIAH 1NIT{AL {TUDY--{~qAL Il, gAIT 12-11.~J.DOC (12116Y03) This was not the city's first brush with a water emergency. A similar one-day incident occurred in Ukiah more than 10 years ago. The public responded quickly and storage levels returned to normal the next day. The city is now close to having water supply emergencies on a regular basis, however, as it lacks adequate water storage. Inadequate water storage is forcing irrigation at the golf course and parks to be shut offfor two or three days at a time an increasing number of times each year. The average daily water usage is so close to the system's and reservoir's capacity that a temperature spike from 85 to 110 degrees can produce an emergency. While the city's average annual water demand is 3.2 million gallons per day (mgd), during the summer months the daily demand exceeds to 6 mgd. The city presently takes in 6.1 million gallons per day --any demand above this level must be served from city storage tanks holding 2.4 mg in reserve. On the day of the water shortage, the demand was so high and within such a short period that the tanks were being depleted faster than water could be pumped back into them. The project involves improvements to the existing treatment plant and its water storage capacity. Specific improvements are as follows: Proposed Improvements at the Existing Treatment Plant/Adjacent Softball Fields · Addition of a 1.5 million gallon water storage tank at the existing softball fields between the Highway 101 and water treatment plant. The tank will be north of the existing well building and south of the access road to the water treatment plant. It will be 120 feet in diameter and 20 feet high. · A pump station with three high service pumps, a generator and a 1,000 gallon, double-containment, above- ground diesel tank to service the emergency generator will be located to the east of the tank. · A 24-inch finished water pipeline and a 30-inch storage tank overflow/drain will nm eastward approximately 800 feet to the treatment plant. · A 40-foot wide by 100-foot long, 20-foot high treatment building expansion will be added to the east side of the existing treatment building. The expansion will be constructed on an existing raised, concrete pad. The addition will be a metal building to match the existing treatment building. It will house two additional filter modules, increasing total treatment process capacity from 6 mgd to 12 mgd and an operations laboratory. Proposed Improvements at the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course · Addition of a .3 million gallon water storage tank immediately west of the existing 25-foot diameter X 30- foot tall concrete tank. The proposed tank will be 39 feet in diameter and 35 feet high and constructed of bolted steel. 850 cubic yards of excavation will be required. · Addition of a 1.5 mg, 120-foot diameter, 20-foot high, concrete water storage tank to the northwest of the existing 150-foot diameter tank. · Excavation of approximately 38,850 cubic yards of material for tank construction. 28,000 cubic yards of spoils fill will be retained on-site in a 280 foot long by 160 foot high mound reaching a maximum height of approximately 20 feet above existing grade. The remaining approximately 10,850 cubic yards will be also be retained on-site and backfilled on the upside of the 1.5 mg concrete tank after tank completion. No export of materials from the site is proposed. (See attached Attachment 1 Location Plan, Attachment 2 Storage Tank Site Plan Water System Improvements and Attachment 3 Treatment Facilities Site Improvements.) Project construction will be completed in two phases. Storage tank construction is anticipated to begin in May 2004 and be completed in October 2004. The water treatment plant upgrades are slated to begin in August 2004 and to be completed in June 2005. In all, 3.3 mg of additional storage will be built for a total storage capacity of 5.9 mg. While the ovemding reason for this project is to ensure that City of Ukiah water users are provided with a reliable water supply even during 4 X:'~GARY BRO,~D~ONC, OING WORK- C, ARY~ ~ STUD Y--FINAL DRAFT 12.1 I.II3.1)O(~ ( I 2Y 16/03 ) C---I 0 0 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2 / ! / A x~ ATTACHMENT 3 the peak summer demand periods and to comply with DHS mandates for water storage capacity levels, the proposed water system improvements will provide additional secondary benefits. The existing water storage shortfall requires the overuse of system pumps to refill storage tanks during peak periods; the city could avoid overusing its pumps if its storage capacity were enlarged. The improvements will also allow the city to take filtration units off-line for maintenance and emergency repair. It will allow staff to clean out large holding tanks and filtration systems and perform general maintenance on plumbing without disrupting the service to its customers. The water system improvement project has the twin goals of improving reliability and redundancy in order to enhance the operation of the treatment plant and better serve the city's residents and water users. The existing facilities cannot meet present demand or water treatment requirements with an assured level of reliability and dependability. The upgraded water system will not affect the plant's design capacity, nor result in any increase in the number of users provided with water service by the City of Ukiah. The water treatment plant was built in 1992, with a TRIDENT adsorption contact clarifier/mixed media filtration system. It has two filter modules capable of processing three mgd each. The plant design enables two additional modules to be installed to achieve a treatment process capacity of 12.0 mgd to match the potential Ranney output. While the City of Ukiah is permitted for 13 mgd of water, operational deficiencies are keeping the daily yield below the city's goals of 9 mgd from the Ranney collector. The existing treatment plant has two backwash clarification ponds, each with a 216,000 capacity, sized for the treatment plant's design capacity of 12 mgd. The plant's clearwell has a capacity of 135,000 gallons and is incapable of meeting the contact time requirements at the maximum designed plant flow of 12 mgd. Additional finished water storage will be provided by the 1.5 mg storage tank at the plant. The city serves a population of 15,500 people and a total of 7,050 connections. Since 1980, water use has increased an average of 1.2% a year. Because Ukiah is largely built-out, future water use is anticipated to continue to increase at the historically low rate. The average peak day demand (from 1994 through 2000) was 7.18 mgd. The city has pursued steps to restore its physical source capacity, including rehabilitation of the existing Ranney collector and the construction of additional laterals. As a result of the rehabilitation, water production from the Ranney collector increased 720,000 gallons/day by August 2003. Unfortunately, well number 5 was in the cone of influence of the Ranney collector and has subsequently stopped producing and well number 2/6 has also gone dry. J. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting This project will be located in two distinct areas: the water treatment plant and adjacent softball fields and the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. The water treatment plant and the adjacent softball fields are located east of Highway 101 approximately one-half mile north of the East Perkins Street freeway exit. Access to both sites is provided from northbound Highway 101 only via a freeway exit for City Well Road. The softball fields are sited mediately east of the freeway and City Well Road while the treatment plant is located adjacent to the softball fields and to the east. The densely wooded Orr Creek riparian corridor borders the southern edge of the sites. Agricultural fields and related structures and uses bound the properties to the north and south. These surrounding parcels to the north, south and east are located outside of the Ukiah city limits. The softball field site is improved with two softball diamonds, unpaved parking area and an existing well building. The treatment plant site includes the existing treatment building, two washwater reclamation basins and solids dewatering basins. An access road serving both parcels runs along the north side of each property. The sites are flat. The softball field site is located on the valley floor, and has been extensively disturbed by past agricultural )~:~-~JtY BROAI)V~GOll~G WORK- GA~.~ ~ STIJ'DY--I~I~AL DII. AFT 12. i 1.0~ .DOC (! 2716/03) cultivation and more recent development of ballfield improvements. Most of the proposed water tank footprint falls in an unpaved parking area for the softball field visitors and a soil stockpile. Vegetative cover is dominated by non-native ruderal grasses and forbs, such as wild oats (Avena sp.), English plantain (Plantago lanceolata), filaree (Erodiurn sp.), clover (Trifoliurn sp.) and wild radish (Raphanus sativus). A small stand of non-native Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor) grows on the north edge of the soil stockpile south of the paved access road to the wastewater treatment plant. Several mature black walnut trees (Juglans californica var. hindsii) grow along the paved access road. The sparse cover, lack of any surface water, and frequency of human activity limits the wildlife habitat value of the softball field site. Wildlife associated with the area is common to non-native grasslands and suburban habitat, consisting of several species of birds, California vole, and Botta's pocket gopher. Bird species observed or suspected to use the surrounding grasslands and agricultural fields include scrub jay, mourning dove, brown towhee, goldfinches, flycatchers, and several species of sparrow. Several raptors (birds of prey) may occasionally forage through the area, such as American kestrel, red-tailed hawk, and turkey vulture, but the low prey base limits the likelihood that the site provides an important source of prey for these species. No evidence of any bird nesting or large mammal denning activity was observed on the ball field site. The Ukiah Municipal Golf is located in northwest Ukiah. The course is located within a transition area, in which residential development on roughly quarter acre lots to the east, south and north of the course and within the city limits gives way to large undeveloped, steeply-sloped, wooded land in the western hills above the golf course. The parcel includes the golf course, a club house and the wooded hillside west of the golf course which includes an existing 25-foot diameter, welded steel water storage tank with a 100,000 gallon capacity and a 150-foot diameter, concrete storage tank with a 2.3 mg capacity. The golf course tank sites are located on wooded hillsides dominated by mixed oak woodland and grassland. Dominant tree species include: interior live oak (Quercus wislizenii), black oak (Q. kelloggii), and madrone (Arbutus rnenziesii). Other tree species found in the woodland include: California bay (Urnbellularia californica), coast live oak (Q. agrifolia), and a few valley oak (Q. lobata). Large manzanita (Manzanita sp.) and toyon (Heterorneles arbutifolia) shrubs are scattered through the understory of the woodland, together with a cover of native and non-native grasses and forbs. Herbaceous species in the understo~ of the woodland include: rattlesnake grass (Briza minor), purple needle grass (Nassella sp.), mule's ears (Wyethia sp.), California poppy (Eschscholzia californica), and iris (Iris sp.). Several stands of the highly invasive non-native French broom (Genista rnonspessulana) are spreading through the woodland and fi-inge of access roads through the hillside near the site. The woodlands at the golf course sites provide for greater wildlife habitat values than the softball field site. They are bordered by undeveloped lands to the west, provide protective cover and nesting oppommities for birds and small mammals, and the acorns and other seed crops provide an important source of food in the later summer and fall. Species associated with the woodlands include mule deer, grey squirrel, deer mouse, wild turkey, jays, woodpeckers, warblers, alligator lizard, ensatina, newts, gopher snake, and western rattle snake. The trees could provide nesting habitat for several species of raptors, but no evidence of any bird nesting or large mammal denning activity was observed during the field reconnaissance. k. Other agencies whose approval is or may be required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): Department of Health Services Division of Drinking Water and Environmental Management i. Incorporation by Reference: Under direction of the project sponsors, several technical studies and supplemental evaluations were prepared in support of the proposed project and are incorporated into the Initial Study by reference: 1(.: ~q.Y BRO,A][~O~OOfIqO WORK- GAR~ ~ ~I'i/DY--4111qAL DRAFT 12. I 1.01 J~}OC (12/I 6/03 ) A Cultural Resources Evaluation of the City of Ukiah Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Project, Ukiah, Mendocino County, California submitted by Katherine Flynn, Archaeological Resource Service, December 2003. Preliminary Report Geotechnical Investigation, City of Ukiah Water System Improvements, Ukiah, California, November 1, 2002 prepared by Miller Pacific Engineering Group City of Ukiah Water System Improvements Biological Resource Assessment, Jim Martin, ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATIVE, December 2002, Updated in August 2003. m. Summary of Findings: Potentially significant impacts were identified in the following areas: aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology/soils and noise. Aesthetics. Potential impacts will result from the construction of a 120-foot diameter water tank and a 39- foot diameter water tank at the Municipal Golf Course, from 38,850 cubic yards of grading for tank construction, from a 10,850 cubic yard and a 28,000 cubic yard fill slope to dispose of the excess spoils on-site, and from tree and vegetation removal for these activities. Additional potential impacts will result at the water treatment plant/softball field site from the addition of a 1.5 million gallon water tank. Mitigation measures must be implemented to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level, including the retention of existing vegetation outside of the project area, the addition of native trees for visual screening, the replanting of native vegetation along cut and fill slopes, the use of earth-tones if the tank at the softball field is made of metal and the provision of landscaping between Highway 101 and the proposed tank. Air Quality. Potential impacts are a result of standard incremental emissions increases from construction activity within an area that fails to meet the State 24-hour PM- 10 standard. Standard mitigation measures to reduce construction-related emissions, such as watering exposed soil to control dust and stabilizing inactive construction areas can reduce potential air quality impacts to less than significant levels. Biological Resources. In order to avoid any potential impact to raptors and their nests from construction activity, a pre-construction nesting survey must be conducted in grading and construction is initiated during the months of April through August. The ephemeral drainageways in the vicinity of the golf course tanks sites must be avoided or approval must be obtained from the Army Corps, California Department ofFish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board. In order to mitigate potential impacts from site grading and the removal of 187 trees greater than 4 inches in diameter, a tree protection plan which includes the protection of trees to be retained, re-establishment of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and a program for replanting trees with tnmk diameters greater than 12 inches shall be prepared. Cultural resources. An archaeological surface survey of the water treatment site and the proposed tank sites did not encounter any surface evidence of archaeological resources. As the sites are moderately sensitive, there is a potential cultural resources to be discovered during actual project construction. Mitigation measures have been included requiring work to be temporarily halted in the event archaeological material is uncovered and for archaeological monitoring to occur if discovered material could be disturbed by project construction. Geology/Soils. The most significant geologic hazards at the project site are strong seismic ground shaking, slope stability and erosion. Standard mitigation measures include adhering to the seismic design factors from the geotechnical investigation, stabilization or repair of any slides that intercept the new tank sites or 7 X:~oARY BROAD,ONGOING WORK- GARY~'liJ~I ~ :STUDY--FINAL DRA/~r 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) cut slopes behind them, preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and on-going geotechnical engineer review of plans and grading, compaction and foundation excavation. Noise. The construction of a 1.5 mg concrete water tank at the golf course site could lead to a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels from concrete trucks traveling from the concrete plant to the golf course to begin concrete pours at 6:00 a.m.. While such a temporary impact can be viewed as less than significant, as a further mitigation measure it is recommended that the Director of Public Works require a construction management plan for the concrete pour, a construction traffic management plan, and distribute early morning construction traffic onto different streets and neighborhoods to the maximum degree feasible. The environmental review did not find any mitigation measures necessary in the following categories: agricultural resources, land use and planning, hydrology/water quality, hazards and hazardous materials, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, utilities and service systems and mandatory findings of significance. X:~u~,RY BROAD'ONGOING WORK- GARY~UKIAH INrrlAL STUDY~ DRAFT 12.11.01.DOC (12716/03) 5. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. · Aesthetics · Biological Resources [] Hazards & Hazardous Materials [] Mineral Resources [] Public Services [] Utilities/Service Systems [] Agricultural Resources · Air Quality · Cultural Resources · Geology/Soils [] Hydrology/Water Quality [] Land Use/Planning · Noise [] Population/Housing [] Recreation [] Transportation/Traffic [] Mandatory Findings of Significance Preparation: The City of Ukiah has had this Initial Study prepared. Interested persons may obtain a copy of this document at the City of Ukiah, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482-5400. 6. PROJECT SPONSOR'S INCORPORATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES As project sponsor, I (undersigned) have reviewed the Initial Study for the City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project and have particularly reviewed the mitigation measures and monitoring programs identified herein. I accept the findings of the/~nitial Study, including recommended mitigation measures, and hereby agree to modi~rojj~os~ed pro~ de..~.to include and incorporate all mitigation measures and monitoring programs //~ Date ~ Printed Determination: Based on the attached Initial Study and without a public heating, it is my judgment that: ~Ifmd that although the propg~ed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be ).~ign~car)t effect..c~is_~se because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the //prp, i~t W6~~.cA"I~~TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. S a e/ For 9 X:~_Yua, Ry BROAD~NGOING WOR~- GARY'~UKIA~ IlqirnAL STUDY--FINAL DKAFT 12.11.03.DOC (I 1/16/0]) 7. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: b. do A brief explanation is provided for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources cited in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer is explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). All answers take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. The checklist answers indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. Potentially Significant Impact is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more Potentially Significant Impact entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from Potentially Significant Impact to a Less Than Significant Impact. The mitigation measures are described and a brief explanation given of how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. e. The explanation of each issue identifies: 1) the significance criteria or threshold; if any, used to evaluate each question; and 2) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant. X:~JAI~Y Bit, OADV~qGOll~G V/~,K- GAI~ IMTL6,L $TUDY-q:INAL DRAFT 12. I 1.03.DOC (I 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Sik~nificant Mitigation Si~fiflcant Impact Incorporated Impact NO Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? [] · [] [] b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not [] · [] [] limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or [] · [] [] quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which [] [] [] · would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The City of Ukiah 1995 General Plan recognizes the high level of scenic beauty of Ukiah's western hills. It credits the tree-studded hillsides with helping to shape the rural setting of the city and playing a significant role in the quality of life. The Ukiah General Plan recognizes that preserving the hills on the west side of the Ukiah Valley will provide environmental benefits to the Valley. The hillsides are recognized as an aesthetic and visual resource fundamental to the Ukiah residents, to the tourist industry and for their economic value. The General Plan includes the following language intended to protect these hillsides: Goal OC-10: Conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills. Policy OC-10.2 Roads and structures shall be designed and sited to conserve or avoid damage to the natural hillside resources where feasible. Implementation Measure OC-10.2(b): Site and design development to minimize impacts on views from the Valley. Implementation Measures OC-10.2(c): Clearings for roads, buildings, and fire protection zones shall be sited in the least visible and ecologically damaging locations possible and screened with vegetation where feasible. Goal OC-11. Conserve coastal oak woodlands in the hills. The General Plan also includes the following language related to protection of scenic areas: Goal GP-24: Conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the Ukiah Valley. Goal GP-25: Ensure aesthetic qualities in the design and construction of the community. Goal GP-26: Require that landscaping be a significant component of development and redevelopment. 11 ~ ~dq.Y BROAEI~ONOOIIq~ WOP. X- GARY~iJKIAH ilqITIAL ~/~JDY-FINAL DRAFF 12.11.03.DOC ( 12/I 6.,'0 ] ) Goal GP-27: Maintain scenic viewsheds of the Valley. This project will result in excavation in the western hillsides above the Municipal Golf Course for construction of a 120-foot diameter and a 39-foot diameter water tank. A 1:1 cut slope will be developed above the smaller tank and a series of 10-foot benches cut behind the larger tank. A total of 38,000 cubic yard of earth will be excavated for the larger tank and 850 cubic yards for the smaller tank. A 28,000 cubic yards spoils fill area will be mounded into an area along the existing access road. This fill area will be about 280 feet long and extend up the hill about 160 feet and have a maximum height above existing grade of about 20 feet. The fill area will begin at an elevation of 780 feet above mean sea level and reach a maximum elevation of approximately 830 feet. Most of the proposed fill area is void of vegetation, with most vegetation and trees located toward the edge of the proposed fill area. As the hillside behind the fill area continues to rise to more than 1000 feet in elevation, the fill mound will be blended into its hillside backdrop and, with appropriate revegetation, after completion will not be visually distinguishable from off-site vantage points against the adjacent hillside topography. This fill area is also located at a relatively low elevation on the hillside, toward the golf course level. The remaining amount, approximately 10,850 cubic yards, will be backfilled behind the concrete tank on the upslope side after completion of the tank. Again, the backfilled area can be revegetated both to control erosion and to restore a more natural looking hillside and will not be visually apparent from off- site vantage points. The area proposed for the two additional tanks has already been disturbed through the construction of two existing water tanks. The existing tanks are well-screened from off-site vantage points because they are located relatively low in elevation on the hillside and because of existing vegetation in front of the tanks. The proposed tanks would similarly be shielded from off-site visibility because of the existing vegetation and the elevation of the tanks. The amount of disturbance will be reduced by constructing the 1.5 mg tank of concrete, rather than metal, and then backfilling behind the tank. Overall impacts to the hillside are less than significant in light of proposed development being concentrated within the lower portions of the hillside, with a considerable area of upper hillside land being preserved intact. The following mitigation measures should be included with this project in order to further mitigate impacts to the hillside scenic vista to less than significant levels: · Existing vegetation outside of the area of project grading, filling and construction shall be protected and retained to protect views to the site. · Finished grading for fill areas shall, as feasible, attempt to leave areas in a natural looking hillside condition. · A landscape plan shall be prepared, subject to Planning Department review and approval, which includes the following: 1) the addition of native trees to fill-in any views to the tanks from off- site vantage points; and 2.) the provision of native vegetation, to the maximum extent possible, along cut and fill slopes to provide a natural-looking hillside environment. · Any metal tanks shall be earthtone in color and blend into the surrounding hillside environment. · Mitigation measures included in Section IV., Biology, shall be incorporated into the project design in order to also mitigate potential aesthetic impacts related to loss of vegetation and tree protection. 12 X:~MI,Y I~ROAD~)NOOII~G WORK- CsAR~ 1NrrlAL ~'UDY--FllNAL DRAFT 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The Ukiah General Plan also recognizes the scenic qualities along Highway 101. General Plan Goal OC- 28 states to "visually enhance the Highway 101 corridor through the planning area" and Policy OC-28.1 states to "upgrade the visual appearance of the corridor along Highway 101." Neither the softball field nor the water treatment plant is particularly scenic in character. Proposed improvements at the softball fields will be located approximately 300 feet east of Highway 101 and are therefore of limited visibility to passing vehicular traffic. Nevertheless, in light of the highway's scenic qualities, the following mitigation measures are recommended to soften the impacts of site development at the softball fields to less than significant levels: If the proposed water tank at the softball field is to be constructed from metal, it shall be earth- tone color to blend it into natural colors of the site. A landscape plan shall be prepared and implemented providing screen vegetation between proposed softball field improvements and Highway 101, as necessary, to soften views from the highway to proposed site improvements. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? II. The proposed mitigation measures in subsections a and b above will also ensure that potential impacts from development at the softball field site and the golf course site will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime v~ews in the area? This project will not create a substantial source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views of the area. This project will allow for the construction of a 1.5 million gallon water tank, a pump house, fuel tank and an expansion of the water treatment plant. The closest of these improvements, the 1.5 mg water storage tank, is located more than 350 feet from highway 101. None of these improvements will have any exterior lighting that would create substantial light or glare or adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. This project will also involve the construction of 1.5 mg and a .3 mg water storage tanks at the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. There will not be any exterior lighting associated with the tanks which would create substantial light or glare or adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Califomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: X:IOARY BROAI~ONGOI!qG WOP-,K - GAR~ l!qrrlAL ~fUDY--FINAL DR. AFT 12.11.0/.DOC (12./16/03) 13 a) b) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Famaland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact [] [] [] · [] [] [] · Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? [] [] [] · Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance ('Farmland), as shown on the maps preparedpursuant to the FarmlandMapping andMonitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? Neither the existing water treatment plant site, the adjacent softball fields nor the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course are designated as prime farmland, unique farmland or farmland of statewide importance on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. This project will therefore not convert any such designated areas to a non-agricultural use. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? This project will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use of a Williamson Act contract. The existing water treatment plant, the adjacent softball fields and the Municipal Golf Course are all zoned Public Facilities rather than for agricultural use. None of these sites are within a Williamson Act contract. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? This project will not involve other changes in the existing environment, which could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. This project will be limited to improvements necessary to upgrade the operation of an existing water treatment system, including its storage capacity. These improvements are not of a nature to affect other agricultural or farmland areas. The proposed tank and facility improvements at the water treatment plant and softball fields will not induce any surrounding land uses to convert from farmlands to non-agricultural uses. The addition of two storage tanks in the foothills above the golf course will not result in the conversion of any farmland to non-agricultural use. The proposed water treatment plant improvements will allow the City of Ukiah to meet the peak water demands of its present water users and will not lead to the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. X:;C~ARY BROAD'ONGOInG WOP..K- GARYXUKIAH INITIAL ~rlJDY-FINAL DRAFt 12.11.0~.DOC (12/16/03) 14 III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact [] · [] [] [] · [] [] c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any [] · criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? [] O [] [] · [] [] [] [] · No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementat~'on of the applicable air quality plan? The City of Ukiah is located in the flat and narrow Ukiah Valley. The mountains to the west and cast sides of the valley restrict the horizontal east-west movement of pollutants. The combined effects of moderate winds, clear skies, frequent atmospheric inversions that restrict vertical dilution and a terrain that restricts horizontal dilution result in a relatively high potential for air pollution. While the potential is high, the actual pollutant levels are relatively low due to the lack of upwind sources and the relatively low level of development in the local air basin. Air quality in Ukiah meets all federal and state air standards with the exception of the State 24-hour PM-10 standard. This standard was exceeded on 3 days in 1990, 2 days in 1991, 0 days in 1992, 2 days in 1993 and 1 day in 1994. It has not been exceeded since 1994. Sources of PM-10 include field burning, dust from unpaved road and grading operations, combustion and automobiles. 54 of the 58 counties in California are designated non-attainment for PM-10, which means that most of the California air basins exceed the permitted 24- hour concentration. The State Air Resources Board (ARB) does not require an Attainment Plan for jurisdictions that violate the PM-10 standard. As part of the regional air basin, the project site would be a very minor contributor, although an incremental contributor, to the quality of the basin. Construction activity associated with the proposed project would temporarily generate emissions of regional criteria pollutants during grading and construction periods for the new treatment building and storage tanks. The emissions produced during construction would be considered as short-term and not significant in nature because they would be limited in duration to the construction period and would vary depending upon the construction activity. X: ~,ARY BROADV3NGO[I'4G WOlt. K- GARY~UKIAH INrrLAL STUDY- -F1NAL DRAFr 12.11.0I.DOC ( 12/16/03 ) 15 To reduce construction-related emissions related to the generation of PM-10 to less than significant levels, the following specific controls should be implemented as mitigation measures: · Maintain construction equipment in accordance with manufacturers' specifications. · Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. · All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. · All construction debris, including dirt and mud, shall be promptly cleaned and cleared from all roadways. · All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. · Trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. · Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. · Hydroseed or apply soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas prior to project completion. · To the extent feasible, construction equipment shall be left idling for not more than 10 minutes. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? This project will not violate any ak quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation. The upgrading of any existing water treatment facility does not result in the release of any pollutants or materials into the air which violate air quality standards or affect existing or projected air quality violations. Short-term construction-related impacts could result during the project construction. Mitigation measures to reduce construction-related impacts to less than significant levels are included in Section IIIa. above. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors) ? This project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Short-term construction-related impacts could result during the project construction. Mitigation measures to reduce construction-related impacts to less than significant levels are included in Section IIIa. above. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? This project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The operation of the existing water treatment facility does not result in the production of substantial pollutant concentrations, nor would the proposed treatment plant improvements lead to substantial pollutant concentrations. The process of treating water to meet health standards and suitable taste and odor levels 16 X:VTsAlt. Y Blt. OAD~ONGOING WORK- C~at, RY~UKIAH INITIAL STUDY~FINAL DRAFI' 12. I 1.03.DOC (I 2/I 6/03) does not generate airborne pollutants. Moreover, the location of this site is in a low-intensity, agricultural area east of Highway 101 and is not immediately proximate to any sensitive receptors such as residential areas. The addition of three water storage tanks, one at the softball fields by the water treatment plant and two at the Municipal Golf Course, will not result m the generation of any substantial pollutant concentrations. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? This project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The water treatment process is designed to ensure that potable dhnking water is provided in terms of both health/safety and in quality/taste. (Water treatment is a different situation than wastewater treatment.) The proposed expansion to the treatment plant will not result in the creation of any objectionable odors. No odors will be generated through the construction of three water storage tanks---one at the softball fields and two at the golf course. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) d) e) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife comdors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Potentially Si~lflcant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No hnpact Incorporated hnpact Impact [] · [] [] [] 0 [] · [] · [] 0 [] · [] [] [] · [] [] X:~3,ARY BROAD~43NOOING WORK- GARY~.JKIAH INITIAL ~I'UDY--F1NAL DIt. AFT 17 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Potentially Significant Potentially Unleas Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Imlmct Impact 0 [] [] · Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department offish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Biological resources associated with the project sites were identified through a review of available background information and a field reconnaissance survey. Available documentation was reviewed to provide information on general resources in the Ukiah area, presence of sensitive natural communities, and the distribution and habitat requirements of special-status species which have been recorded from or are suspected to occur in the project vicinity. A field reconnaissance survey was conducted by James Martin, a biologist and principal of Environmental Collaborative, on December 22, 2002 to determine the vegetation and wildlife resources, presence of any sensitive natural cornmunitics, potential for jurisdictional wetlands, and suitability of the sites to support populations of special-shams species. Supplemental surveys were conducted by Jane Valcrius on 23 May and 1 August 2003 to dcternfine presence or absence of any special-status plant species from the golf course sites. The following provides a summary of the biological and wetland resources on thc sites, and an assessment of the significance of thc potential impacts of project implementation. Special-status species are plants and animals that are legally protected under the state and/or federal Endangered Species Acts~ or other regulations, as well as other species that are considered rare enough by the scientific community and trustee agencies to warrant special consideration, particularly with regard to protection of isolated populations, nesting or denning locations, communal roosts and other essential habitat. Species with legal protection under the Endangered Species Acts ot~en represent major constraints to development, particularly when they are wide ranging or highly sensitive to habitat disturbance and where proposed development would result in a "take"2 of these species. Records maintained by the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) of the CDFG (2002) and other information sources indicate that several special-status plant and animal species have been reported from or are suspected to occur in the Ukiah vicinity. No occurrences from the CNDDB records actually extend over the proposed tank locations. Known occurrences in the vicinity include 1 The federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 declares that all federal departments and agencies shall utilize their authority to conserve endangered and threatened plant and animal species. The California Endangered Species Act (CESA) of 1984 parallels the policies of FESA and pertains to native California species. 2 "Take" as defined by the FESA means "to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or collect" a threatened or endangered species. "Harm" is further defined by the USFWS to include the killing or harming of wildlife due to significant obstruction of essential behavior patterns (i.e., breeding, feeding, or sheltering) through significant habitat modification or degradation. The CDFG also considers the loss of listed species habitat as take, although this policy lacks statutory authority and case law support under the CESA. 18 WORK- GAR~ INITIAL ~'IYDY-FINAL DIO~Wi' 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) several reported occurrences of foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) along the Russian River and tributary streams, an occurrence of northwestern pond turtle (Clemmys marmorata marmorata) extends along the Russian River corridor just northeast of the ballfield site, and a general occurrence of Burke's goldfields (Lasthenia burkei) encompasses most of the Ukiah area. Foothill yellow legged frog, which is a federal Species of Concern and a CDFG Species of Special Concern, is restricted to perennial and intermitted streams not found on any of the sites. Northwestern pond turtle is also a CDFG Species of Special Concern and is generally restricted to riparian corridors and marshes, and suitable habitat for this species is absent on the sites. The occurrence of Burke's goldfields, a state and federally listed endangered species, was reported in 1986 from the vicinity of Ukiah and the Russian River and has not been found in subsequent survey efforts. Based on conditions encountered during the December 2002 field reconnaissance, past disturbance has eliminated the potential for occurrence of Burke's goldfields and other special-status plant species from the ballfield site. However, it was determined that there was a potential for one or more special-status plant species to occur in the relatively undisturbed woodland in the vicinity of the golf course sites. These include: the State-threatened north coast semaphore grass (Pleuropogon hooverianus), Mendocino bush mallow (Malacothamnus mendocinensis) which is presumed to be extinct but was last observed in 1939 from the Ukiah vicinity, and Colusa layia (Layia septenrionalis), among others. Detailed surveys are typically required during the spring and early summer months when most plants are in flower to conclusively determine presence or absence from an area, unless the species has conspicuous characteristics year-round. Supplemental surveys were conducted in May and early August 2003 which confirtned absence of any special-status plant species in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites. No impacts on special-status plant species are anticipated due to the absence of any populations in the vicinity of proposed improvements. No evidence of active raptor nests was observed in the vicinity of any of the sites, but there is a possibility that new nests could be established in the future. Raptors and their nests are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Fish and Game Code of California. Essential habitat for special-status animal species is absent from the sites and no significant impacts are anticipated. One or more bird species of concern may occasionally fly over the sites, but suitable nesting habitat and important foraging habitat is absent from the softball field site and no significant impacts would occur as a result of the project. No evidence of any raptor nests was observed in the woodlands at the golf course sites, but there is a possibility that new nests could be established in the future before construction proceeds. The potential loss of active nests could be avoided by removing trees during the non-nesting season or by conducting a preconstruction survey if vegetation clearance must be done during the nesting season. The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential impacts on special-status animal species to less-than-significant levels: A pre-construction nesting survey shall be conducted for tree nesting rapt_ors if grading and construction is to be initiated during the months of April through August. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading. If any raptor nests are found within the construction area after April and before August, grading and construction in the area shall either stop or continue only after the nests are protected by an adequate setback approved by a qualified biologist. If permanent avoidance of nests is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by avoiding disturbances to the birds during the nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not X:~i,M~,Y BR. OAD~OlqC, OIN(3 WORK- CaARY~iJKIAH DqmAL ~TUDY--FINAL DKAFr 1/.~ I 1.03.DOC (! 2/16/03) 19 begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the juveniles from those nests are foraging independently and capable of independent survival at an earlier date. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Sensitive natural communities are absent from the sites and no adverse impacts are anticipated. As such, no mitigation is required. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Ygater Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Although definitions vary to some degree, wetlands are generally considered to be areas that are periodically or permanently inundated by surface or ground water, and support vegetation adapted to life in saturated soil. Wetlands are recognized as important features on a regional and national level due to their high inherent value to fish and wildlife, use as storage areas for storm and flood waters, and water recharge, filtration and purification functions. The CDFG, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and California Regional Water Quality Control Board have jurisdiction over modifications to wetlands and other "waters of the United States." Jurisdiction of the Corps is established through provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, which prohibits the discharge of dredged or fill material without a permit. Regional Water Quality Control Board jurisdiction is established through Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, which requires certification or waiver to control discharges in water quality. Jurisdictional authority of the CDFG over wetland areas is established under Sections 1601-1606 of the State Fish and Game Code, which pertains to activities that would disrupt the natural flow or alter the channel, bed or bank of any lake, fiver or stream. A preliminary wetland assessment of the sites was conducted during the field reconnaissance. No evidence of any jurisdictional wetlands, unvegetated other waters, or drainage channels were observed on the softball field site. Three ephemeral drainages occur on the hillside between the two proposed water tanks at the golf course sites, but do not support any wetland vegetation. These ephemeral drainages generally have a width of two feet or less and a depth of less than one foot. They would most likely be considered jurisdictional "other waters" by the Corps and fall under the jurisdiction of the CDFG. No wetlands or jurisdictional waters occur on the softball field site or would be directly affected by the proposed project at this location. No wetlands would be directly affected at the golf course sites, but grading and construction would occur in the vicinity of the ephemeral drainages on the hillside between the proposed new tanks. Adequate protections would be necessary to prevent inadvertent fill in these features or secondary effects of sedimentation. A Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan using Best Management Practices would be required as part of the grading permit for the project, which would ensure that the potential for any down gradient sedimentation impacts are adequately controlled. The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential impacts on wetland resources to less- than-significant levels: 20 X:K~JARY BROAD~OI~C. Oi~G WORK- GARY~UKIAH llqrllAL 3TUDY--FINAL DRAFt I/-! 1.03.DOC (i 1/16/03) The proposed project shall avoid the ephemeral drainages in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites to the maximum extent practicable. If complete avoidance is not feasible, the proposed improvements shall be coordinated with representatives of the Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB, and any required authorization obtained prior to any modification to jurisdictional waters. Additional conditions may be required by jurisdictional agencies to minimize disturbance and provide appropriate mitigation. These include restrictions on construction activities during the low flow summer months, prohibition on placement of fill or equipment maintenance within the ephemeral drainages, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. · A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing Best Management Practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratoryfish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Proposed improvements would have little effect on wildlife resources at the softball field site due to the extent of past disturbance. The mature trees in the vicinity of the proposed tank at the softball field should be avoided due to the limited cover in the area and the value they provide wildlife. Proposed grading to accommodate the two tanks and soil disposal at the golf course sites would require tree removal and would temporarily disrupt wildlife use of the area. An estimated 187 trees with trunk diameters greater than four inches would be removed based on the preliminary grading plans for the project. Of these trees to be removed, an estimated 42 percent would be black oak, 38 percent live oak, 20 percent madrone, and less than one percent valley oak. While substantial areas of oak woodland would remain undisturbed in the surrounding area and many of the trees to be removed are relatively small in size with trunk diameters less than 10 inches, the tree removal in this area is considerable. Regeneration of woodland habitat on the graded slopes may take a considerable length of time unless a revegetation program is implemented as part of the project. Grading would also create suitable growing conditions for further establishment of French broom, which would limit habitat values unless carefully controlled. The following measures are recommended to mitigate potential impacts on wildlife habitat resources to less-than-significant levels: Mitigation Measure: A Tree Protection and Revegetation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect or certified arborist, which provides for protection of trees to be retained, re- establishment of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and replacement of trees removed as part of the project. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning department prior the issuance of any building or grading permits or any site preparation and construction activity. The following requirements and restrictions shall be incorporated into the plan: Tree removal shall be minimized with valley oaks and other mature trees avoided to the maximum extent practicable. All trees shall be avoided on the softball field site. The mature valley oaks on the golf course sites shall also be avoided, specifically including the 32-inch diameter valley oak south of the existing 150-foot diameter tank and the scattered mature valley oaks at the westem fringe of the golf course fairway just down slope from the proposed central soil disposal area. 21 X:~,,~M~Y I~,OAD~}~GOII~G WOI~,K- CaARY~JKIAH llqrl'lAL :]TODY--FINAL DRAFT 12. I 1.0~J.DOC ( I ~16/0~ ) Detailed guidelines shall be prepared to control possible damage to trees to be preserved. The location of trees to be retained within 50 feet of proposed grading shall be identified in the field through flagging or other obvious marking method prior to any grading. Temporary fencing shall be provided along the outermost edge of the dripline of each tree or group of trees to be retained in the vicinity of grading to avoid compaction of the root zone and mechanical damage to thinks and limbs. Storage of construction equipment, materials, and stockpiled soils shall be prohibited within the tree dripline of trees to be preserved to prevent possible damage. A program shall be developed which provides for replanting of trees removed on graded slopes. Trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as feasible, for all trees with mink diameters greater than 12 inches removed as part of the project. Suitable species which shall be used in the tree replacement shall include: valley oak (Quercus lobata), interior live oak (Q wislizenii), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). Replacement tree plantings shall be irrigated during the dry summer months as necessary to ensure establishment, typically for a minimum of two years. Replacement tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a minimum of five years. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on an annual basis. e) A program to remove French broom shall be incorporated into the Revegetation Plan to eliminate this species and prevent its reestablishment. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent reestablishment and spread of broom. The removal and monitoring program shah include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants when soils are saturated, and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April. Monitoring and routine removal shall be provided on an annual basis for a minimum of five years to prevent reestablishment. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The City of Ukiah's General Plan contains a number of goals and policies related to the protection of valley oaks and use of native plant species in landscaping. These consist of the following policies from the Open Space and Conservation Element: Goal OC-10: Conserve the natural woodlands environment of the area hills. Goals OC-11: Conserve coastal oak woodlands in the hills. Goal OC-22: Conserve and replenish valley oaks in the Valley. Policy OC-2Z 1 Maintain, protect, and replant stands of Valley Oaks. Implementation Measure 0C-22. l(a): When reviewing proposals for development, require that all valley oaks on the project area be identified, and ensure that all reasonable efforts have been 22 X:W. TatCltY BROAD~ONOOllq(3 WORK- GARY~JKIAH INrriAt, STUDY-FINAL DRAFt 12.11.03.DOC (I 2/16,/03) undertaken to protect the trees. Goals OC-23: Native plant landscaping shall be encouraged. Policy 0C-23: Define standards that include native plant landscaping. In general, the project would conform with the goals and policies of the City of Ukiah General Plan regarding avoidance of valley oaks and use of native species in landscaping. Required mitigation measures recommend protecting tree resources, avoiding the removal of valley oak, and replanting with valley oak and other native species would ensure compliance with the relevant goals and policies on the Ukiah General Plan. No additional mitigation is required. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservatwn plan ? The proposed project would not conflict with any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved conservation plan. No such conservation plans have been adopted encompassing the project vicinity and no impact is therefore anticipated. No mitigation is required. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in' 15064.57 b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] · [] [] [] [] [] · Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ora historical resource as defined in ' 15064.5? See discussion below. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Statute 15064.5? No change will occur because the project will not affect known area of a site (see also discussion below.) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? X:~CsARY BROAI[~(~II~} WOl~l~- GARY~q~,A~ INrrlAL STUDY-FflqAL DKAFF 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) 23 See discussion below. The project will not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or umque geologic feature. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries? See discussion below. No human remains have been identified at these sites. The following discussion relates to a), b), c) and d) above. Because of the possibility of archaeological or cultural resources being located in this area, Archaeological Resource Service was retained to conduct an archaeological evaluation of the project. Their evaluation consisted of an extensive review of the literature, preparation of a cultural resource overview to determine the distribution of cultural resources in or in close proximity to the project sites, and a surface reconnaissance of all accessible parts of the project areas to locate any visible signs of potentially significant historic or prehistoric cultural deposits, features or isolated artifacts that might be adversely impacted by the proposed project. The water treatment plant and golf course properties were found to be moderately sensitive, although no previously known sites are present within close proximity to them. Although prehistoric/aboriginal resources might be found in their vicinity, the Archaeological Resource Service survey of the water treatment site and the proposed tanks sites at the golf course did not encounter any surface evidence of Native American utilization in any of the examined areas. No adverse effects are foreseen if the new expanded structure and the new reservoir at the existing facility and the two tanks in the western hillside are built as planned. The following mitigation measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels based on the Cultural Resources Evaluation by Archaeological Resource Service: In the event that major grading or underground excavation uncovers what appears to be archaeological material, particularly within the existing treatment facility, a temporary work shutdown in that immediate area should be enforced until the discovered materials can be evaluated. · If archaeological materials are found in concentration and therefore deemed to be potentially important, formal documentation should occur before work is allowed to resume. If it appears likely that the discovered material could be further disturbed by the proposed project, subsequent activity should be performed under the supervision of an archaeological monitor. An example of standard procedures for monitoring and spot checks as attached to the Archaeological Resource Service cultural resources evaluation should act as guideline in the event that potentially important archaeological materials are encountered. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Potentially Significant Potentially Unleas Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact [] · [] [] NO Impact X:~,ARY BROAD~3NCsOING WORK- GA~Y~UIOaaJ'I INITIAL ~f'0DY-F[NAL DRAFT 12.11.03.DOC (1 Z/16/03) 24 b) c) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact [] [] [] 0 [] [] [] [] 0 [] No Impact e) [] · i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on [] · the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? [] · iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?[] · iv) Landslides? [] · Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? [] · Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or [] · that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defmed in Table 18-1-B [] [] [] · of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of [] [] septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 0 Rupture ora known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence ora known fault; ii} strong seismic ground shaking; ii0 seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or iv.)landslides? A preliminary report of the geotechnical investigation of the site and proposed project was completed by Miller Pacific Engineering Group. The purpose of their work was to conduct a geotechnical investigation, evaluate geologic hazards, identify geotechnical constraints and develop recommendations to aid in the design and construction of the water system improvements. Their investigation included the following: a site reconnaissance to observe existing conditions, subsurface exploration utilizing soil borings at the three tank sites and treatment plant site conducted on October 1 and 2, 2002, laboratory testing to evaluate engineering properties, a description of the geologic and site conditions, a determination of the depth to competent foundation material, an assessment of the geologic hazards and seismic design criteria, recommended foundation type and design criteria, recommendations for site grading, and a geologic investigation report. Miller Pacific indicated that pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972, the California Geological Survey produced 1:24,000 maps showing all known active faults and delineating boundaries to either side of these faults called "special study zones." Within these zones, the act 25 X:K3ARY BROAD'~IGOI~G WOR~- GARY~UKIAH ~ ~'UDY~FllqAL DRAFT I 2. I 1.03.DOC (12716/03) requires that a fault investigation be untaken to ensure that structures for human habitation are not located on an active fault trace. The Miller Pacific review of the Special Studies maps and their aerial photography interpretation indicate that although the Maacama Fault trace nms closely to the east of the water treatment site, active faulting is not present through any of the three tank sites. For that reason, the potential for surface fault rupture through the property is low and, therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary related to earthquake faults. Miller Pacific further concluded that the sites will experience seismic ground shaking similar to other areas in the seismically active California Coast region. Earthquakes along active faults in the region could produce moderate to strong shaking at the treatment plant and storage tank sites. The intensity of ground shaking will depend upon the characteristics of the causative fault, the distance from the fault, the earthquake magnitude, duration and site-specific geologic conditions. The potential for strong seismic shaking at the sites is high, particularly from the Maacama fault. Strong seismic shaking may result in adverse impacts such as potential damage to structures and related improvements. Ground shaking could lead to slope failures affecting the two proposed hillside tanks. Miller Pacific recommended the following mitigation measures relative to this potential impact: · Site development shall comply with the seismic design factors recommendations of Section V. of the Miller Pacific Geotechnical Investigation dated November 1, 2002. · All improvements and structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic provisions of the most-recent version of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the American Water Works Association (AWWA). · The design base shear of the new construction shall comply with the seismic coefficients and site values included in Table C of the Miller Pacific report, which are based on interpreted subsurface conditions at the site and the closest fault type and distance to the site. · The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications prior to the commencement of construction to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confn-m that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Miller Pacific indicated that landsliding is most extensive above the southern hillside tank. They identified numerous landslides during their field reconnaissance. However, the cut slopes behind the existing concrete tank are performing well and none of the slides appear to have developed into deeper bedrock fractures, nor affected the structure or stability of the tank. One landslide was identified at the northern tank site, however, they do not anticipate that the slide will intercept the new tank or new cut slope and should not require mitigation. Miller Pacific recommended the following slope stability mitigation measures at the southern hillside tank site: Slope stability mitigation options, such as stabilization or repair of any slides that intercept the new tank sites or cut slopes behind the tanks, shall be implemented, subject to geotechnical engineer approval. (If any unidentified zones of instability are encountered during grading operations at the northern hillside tank site, they shall be stabilized or repaired. Benches should be constructed in the cut slopes at the soil/rock transition that are wide enough to allow equipment to clear any debris that sloughs and accumulates on them. The upper five feet at the top of cut slopes should be no steeper than 2:1 and rounded to conform to the existing terrain. Benches shall be regularly maintained to keep them clear of debris 26 X:~OARY BIt. OAD~ONGOING WORK- GARY~U1OAH INITIAL ~TUD¥--FINAL DRA}"f 12.1 I. 0~.DOC ( 12/! 6/0~ ) · A concrete lined v-ditch shall be provided across the top of cut slopes. All cut slopes shall be revegetated. These mitigation measures are consistent with City of Ukiah General Plan Policy SF-2.2: "Protect people and property from landslide danger." Miller Pacific has completed a geotechnical evaluation of this project consistent with General Plan Implementation Measure SF-2.2(a.) Miller Pacific further concluded that ground shaking could induce settlement of loose granular soils above the water table. Exposed bedrock conditions are anticipated at foundation levels for the hillside tank sites. Therefore, the potential for structural damage from seismic induced settlement is low at these sites. Loose granular soils exist in the upper ten feet of the treatment plant site. These soils may experience settlement during seismic events, therefore, mitigation to reduce the potential for structural damage to the tank will be required. No mitigation measures related to seismic induced ground settlement are required for the hillside tanks. The following mitigation measures are required to mitigate potential impacts for the treatment plant and softball field sites: The treatment plant shall be supported on a shallow foundation system that bears on properly compacted fill. The depth of over excavation and recompaction should be at least 10 feet. The upper ten feet of soils should be removed and recompacted in the area beneath the tank and pump station at the softball field site prior to foundation construction. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Severe erosion can occur on slopes underlain by soil and soft, weathered, fractured bedrock. The potential for such erosion is greatly increased where the slope is subjected to concentrated nmoffby outfall from drainage facilities onto areas where vegetation is removed by eonstmction activities. There is some potential for accelerated erosion in soil deposits at the top of the cut slope behind the proposed hillside tanks. The following mitigations measures are recommended to reduce potential impacts to erosion to less than significant levels: The required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and shall include the use of straw waddles and sediment traps during and immediately after site grading and erosion control blankets or other standard erosion control practices to prevent damage from erosion caused by slope runoff. Erosion from increased nmoff from hardscape and other site improvements shall be mitigated by conveying discharges from the water tank, roads and other site improvements into a site drainage system. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, s~bsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Liquefaction refers to the sudden, temporary loss of soil shear during strong groundshaking. Liquefaction-related phenomena include liquefaction-induced settlement, flow failure and lateral spreading. These phenomena can occur where there are saturated, loose, granular (non-clayey) deposits. Subsurface conditions at the hillside tank sites did not indicate the presence of such deposits. For the treatment plant site, Miller Pacific's preliminary evaluation of liquefaction potential indicates liquefaction may occur during a 0.67 seismic event on the nearby Maacama Fault. 27 X:~-s,~RY ltROADK)NGOING WORK- GARY~IJKI,~Xi INn'IAL 8'TUDY--Fi~AL DRAFT 12. I 1.03.DOC ( 12716/03 ) Miller Pacific concluded that no mitigation measures related to liquefaction are necessary at the hillside tank sites. The following mitigation measure is necessary to reduce potential impacts at the treatment plant site to less than significant levels: Treatment Plant construction shall incorporate the detailed recommendations for liquefaction remediation Miller Pacific Engineer Group develops in their final geotechnical report. Plant construction shall include a soil modification technique, such as compaction grouting or stone columns to densify the loose granular layer below the water table, or other appropriate remediation as determined necessary by the project geotechnical engineer. Miller Pacific determined that settlement caused by compression of loose soils at the main treatment plant site will result in the gradual lowering of the elevation of new structures and improvements. Differential settlement could also cause damage to buildings, tanks and pipelines. In order to mitigate this impact to less than significant levels, the following mitigation measures were recommended: · In order to mitigate the potential for damage due to differential settlement, the treatment building shall be constructed with either the use of shallow footings combined with over excavation and recompaction of soils within the new building footprint, or, the use of drilled pier foundations excavated into a uniformly firm soil strata. · The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications when they near completion to confn'm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Expansive soil conditions occur when clay particles interact with water, causing volume changes in the clay with a resultant reduction in strength. The clayey soils swell when saturated and shrink when dry, with the resulting physical changes capable of damaging lightly loaded foundations, flatwork and pavement. Expansive soils problems generally decrease in magnitude with increased confinement pressure at depth. The Miller Pacific report concluded that their observations indicate that expansive soils are not present at any of the proposed tank sites. As such, there is no substantial risk to life or property from this project and no mitigation is required. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems are proposed as part of this project. As such, no impact or mitigation measures are necessary. X:~L,~RY BROADV:)NOODqG WORK- GARY~UKIAH ~ ~g'IX/DY--FINAL DR,M:I' i 2. ! 1.03.DOC (12/16/03) 28 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless [ams Than Significant Mitigation Signllkant Impact Incorporated Impact VII. HAZARDS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [] environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the [] environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emission~ or handle hazardous or acutely [] hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of [] hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, [] where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private [] airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an [] adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, [] injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? [] [] · [] [] [] [] · [] [] · [] [] · [] [] · [] [] · [] [] · No Impact Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? _ This project will not result in a significant hazard to the public or to the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. Neither the proposed addition to the treatment plant to allow for the installation of two additional modules nor the construction of three additional water storage tanks will require the use of hazardous materials. As such, there will be no impact related to hazardous material transport, use or disposal. X:~GARY BROAD~OIqGOII~G WOR~- GARY~UKIAH ~ STUDY--FllqAL DRAFt 12.11.03.DOC (1~!6/03) 29 Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? The improvement of three water storage tanks and the proposed treatment plant improvements do not involve any hazardous materials which could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. As such, the proposed expanded water treatment facility will not create a reasonably foreseeable upset accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile o fan existing or proposed school? This project will not emit any hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing school. No hazardous materials will be located at the tanks sites at the golf course. There are no schools located within one-quarter mile of the water treatment plant. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiledpursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Neither the softball field/treatment plant site nor the golf course is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and therefore would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles ofa public airport orpublic use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Both the golf course and the water treatment plant are located slightly less than two miles away from the northern boundary of the Ukiah Municipal Airport, a public airport. However, neither the proposed water treatment plant improvements nor the three water storage tanks would result in any safety hazard for people or residing in the project area. No hazards are associated with water storage tanks. This project is consistent with the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan, adopted 1996. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard forpeople residing or working in the project area? This project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would therefore not result in any safety hazard related to this issue for people residing or working in the project area. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan ? This project would not impair the implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The proposed improvements to the existing water treatment facility east of Highway 101 in Ukiah and the proposed addition of two water storage tanks at the municipal golf course will not have any impact related to emergency response or emergency evacuation. This project is consistent with the Ukiah Emergency Plan, adopted 2002. X:~C. IA,e,Y BItOAI~,OI~OOI~G WORK- GARYM. JICIAH IIqlTIAL ffI'UDY--FBqAL DRAFT 12. I 1.03.DOC (1.1/16/03) 30 Expose people or structures to a significant risk o floss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands ? This project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires. The upgrading of the existing water treatment facility and the addition of three water storage tanks does not pose a significant risk due to wildland fires. Any potential impact from this project related to wildland fires would be positive, as the provision of adequate water storage would provide water capacity to fight any wildland fires adjacent to the urbanized areas of the city. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements ? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface nmoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted nmof~. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a lO0-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? [] [] · [] · [] · [] · [] · [] · · [] X:~--tARY BROAD~NGOING WOl~.K- GARYMJKIAH INITIAL STUDY--FINAL DRAFT 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) 31 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant ~Vtitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, [] injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? [] · [] [] [] [] · a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? This project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The proposed expansion of the existing water treatment plant and the construction of three water storage tanks will not require any waste discharge or any discharge which would violate any water quality standards. No negative impacts to water quality will result from the proposed improvements. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? The water used by the existing and proposed treatment facility is supplied from the Russian River and from wells. This project will not increase the amount of water which the City of Ukiah is permitted from the Russian River. This project will allow for the construction of three additional water storage tanks in order to provide enhanced reliability and redundancy at the water treatment plant and for City of Ukiah residents and water users. This project will not involve any use of groundwater supplies and will therefore not have any impact upon groundwater recharge or upon nearby wells. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? This project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or fiver, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Biological resources mitigation measures also require that a stormwater pollution prevention plan prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing best management practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. These mitigation measures ensure that erosion impacts will be less than significant. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? This project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area as discussed in item c. above. It will not alter the course of a stream or river--the project would only potentially require the addition of culverts to allow the continued seasonal flow of existing ephemeral drainageways at the golf course site. The proposed improvements will not lead to a substantial increase in runoff that would significantly affect the rate or amount of surface runoff and result in on- or off-site flooding. X:~-aARY B~.OAD~ONOOING WOI~K- OARY~UKIAH INITIAL KI'UDY--I~IAL DRAFT 12.1 I.O'J.DOC 32 Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing orplanned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?. This project will not create or contribute runoff water which will exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Site runoff from the treatment plant improvements and the water tanks will be controlled through preparation of a grading and drainage plan prepared by the project civil engineer. Drainage will not flow into any areas such that it becomes tainted with any sources of pollution to create polluted runoff. The amount of runoff generated from the proposed water tanks and treatment plant expansion will not lead to an increase above the area's drainage capacity. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? This project will not result in any other conditions resulting in a substantial degradation of water quality. No other issues related to otherwise substantially degrading water quality have been identified in either the biological or geotechnical assessment conducted for this project. The project will not result in any conditions which could degrade water quality except those identified above related to site construction and new runoff and drainage patterns. Place housing within a 100-yearflood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? This project does not involve the creation of any housing. It will therefore not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map h) Place within a lO0-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? This project will not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard that would impede or redirect flood flows. While treatment plant improvements, including the softball field improvements, are located within the 100 year floodplain, they are located outside of the floodway. They therefore will not affect impede or redirect the flow of floodwaters. Land areas around these improvements, however, will experience flooding during 100-year storm events. City of Ukiah General Plan Goal SF-4 states to "strive for a flood-safe commumty" and General Plan Policy F J-4.1: states to "avoid critical public facilities in areas subject to flooding." Implementation Measure SF-4.1 (a) further states "to the extent feasible, the public agencies shall avoid constructing new critical facilities--public safety, public health, water and sewer treatment facilities--within areas subject to one hundred year floods. It is recognized that certain facilities must be sited to meet other development or regulatory criteria, and as such are not precluded from building within a flood plain if the flood-prone location is a feasible site." Because the existing water treatment plant is located within the 100-year flood plain, any plant expansion, such as this project, must therefore be sited in the same location and will also be within the 100-year flood plain. Because the facility draws its water from the Russian River, it must be located proximate to the river and thereby is sited within the 100-year floodplain. Recognizing these factors, the proposed expansion at the treatment plant site is consistent with language related to flood protection. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, includingflooding of as a result of the failure ora levee or dam? X:W_~,R Y ~,OAD~lqOOll~ WOK[i- I~It~, Y~IJKIAH ~ ~TOD Y--FINAL DRAFT i 2.1 I . ~.DOC ( 12,11610~ ) 33 This project will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. According to Miller Pacific Engineering Group, the treatment plant site elevation is at approximately 602 feet, while the FEMA flood insurance rate maps for the area indicate the site is within the 100-year flood zone with a base flood elevation of between 601 and 599 feet. New construction will therefore be required to comply with FEMA requirements, related to raising habitable space above 100-year floodplain levels. With this requirement, the risk of loss, injury or death from flooding is less than significant. j.) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? This project does not place any people or structures at risk due to tsunami or mudflow. Seiches and tsunamis are short duration earthquake-generated water waves in large, enclosed bodies of water and the open ocean, respectively. The extent and severity of a seiche would be dependent upon the ground motion and the fault offset from nearby active faults. Neither the water treatment plant nor the golf course property is located adjacent to the ocean or near significant bodies of water. The potential hazards by seiche or tsunami are therefore not significant. The Miller Pacific Geotechnical investigation for the treatment plant expansion and the proposed water tanks did not identify any conditions which would create a hazard from mudflow, therefore, no mitigation is required. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Le~m Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] [] · [] a) Physically divide an established community? This project will not physically divide an established community. The proposed improvements to the water treatment plant and the proposed addition of two water storage tanks at the Municipal Golf Course will not have any physical impacts off the site and will not physically divide an established community. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? This project will not conflict with land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. X:~13ARY' BB. OAD%ONOOINO WORK- GARYRJKIAH INYIIAL STUDY--FINAL DRAFT 12. ! 1.03.DOC (12/16/03) 34 Section IV., Biological Resources, includes mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to a less than significant level. The project design has been amended to avoid the ephemeral drainages at the golf course site. No activity could occur which would affect the ephemeral drainage without advance authorization from representatives of the Army Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This project is consistent with the City of Ukiah General Plan adopted December 1995 by the Ukiah City Council. Consistency with some general plan goals, policies and implementation measures are discussed throughout initial study sections. This overall project is specifically consistent with the following general plan language: 3.02 Overall General Plan/Growth Management goals and policies 3.02.01 Sound, stable community-based economy We envision a creative, mixed economy with both large and small employers, jobs that attract and satisfy our children and citizens, and businesses that retain and create new dollars within the commumty. We envision development that provides a mix of housing types and prices. We envision that development of adequate water, sewer and utility resources to support the future of our valley... (General Plan page 3.) Goals CF-1: Maintain a safe and adequate water system to meet the needs of existing and projected development. Implementation Measure CF-I.1 (b): Determine water needs and demands for the end of the short-term, during the intermediate-term, and for the long-term planning period. Policy CF-1.2: Protect and expand existing sources for water storage. c.) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? This project will not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural conservation plan. No such conservation plans have been adopted encompassing the project vicinity and no impact is therefore anticipated. Xe Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Le~ Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral [] [] _ [] resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important [] [] [] mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact X:~.aM~Y BI~OAD~OIgC~OI~G WORK- GA~.Y~IIKIA~ INITIAL ~I'UDY-FINAL DKAFT 1 ~. ! 1.03.DOC (1 :UI 6/03 ) 35 XI. Result in the loss of availability ora known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? This project will allow the construction of an additional 1.5 and a .3 million gallon water storage tank in the foothills above the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. It will also allow for the construction of a 1.5 mg water storage tank, a pump station, generator and diesel tank at the soft ball fields adjacent to the water treatment plant and for an expansion of the water treatment plant. These proposed water system improvements will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the state. No known mineral resources of such value are known to exist at these sites. Result in the loss of availability ora locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? This project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. This project will allow for the development of additional City water storage capacity and an expanded water treatment plant. No locally-important mineral resource recovery sites are delineated at these parcels. Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in [] [] excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground [] [] borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels [] [] in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient [] · noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, [] [] where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, [] [] would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? · [] [] · · [] [] · Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 36 X:V],MiY BROAD~ONGO~Ki; WORK- GARY~OKIAH INTTIAL STUDY--FINAL DP. AFT 12~ I 1.0].DOC (I 2/16/03) The 1995 Ukiah General Plan identifies the significant noise sources in the city as being transportation noise from major roadways, railroad operations, industrial plants and airports. The water treatment plant is not identified as a significant generator of noise. Water storage tanks, in fact, generate no noise, nor does the operation of a water treatment plant generate any significant noise activity. Additionally, the treatment plant is not located in any area of sensitive receptors--the noise generated from vehicular traffic along nearby Highway 101 would greatly exceed any minor noise associated with operation of the treatment plant. This project will therefore not expose people to noise levels in excess of standards established in the Ukiah noise ordinance or general plans, nor generate noise levels in excess of such standards. The process of treating water to deliver potable water for residential and agricultural use does not involve processes generating excessive noise that would exceed applicable local standards. Most of the equipment related to the treatment is located within the treatment buildings and the pump station. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? This project will not expose people to excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels, nor generate excessive ground bome vibration or noise. The upgrading of the existing water treatment facility and the construction of three additional water tanks will not produce ground vibrations or ground borne noise. A substantialpermanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? This project will not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. The proposed improvements at the water treatment plant and adjacent softball fields will not generate additional noise beyond existing levels. The addition of two storage tanks at the golf course will not produce any increase in ambient noise levels. A substantial temporary orperiodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The on-going operation of the expanded water treatment plant and its additional storage tanks will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels above present levels. Neither the treatment plant nor water storage tanks generate any noise of a temporary or periodic nature which would raise existing levels. The actual construction of the plant and tanks will result in temporary construction noise which will raise noise levels in the project vicinity above existing levels. This noise will include typical noises associated with construction activity--noise from heavy equipment operation duhng site preparation, noise from other equipment, noise from the removal of trees and worker and vehicle noises. While construction-related noises may be a source of annoyance to surrounding sensitive receptors, because they are temporary in nature and last for a limited duration, they are considered to be less than significant in impact. Nevertheless, site construction must comply with the requirements of City of Ukiah Municipal Code Section 6053 as follows: X:~.~AR.Y BR. OAD~)NOOIN(3 WORK- GARY~JI~XAH ~ ffI'UDY--FINA1. D R. Ar-'T 12.11.03.OOC (I 2/I ~03) 37 e) It shall be unlawful for any person to operate any machinery, equipment, pump, fan, air conditioning apparatus, or similar mechanical device in any manner so as to create any noise which would cause the noise level at the property line of any property to exceed the ambient base noise level by more than five (5) decibels between seven o'clock (7:00) p.m. and (7:00) a.m. On-site site preparation and construction at both the treatment plant/softball field sites and the golf course site would be required to comply with this regulation. While the 300,000 gallon tank will be constructed of metal, the 1.5 million gallon storage tanks will be constructed of concrete. If construction occurs during the summer months, the work would have to start early to avoid the concrete curing too quickly. This would require concrete pours to begin at 6 a.m. with the first concrete trucks traveling through residential neighborhoods to arrive at the golf course prior to 6 a.m. Section 6053 of the Ukiah Municipal Code requires the following: It shall be unlawful for any person within a residential zone, or within a radius of five hundred feet (500') therefrom, to operate equipment of perform an outside construction or repair work on buildings, structures or projects or to operate any pile driver, power shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, power hoist or any other construction type device (between the hours of seven 7:00 p.m. of one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day) in such a manner that a reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in the area is caused discomfort or annoyance unless beforehand a permit therefore has been duly obtained from the Director of Public Works. Work at the site could commence prior to 7 a.m. with Director of Public Works approval. Concrete trucks would be traveling from the concrete plant to the site to begin a 6 a.m. pour. The City Engineer/Director of Public Works has recommended that they use Walnut Street when the concrete mixing trucks are full and Grove Street for the return trip. The following mitigation measure would still be recommended to reduce this substantial, but temporary, increase in ambient noise levels to less than significant levels: All site preparation work and construction activity at the golf course site shall comply with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements restricting equipment operation between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. The Director of Public Works may approve concrete pours at 6 a.m. subject to the following restrictions: a.) a construction management plan shall be submitted outlining the full schedule for concrete work at the site; b.) a traffic management plan for access to and from the site shall be submitted for approval; c.) selected routes shall distribute early morning construction traffic impact onto multiple streets and neighborhoods to the maximum degree feasible; and d.) all other site work shall comply with Municipal Code noise/construction ordinance regulations. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Both the water treatment plant and the Municipal Golf Course are located slightly less than two miles from the Ukiah Municipal Airport. The proposed addition to the water treatment plant and the construction of three water storage tanks will not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. No employees will be working at the storage tanks at the golf course. The proposed expansion to the water treatment plant is not anticipated to result in any increase in staffing levels at the plant. 38 X:~,~,RY ltROAD~NOO~IG WOIa, K - GARY~ I!qiTIAL STUDY--FINAL DRAFT 12. I 1.03.DOC (12/16/03) For a project within the vicinity ofa private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? This project is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip and would therefore not expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels due to airport-related noise. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Le~ Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either [] [] · [] directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, [] [] [] · necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the [] [] [] · construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? This project will not induce substantial population growth, either directly or indirectly. The proposed water treatment plant expansion and the proposed three water tanks do not include any direct development, such as new homes or businesses, which would lead to substantial population growth in the Ukiah area. As discussed in the project description, this project is being undertaken to provide additional water storage capacity as required by the Department of Health Services in order to meet peak water demands for the existing City of Ukiah residents and water users. In addition, the proposed water treatment plant module additions will increase the treatment plant's capacity to its design capacity and allow for repair and maintenance work to be completed on the existing two modules without having to shut down treatment plant operations. As the city is close to built-out, and water use has historically been increasing at a rate of only 1.2% a year, the additional storage capacity and treatment capacity will not induce a substantial population growth in the area. The plant presently operates far below its design capacity and would need to develop enhanced methods of water extraction prior to any substantial increase in treatment plant production. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction-of replacement housing elsewhere? This project will allow for upgrading an existing water treatment facility and the construction of additional water storage capacity in order to meet Department of Health Services mandates. There are no housing units at the water treatment site, the adjacent softball fields or at the golf course. The improvements necessary for this project will not displace any existing housing, nor necessitate the construction of any replacement housing units. 39 X:~ARY BROAD~ONOO~IC~ WORK- GAR~ INTYIAL STUDY-F~AL DRAFT 1/-11.03.DOC (I c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? This project will not result in the displacement of any people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. There is no residential use at the water treatment plant, the adjacent softball fields or the Municipal Golf course. As such, the proposed water tank and plant improvements will not result in any displacement of people, nor require any replacement housing elsewhere. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] [] [] · Fire protection? [] [] [] · Police protection? [] [] [] · Schools? [] [] [] · Parks? [] [] [] · Other public facilities? [] [] [] · Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or otherperformance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, otherpublic facilities? Upgrading the existing water treatment facility by adding two modules and three additional water tanks to provide enhanced water capacity will not result in any adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of fire protection, police protection, schools, parks or other public facilities. To the contrary, as previously discussed, the proposed upgrades are required to meet State Department of Health Services mandates for water storage. This project will allow the City of Ukiah to continue to provide the 15,500 people depending on water for fire protection, for potable water at schools and public facilities, and for irrigation at parks and other public facilities. Any impact related to public services would be positive, as the City has already experienced water shortages in 2002 which affected its ability to supply water for domestic purposes and is likely to continue to experience additional shortages in future years without this project. X:t, GARY BROAD, ONGOING WORK- GARY~ IN1T[AL ~rUDY---FINAL DRAFT 12. I 1.03.DOC (I .l/16/03) 40 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Le~ Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact XIV. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing [] [] neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require [] [] the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? [] · [] · No Impact Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? This project will not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that a substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The upgrading of the existing water treatment facility and the provision of additional water storage capacity will not generate additional demand for the use of recreational facilities. The addition of the 1.5 million gallon water storage tank, diesel tank, generator and pump station at the existing softball fields will continue to provide for long-term use of the existing two softball fields. Any impact of this project on existing parks and recreational facilities would actually be positive as the existing shortage of water storage capacity has required on-going interruptions in irrigation of city facilities in order to conserve water during critical periods. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed additional water storage capacity and water treatment building improvements do not include, or require the construction or expansion of any recreational facilities. No impact will result. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase m traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact [] [] · [] [] [] [] · 41 X:~R.Y BROAD~O1qC. ff)llqG WORK- GARY~UKIA.H INI'I'IAL $TUDY--FllqAL DRAFt 12.11.03.DOC (12/I 6/03) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either[] [] an increase in traffic levels or a change in location, that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature [] [] (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? [] [] f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? [] [] g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs [] [] supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Less Than Significant Impact [] · No Impact Cause an increase tn traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? The proposed upgrades to the existing water treatment plant and the proposed additional water storage tanks will not result in any increases in staffing levels, nor any resulting increase in daily traffic, that would create any adverse traffic consequences. The water treatment facility and the adjacent softball fields are readily accessed from Highway 101 and can readily accommodate any increase in staffing levels and associated daily trips that occur. The addition of two water tanks at the Municipal Golf Course will not result in any permanent traffic increase and will not impact existing traffic load, nor the capacity of the street system. Highway 101 has adequate capacity to accommodate the additional construction-related traffic increase during project construction at the treatment plant and softball fields. The local network of streets which would provide construction traffic access to the Municipal Golf Course could handle the additional short-term traffic increase, including concrete tracks for tank construction. It will be necessary to install a temporary vehicular access across the golf course grass to the tank sites, however, this would be a driveway for construction traffic only with no public usage and would be removed at project completion. As has been previously discussed, project cut and fill will be balanced with the spoils from tank construction retained on-site in two fill areas. There will therefore not be any removal of spoils from the site, not any associate truck traffic for such removal. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways? The proposed expansion to the water treatment building and increased water storage capacity will not result in daily trips exceeding designated road or highway service standards. No additional daily traffic will be generated from the three water storage tanks. The proposed treatment plant expansion will not result in any increase in employees and will therefore not result in any additional traffic generation. 42 X:~sA.RY' BROAD'ONGOING WORK- GARY~UKIAH INrTIAL STUDY-IqNAL DRAFT 12.1 i.~.DOC (17./16/05 ) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The proposed upgrades to the existing water treatment plant and the proposed three additional water storage tanks will not result in any change in air traffic patterns, levels or locations that would constitute a substantial safety risk. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipmenO ? This project will not substantially increase hazards due to project design features. No new roadways or intersections are proposed for this project. Access to the softball fields, the water treatment plant and the golf course will not be changed by this project. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed improvements to upgrade the existing water treatment facility and the proposed additional water storage capacity will not result in any conditions which would result in inadequate emergency access. The proposed improvements will not affect access to any of the sites and they will continue to be readily accessible to emergency vehicles. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? This project will not result in inadequate parking capacity. Neither the proposed water treatment plant expansion nor the proposed storage tanks will result in any additional staffing levels and will not create any additional parking demand. The treatment plant site and the adjacent softball fields contain extensive flat areas which can be used for construction-related traffic and for project staging areas. Parking for construction-related traffic can be accommodated on city streets adjacent to the golf course. g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) ? This project will not conflict with any adopted programs, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. The proposed upgrades to an existing water treatment facility and the provision of additional water storage capacity, will not affect the provision of alternative transportation. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Potentially Si~,nifi~ant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation_ Significant Impact Incorporated Impact [] 0 [] No Impact X:~-JARY BROAD'ONGOING WORK- GARY~UKIAH ~ ~rUDY--FINAL DRAFT I 2. i 1.03.DOC ( 17/16/03 ) 43 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless L~s Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact [] · [] · · [] [] · [] · Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional }rater Quality Control Board? The proposed improvements to an existing water system to meet existing peak water demand will not result in the creation of any new wastewater. As such, this project will not lead to the creation of any wastewater exceeding any applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? This project will upgrade the existing City of Ukiah water treatment facility and provide additional required water storage. It will not require the construction of any other new wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of the existing facilities. As such, it will not create any significant environmental effects related to wastewater treatment facilities construction. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The upgrading of the existing water treatment system will not result in the need for significant new storm water facilities resulting in significant environmental effects. While the additional drainage generated from the proposed system improvements should be limited to on-site improvements, the project engineer will develop a drainage plan for the proposed improvements in conjunction with X:~-.~,ARY BROAD~,blGOI~IG WORK- GARYVJIU. AH ~ KTLIDY-YI~AL DR,AFT I 2. I 1.03.DOC (12/16/03 ) 44 overall project design. No off-site improvements will be required. The provision of local drainage improvements will not cause significant environmental effects. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No new or expanded entitlements are required to provide the additional storage capacity for this project. The City of Ukiah is permitted for Russian River underflow up to a maximum of 20 cubic feet per second (12.9 mgd), but is presently using less than half this permitted amount. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatmentprovider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider 's existing commitments? The proposed water treatment system improvements will expand the storage capacity of the system, rather than increase the water demand and therefore increase the wastewater treatment capacity. There is therefore no impact to a wastewater treatment provider's capacity. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? No solid waste will be produced from the additional water tanks. The amount of solid waste generated by the existing water treatment pond at its dewatering basins is small, estimated to be less than 100 cubic yards a year, and can be disposed of on-site without requiring the use of a landfill. Any incremental increase in the solid waste produced by the proposed treatment plant expansion can be similarly accommodated without the services of a landfill. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The project will comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. XVII. PROJECr ALTERNATIVES A) Alternatives for Each Major Phase or Component of the Project The 1992 water treatment plant was specifically designed to be able to operate at a maximum capacity of 12 mgd with four modules. The plant was designed initially with two modules and a 6 mgd capacity--this project would allow for the addition of two modules in order to bring its ultimate capacity up to 12 mgd. There is no available method to continue to operate the existing plant and its two existing modules and provide for the treatment of 6 mgd on a continuous and reliable basis. The project also includes the construction of 3.3 million gallons of additional water storage capacity. The City of Ukiah has received notification from the Department of Health Services that it must provide this additional capacity. The Department of Health Services did not offer any alternatives to the city instead of providing this additional storage capacity, nor is the city aware of any alternative methods to provide additional storage. The tanks are the most efficient means of providing additional storage, as no land area exists which would allow for the creation of a man-made body of water to be used as a reservoir. B) Alternative Siting Locations: X:~JtY BROAII~ON{~ WOltK - Cu~Y~UKIAH INITIAL ~IJDY-FINAL DRAFT 12.1 I.IB.DOC ( 11/! 6/0] ) 45 As outlined in the Department of Health Service letter, the City of Ukiah must specifically add approximately 3,000,000 gallons of water storage to its Zone 1 and 260,000 gallons of water storage to Zone 2. The existing water treatment plant is located east of Highway 101 and to the west of the Russian River. Because the plant was constructed in this location in 1992, it would not be feasible to expand the plant at an alternative location to add the two additional modules to increase potential treatment to the plant's design capacity of 12 mgd nor would it be feasible to construct the 1.5 million gallon water tank at an alternative site. Similarly, in light of the existing location of the 2.3 million gallon and the 100,000 gallon tanks at the golf course, the proposed addition of a 1.5 million gallon and a .3 million gallon tank at the same site are more efficient from an operational perspective and concentrate improvements within an already disturbed site. In addition, the location of the tanks at the golf course site allows for gravity flow of stored water as necessary during periods of peak demand to serve the city's residents and water users. The location of the tanks at a lower altitude would require pumping water throughout the distribution network, increasing operational costs, the potential for necessary maintenance and repair, and the risk of interruption of service due to power outages. C) Alternative Projects That Could Accomplish the Project Objectives The City of Ukiah water system fails to have enough storage capacity to meet DHS requirements. It also lacks adequate modules to allow it to perform repair and maintenance to its two existing units. The 1992 water treatment plant was specifically designed for an ultimate capacity of 12 mgd with an initial capacity of 6 mgd. No other alternative projects are known that could meet DHS requirements and allow for necessary plant upgrades for reliability and redundancy. D) No project Alternative: The no project alternative would result in the development of no additional treatment or storage capacity for the City of Ukiah water system. The City of Ukiah would continue to be faced with regular water shortages during peak periods due to an inadequate amount of storage capacity to meet peak demands. City residents and system users would continue to worry about not having adequate water to meet their needs and to receive warnings that low water supply situations required a limitation in the use of water for non-essential purposes. Even if demand continued to grow at only the historically low rate of 1.2% a year, over time demand would further outstrip supply and water shortages would become more routine and more severe. Idenafication of the Environmentally Superior Alternative (if the "no project" alternative ts not the environmentally superior alternative. The environmentally superior approach is the proposed City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project. This project will ensure that Ukiah residents and water users are provided with a critical public service, potable water. The project design, both in terms of total proposed additional water storage capacity and storage capacity per zone, is consistent with the 2001 mandates of the Department of Health Services. The environmental review for this project has determined that the potential impacts from the water treatment expansion and the storage tanks are relatively minor--and all can be reduced to less than significant levels through the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. X:~TaARY BR. OAI:~Ob/{3OII'~ WORK- GAR'Y~UKIAH IIqTrlAL STUDY--FINAL DRAFT 12.11~3.OOC (12./16/03 } 46 XVIII. a) Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Lezz Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact · [] MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality [] [] of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually [] [] · [] limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will [] [] · [] cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat ofa fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range ora rare or endangeredplant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? This project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. An archaeological review of this project failed to identify any important examples of major period of California history or prehistory and included mitigation measures to protect any such resources which might be discovered during project construction. A biological inventory of the site failed to discover any rare or endangered plants or animals. Biological mitigation measures have been identified to ensure that the project will not reduce the habitat or a fish or wildlife species, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels. Mitigation measures have been included throughout the Initial Study to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels to ensure that the quality of the envir3nment will not be degraded. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of pastprojects, the effects of other currentprojects, and the effects of probable future projects.) X:~_~RY BROAD~ONGOilqG WORK- GARYM./KIAH IlqFYIAL :TI'UDY--FIIRAL DRAFI' 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) 47 This project does not have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable. There have been no past projects at these sites, or in the area of the sites, which would increase the identified impacts to a level of significance above that discussed in the text of this Initial Study. There are no known effects of current or probable future projects which would raise any of the analyzed impacts to a significant level. No impacts have been identified for this proposed upgrade of an existing water treatment facility and addition of storage capacity which would be affected by past, current or future development on these sites or in their vicinity. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? This project does not have any environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, directly or indirectly. As evidenced by this Initial Study, all potential impacts of this water treatment plant and storage expansion can be reduced to less than significant levels through the recommended mitigation measures and ensure that no substantial adverse effects to humans will result. Specific mitigation measures to reduce project impacts to less than significant levels are included in the following sections: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural 'Resources, Geology and Soils and Noise. XIX. SUMMARY OF PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES The following mitigation measures have been incorporated into this project to reduce identified impacts to less than significant levels: Aesthetics Mitigation Measures: · Existing vegetation outside of the area of project grading, filling and construction shall be protected and retained to protect views to the site. · Finished grading for fill areas shall, as feasible, attempt to leave areas in a natural looking hillside condition. · A landscape plan shall be prepared, subject to Planning Department review and approval, including the following: 1) the addition of native trees to fill-in any views to the tanks from off-site vantage points; and 2.) the provision of native vegetation, to the maximum extent possible, along cut and fill slopes to provide a natural-looking hillside environment. · Any metal tanks shall be earthtone in color and blend into the surrounding enviromnent. · Mitigation measures included in Section IV., Biology, shall be incorporated into the project design in order to also mitigate potential aesthetic impacts related to loss of vegetation and tree protection. · If the proposed water tank at the softball field is to be constructed from metal, it shall be earthtone to blend it into the natural colors of the site. · A landscape plan shall be prepared and implemented providing screen vegetation between proposed softball field improvements and Highway 101, as necessary, to soften views from the highway to proposed site improvements. Air Quality Mitigation Meaures: Maintain construction equipment in'accordance with manufacturers' specifications. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. 48 X:~-~,¥ BROAD6ONOOING WORK- GARYMIKIAH 1NTrlAL $1'UDY'-FINAL DRAFT 12. i 1.03.DOC (! 2/16/03) · All construction debris, including dirt and mud, shall be promptly cleaned and cleared from all roadways. · All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. · Trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. · Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. · Hydroseed or apply soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas prior to project completion. · To the extent feasible, construction equipment shall be left idling for not more than 10 minutes. Biological Resources Mitigation Measures: · A pre-construction nesting survey shall be conducted for tree nesting raptors if grading and construction is to be initiated during the months of April through August. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading. If any raptor nests are found within the construction area after April and before August, grading and construction in the area shall either stop or continue only after the nests are protected by an adequate setback approved by a qualified biologist. If permanent avoidance of nests is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by avoiding disturbances to the birds during the nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the juveniles from those nests are foraging independently and capable of independent survival at an earlier date. · The proposed project shall avoid the ephemeral drainages in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites to the maximum extent practicable. If complete avoidance is not feasible, the proposed improvements shall be coordinated with representatives of the Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB, and any required authorization obtained prior to any modification to jurisdictional waters. Additional conditions may be required by jurisdictional agencies to minimize disturbance and provide appropriate mitigation. These include restrictions on construction activities during the low flow summer months, prohibition on placement of fill or equipment maintenance within the ephemeral drainages, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. · A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing Best Management Practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. · A Tree Protection and Revegetation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect or certified arborist, which provides for protection of trees to be retained, re-establishment of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and replacement of trees removed as part of the project. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning department prior the issuance of any building or grading permits or any site preparation and construction activity. The following requirements and restrictions shall be incorporated into the plan: · Tree removal shall be minimized with valley oaks and other mature trees avoided to the maximum extent practicable. All trees shall be avoided on the softball field site. The mature valley oaks on the golf course sites shall also be avoided, specifically including the 32-inch diameter valley oak south of the existing 150-foot diameter tank and the scattered mature valley oaks at the western fringe of the golf course fairway just down slope from the proposed central soil disposal area. · Detailed guidelines shall be prepared to control possible damage to trees to be preserved. The location of trees to be retained within 50 feet of proposed grading shall be identified in the field through flagging or other obvious marking method prior to any grading. · Temporary fencing shall be provided along the outermost edge of the dripline of each tree or group of trees to be retained in the vicinity of grading to avoid compaction of the root zone and mechanical damage to trunks and limbs. 49 X:~AI~.Y B.q. OAD~ONGOIN6 WORK- GARY'~UKIAH 1NfrlAL STUDY-FINAL DR/iFf 12. ! i.03.DOC (12/16/03) · Storage of construction equipment, materials, and stockpiled soils shall be prohibited within the tree dripline of trees to be preserved to prevent possible damage. · A program shall be developed which provides for replanting of trees removed on graded slopes. Trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as feasible, for all trees with tnmk diameters greater than 12 inches removed as part of the project. Suitable species which shall be used in the tree replacement shall include: valley oak (Quercus lobata), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). · Replacement tree plantings shall be irrigated during the dry summer months as necessary to ensure establishment, typically for a minimum of two years. · Replacement tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a minimum of five years. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on an annual basis. A program to remove French broom shall be incorporated into the Revegetation Plan to eliminate this species and prevent its reestablishment. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent reestablishment and spread of broom. The removal and monitoring program shall include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants when soils are saturated, and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April. Monitoring and routine removal shall be provided on an annual basis for a minimum of five years to prevent reestablishment. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures: · In the event that major grading or underground excavation uncovers what appears to be archaeological material, particularly within the existing treatment facility, a temporary work shutdown in that immediate area should be enforced until the discovered materials can be evaluated. · If archaeological materials are found in concentration and therefore deemed to be potentially important, formal documentation should occur before work is allowed to resume. · If it appears likely that the discovered material could be fiuther disturbed by the proposed project, subsequent activity should be performed under the supervision of an archaeological monitor. An example of standard procedures for monitoring and spot checks as attached to the Archaeological Resource Service cultural resources evaluation should act as guideline in the event that potentially important archaeological materials are encountered. Geology and Soils Mitigation Measures: · Site development shall comply with the seismic design factors recommendations of Section V. of the Miller Pacific Geotechnical Investigation dated November 1, 2002. · All improvements and structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic provisions of the most-recent version of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the American Water Works Association (AWWA). · The design base shear of the new construction shall comply with the seismic coefficients and site values included in Table C of the Miller Pacific report, which are based on interpreted subsurface conditions at the site and the closest fault type and distance to the site. The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications prior to the commencement of construction to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. · Slope stability mitigation options, such as stabilization or repair of any slides that intercept the new tank sites or cut slopes behind the tanks, shall be implemented, subject to geotechnical engineer 50 WORK- GARY~UKIAH II'4Ti'IAL ~FUDY--FINAL DRAFT 12. ! 1.03.DOC (17./16/03 ) approval. (If any unidentified zones of instability are encountered during grading operations at the northern hillside tank site, they shall be stabilized or repaired. · Benches should be constructed in the cut slopes at the soil/rock transition that are wide enough to allow equipment to clear any debris that sloughs and accumulates on them. The upper five feet at the top of cut slopes should be no steeper than 2.' 1 and rounded to conform to the existing terrain. Benches shall be regularly maintained to keep them clear of debris · A concrete lined v-ditch shall be provided across the top of cut slopes. All cut slopes shall be revegetated. · The treatment plant shall be supported on a shallow foundation system that bears on properly compacted fill. The depth of over excavation and recompaction should be at least 10 feet. The upper ten feet of soils should be removed and recompacted in the area beneath the tank and pump station at the softball field site prior to foundation construction. · The required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and shall include the use of straw waddles and sextiment traps during and immediately after site grading and erosion control blankets or other standard erosion control practices to prevent damage from erosion caused by slope runoff. Erosion from increased runoff from hardscape and other site improvements shall be mitigated by conveying discharges from the water tank, roads and other site improvements into a site drainage system. · Treatment Plant construction shall incorporate the detailed recommendations for liquefaction remediation Miller Pacific Engineer Group develops in their final geotechnical report. Plant construction shall include a soil modification technique, such as compaction grouting or stone columns to densify the loose granular layer below the water table, or other appropriate remediation as determined necessary by the project geotechnical engineer. · In order to mitigate the potential for damage due to differential settlement, the treatment building shall be constructed with either the use of shallow footings combined with over excavation and recompaction of soils within the new building footprint, or the use of drilled pier foundations excavated into a uniformly firm soil strata. · The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications when they near completion to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. · During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confmn that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Noise Mitigation Measures: · All site preparation work and construction activity at the golf course site shall comply with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements restricting equipment operation between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. The Director of Public Works may approve concrete pours starting at 6 a.m. subject to the following restrictions: a.) a construction management plan shall be submitted outlining the full schedule for concrete work at the site; b.) a traffic management plan for access to and from the site shall be submitted for approval; c.) selected routes shall distribute early morning construction traffic impact onto multiple streets and neighborhoods to the maximum degree feasible; and d.) all other site work shall comply with Municipal Code noise/construction ordinance regulations. XX. RESOURCES USED TO PREPARE INITIAL STUDY The City of Ukiah Emergency Plan, 2002. The City of Ukiah General Plan Growth Management Program, December 1995. 51 X: ~.Y BROAD~ONOOING WOBX- GARY~rg~M-I INITIAL STUDY~FI~AL DR, AFT 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) The Ukiah Airport Master Plan, Shutt Moen Associates, July, 1996. The following Technical Studies prepared in conjunction with this initial study: A Cultural Resources Evaluation of the City of Ukiah Water Treatment Facilities Improvements Project, Ukiah, Mendocino County, California submitted by Katherine Flynn, Archaeological Resource Service, December 2003. LOMS Package for the Treatment Facility in the City ofUkiah, Winzler & Kelly, December 30, 2002. Preliminary Report Geotechnical Investigation, City of Ukiah Water System Improvements, Ukiah, California, November 1, 2002 prepared by Miller Pacific Engineering Group City of Ukiah Water System Improvements Biological Resource Assessment, Jim Martin, ENVIRONMENTAL COLLABORATIVE, December 2002, Updated in August 2003. The following technical drawings: Zones I and II Water Storage System Expansion Project, Ukiah Utilities, SPH Associates, January 2003. Discussions and correspondence with the following City staff: Charley Stump, City of Ukiah, Planning Director Ann Burke, City of Ukiah, Project Engineer/Manager X: KT~.R Y BRO~.D~O~IOOI~G WORK- GARY~UICIA~ ~ 3TUDY--ta~AL DRAFI' 12.11.03.DOC (12/16/03) 52 APPENDIX A. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLISTmUKIAH WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT The following mitigation measures were incorporated into the mitigated negative declaration for the City of Ukiah Water System Improvement Project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of less than significance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure will indicate that the mitigation requirement has been complied with and implemented. Ao . o . o . Aesthetics Mitigation Measures: Existing vegetation outside of the area of project grading, filling and construction shall be protected and retained to protect views to the site. Finished grading for fill areas shall, as feasible, attempt to leave areas in a natural looking hillside condition. A landscape plan shall be prepared, subject to Planning Department review and approval, including the following: 1) the addition of native trees to fill-in any views to the tanks from off- site vantage points; and 2.) the provision of native vegetation, to the maximum extent possible, along cut and fill slopes to provide a natural-looking hillside environment. Any metal tanks shall be earthtone in color and blend into the surrounding environment. Mitigation measures included in Section IV., Biology, shall be incorporated into the project design in order to also mitigate potential aesthetic impacts related to loss of vegetation and tree protection. If the proposed water tank at the softball field is to be constructed from metal, it shall be earthtone to blend it into the natural colors of the site. A landscape plan shall be prepared and implemented providing screen vegetation between proposed softball field improvements and Highway 101, as necessary, to soften views from the highway to proposed site improvements. Aesthetics Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Mitigation Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Measure Check A. 1 Planning/Building A.2 Utility/Contractor Daily A. 3 Planning Dept. . Daily A.4 Planning Prior to permits A. 5. See section C. See section C A.6. Planning Prior to - permits A.7 Planning Prior to permits B. Air Quality Mitigation Meaures: 1. Maintain construction equipment in accordance with manufacturers' specifications. . o . o . . Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. All construction debris, including dirt and mud, shall be promptly cleaned and cleared from all roadways. Ail earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. Trucks hauling soil, sand and other loose materials shall be covered or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. Hydroseed or apply soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas prior to project completion. To the extent feasible, construction equipment shall be left idling for not more than 10 minutes. Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Measure Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Check Air Quality B. 1 Utility/Contractor Daily B.2 Utility/Contractor Daily B.3. Utility/Building Daily Dept. and Contractor B.4. Utility/Building After Dept. and grading Contractor B.5. Building Dept. Daily B.6. Building Dept. Daily B.7. Planning, Building, Post Pub. Works grading B.8 Building/Pub. Post grading Works construction B.9 Building/Contractor Daily Ce . Biological Resources Mitigation Measures: A pre-construction nesting survey shall be conducted for tree nesting raptors if grading and construction is to be initiated during the months of April through August. The surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to initiation of grading. If any raptor nests are found within the construction area after April and before August, grading and construction in the area shall either stop or continue only after the nests are protected by an adequate setback approved by a qualified biologist. If permanent avoidance of nests is not feasible, impacts shall be minimized by avoiding disturbances to the birds during the nesting season unless a qualified biologist verifies that the birds have either a) not begun egg-laying and incubation, or b) that the juveniles from those nests are foraging independently and capable of independent survival at an earlier date. The proposed project shall avoid the ephemeral drainages in the vicinity of the golf course tank sites to the maximum extent practicable. If complete avoidance is not feasible, the proposed o . improvements shall be coordinated with representatives of the Army Corps, CDFG, and RWQCB, and any required authorization obtained prior to any modification to jurisdictional waters. Additional conditions may be required by jurisdictional agencies to minimize disturbance and provide appropriate mitigation. These include restrictions on construction activities during the low flow summer months, prohibition on placement of fill or equipment maintenance within the ephemeral drainages, and implementation of adequate erosion and sedimentation control measures. A Storrnwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer utilizing Best Management Practices to address the potential for erosion and sedimentation. A Tree Protection and Revegetation Plan shall be prepared by a qualified landscape architect or certified arborist, which provides for protection of trees to be retained, re-establishment of grassland ground cover on graded slopes and replacement of trees removed as part of the project. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the planning department prior the issuance of any building or grading permits or any site preparation and construction activity. The following requirements and restrictions shall be incorporated into the plan: · Tree removal shall be minimized with valley oaks and other mature trees avoided to the maximum extent practicable. All trees shall be avoided on the softball field site. The mature valley oaks on the golf course sites shall also be avoided, specifically including the 32-inch diameter valley oak south of the existing 150-foot diameter tank and the scattered mature valley oaks at the western fringe of the golf course fairway just down slope from the proposed central soil disposal area. · Detailed guidelines shall be prepared to control possible damage to trees to be preserved. The location of trees to be retained within 50 feet of proposed grading shall be identified in the field through flagging or other obvious marking method prior to any grading. · Temporary fencing shall be provided along the outermost edge of the dripline of each tree or group of trees to be retained in the vicinity of grading to avoid compaction of the root zone and mechanical damage to trunks and limbs. · Storage of construction equipment, materials, and stockpiled soils shall be prohibited within the tree dripline of trees to be preserved to prevent possible damage. · A program shall be developed which provides for replanting of trees removed on graded slopes. Trees shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio, as feasible, for all trees with trunk diameters greater than 12 inches removed as part of the project. Suitable species which shall be used in the tree replacement shall include: valley oak (Quercus lobata), interior live oak (Q. wislizenii), and California buckeye (Aesculus californica). · Replacement tree plantings shall be irrigated during the dry summer months as necessary to ensure establishment, typically for a minimum of two years. · Replacement tree plantings shall be monitored and maintained for a minimum of five years. Any plantings lost within this monitoring period shall be replaced at a 1:1 ratio on an annual basis. · A program to remove French broom shall be incorporated into the Revegetation Plan to eliminate this species and prevent its reestablishment. Graded slopes and areas disturbed as part of the project shall be monitored to prevent reestablishment and spread of broom The removal and monitoring program shall include annual late winter removal of any rooted plants when soils are saturated, and cutting back of any remaining flowering plants in the spring before seed begins to set in late April. Monitoring and routine removal shall be provided on an annual basis for a minimum of five years to prevent reestablishment. Biological Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring Approved Implementation Remark Resources Schedule during Verification Mitigation Plan Measure Check C. 1. Project Before permit, Biologist/Planning/Utility grading or construction C.2. ArmyCorps/CDFG Before permit Proj. Engineer RWQCB grading or construction C.3 Project Engineer, Public Before permit Works, Building grading or construction C.4. Project arborist or Before permit, landscape architect, before and planning, building, during grading and construction D. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures: 1. In the event that major grading or underground excavation uncovers what appears to be archaeological material, particularly within the existing treatment facility, a temporary work shutdown in that immediate area should be enforced until the discovered materials can be evaluated. 2. If archaeological materials are found in concentration and therefore deemed to be potentially important, formal documentation should occur before work is allowed to resume. 3. If it appears likely that the discovered material could be further disturbed by the proposed project, subsequent activity should be performed under the supervision of an archaeological monitor. An example of standard procedures for monitoring and spot checks as attached to the Archaeological Resource Service cultural resources evaluation should act as guideline in the event that potentially important archaeological materials are encountered. Cultural Mitigation Monitoring Implementation Remarks Resources Responsibility Schedule Approved Verification Mitigation during Measures Plan Check D. 1. Utility/Contractor During construction D.2 Utility/Contractor/Proj. During Archaeologist construction D.3. Utility/Contractor Proj. During Archaeologist construction Ee . . . . . 10. 11. 12. 13. Geology and Soils Mitigation Measures: Site development shall comply with the seismic design factors recommendations of Section V. of the Miller Pacific Geotechnical Investigation dated November 1, 2002. All improvements and structures shall be designed in accordance with the seismic provisions of the most-recent version of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) or the American Water Works Association (AWWA). The design base shear of the new construction shall comply with the seismic coefficients and site values included in Table C of the Miller Pacific report, which are based on interpreted subsurface conditions at the site and the closest fault type and distance to the site. The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications prior to the commencement of construction to confirm that the intent of their geotechnical recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Slope stability mitigation options, such as stabilization or repair of any slides that intercept the new tank sites or cut slopes behind the tanks, shall be implemented, subject to geotechnical engineer approval. (If any unidentified zones of instability are encountered during grading operations at the northern hillside tank site, they shall be stabilized or repaired. Benches should be constructed in the cut slopes at the soil/rock transition that are wide enough to allow equipment to clear any debris that sloughs and accumulates on them. The upper five feet at the top of cut slopes should be no steeper than 2:1 and rounded to conform to the existing terrain. Benches shall be regularly maintained to keep them clear of debris A concrete lined v-ditch shall be provided across the top of cut slopes. All cut slopes shall be revegetated. The treatment plant shall be supported on a shallow foundation system that bears on properly compacted fill. The depth of over excavation and recompaction should be at least 10 feet. The upper ten feet of soils should be removed and recompacted in the area beneath the tank and pump station at the softball field site prior to foundation construction. The required Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan shall be prepared by a qualified engineer and shall include the use of straw waddles and sediment traps during and immediately aPter site grading and erosion control blankets or other standard erosion control practices to prevent damage from erosion caused by slope runoff. Erosion from increased runoff from hardscape and other site improvements shall be mitigated by conveying discharges from the water tank, roads and other site improvements into a site drainage system. Treatment Plant construction shall incorporate the detailed recommendations for liquefaction remediation Miller Pacific Engineer Group develops in their final geotechnical report. Plant construction shall include a soil modification technique, such as compaction grouting or stone columns to densify the loose granular layer below the water table, or other appropriate remediation as determined necessary by the project geotechnical engineer. In order to mitigate the potential for damage due to differential settlement, the treatment building shall be constructed with either the use of shallow footings combined with over excavation and recompaction of soils within the new building footprint, or the use of drilled pier foundations excavated into a uniformly firm soil strata. The project geotechnical engineer shall review the plans and specifications when they near completion to confirm that the intent of their geotechnieal recommendations has been incorporated and to provide supplemental recommendations, if needed. 14. During construction, the project geotechnical engineer shall observe and test the site grading, compaction of fill material and foundation excavations to confirm that subsurface conditions are as expected and adjust foundation depths and other elements of the design, if warranted. Mitigation Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Measure Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Check Geology/Soils E 1. Building, During Geo. Engineer construction E.2. Building, Plan Geo. Engineer development & prior to permit E.3 Project eng. Plan Geo. engineer development & prior to permit E.4. Geotechnical Prior to engineer construction E. 5. Geotechnical During engineer construction E.6. Building, During Geo. engineer construction E.7. Building, During Geo. engineer construction E.8. Building During construction E.9. Building, During Geo. engineer construction E. 10 Building, Before Geo. engineer permit, during construction E. 11. Building, Before Geo. engineer permitting E. 12 Building, geo. Before engineer permitting E. 13 Building, geo. Before final engineer approval E. 14 Building, geo. During engineer construction F. Noise Mitigation Measures All site preparation work and construction activity at the golf course site shall comply with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements restricting equipment operation between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. The Director of Public Works may approve concrete pours starting at 6 a.m. subject to the following restrictions: a.) a construction management plan shall be submitted outlining the full schedule for concrete work at the site; b.) a traffic management plan for access to and from the site shall be submitted for approval; c.) selected routes shall distribute early morning construction traffic impact onto multiple streets and neighborhoods to the maximum degree feasible; and d.) all other site work shall comply with Municipal Code noise/construction ordinance regulations. Noise Mitigation Monitoring Approved Implementation Remarks Mitigation Responsibility Schedule during Plan Verification Measure Check F. 1. Public Works Prior to permit AGENDA ITEM NO: 9a MEE'I'~NG DATE: February 18, 2004 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: APPROVAL OF REVISIONS TO THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND LAND USE AGREEMENT BETVVEEN THE CITY OF UKIAH AND COUNTY OF MENDOCINO At the February 4 City Council meeting, the Council discussed the draft mitigation agreement between the City of Ukiah and the County of Mendocino in the Brush Street Triangle. Council directed staff to make revisions to the draft agreement for consideration by the County before final approval by the Board of Supervisors. The attached document contains the revisions as rewritten by staff based on Council's direction. Staff is asking for the Council's final approval of this language before submitting these revisions to the County. RECOMMENDED ACl']:ON: Approve revisions to Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement. ALTERNAT]:VE COUNC]:L POL]:CY OPT]:ONS: alternate direction to staff. Discuss revisions and provide Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A 1. Revised Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement Candace Horsley, Cit~ 4:CAN/ASR. RevisedRoadandLandAgrmt.021804 Manager ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND LAND USE AGREEMENT- 9/30/03 This Agreement is made and entered on 2004 ("Effective Date"), in Ukiah, California, by and between the City of Ukiah ("City"), a general law municipal corporation, and the County of Mendocino ("County"), a political subdivision of the State of California. RECITALS: 1. The City has under review the construction of certain improvements which will consist of constructing a bridge over Orrs Creek and extending Orchard Avenue to Brush Street. These improvements are more particularly described in the attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by this reference ("Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements"). 2. The City has prepared a Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report ("RDEIR"), dated October 2002, for the Orrs Creek Improvement project under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") which has determined that the construction of the Orrs Creek Improvements will promote commercial development in an unincorporated area ("Brush Street triangle"), depicted and described in the attached Exhibit B which is incorporated herein by this reference. 3. According to the RDEIR, commercial development within the Brush Street triangle will have adverse impacts on traffic and other adverse environmental impacts within the incorporated limits of the City of Ukiah. 4. Both parties also acknowledge that commercial development outside the Brush Street triangle, including within the City of Ukiah, may have adverse traffic impacts within the Brush Street triangle. 5. Under its current zoning designation and the applicable provisions of the Mendocino County zoning ordinance, some commercial and industrial development in the Brush Street triangle can be constructed on existing parcels subject only to obtaining building permits from the County. No discretionary permits, such as use or site development permits, are required. As a consequence, unless the County imposes additional land use regulations in the Brush Street triangle, property owners may construct some commercial and industrial development with potentially adverse environmental impacts within the incorporated limits of the City without adequate means currently in place to assess or mitigate those impacts. 6. The City takes the position that under the requirements of CEQA it cannot certi~ the RDEIR and undertake the construction of the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements, unless it can find that cumulative adverse environmental impacts within the City of Ukiah from construction of the Orr Creek Bridge, including development in the Brush Street triangle, as identified in the RDEIR or as may be identified in future evaluations of specific projects, are reduced to the point below the threshold of significance through changes to the projects or the adoption of enforceable conditions to the approval of those projects. 7. Pursuant to Streets and Highways Code § 1810, the County has no objection to the City acquiring fight of way and constructing the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements partially within the unincorporated area. AGREEMENT: Wherefore, in consideration of the above-recited facts and the terms and conditions as further stated herein, the parties hereby agree as follows. 1. Consent to Construction of Improvements. The County hereby consents to the construction of those Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements which will be within the unincorporated areas of the County, and any right of way acquired for thc extension of Orchard Avenue or for thc construction of the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements, lying north of thc Ukiah City limits. 2. Dedication to the County. The City shall irrevocably offer to dedicate to the County the constructed improvements north of the north bridge abutment and all acquired rights of way not already owned by the County which are part of the extension of Orchard Avenue within the unincorporated area. The County shall accept the rights of way and improvements as part of the County Maintained Road System and shall assume maintenance responsibility for the Orchard Avenue Bridge Road Improvements located outside City limits or north of the north bridge abutment. That acceptance shall occur within sixty (60) days after the improvements have been completed in compliance with the plans and specifications for their construction. 3. Maintenance, Rehabilitation and Replacement of Orchard Avenue Bridge. A long as the Orchard Avenue Bridge remains within the jurisdictional boundaries of both the City and the County, the expense of maintenance of the bridge shall be borne equally by the City and the County. Maintenance of the bridge shall be the responsibility of the City and shall occur on an as needed basis. Annually, after completion of the bridge, the City shall submit an invoice to the County setting forth the actual expenditure for the maintenance of the bridge for the previous twelve (12) months. The County shall pay the invoice within sixty (60) days of its submission. As long as the bridge remains within the jurisdictional boundaries of both the City and the County, the cost of rehabilitation and replacement of the bridge shall be borne equally by the City and the County. If the Brush Street triangle, or any portion contiguous to the bridge, is annexed into the City, the Orchard Avenue Bridge shall also be annexed and all future maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement costs shall be borne entirely by the City. If the north bridge abutment of the Orchard Avenue Bridge is annexed into the County, all future maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement costs of the bridge shall be borne entirely by the County. 4. Construction of improvements. The City shall construct the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements in accordance with the construction schedule set forth in the contract documents for the construction of these improvements, unless the time for completion is extended with the approval of the City or as a result of the contractor's performance. 5. Future County land use approvals. Prior to issuing any building permit for gl ty pt construction within the Brush Street trian e, the Coun agrees to ado and apply to each development proposal in the Brush Street triangle land use regulations that: require discretionary approval by the County of any commercial development or other development with potentially significant adverse environmental impacts (either individually or cumulatively) within the City of Ukiah ("a Project") and to evaluate such impacts in accordance with the requirements of CEQA prior to approving any such Project:; and (2) adopts Commercial Development Design Guidelines in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit C. The discretionary approval adopted by the County shall require tbr commercial developments, at a minimum, findings as set forth in Ukiah City Code Section 9_6_~ E. a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit D. Any such discretionary approval shall provide the County with sufficient authority to impose conditions or take other actions to adequately mitigate any adverse environmental impacts identified during the evaluation of the Project in compliance with CEQA._ 6. Process by which County adopts land use approvals. The County will proceed to amend its zoning ordinance providing discretionary approval authority as described in paragraph 5 of this Agreement. Within 90 days of receipt by the City of the land use regulations adopted by the County pursuant to this paragraph 6 and upon the City's satisfaction therewith, the City shall take final action on the Revised Draft EIR for the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements. Within 45 days of its receipt of said land use changes, the City shall noti~ the County in writing as to whether or not it is satisfied that those changes comply with the requirements of this Agreement. If the City is not satisfied, the notice shall include the reasons for the City's dissatisfaction. 7. Mitigations. 7.1 The parties acknowledge that the Mendocino Council of Governments ("MCOG"), at their request, commissioned a technical study, entitled Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study (W-trans, May 30, 2003) which can be used as deemed appropriate by the parties to develop for adoption by the County and the City resolutions imposing off-site capital improvement fees sufficient to fund capital improvements necessary to mitigate traffic impacts from development within the "MCOG study area," which includes the Brush Street Triangle Development Area, all as depicted and described on pages 1-5 and 16 of the MCOG Study, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit GE and incorporated herein by reference. The County and the City shall endeavor to adopt off-site capital improvement fees as authorized by the Mitigation Fee Act to fund capital improvements in the City and the County necessary to adequately fund mitigations for traffic impacts from developments that will generate additional traffic within the MCOG study area. This Agreement does not obligate either the City or the County to accept or use the study in the form approved by MCOG. Each jurisdiction shall have discretion to adopt a study that it determines fairly and adequately apportions among affected parcels of land the cost of constructing improvements to adequately mitigate off-site adverse environmental impacts of new development within the MCOG study area, but the parties shall endeavor to coordinate their studies and to make them compatible. 7.2. In evaluating the environmental impacts of a project that will generate additional traffic within the MCOG study area (as defined in paragraph 7.1 above), the County and the City shall consider the EIR certified by the City for Orchard Avenue Bridge and shall, in compliance with CEQA, mitigate project-related traffic impacts within the City as well as in the unincorporated area, c~omprising the MCOG study area. In evaluating the impacts of any individual such projects within the MCOG study area, the County and the City shall include an evaluation of the cumulative impacts from all potential new development that may generate additional traffic within that area. Neither the City nor the County shall rely on its lack ofjurisdiction within the other jurisdiction to find that it is infeasible to mitigate an adverse environmental impact in the other jurisdiction. The County and the City shall take steps to fund improvements in the other jurisdiction deemed necessary to mitigate adverse environmental impacts from full development of projects that will generate additional traffic within the entire MCOG study area. Subject to Section 7.3, below, neither the County nor the City shall approve any project that will generate additional traffic within the MCOG study area, unless such steps have been taken to fund that project's proportionate share of the costs to mitigate such environmental impacts. The amount contributed by or on behalf of such projects shall satisfy the proportionality requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act (Cal. Gov't Code {}66000 et seq.). 7.3 The MCOG Study identifies a series of recommended mitigations to address cumulative traffic impacts of development within the MCOG study area. The parties agree that these mitigations should be prioritized with some performed before others, and that some of the proposed mitigations may require revision or modification based on the infeasibility of the mitigations or development of a better altemative. The parties also recognize that development in the portions of the MCOG study area located within the City and within the unincorporated area of the County is likely to take place at different rates. The parties shall determine a schedule tied to increased levels of traffic for constructing the recommended traffic mitigations or any agreed upon modifications of such mitigations. Those mitigations, including any agreed upon modifications, shall either (1) be constructed when called for under the agreed upon schedule, or (2) the project shall not be approved, if sufficient funding is not available to construct the mitigations as scheduled Alternatively, any funding shortfall may be addressed by requiring some projects to pay for the full cost of the required mitigations, even if that cost exceeds that project's proportional share of the cost of all mitigations required by this agreement, with a right of that project to be reimbursed from the fees paid by furore developments; or, the jurisdiction or jurisdictions where the development triggering the need for the mitigations has occurred may proportionally fund the shortfall with a similar right of reimbursement from the fees paid by future developments; or, the jurisdiction may require a given project, in lieu of paying its full share of each mitigation identified in the MCOG study (or other study referred to in paragraph 7.1), to pay a higher proportional share of a specific mitigation, provided that each project pays its proportional share of the total mitigation costs identified in the MCOG study or other study under paragraph 7.1; or, after meeting and conferring with the other party to this agreement, and subject to the requirements of CEQA, the parties may allow a project to proceed by modifying the schedule or the required mitigations. 7.4 The foregoing provisions of this paragraph shall not preclude either the City or the County from adopting a statement of overriding consideration to reduce or limit the imposition of mitigation funding for specific projects that the City or County approves prior to the adoption of off-site capital improvement fees under the Mitigation Fee Act for projects within the MCOG study area; provided, however, that ( 1 ) the parties agree in writing to the reduction or limitation of mitigation funding tbr the specific project and (2) the City or the County.,,,..,"~'~'l! .-.,,,,~.,~ycomplies with its obligations under Section 7.3, above. 8. Modifications. City or County may, from time to time, request changes in the terms of this Agreement. Such changes, which are mutually agreed upon by and between City and the County, and approved by the City Council and the Board of Supervisors, shall be incorporated in written amendments to this Agreement. 9. Assignment. City and County shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without the prior written consent of the other party. 10. Application of Laws. The parties hereby agree that all applicable Federal, State and local rules, regulations and guidelines not written into this Agreement shall hereby apply to the parties' performance under this Agreement. 11. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and any legal action concerning the agreement must be filed and litigated in the proper court in Mendocino County. 12. Attorneys fees. In any action to enforce the provisions of this Agreement the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the other party, its reasonable attorneys' fees in addition to its costs of suit. 13. Severability. If any provision of the Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way. 14. Integration. This Agreement contains the entire agreement among the parties and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous oral and written agreements, understandings, and representations among the parties. No amendments to this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing by all of the parties. 15. Waiver. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor shall any waiver constitute a continuing waiver. No waiver shall be binding unless executed in writing by the party making the waiver. 16. Notice. Whenever notice, payment or other communication is required or permitted under this Agreement it shall be deemed to have been given when personally delivered or when deposited in the United Sates mail as certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, and addressed as follows: COUNTY UKIAH County of Mendocino c/o: County Administrator County Administration Center 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA. 95482 City of Ukiah c/o: City Manager Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 17. Paragraph headings. The paragraph headings contained herein are for convenience and reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of this Agreement. 18. Duplicate originals. This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals bearing the original signature of both parties and when so executed any such duplicate original shall be admissible as proof of the existence and terms of the Agreement between the parties. 19. No third party beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of City and County and confers no rights or benefits on any persons or entities not a signatory to this Agreement. No third party beneficiaries are intended or established by this Agreement. WHEREFORE, the parties have entered this Agreement on the date first written above. CITY OF UKIAH By. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney COUNTY OF MENDOCINO By: Chairman of the Board of Supervisors ATTEST: Clerk of the Board Approved as to form: County Counsel ITEM NO: to,, DATE: February 18, 2004 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING THE CITY OF UKIAH SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BOUNDRY SUMMARY: The current Sphere of Influence for the City of Ukiah was adopted in 1982. It extends from Highway 20 to Burke Hill Road, and from ridge top to ridge top. The 1995 General Plan recommended that it be significantly reduced in size to more accurately reflect the limits of probable or possible City expansion through the year 2015. The proposed new Sphere of Influence extends from the westem hills ridge top to Highway 101 and from Whitmore Lane west of South State Street north to Orr Springs Road. It includes the old Masonite property east of Highway 101, the acreage north of Lover's Lane, and the area known as the Brush Street Triangle. There is a need to determine if the current or 1995 General Plan proposed Spheres of Influence are appropriate for the City over the next 10-15 years. No annexations can occur without the Sphere of Influence being consistent with the General Plan, and there is a current need to annex City-owned land adjacent to the airport and sewer treatment plant, and the RCHDC project parcel in the Brush Street Triangle. Additionally, the City has experienced many changes from when the General Steering Committee completed theirwork in 1994 and the Council adopted the Plan in 1995. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Discuss the current and 1995 General Plan proposed Spheres of Influence and decide if either one makes sense or if a different Sphere is desirable; and 2) Provide direction to Staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not discuss the Sphere of Influence and provide direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: LAFCO Staff and general public via notice published in the Ukiah Daily Journal Requested by: Chadey Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Chadey Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Map of existing and 1995 General Plan proposed Spheres of Influence 2. Maps of three possible areas to include in Sphere of Influence 3. Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan "Ukiah Urban Boundary." 4. LAFCO Sphere of Influence general policies and update guidelines APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City I~anager The changes include huge increases in home prices and rents, an increase in homelessness, particularly for working families, a significant increase in traffic congestion, the transformation of the Airport Industrial Park into a retail center, the approval of nearly a million square feet of commercial development, the City reaching approximately 85% build-out, and the loss of long-standing industrial jobs due to plant closures. The Council needs to decide if the current 1982 Sphere or the 1995 General Plan recommended Sphere makes sense, or if the City should establish a different one. If it is decided that the Sphere recommended in the General Plan is reasonable and appropriate, Staff will begin the process of making application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for a Sphere of Influence Amendment. If it is decided that a different Sphere is desired, Staff will initiate the General Plan amendment and required CEQA process before making application to LAFCO to amend the current Sphere. In Staff's opinion, if large complex changes are desired for the Sphere, the General Plan amendment process would be equally complex and controversial, and would involve a comprehensive California Environmental Quality Act process. Any modifications to the 1995 General Plan Sphere should be well thought-out, discussed with all stake-holders, based on sound planning principals, and consistent with the General Plan vision statement. PLANNING COMMISISON REVIEW: On February 11,2004, the Planning Commission discussed the current and 1995 proposed Spheres of Influence. No clear consensus was reached in terms of an appropriate Sphere. The Commissioners grappled with the concepts of maintaining a compact practical Sphere that would reflect only those areas where the City anticipated growth to occur in the next 15 years, or establishing a larger Sphere to provide broader annexation possibilities if needed in the near future. Two members of the original General Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) spoke and cautioned the Commission to be very careful about suggesting changes to the 1995 recommended Sphere. They provided an historical perspective about the CAC efforts and difficult consensus building process that occurred to establish the 1995 recommended Sphere. While it is acknowledged that the CAC work and consensus process was intense and demanding, it is important to keep in mind that State General Plan law encourages communities to periodically re-evaluate its "constitution" for growth and development, and to make changes if local circumstances present new and important quality of life issues. In general, the Commission felt that there was some medt to discussing possibilities and looking beyond the 1995 recommended Sphere, but that maybe the prudent approach for now would be to move forward with the 1995 General Plan recommended Sphere, but continue discussions in the coming years with the possibility of modifying it at a later date. What is a Sphere of Influence? California law requires that each City have a Sphere of Influence to represent the ultimate limits to which the City will extend its services, embrace new territory, and anticipate growth in the future. State law also requires the Sphere to be approved by LAFCO before the City can consider annexing land. The 1995 General Plan Sphere of Influence Through the General Plan update process during the early 1990's, it was determined that the Sphere of Influence boundary was unreasonably large, and did not accurately reflect the area in which the City would logically grow through the year 2015. The Council at the time accepted the recommendation of the General Plan Steedng Committee, and adopted the Plan with a significantly smaller Sphere of Influence. The City has not approached LAFCO to amend the Sphere to be consistent with the Sphere recommended in the General Plan for a variety of reasons. First, when the City Council adopted the General Plan in 1995, they deleted the "assertive" annexation policies recommended by the CAC and Planning Commission. Second, it was never set as a high priority by the City Council due to the deletion of the "assertive" annexation policies, and the fact that it was a reduction in the Sphere, rather than the more common increase that usually accompanies updated General Plans. Third, the Council recognized the high priority and pressing need to revise the zoning ordinance and map, as well as a number of other regulatory tools to be consistent with the new General Plan. The 1995 General Plan Sphere includes the western hills area to the ridge top above the City. At the time, it was felt that the City may wish to annex this land if it could provide adequate public services to control and mange development. The General Plan Sphere also includes the area north of the City to Orr Springs Road, which captures the "Lover's Lane Master Plan Area." It was determined that this acreage represented an area of probable future urban development that logically would become a part of the City. To the south, the General Plan Sphere includes developed parcels, as well as vacant lands in the foothills. The Sphere boundary line on the east was reduced from the ridge top of the eastern hills to Highway 101. This was done to support the General Plan policies of containing urban development to areas west of the Highway in an effort to protect agriculture as a dominant component of the local high quality of life. 2004 Issues There are a number of Sphere of Influence issues that have surfaced since the 1995 General Plan was adopted. It is estimated that the City is approximately 85% built out. Very little vacant land remains in the City, and what land is left is either burdened with constraints, small, or generally unavailable. Opportunities for housing development are limited, and the number of building permits issued for new housing units has been limited primarily to infill apartment buildings. The recent request for water service outside the City limits to serve an affordable housing project illustrates the scarcity of suitable vacant land for housing development in the City limits, and that the development pressure on vacant land adjacent to the City is mounting. While the emerging 5-7 year Housing Strategy in our recently completed draft General Plan Housing Element focuses on infill development, the City may want to look beyond this timeframe, and evaluate areas outside the General Plan recommended Sphere that it may want to eventually manage, control, and plan for housing, mixed-use, and/or "village" development. These areas may include lands to the south and east. The amount of land suitable for light manufacturing land uses has changed since 1995. Most has been developed with commercial and residential land uses rather than light manufacturing or industrial, and there is very little left. A large light manufacturing land use looking to relocate to the City from Sonoma County recently contacted Staff about the availability of vacant 10-acre parcels in the City limits. It was the type of light manufacturing that could co-exist with commercial and residential land uses, but very little opportunity for this type of land use is left within the City limits. Additionally, if the Council desires to manage community design and open space, there must be discussions about including all lands adjacent to the Citywithin our Sphere of Influence. Possible Areas to Evaluate Areas outside the General Plan recommended Sphere that the Council may want to discuss include 1 ) the acreage east of and adjacent to Highway 101 between East Gobbi Street, Babcock Lane, and Talmage Road; 2) the acreage east of and adjacent to Highway 101 between East Perkins Street and the Softball complex/VVater Treatment Plant property (see Attachment No. 2-1); and 3) lands south of the City to approximately Highway 253 (Attachment 2-2). Owners of the parcels to the east have approached Staff in the past to discuss the possibilities of future annexation and specific plan development with an emphasis on housing. If the Council is interested in the discussions evolving, the areas should be included in the City's Sphere of Influence. As previously indicated, these parcels are in the existing Sphere, but not included in the 1995 general Plan recommended Sphere. The primary issue associated with including lands to the east of Highway 101 in the Sphere of Influence and designating it for future urban development is that it would undermine one of the primary themes of the General Plan - that Highway 101 is the demarcation line between urban development and agriculture/open space. Including it in the Ukiah Sphere of Influence would require amendments to various elements of the General Plan, and would likely involve considerable discussion and debate, particularly with the agricultural community. Area 1: This area is comprised of several parcels under various ownerships totaling approximately 85 acres. Potential constraints to development include agricultural land, drainage, flood zone, visual quality, traffic, access/circulation, air quality, and water/sewer availability. Opportunities for development include a Specific Plan designation that could use new urbanism and smart growth planning techniques to create a progressive sustainable village development. The Specific Plan could include compact mixed residential densities, neighborhood serving commercial land uses, light manufacturing business development, bicycle and pedestrian orientation, and open space and park development. Area 2: This area is comprised of several parcels that total approximately 83 acres. The development constraints and opportunities are the same to Area 1, although traffic circulation may be more problematic. In addition, the land may be more suitable (prime)for agriculture than Area 1, which is apparently burdened with a higher water table and less suitable soils. Area 3: The lands to the south of the City to Highway 253 are developed with primarily single family residences. There is a large amount of acreage currently under agricultural production, but earmarked for future housing development. The constraints and opportunities are similar to those for Areas 1 and 2 above. Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan "Ukiah Urban Boundary" The Draft Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan includes an "Ukiah Urban Boundary" (Attachment No. 3). This area, which includes lands north and south of Ukiah is meant to include those properties around the City where urban growth should be directed. It includes land within most of Ukiah's Sphere of Influence, currently urbanized areas, and "contiguous areas appropriate for future urban scale development, infill, or redevelopment." This boundary is not officially recognized by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), and does not usurp or replace the Ukiah Sphere of Influence boundary. It is intended to identify areas outside the City that are appropriate for urban scale development. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Discuss the current and 1995 General Plan proposed Spheres of Influence and decide if either one makes sense or if a different Sphere is desirable; and 2) Provide direction to Staff. Ukiah Valley General Plan and Growth Management Program City of Ukiah ~ Mendocino County, California I1.1. What is a General Plan? 4, Page 6 Planning Area City Lhnits ~J PROPOSE~) SPHERE OF INFLUENCE Figure II. f-D: Sphere of Influence proposed by the General Plan for LAFCo approval Adopted by the City Council: December 5, 1995 / RMR RR LI ,G RMR RL' Draft Ukiah Valley Area Plan Chapter 1 - The Area Plan · ,, Ukiah Urban Boundary Figure 1-D June 10, 2003 Page 1-9 LAFCO of Mendocino County Policy and Procedures per AB 2838---2002 this prohibition if the Commission finds that this is detrimental to the public interest [56884]. 14. For any proposal initiated by the Commission, a public protest hearing will be held in the affected territory [57008] 15. The Commission.will order the change of organization or reorganization subject to an election if it finds either of the follOwing: [57113] · For an inhabited territory, that a petition requesting that the proposal be submitted to confirmation by the voters has been signed by at least 10% of the number of landowners within any affected district who own at least 10% of the assessed valUe of the land within the territory; or at least 10% of the voters entitled to vote as a result of residing within, or owning land within, any affected district within the affected territory. · For a landowner-voter district that the territory is uninhabited and a petition requesting that the proposal be submitted to confirmation by the voters signed by at least 10% of landowners within any affected district within the affected territory, who also own at least 10% of the assessed value of land within the territory. If there are less than 300 voters, the petition must be signed by 25% of the voters entitled to vote. D. SPHERE OF INFLUENCE LAFCO is required to adopt a sphere of influence for each local agency within its jurisdiction. "In order to carry Out its purpose and responsibilities for planning and shaping the logical and orderly development and coordination of local government agencies so as to advantageously provide for the present and. future needs of the county and its communities, the commission shall develop and determine the sphere of influence of each. local government agency within the county and enact 'policies. designed' to promote the logical and orderly development of areas within the sphere." [56425] General Policies for Spheres of Influence o A sphere of influence is defined as a "plan for the probable physical boundary and service area of a local government agency, as determined by the commission" [56076]. Every determination on changes of organization or reorganization shall be consistent with the spheres of influence of the local agencies affected by that determination [56375.5]. A sphere of influence is primarily a planning tool that will: · Serve as a master plan for the future organization of local government within the county by providing long range guidelines for the efficient provision of services to the public. · Discourage duplication of services by two or more local government agencies. · Guide the Commission when considering individual proposals for changes of organization. 59 policy and. ProceOares per AS; 5.~7,'~:--27~2 . . . ~ ~.c-~'3~tifv the need for reorganization studies and provide the basis for ~cc,~mmendations to particular agencies for government reorganizations. In determining the sphere of influence for a_!ll local .agencies the Commission is required to consider and make a written statement of determinations with respect to each of the following: [56425(e)] · The present and planned land uses in the area, including agricultural and open space lands. · The present and probable need for public facilities and services in the area The present capacity of public facilities and adequacy of public services that the agency provides or is authorized to provide. · The existence of any social or economic communities of interest in the area if the commission determines they are relevant to the agency. · Before making these determinations the Commission will review the factors to be considered in the review of a proposal as detailed in Section 56668. When adopting, amending or updating a sphere of influence for a special district the commission shall do all of the following: [56425(h)] · Requke existing districts to file written statements with the Commission specifying the functions or classes of services provided by those districts. · Establish the nature, location and extent of any functions or classes of services provided by existing districts. As mandated by law, in order to prepare and update spheres of influence in accordance with Section 56425, the commission shall conduct a service review of the municipal services provided in the county or other appropriate area designated by the commission [56430]. (See Section D, Service RevieWs below) 'As mandated by law, the adequacy of each adopted sphere of influence will be reviewed every 5 years following the initial sphere determination or initial sphere review. At approximately 5 year intervals, a preliminary sphere evaluation will be conducted by LAFCO. The evaluation will include a recommendation by the Executive Officer to either proceed with a comprehensive sphere update study or to affirm the existing sphere. · Each subject agency will be notified of the pending review of its sphere of influence and will be invited to participate actively in any restudy efforts deemed necessary by the Commission. · Each agency will complete a sphere of influence questionnaire relating to its services and plans. Failure to respond will be regarded as concurrence with the Executive Officer's recommendation. Changes in land use, planning policy, demographics, service capabilities, resource availability, increased demand for public services, or requests for changes in organization or reorganization may justify the need to perform a comprehensive update study to amend or affirm spheres of influence. 60 LAFCO of lVlendocino County Policy and Procedures per AB 2838--2002 . . Any person or local agency may file a written request with the Executive Officer requesting an amendment of a Sphere of Influence or urban service area adopted by the Commission. [56428] · The request shall state the nature'of the proposed amendment, state the reasons for the request, include a map of the proposed amendment and contain any additional data and information as may' be required by the Executive Officer. [S6428(a)] · After complying with CEQA, and preparing a report and recommendation for the Commission the Executive Officer shall place the request for amendment on the agenda of the next meeting of the Commission for which notice can be given. The report shall be mailed to the person or agency making the request, each affected agency and any person requesting a report. [56428(1>) & 56428(01 · The Commission may either consider the amendments to sphere of influence as requested or set a future date for the hearing on the request for amendment._ [56428(b)(1)(2)] · The Commission may approve or disapprove with or without amendment, wholly, partially, or conditionally the request for amendment and shall follow the procedures in Section 56425. · The Commission will require.the person or agency making the request to pay the actual costs of providing the service. [56428(0] Fees for conducting sphere of influence/service reviews shall be apportioned according to the following: · The applicant agency is responsible for the cost of a review and revision of sphere of influence studies/service reviews required for changes of organization or reorganization. · The affected agency(s).are responsible for the costs of the review and updates' required by law every five years. · The Commission is responsible for the cost of a LAFCO initiated review and revision of sphere of influence for purposes of Reorganization. LAFCO will seek cooperative cost sharing agreements with the agencies involved. · The party that requests a review according to Section 56428, (Item 7 above) will be charged the actual costs associated with the sphere review and/or amendment including CEQA. Except for minor changes involving' one or two parcels, no change of organization or reorganization will be allowed until an initial or 5-year updated sphere of influence review and service review as required by Sections 56425 and 56430 are completed. · Agencies may submit proposals for a change of organization or reorganization along with a sphere update study and service review so that they can be conducted concurrently. · This would be the most cost effective means of completing the requirements of Sections 56425 and 56430. 61 LAFCO of Mcndocino County Policy and Proc, exlures per AB 2838--2002 10. The Commission may recommend governmental reorganizations to particular agencies in the county, using the spheres of influence as the basis for those .recommendations. The Commission shall make all reasonable effort to ensure wide public dissemination, of the recommendations. [56425(g)] 11. The Commission may initiate proposals for consolidation of districts, dissolution, merger, establishment of a subsidiary district or a reorganization that includes any of these changes of organizati6n, if that change of organization or reorganization is consistent with a recommendation or conclusion of a study pursuant to Section 56378 (special studies) or Section 56425 (sphere of influence studies) if the Commission makes the determinations specified in Section 56881(b) [56375(a)]. (See Section A, Special Studies and Section B, LAFCO Initiated Proposals above) 12. When more than one agency can serve an area, LAFCO shall consider each agency's service capacity, financial capabilities, costs of service, social and economic interdependencies, topographical factors, LAFCO policies and input from affected communities and agencies. 13. LAFCO will make every attempt to bring about amicable agreements on spheres of influence but ultimately, if a conflict between agencies should arise, LAFCO is the final determiner of the sphere of influence. [56425] 14. Inclusion of territory within an agency's sphere of influence does not assure annexation of that territory into that agency. There are a number of factors the Commission must review before it can approve an annexation. 15. Spheres of Influence for cities and districts shall promote the long term preservation and protection of the County agricultural, resource and open space lands. 16. Once a sphere of influence has been adopted, it shall be reviewed and updated, as necessary, not less than once every five years [56425(0] ,: General Guidelines for Determining Spheres of Influence 17. Territory that is currently receiving services from a local agency shall be considered for inclusion within that agency's sphere. Territory that is projected to need services within the next 5-10 years may be considered for inclusion within an agency's sphere, depending on a number of factors required to be reviewed by LAFCO. Additional territory may be considered for inclusion if information is available that will enable the Commission to make determinations as required by Section 56425. 18. Territory will not be considered for inclusion within a city's sphere of influence unless the area is included within the city's general plan land use or annexation element. 62 LAFCO o£Mendocino County Policy and Procedures per AB 2838--2002 19. A special district that provides services, which ultimately will be provided by another agency (e.g. mergers, consolidations) will be assigned a zero sphere. 20. When more than one agency can serve an area, agency service capabilities, costs for providing services, input f~om the affected community, and LAFCO's policies will be factors in determining a sphere boundary. 21. If additional information is necessary to determine a sphere boundary a partial sphere may be approved and a special study area may be designated. 22.' A local agency may be assigned a coterminous sphere with its existing boundaries if: · There is no anticipated need for the agency's services outside its existing boundaries. · There is insufficient information to support inclusion of areas outside the agency's boundaries in a sphere of influence. · The agency does not have the service capacity, access to resources (e.g. water rights) or financial ability to serve an area outside its boundaries. · The agency's boundaries are contiguous with the boundaries of other agencies providing similar services. · The agency's boundaries are contiguous with the sphere of influence boundaries previously assigned to another agency providing similar services. · The agency requests that their sphere of influence be coterminous with their boundaries. 23. If territory within the proposed sphere boundary of a local agencY does not need all of the services of the agency, a service specific sphere of influence may be designated. Guidelines for Updating City_ Spheres of Influence 24. After completion of the initial requirements to conduct a sphere of influence update and service review, once every five years thereafter a preliminary sphere evaluation will be prepared by the Executive Officer for each city in Mendocino County to determine whether a sphere update study should be conducted. · A preliminary evaluation may be conducted at any time if requested by a city. · Applications for changes of organization or reorganization may trigger a *k preliminary sphere evaluation by the Executive Officer; the closer the time to the five year mark, the greater the likelihood of a preliminary sphere evaluation upon receipt of an application for a change of organization or reorganization. · If the initial review has not been made as required by law, then LAFCO will require a sphere of influence update and service review. 63 ,,f' Mendocino County Policy and Procedures per AB 2838---2002 · . · Applications for changes of' organization or reorganization with a sphere of influence amendment will trigger a preliminary sphere evaluation and ~ require a comprehensive sphere update study. 25. A preliminary evaluation will begin with a questionnaire requesting the city to update pertinent information. The city's response should include: · Information necessary to complete a statement of determinations required under Section 56430. · Each city's assessment as to the need for a sphere update, sphere change or sphere amendment. Information as to changes in land use (e.g. General Plan or Specific Plan changes), planning policy, demographics, service capabilities, resource availability or increased demand for public services. Necessary maps and legal descriptions Other data or information as considered appropriate by the Commission or the Executive Officer 26. The preliminary sphere evaluation will be distributed to the subject city, other affected agencies, the county and other interested parties. 27. The preliminary sphere evaluation will include one of the following recommendations by the Executive Officer: · Proceed with a comprehensive sphere of influence update study because of significant changes in circumstances from the previous study or last update · Affirm the city' s existing sphere of influence without an update study · Amend the city's existing sphere of influence With a comprehensive update study · Amend the city's existing sphere of influence without a comprehensive update study (e.g. minor amendments) 28. The subject city will be requested to respond to the preliminary sphere eValuation and recommendation within 90 days. Failure to respond within 90 days will be regarded as concurrence with the evaluation and recommendation. 39. The Executive Officer will present his/her preliminary sphere evaluation and recommendation, along with the response and recommendations from the subject city and comments received from other local agencies or interested parties, to the Commission at a noticed public hearing. 30. At the hearing the Commission may approve, with or without changes, or deny the Executive Officer's recommendation. 31. If the Commission determines to proceed with a city comprehensive sphere update study/service review, applications for jurisdictional changes will be considered incomplete until the sphere update is completed. Exceptions will be 64 LAFCO of. Mendocino County Policy and Procedures per AB 2838--2002 made if the Executive Officer has issued a Certificate of Filing prior to the Commission' s decision to proceed with an update study. 32. Within 90 days of a public hearing where the Commission determines to proceed with a comprehensive sphere of influence update study/service review, LAFCO staff in cooperation with city staff will develop a work plan, time table and mapping requirements needed for completing the update study, service review and appropriate environmental study. 33. City staff, in cooperation with LAFCO staff, will prepare a comprehensive sphere update study/service review according to the agreed upon work program and time table. If the city chooses not to participate in the development of the sphere update study, then the Executive Officer may proceed with the process using LAFCO staff or consultants. Costs for this process will be billed to the city. 34. At least 30 days prior to formally submitting the sphere update study to LAFCO, the city must distribute its proposal to all affected agencies and other interested parties who have requested a copy, other than the county. Affected agencies must be notified that their comments will be received by LAFCO for purposes of evaluating the update study. 35. At least 60 days prior to formally submitting the sphere update study to LAFCO the city must distribute the study to the county. Representatives of the city are required to meet with representatives of the county to discuss the proposed sphere and its boundaries and explore methods to reach agreement on the boundaries, development standards and zoning requirements within the sphere. The purpose of the discussions between the city and the county is to ensure that development within the sphere occurs in a manner that reflects the concerns of the city and is accomplished in a manner that promotes the logical and orderly development of 'the sphere territory. 37. Upon receipt of the sphere update study from the city, LAFCO staff will review the spheres of influence for affected districts in conjunction with the review of the city sphere update study. 38. The Executive Officer will present a report and recommendations concerning the city sphere update study and sphere amendment, if any, to the Commission at a noticed public hearing. The report may include recommendations to amend the spheres of affected special districts. 39. The Commission will approve, with or without changes, or deny the Executive Officer's recommendation for the comprehensive sphere update. 65 AGENDA ITEM NO: 10b MEETING DATE: February 18, 2004 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES SESSION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004-2005 The City Council, at its February 4th, 2004 meeting, requested a discussion of the development of a list of City Council priorities above and beyond the goals and objectives of the budget document, which are more operational in nature. The Council determined that they would like to have a special meeting for these discussions, in a less formal atmosphere, such as the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. At the last Council meeting, it was proposed that each Councilmember develop a list of one to five personal goals that could then be combined to establish a Council priority list of seven or fewer items for the fiscal year. Staff is requesting Council's discussion of this process and selection of a date and time for the special meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss priority-setting process and select a possible date for these discussions to take place. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Provide alternate direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A None Approved: "' ~-~ Candace H6rsley, City M~ger 4: CAN/AS R.Cou ncilpriorities.021804 AGENDA ITEM NO' MEETING DATE: SUMMARY REPORT 10c February 18, 2004 SUBJECT: SET DATE FOR A WORKSHOP WITH THE CITYGATE ASSOCIATES The City Council approved a contract with Citygate Associates to develop a strategy for annexation and revenue sharing. The consultants have recently completed an interim report that defines annexation procedures and property tax exchange basics. Due to the timeliness of the development of this strategy, staff recommends the Council's approval of a special meeting in order to discuss this issue, as the consultants are unavailable for the March 3rd Council meeting. The consultants are available on February 25th and March 10th. They are also available on March 17th if the Council is not available on the other two special meeting dates. Staff is also requesting that after the presentation by Citygate Associates, the Council select an ad hoc committee of two Councilmembers to work on the recommendations and strategy for annexation with the consultants, and then invite the County to discussions regarding this issue. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Select a date for discussion of the Citygate Associates interim report on annexation. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Discuss and provide alternate direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager Citygate Associates None Approved: ~,,~~~ Candace Horsley, City I~nager 4:CAN/ASR.CitygateWkshpDate.021804