HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-01-05 Packet CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Regular Meeting
CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
January 5, 2005
6:30 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Regular Meeting of November 17, 2004
b. Regular Meeting of December 1,2004
c. Joint Meeting of the City Council & Ukiah Valley Sanitation District of December
15, 2004
m
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. Rejection of Claims for Damages Received from Katherine Graham and St.
Mary's Catholic Church and Referral to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood
Empire Municipal Insurance Fund
b. Adoption of Resolution Approving Records Destruction
c. Reject Proposals Received For Conference Center Roof Overlay
d. Notification of Purchase of 18 Wildland Fire Shelters in the amount of
$5,575.86
e. Approval of Budget Amendment of $18,720 to the City of Ukiah Water Storage
Expansion Project, Account #840-3850-250-000, for Increased Costs for Quality
Control Testing by Rau and Associates
6. 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.
7. PUBLIC HEARING (6:45 P.M.)
a. Adoption of Resolution Certifying the Environmental Impact Report for the Orr
Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension project
8. UN
FINISHED BUSINESS
Approval of Renewal of Sun House Guild & City of Ukiah Agreement and
Authorization for City Manager to Execute Agreement
b. Consideration and Adoption of Policy Resolution for Amplified Sound in Parks
and Outdoor City Owned Facilities
c. Approve Amendments to the Ordinance As Introduced Amending Section 1985,
6058, and 6060 of the Ukiah City Code Regarding Noise Regulations
d. Update on Marijuana Ordinance
1
a.
NEW BUSINESS
Appointments to the Planning Commission
Approval of Orchard Avenue Orr Creek Bridge and Street Extension Project
And Authorization to Secure Regulatory Permits and Solicit Competitive
Construction Bids
c. Discussion Of and Possible Introduction of Ordinances Regulating Pan Handling
And Camping in the City of Ukiah
Discussion of Possible Sales Tax Ballot Measure - Ashiku
d.
10. COUNCIL REPORTS
11. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORT
12. CLOSED SESSION
a. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL- EXISTING LITIGATION
Government Code Section 54956.9(a))
Name of case: In re: Proposed Cease and Desist Order Against
MCRRFC&WCID (Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water
Conservation Improvement District) and SWRCB (State Water Resources
Control Board)
13. ADJOURNMENT
The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably
accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request.
3a
MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2004
The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on November 17, 2004, the notice for
which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:40 p.m. Roll was taken and the
following Councilmembers were present: McCowen, Rodin, Smith, Baldwin (arrived at
7:20 pm.), and Mayor Larson. Staff present: Development Permit Coordinator Ballard,
Police Captain Dewey, Water Utilities Project Manager Burck, Civil Engineer Eriksen,
Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor Gall, Risk Manager/I
Manager Horsley, Fire Chief Latipow, Associate Plannt
McCann, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steele,
Director Stump, Police Chief Williams, Public Utilities
Ulvila.
et Officer Harris, City
~se, Finance Director
Rapport, Planning
and City Clerk
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
James Mulheren led the Pledge of Allegian
2b. SWEARING IN NEW COUNClLMEM
a. Adoption of Resolution
an Unexpired Term
New Councilmember
City Clerk Ulvila advised that at
Council heard presentations from .~
vacancy created by Co Ar
After discussion by Iion
vacancy. :ion
making the ent to the
Resolution and O~
and
.assed,
Cou~
~t to the City Council to Fill
of Oath of Office for
10, Council meeting, the City
to fill the Council
October 31,2004.
ed nora ing John McCowen to fill the
later rescinded, to adopt a Resolution
Council directed Staff to agendize the
this meeting.
M/S
roll
AB~
AYES:
None. AB~
8, making the appointment of John
term of Paul Andersen, carried by the following
,ers Rodin, Smith, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None.
Baldwin.
City Clerl la admini=
took his seat
the Oath of Office to Mr. McCowen. Mr. McCowen then
.
3a. Re_clular Me ~q Minutes of October 207 2004
M/S Rodin/Smith approving the Regular Meeting minutes of October 20, 2004, as
presented, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Smith,
and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Councilmember McCowen. ABSENT:
Councilmember Baldwin.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3b. Reqular Meeting Minutes of October 207 2004
M/S Smith/Rodin approving the Special Joint Meeting minutes of the City Council and
the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District of October 20, 2004, as presented, carried by the
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 1 of 12
following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Smith, and Mayor Larson.
NOES: None. ABSTAIN: Councilmember McCowen. ABSENT: Councilmember
Baldwin.
4. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION
Mayor Larson read the appeal process.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
City Manager Horsley advised that some corrections were m
item 'T' of the Consent Calendar and the corrected report
to the meeting.
to the Staff Report for
sented to Council prior
M/S Smith/Rodin approving item "a" through "i" of
a. Approved Disbursements for Month of
b. Received Annual Review of Traffic
and East Gobbi Street;
c. Rejected Claim for Damages
Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Munici
d. Adopted Resolution 2005-19 Approving
Employee Bargaining Unit- Head
e. Adopted Resolution 2005- 20
f. Approved Purchase of
Management Equipment From Cu
g. Awarded Bid for ole
$34,130.17 to W(
h. Awarded Sole :e Bid 'olice
and A et
i. Adopted
Base
WA! ~rcentage an,
,ndar as follows:
Fund for SoL Avenue
Mark
and rd to Joint
Fund;
.ndum of Understanding' for
'uction;
deo Ins ~n and Data
;rs in the Amount of
Services not to Exceed $19,026
uest for Assignment of City of Ukiah's
nment Administration Agreement for
kuthorization for City Manager to Execute
Moti~ by thi
Rodin, and
Councilm~ Baldwin.
Larson.
call vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCowen,
NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
6. AUDIENCE 'S ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Daniel de la , announced that there will be a memorial on November 20th
at the Elks Club Stephanie McKinley, who passed away last month. He also
suggested to Council that if a Proposition 215 marijuana provider wants to be a provider
within the City limits, they must live at the location where they are providing the
marijuana. He voiced his concern with armed guards protecting marijuana gardens.
9. CITY MANGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
City Manager Horsley announced that on December 15th at 4:00 p.m. a Joint Meeting
of the City Council and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District is planned in the Council
Chambers. She also reported on December 1st, prior to the commencement of the
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 2 of 12
Council meeting, there will be a reception welcoming the new Councilmembers and
saying thank you to those who are leaving office.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
7a. Adoption of Resolution Approving the Proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project
(Continued from November 3~ 2004)
Planning Director Stump explained that at the November 3, 2004 City Council
meeting, the Council conducted a public hearing and hz the public on the
matter of the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for
Plant Improvement Project. There was considerable
Council heard comments from an attorney representin,
the conclusion of that hearing, while the Council
document, the City Attorney suggested that the be
allow him time to review the comments m~
has completed his review and his m(
Report. City Attorney Rapport's conclusil
light of those comments, with the City
Declaration for this project.
Treatment
c testimony; specifically
property owner. At
:omfortable with the
Io this meeting to
at attorney. C Rapport
is attached to the Summary
~at he to be in
with a Mitigat ,d Negative
City Attorney Rapport advised th~
by Mr. Belzer, an attorney speaking
them separately.
mo he
the various arguments made
and responded to each of
Councilmember R~
Negetive Decl~
CEQA."
efers
the
orney res to the second issue: "The
~t of mitigation measures in violation of
City Atto
conten(
prop
a
requ~
City
which thal
the Miti,
as set
went throu
le most complicated issue. Mr. Belzer
additional iluation and additional mitigation that the
on requires to be completed after the Council
Declaration. Mr. Belzer contends that it violates
Sundstrum v. the County of Mendocino. The
detailed analysis of that case and the CEQA Guidelines
in his view, this situation is very different.
In the Mitigate, Declaration before the City Council, there aren't unknown
future impacts wh Mitigations say have to be studied after the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is appro based on future studies that will be conducted by the City.
There were two things going on in Sundstrum that the court found to violate the CEQA
Guidelines. He reviewed the information contained in his Memo concerning this case.
The court said there was a violation of the Guidelines because it involved the County
doing additional evaluation of the project through an applicant supplied expert and then
relying on the expert to develop mitigations after the Negative Declaration was
approved. The Court said that the Guidelines require any mitigation to be proposed
before the Mitigated Negative Declaration is released for public comment. The County
procedure would result in those proposed mitigations completely evading public review.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 3 of 12
The other element concerned mitigations that relied on subsequent approval by other
regulatory agencies. The court upheld those mitigations, except for one involving a site
plan and a sludge disposal plan that had to be approved by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) after the negative Declaration was approved. In Sundstrurn
evidence had been submitted that there was no place in the County that would accept
the sludge for disposal. Because of that evidence, the County couldn't leave the
development of a disposal plan to the RWQCB.
In the City's case, there are between .2 and .5 of an acre
wetlands that have been identified in the Mitigated N~
also some potential impacts on wildlife and cultural resou
from those things are knowable at this time and th~
the standard regulatory approvals that are
City Council won't mitigate those impacts. Th
Engineers relies on well-established environ~
complies with those standards, there is no
wetlands won't be adequately protected.
~an-made and natural
eclaration. There are
All of the physical effects
in the record that
~s approved by the
permit f~ )e Army Corp of
standards, g as the City
to think that the .2 an acre of
He noted that flooding was the other issue and
within the floodway and any impl ~nts withi
standards. By definition, there is ~e that
cause flooding impacts. Dealing
requires someone to be present at th~
disturb either cultural or wilC
the opposite of the
are; it knows th, 3 be
environmental rds and ulatory
reason that the
was speci
Iions call for no improvements
Flood Plain must meet FEMA
those improvements could
ife and cultural resources
g sure the work doesn't
that the City's situation is
th City knows what the impacts
the City is relying on well established
from other agencies. The only
in Sundstrum was because there
ithin the County where sludge could be
It s opinion th
Mitig legative DeC
the Negati
case is not a problem for the City Council with this
y, it doesn't suffer from any of the procedural
~n in the Sundstrurn case had.
He further rden on someone challenging a Negative Declaration is to
identify substa~ :e that is in the record, either evidence that a person presents
or that is develo 'ough the environmental review, on the basis of which a fair
argument can be m~ that the project may have an adverse impact. It was his opinion
that Mr. Belzer did not identify any substantial evidence he could base that argument
on.
Public Hearing Opened: 6:55 p.m.
Planning Director Stump advised that he provided Council with a revised resolution
which is different from the one presented to Council at its last meeting. Staff
inadvertently left off the impacts and mitigation measurers listed for Cultural Resources
and have revised the resolution accordingly.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 4 of 12
Richard Mattern, Ukiah, advised that their attorney, Mr. Belzer, was unable to attend
this Council meeting. He asked for a two weeks continuance because Mr. Belzer did
not receive the materials from Mr. Rapport until this morning and he didn't have time to
adequately review them and respond. He stated that when there is a plan to build on
property and there isn't a complete plan, and it is difficult to know if you are mitigating all
of the problems. He did not think the City's plan was mitigated completely with regard
to the impacts of the project on adjacent property owners.
Jeff Ward, one of the owners of Wardway Lumber Co. Io< y to the west and
adjacent to the sewage treatment plant, stated that one challenges his company
has had to deal with is the smell from the plant. Some ,Ioyees working on the
east side of the plant wear masks to take care of smell. He recently
found out that if they have a problem with the sm~ need to .ct the Mendocino
County Air Quality Control Board. He is, supportive of ti ect if it takes
care of the smell problem.
Donna Mattern, Ukiah, stated that she and I'
project. She feels it would be a hel to them if
going on near their property and allow th
own.
not receive n~ :ices on the
be notified of things that are
possibly take a steps on their
Public Hearing Closed: 7:05 p.m.
Councilmember M
200 feet of the re,,
on N,
II be se~ ir ponds located within 100 to
Paul Scheidegge
located ab
the
on a large
p.
calculated that the ponds would be
aard Lane residences. He pointed out
C~ member Mc
surro property
Mr. Schei ~r respon,
consult with
if Staff is aware of complaints from any of the
regarding odors.
that during the preparation of the Initial Study, they always
er and get debriefed on the historical performance of the
plant. In this who has been at the plant from eight to ten years and
never has known )r to be a nuisance issue. There wasn't anything conveyed to
him that demon~ that there was a significant odor issue. They also consulted with
the Mendocino County Air Quality Control District (District) and received a historical
perspective on odor complaints. There have not been any documented odor complaints
associated with the Wastewater Treatment Plant. They did note for the record that
there was one occurrence at the Brewery treatment plant that caused a complaint to be
reported and started the process whereby the District investigates the source of odor.
In that situation, it was not the Wastewater Treatment Plant, but the Brewery facility
causing the odor. From a regulatory standpoint, the wastewater treatment plant is not
considered to be a nuisance, nor a potential nuisance.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 5 of 12
Councilmember McCowen inquired if the improvements to the plant could be expected
to reduce odor even with the expansion, that is, if there were an odor problem.
Mr. Scheidegger responded affirmatively. He explained that there is a modest
increase in flow. The current permitted flow is 2.8 MGD; the increase would go to 3.01
MGD. He advised that Brown and Caldwell Engineering consultants identified all of the
design measures that would be included in the treatment plant that would provide for
more efficient treatment of the flows and thereby further reduce the odor potential.
Councilmember McCowen inquired if there would be a
week delay.
;m with having a two
Mr. Scheidegger responded by discussing the 404
Army Corp of Engineers. All of that permitting
of Determination issued. To the extent th;
permitting process. There are broader is,,
start of construction next summer that are
continger
~ys occur,
with the
involved with the
having a Notice
extend the
~, cost, and
City Attorney Rapport explained that he
Council meeting and Belzer
email Mr. Belzer his memorandum
morning. It is his understanding fro~
the meeting was closed after rece
continuance was to
meeting. He was that
comment at this g; he di
so or to extend portio
meeting. Council
public corn
to hi
Council
[zer shortly after the last City
Monday. He volunteered to
it to him at 8:00 a.m. this
hearing portion of
November 3 and the
Mr. Belzer at the previous
I could tee to hear additional public
think Council had a legal obligation to do
the meeting any further than tonight's
once and has allowed additional
lot legally required.
Plan
d worried al:
in make the
constru~ ;eason, the
problemati ~ncially.
may increase
getting through
that the Public Utility Staff is concerned with a
h the regulatory process with the other agencies
season. If the City does not make the next
ect would be delayed another year and that would be very
has indicated that the cost of materials, such as concrete,
would potentially create a hardship if it kept Staff from
~ulatory processes.
City Manager Hors noted that the design phase for the water plant is at 80% and
the sewer treatment project is at 100%. The contractor is ready to begin after this
hearing is complete.
Mr. Scheidegger advised that the project which is scheduled to begin next summer
consists of everything within the existing treatment plant boundary. Future plant
expansion is expected to occur within the next five to ten years. The City will be
conducting an additional environmental review under CEQA at that time because the
project will be subject to further design efforts. That CEQA review will then look back on
this review if any conditions have changed in this project area and see if the analysis
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 6 of 12
that was conducted was appropriate and accurate. If not, then additional review would
be necessary and the City would need to go through the whole process again. The
project that is in the plant expansion area is not part of the construction scheduled to
begin next summer.
City Attorney Rapport advised that he also addressed that issue in his memo because
that was one of the arguments made by Mr. Belzer; that CEQA required the City to
completely design the improvements in the expansion area before approving the
Mitigated Negative Declaration. Mr. Mattern made that
Rapport's opinion, the case law does not support that po.
Expansion Area were so uncertain that the City couldn't
about it, it wouldn't have to analyze the impacts from
that is not the case here. The City has und~ :t
impacts from the projected development within t
it won't take place for 5-10 years, because th~
overall design. However, the City is only
the information currently available. It is
obligations under CEQA to look at what the
going to be, based on what the knows r~
more specific information is then tht
environmental review to see if the ~al
point today. In Mr.
If plans for the Plant
meaningful comment
~ment at all. However,
the environmental
Expan.,rea, even though
is a r part of the
to conduct that based on
~pinion the City h~ its
uture expansion project are
it is further designed and
will have to reevaluate that
:hat need to be addressed.
Councilmember Smith advised that
Council's last meeting, ~reed 1
comments and it is th~
them and that M ;r's
the Negative De( on, nor the
on the project.
at the conclusion of the
would explore Mr. Belzer's
Attc .y has satisfactorily explored
not prevent the Council from approving
o prepare an EIR. He opposed a delay
Mayor
and
Th~
the p
II be further
inion that th, has shown due diligence in this matter
legal issues have been satisfied by the City Attorney.
review for the future component of the expansion of
M/S Rod ~ith
Declaration
the following ro
and Mayor Larsor
ado
Resolution 2005-22 approving a Mitigated Negative
Treatment Plant Improvement Project, carried by
AYES: Councilmembers McCowen, Rodin, Smith, Baldwin,
!S: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
7b. ,Consideration and Action on Appeal Filed by Fred Bellows and Catherine
Indermill of the Plannin.q Commission's Conditional Approval of thc
Graeber Use Permit and Variance for Project at 290 Highland Avenue
Mayor Larson explained that the lack of a site visit is grounds for recusal on this matter
and in polling the Councilmembers it was determined that Councilmember Smith had
not visited the site.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 7 of 12
City Attorney Rapport advised that Councilmember Smith should not vote on the
matter because all of the Councilmembers are basing their decision on the same
evidence and if one Councilmember has not visited the site, then the information is not
equally available to all of the Council.
Planning Director Stump explained that Dr. Graeber has proposed a 2,500 square
foot home on the parcel that is located in the lower portion of the Hillside District at 290
Highland Avenue. Due to the narrow 60-foot width of the parcel, as well as the large
yard setback requirements of the Hillside Zoning District,
locate the house closer to the property lines than typicall'.
Accordingly, in addition to the required Use Permit for co
District, front and side yard setback variances are
reviewed his Staff Report and explained the
15%. Dr. Graeber is proposing a six foot side
side yard set back on the south, and is askin~
is proposing to
;d on steep property.
:ion in the Hillside Zoning
for the project. He
;s with a slope over
~etback or ~rth and 14 foot
!0 feet in the here 30 feet is
required. On September 22, 2004, the ng
hearing, and after considerable public testii
Mitigated Negative Declaration and condition;
to allow the construction of a single family resid
Bellows and Ms. Indermill, the owners
During the Planning Commission appell
about the project. Those issues
privacy, and a belief that the parcel c
Planning Co on iss~
the Staff Report.
Commission's ~nd den ~e appe.
and dis.
Commission co~ ;d a public
voted Zl adopt a
Use Permit e d Variance
narrow vacant parcel. Mr.
north, filed a timely appeal.
a number of concerns
investigation, invasion of
Stump discussed the
ect, which are addressed in
Cc il agree with the Planning
Public Hearing
Fred B
writt( ponse
nc at the Hillsi,
discu his concerns
project ;d to ti
neighborh
property own
City Council
because it doesn'
for the lot, and the
hland Aver ~, explained that he and his wife made a
Declaration for the Major Use Permit last year and
was not mentioned in the document. He
grade of the parcel, the proposed setbacks for the
;etbacks for his property and other properties in the
Is investigation, invasion of their privacy as an adjacent
Is engineering and the hydrology report. He requested the
g Commission's ruling on the variance and Use Permit
dy with the Hillside Zoning regulations, the project is too large
etback requirements are not acceptable. Upon questioning by
Councilmember McCowen, Mr. Bellows stated that he objects to the entire project, not
just the 20 foot front setback.
Dr. Fred Graeber, 3600 Orr Springs Road, Ukiah, provided a history of how this project
began and noted that he worked with an architect, who in turn worked with the City's
Planning Department in order to satisfy the Hillside Ordinance setback requirements.
He inquired as to why Mr. Bellows obtained first right of refusal on the property. Upon
questioning by members of the City Council, Mr. Graeber explained that they originally
wanted to have a guest house on the property and didn't look at options for situating
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 8 of 12
their home differently on the property. He discussed situating the house closer to the
street instead of up on the hill, noting that the adjacent property owner has an easement
in the rear of the property. With regard to the shed located on both parcels, as notated
on the site map, he explained that the shed has been demolished. He went on to
discuss the terrain of the property and Council's inquiry of situating the home at another
location on the property.
Planning Director Stump referred to attachment #2-2 in the Staff Report that provides
an aerial view of the parcel and adjacent parcels, and note at Staff recommends
shifting the location of the house so as to have 10 feet sides. He went on to
discuss the removal of the shed subsequent to the taken.
Dr. Grabber explained that their plan is to build
other home on the property as a guest house.
house to the south.
not consi~
~selves and use the
moving the main
Public Hearing Closed: 7:52 p.m.
Considerable discussion followed between Co~
project. Topics discussed include~
big for the lot, the proximity of the
line of Mr. Bellows' home, whether
Graeber home, the of th
construction of the fo~ for thc
Director Stump th~
consulting des
certain designs ate
her the
~bers and Staff related to the
d site plan for the house is too
adjacent residence, the roof
be looking down on the
recommendations for
It was noted by Planning
for the ,ject is submitted, the City's
any inaccuracies and will recommend
Associate
previously approved for the Bellows'
member
it wo~ more of an
landsca be lc
that if the project were located further up the hill,
Bellows'. It was his recommendation that more
~d on the east side of the project.
Planning Di that the Planning Commission adopted conditions
of approval ping. The applicants submitted a site plan with
considerable land ~] between their parcel and the Bellows' parcel. He noted that
Council could req ' a landscaping plan be submitted by the applicant to the Planning
Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. He went on to discuss condition
#40 related to outdoor lighting.
Councilmember McCowen drew attention to the existing live oak seedlings in the
southern portion of the property and recommended they be protected unless the
driveway is enlarged, necessitating their removal.
Planning Director Stump referred to condition #32 concerning retaining trees on
property.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 9 of 12
Councilmember McCowen discussed the difference between seedlings and trees and
noted his concern for the northern boundary of property, and that more landscaping in
that location would create more of a fire danger. In this case it may not be advisable. He
is satisfied with the conditions concerning landscaping and lighting issues, noting that
lighting should be shielded and downcast.
Tape 2
Discussion continued with regard to the recommendation of
Graeber's home so that it will not be distracting to the
rk colored roof for Dr.
Councilmember McCowen voiced his concern
property that extend into the property to the south,
arborist perform any necessary pruning.
th
es to the north of the
the need to have an
Planning Director Stump referred to cond
whether the condition should specify that ~rist
supervise the pruning of the trees. He n
concerns with regard to pruning of the trees an~
are recorded in the minutes of th~ 'ing. The
it be part of the conditions of ap
33, and discussion ;d regarding
~e trees or if can
g ~ission had
s and directions to Staff
ling Commission recommended
M/S Rodin/Baldwin supporting the
filed by Mr. Fred Be Ca1
vote: AYES: Council Cowe
None. ABSTAIN: cilmeml Smith.
and deny the appeal
ed by the following roll call
and Mayor Larson. NOES:
,
SENT: None.
7. PUBLIC
7C.
Mal
an~ ,oiling the
vi: site.
Structures Over Years Old
~st Perkins et Ukiah
e lack of a site visit is grounds for recusal on this matter
,rs it was determined that all Councilmembers had
Planning
demolition is
Permit Review
structures on Ea.
St~
liscussed his Staff Report to Council. The reason for the
~ite for future development. He advised that the Demolition
found the subject buildings to be the oldest commercial
Street. Rather than recommend denial of the Demolition
Permit, the Comm worked with the property owner to identify reasonable and
feasible mitigation measures to off-set the impact of demolishing these historically
significant structures, which he discussed in detail with Council. It was noted that the
property was the former site of the old Farmers Club.
Public Hearing Opened: 8:21 p.m.
Grant Leschin, Project Manager for Marin Ventures, explained that they have worked
in a collaborated effort to develop a plan that would be appealing to the City. He
explained that his company is in the early stages of design for their new development
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 10 of 12
and has been working with City Staff on a Site Development Plan. He requested
Council's approval of the project. With regard to the demolition process, he advised that
they would like to begin construction in the Spring of 2005. In response to inquiries by
Council, Mr. Leschin advised that they have made an effort to acquire the property to
the east of the proposed demolition. They are in discussions with the current tenants of
the existing structure, and Marin Ventures plans to develop a commercial project at that
location.
Councilmember Baldwin stated that he is opposed to a
location.
h business at that
Public Hearing Closed: 8:25 p.m.
A brief discussion followed relative to design
Planning Director Stump stated that the app
with the City to meet the design guidelines
major gateway of the City. He further
development, noting that Staff has discussed
for com iai developments.
are extremely i in working
are aware that s Street is a
issL future
the applica ~t.
M/S Baldwin/McCowen a
finding that as mitigated, the im
East Perkins Street will be reduced
roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembe
Larson. NOES: None.
ated
ishing
Declaration, based on the
located at 308/310
e, carried by the following
Baldwin, and Mayor
M/S Baldwin/Mc
Street, carried bl
Smith, Baldwin, an,
~n
the
g call vot6
~olition Permit for 308/310 East Perkins
Councilmembers McCowen, Rodin,
ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None.
am
on
~orted that, thanks to the Roots of Motive Power, the
undergo a cleanup.
Counci ~ber Baldwi
and Powei ~mission (
the IWPC ag
the height of ti'
approval of their
project is beginninc, to
that he will not be able to attend the Inland Water
meeting tomorrow at the Ukiah Conference Center. On
from the Army Corp of Engineers concerning increasing
a report from Redwood Valley Water District seeking IWPC
ects. The City Council will have to approve it. The Hop/Kiln
go through the Mendocino County Planning Commission
process. The project calls for about 500 units to be located east of the former Masonite
plant site. He advised that Council should be aware of any impacts to the sewer
treatment plant and Ranney collector with this project.
After a brief discussion it was decided that Councilmember Rodin and City Manager
Horsley would attend the IWPC meeting tomorrow on the City's behalf.
Adjourned to sit as the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency: 8:35 p.m.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 11 of 12
10. CLOSED SESSION
a. G.C. §54957.6- Conference with L~bor Ne.clotiator
Employee Negotiations: Directors and City Manager
Labor Negotiator: Candace Horsley
No Closed Session required.
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
November 17, 2004
Page 12 of 12
3b
MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2004
The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on December 1, 2004, the notice for
which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:40 p.m. Roll was taken and the
following Councilmembers were present: McCowen, Rodin, Smith, Baldwin, and
Mayor Larson, as well as newly elected Councilmember Crane and newly elected
Mayor Ashiku. Staff present: Customer Service Supervisor Archibald, City Treasurer
Carter, Police Captain Dewey, City Manager Horsley, McCann, Public
Works Director/City Engineer Steele, City Attorney Rap llice Chief Williams,
Public Utilities Director Ziemianek, and City Clerk Ulvila.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Larson and Councilmember Smith led
e of All ce.
3. INTRODUCTIONS
a. Introduction of New Meter
Customer Service Supervisor Archibald
recently hired employees who are now part
team.
Vigil and .~ff Walker,
ig and Collection Department
Ezra Vigil and Jeff Walker voiced t
on fo~
employed with the City.
4a. Meetin
City Clerk Ulvila
paragraph should
Anton Stadium [bilitation
proposed by Staff."
~s of N~
,rrectic
cons(
~d
he on page 7. The second
of Council to approve the Skate Park,
'' Swimminq Pools Proiects as
Also th(
in~
~ad,
R(
Clean
for the U~
"...and
-Harris
Clean Air
on page ~at states the motion by Council, should
g the Ukiah Municipal Swimminq Pools Projects, and
for grant funds for the
Area Need-Basis Proqram under the California
~rhood Parks, and Coastal Protection Act of 2002
Pools Rehabilitation Proiect."
Councilmeml: recommended the following corrections to the minutes:
Page 6: Add "Joh ;n" to the list of speakers.
Page 7: Second p; graph under item "10d" should read, "It was the consensus of
Council to approve the Skate Park, Anton Stadium Rehabilitation, and Ukiah Municipal
Swimminq Pools Proiects as proposed by Staff."
Page 7: In the third paragraph under item "10d", the following wording should be added
to the last sentence, "and Resolution 2005-23 approving the application for grant funds
for the Roberti-Z'Berq-Harris Nonurbanized Area Need-Basis Proqram under the
California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks, and Coastal Protection
Act of 2002 for the Ukiah Municipal Swimminq Pools Rehabilitation Project."
Page 7: The fourth paragraph under item "10d" should read, "John McCowen voiced his
support for the Skate Park Project because matchinq funds would come from private
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
December 1,2004
Page 1 of 6
sources, but expressed concern with the City_p_roviding_matchin_q_funds for the other
Droiects .qiven the bud.qet deficit"
Page 8: In the fourth paragraph beginning with Vice Mayor Baldwin, the second
sentence should read, "He advised that he is sa~ sad to see Mayor Larson leaving and
thought he was very generous with the public's expression at meetings."
Page 8: The first sentence of the fifth paragraph should read, "Mayor Larson
congratulated te Mari Rodin and Doug Crane for being elected to the City Council and
Mark Ashiku who was elected Mayor."
Page 8: The first sentence of the third paragraph under item should read, "Deputy
City Clerk Ulvila reported to Council on the number of s~ and provisional ballots
that are still uncounted."
M/S Baldwin/Smith approving the Regular Meetin.
amended, carried by the following roll call vote:
Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
3, 2004, as
Coun, Rodin, Smith,
N: Counc McCowen.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4b. Ad R ~lar Meetim
Councilmember McCowen re~
Page 1: Item 2, the correct spelB
those speaking in support of John M
Page 2: Item "4a", the ninth paragra
of reconsidering a mot
motion to reconsider ~e
of
the foll~
Oswe
200~.
corrections to the minutes:
add "Eloise Grothe" among
explained the process
Id be located before the
City Clerk Ulvil~
concurred that the
motion to
th
listene
the tape recording of the meeting and
should be placed before the
COl
se~ ~= in
tax a special
M/S Bald
10, 2004, a,,
Rodin, Smith,
McCowen. ABSEI
recommended the following correction to Page 3; the
should read, "The difference between a general
by the City Attorney."
app "ng the Adjourned Regular Meeting minutes of November
ied by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers
Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN' Councilmember
)ne.
4. .APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4c. Re ular Meetin Minutes of November 17 2004
City Clerk Ulvila recommended the draft minutes of November 17, 2004 be continued
to the next Council meeting.
5. CERTIFI.CATION OF NOVEMBER ELECTION AND ADMINISTRATION OF OATH
~ ~"~ COUNCI~EMBER$
a.
November 2 2004 and Swearin in Ceremon for Ma or Mark Ashiku
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
December 1,2004
Page 2 of 6
Councilmembers Mari Rodin and Douglas Crane~ and City Treasurer R.
Allen Carter
City Clerk Ulvila advised that the Mendocino County Clerk has certified the results of
the City of Ukiah's Municipal Election held on November 2, 2004. The City Council
must now adopt a Resolution declaring the results of the Municipal Election. After the
Resolution is adopted, the newly elected officials may then be sworn into office by the
City Clerk.
M/S Rodin/Smith adopting Resolution 2005-24, reciting
Municipal Election held on November 2, 2004, declaring
matters as provided by law, carried by the folk
Councilmembers McCowen, Rodin, Smith, Baldwin,
ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None.
fact of the General
Its and such other
roll call vote: AYES:
NOES: None.
City Clerk Ulvila administered the Oath
Councilmembers Mari Rodin and Douglas
The new Mayor and Councilmembers then
Larson and Councilmember Smith left the me(
to Mayor- Mark Ashiku,
and to City Carter.
the dais an~ Mayor
6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISI{
Mayor Ashiku read the appeal pro
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
M/S Baldwin
follows:
a. Received Re
Commission;
b. Received N,
Chlorh~
,lng
City Co il
the Consent Calendar as
Advertising For Vacancy on the Airport
000 Pounds of C-1200 Aluminum
yne Inc. for $0.35/Ib.
Moti~
None
Baldw
g roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCowen,
Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
8. AUDIE COMM,
No one came
ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
9. NEW BUSl
9a. Authorizati~ for City Manager to Execute a Contract for the Purchase of =
CNG-Fueled Sweeper Utilizing Fundin_~ from the Public Benefit Fund an~'
Grants
Public Works Director/City Engineer Steele discussed her Staff Report to Council
and explained the bid process and the initial cost and serviceability ramifications beyond
the initial cost for the street sweeper. The City owns two sweepers and both are long
overdue for replacement. Staff applied to the Mendocino County Air Quality
Management District for Carl Moyer Grant Funding for this project. The funding is
comprised of two parts: 1) approximately $45,000 from the Carl Moyer Grant and 2)
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
December 1,2004
Page 3 of 6
$20,000 from local discretionary grant funding. Staff is very interested in pursuing a
CNG sweeper because of its Iow emissions and the potential for expanded use of CNG.
Chris Brown, Mendocino County Air Quality Control District planner, advised that it is
important to consider the Public Fleet Rule that is currently being developed at the Air
Resources Board in Sacramento, which would require all public fleets in Mendocino
County and all counties statewide to retrofit their diesel equipment with various
technologies, including existing equipment and newly purchased equipment. It was his
opinion that CNG would assist the City in accomplishing that
Phil Ashiku, Ukiah, supported Staff's recommendation
the Public Benefits Fund. He also encouraged Counc
accessible to the public.
ht it is a great use of
making CNG-fueling
City Manager Horsley explained that this will
expand its use to other vehicles. Once the
capacity to have an unlimited number of
provide public service in the future.
pilot program if the City can
installed to the , it has the
)ns it. The also
M/S McCowen/Rodin authorizin,
purchase of a CNG-fueled street
the purchase price of $185,422.96
$138,634 of Public Benefit Fund
Public Benefit funding
necessary fueling s'
Man~
~m Mur
to execute a contract for the
Maintenance Equipment for
with approximately
:ling that additional
required to complete the
Director Steele
installation cost wa
She also
the CN
in,
a
Attachment #5 in which the capital
#5 was distributed to Council.
August. She spoke to the vendor of
has commitment from the factory on the
in approval of the bid, that cost would be at risk of
Cu~ Service ervisor Archibald responded to questioning by
CouncilmE Baldwin stating that this bid is approximately 90% of this year's
income to the Fund. However, some of these costs are one-time costs,
in particular the of the fuel station. Once those are paid for, the ongoing
costs of the fuel a ntenance are significantly lower than with liquid propane.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCowen,
Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
w
NEW BUSINESS
Authorization to Edge Wireless to Sublease a Portion of the City of Ukiah
Radio Tower to United States Cellular for the Addition of Three Cellular
Antennas
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
December 1,2004
Page 4 of 6
Police Captain Dewey discussed his Staff Report with Council. He explained that the
City's contract with Edge Wireless allows Edge Wireless to seek partnerships with other
vendors for collocation on the tower. The contract calls for the City of Ukiah to consent
to any subleasing agreement between Edge Wireless and another vendor. Edge
Wireless has approached the City to sublease a portion of the tower to United States
Cellular to allow the addition of three cellular antennas at approximately the 60 foot
level. To ease visual impacts of the additional antennas, staff has negotiated with Edge
Wireless to have the antennas flush mounted. This requirement will ensure that the
new antennas have a limited visual impact.
Discussion continued with Captain Dewey fielding quest
design, size, and mounting of the antennas.
Council related to the
Councilmember McCowen recommended a p
signed by Edge Wireless with United States C~
and conditions of the original lease. A
next carrier would also provide for an annu.
be incl
that it is in line
would like to see in
increas~
in the new lease
same terms
.ase with the
City Attorney Rapport advised that there are
agreement that the City would ~ded. In
provision that if the operation of ~nas in
communication equipment, the
interference. It is important that t~
licensee and the license
of provisions in the licensing
g agreement there is a
interferes with the City's
take steps to stop that
for both the sub
M/S McCowen
Cellular, with
carried by the
and M~
None.
pprovin W
~e appli, proviso,
sublease agreement with United States
and Staff's recommended restrictions;
~ncilmembers McCowen, Crane, Rodin,
ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
10. NClL REPI
Bait
promise ng the
about nois the ho
he spoke to the City Manager about Council's
noise enforcement back for discussion. He is concerned
season.
City Manager
completed and th
Council's considerati, n.
lained she is waiting for the Parks Department's report to be
.~r is tentatively scheduled for the December 15th meeting for
11. CITY MANGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
City Manager Horsley reported that she attended the IWPC meeting in which the
Redwood Valley Water District submitted a request to develop water at Mill Creek Dam
and they are looking at a variety of new water sources to develop. The agencies within
the area have an opportunity to protest or provide appeals to that permit request. At the
City Council's next meeting, Council will be discussing the City's protest letter because
the City is concerned about its water rights.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
December 1,2004
Page 5 of 6
She reminded Council of the Council Orientation Workshop scheduled for December 7th
at 9:00 a.m.
Mayor Ashiku requested the City Manager email to all Councilmembers the list of
committees that Councilmembers sit on. Councilmembers should consider the
committees of interest to them and provide the City Manager with a list. Appointments
to these committees are scheduled for the December 15th meeting.
City Clerk Ulvila requested that FPPC form 700 which was
Councilmembers along with payroll information be returned
soon as possible.
issued to the new
City Clerk's office as
12. CLOSED SESSION
None.
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the City
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
g was adjourn
7:30 p.m.
Regular Ukiah City Council Meeting
December 1,2004
Page 6 of 6
MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL
Special Joint Meeting of the Ukiah City Council
And Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
Wednesday, December 20, 2004
The Ukiah City Council met at a Special Joint Meeting with the Ukiah Valley
Sanitation District (UVSD) on December 15, 2004, the notice for which had been
legally noticed and posted, at 5:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following
Councilmembers were present: McCowen, Crane, Rodi Baldwin, and Mayor
Ashiku. Staff present: City Manager Horsley,
Technician McArthur, City Attorney Rapport, Public
and City Clerk Ulvila. Ukiah Valley Sanitati,
present: Shoemaker, Baldwin, and Chairman
District Secretary Rau was also present.
Engineering
;s Director Ziemianek,
ict Board Members
Valley Sanitation
2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
2a. Adoption of Cost Share
Split for the D~ ' n and Constru~
Treatment Plant Rehab
Public Utilities Director Zi,
Chief Deputy Counsel for the
proposed Cost Share Agreement
Valley Sanitation Distr
Chief Deputy Coun: sues
tred t
Waste Water
ect
both the City Attorney and
nput and discussed the
Council and the Ukiah
mented to Staff that the
~ document.
M/S Rodin
Compromise Spli
Agreement supporting the 65/35
Discu=
defi~
to the con ~nts of the Cost Share Agreement, the
', and the arbitration clause.
PU OMMENT
Mike J~ ,n, 255 W
Council sh
limits.
Street, Ukiah, expressed his opinion that the City
gressive stance to annex the UVSD land into the City
Discussion contin[ with regard to the number of allocations split between the
City and the UVSD, applying smart growth principals for potential infill within the
City limits of Ukiah, the City and County's General Plans, and the option of
establishing no set rations between the UVSD and the City.
Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCowen,
Crane, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES' None. ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Joint Meeting of the City Council
And the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
December 15, 2004
Page 1 of 3
M/S UVSD Board member Baldwin/Shoemaker to adopt the Cost Share
Agreement supporting the 65/35 Compromise Split; carried by the following roll
call vote: AYES: Board members Baldwin, Shoemaker, and Chairman Delbar.
NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None.
2b. Adoption of the ESSU "Will Serve" Procedure
Public Utilities Director Ziemianek provided a summary of his Staff Report
concerning the ESSU "Will Serve" procedure and discussed changes to the draft
document as revised by the Council and Board members at the last meeting. He
explained that the revised procedure will provide better :roi and the requestor
should have a better understanding of what is ex recommended the
City Council and USVD Board approve the "Will
Discussion ensued between members of the
regarding the following items:
· The procedures for providing a"Will
· Concern with granting ESSU's a~
process
· The possibility of planning assignme~
Council, and Staff
~" letter to rs.
it dot not e planning
:ed with granting ESSU's
PUBLIC COMMENT
Mike Johnson, 255 W. Gobbi
a policy regarding "Will Serve"
Adjustment that he
Department.
the District currently has
a Boundary Line
th the County Planning
M/S McCowen
revi,,
"Will Serve" policy.
Count
in'
apl
~r there would be a conflict of
~erv~sors that serve on the UVSD when there is an
Fr~ :er, Cou
m~ Board
a conflict
m,
provided examples of similar situations that
encounter and he did not think it would be
Motion carried
Crane, Rodin, Bal
ABSENT: None.
g roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCowen,
~vin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None.
M/S UVSD Board member Shoemaker/Baldwin adopting the revised ESSU
'~/ill Serve" policy; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Board members
Baldwin, Shoemaker, and Chairman Delbar. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
Joint Meeting of the City Council
And the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
December 15, 2004
Page 2 of 3
c. Reschedulin.q of the Value Engineering Team Desi_cln Review Feedback
to the January 197 2005 Joint Meetin.o
It was the consensus of both the City Council and UVSD Board members to
reschedule the joint meeting for the Value Engineering Team design review
feedback to February 2, 2004.
3. PUBLIC EXPRESSION
3a. Announcements/Other Business
None.
4. ADJOURNMENT OF JOINT MEETING
There being no further business, the meeting was ad
at 5:40 p.m.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Joint Meeting of the City Council
And the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District
December 15, 2004
Page 3 of 3
ITEM NO. .Sa
DATE: JANUARY 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM KATHERINE
GRAHAM AND ST. MARY'S CATHOLIC CHURCH AND REFERRAL TO
JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE
FUND
The claim from Katherine Graham was received by the City of Ukiah on December 7,
2004 and alleges damages to her vehicle involved in a traffic accident with a Ukiah Police
Patrol vehicle at the intersection of Walnut Ave. and Dora Street, Ukiah on June 11, 2004.
The claim from St. Mary's Catholic Church was received by the City of Ukiah on
December 1,2004 and alleges damages to their facility located at 900 S. Oak St., Ukiah due to
an electric power failure that occurred on October 4, 2004.
Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject the claims as stated
and refer it to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF).
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject Claim For Damages Received From Katherine Graham
and St. Mary's Catholic Church 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
Claimant
Patsy Archibald, Risk Manager/Budget Officer i'~.~. ~,
Candace Horsley, City Manager
1. Claim of Katherine Graham, pages 1-4.
2. Claim of St. Mary's Catholic Church, pages 1-4.
APPROVED:'
Candace Horsley, ~)~ Manager
PA:WPD,ASR Remif Claim Rejections/Graham St. Mary's Jan 05
, . ~,:.... ~.
· . .~.. ,-,. :,.'.. .., .. .. ,
.:.;~: · ~ · .%... ' ..-,. . . . : :.. ..
·
.
·
,'
":"': ' / C~erk's Office' ·
. .
-" -./.'- :..-'City o!
3z~0 Seminary Ave ..
u~i~;-c~,?48~::... · · ·
'" ' " :'~'~-
; . '. ; -. o ~ · -~ .
., ,. . ;..-
·
.
. .~ , .-
·
....... _..._ ~ _ !! .
· . ;i~:n¢. ~ ", -~ ' '"".',..~proscr~d'b' ~he' ' · -~ · · .... ' .' · ..' ...... ....
: .::........:... ,
-'. 'h~i~E3h~ered. '~.. ~d~y~ur'info~a~ c, .... .',, : : .:-'..'~. · .' ' "- .... ' . · ' . .
. .~.'... ~' .. . ... .. .: .. .... ..~--,.., ,,,,, ,~=~ ,~,~:...~........~ .-..............
: ....... . . . .. ,'~; .... · . . ' . . .,~. en~mg tho p=~r~r-~'. ·
: ' "' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ~11 3 ' '
...... = ...... :~, ....... '~.' .. · '. .' .. · : '.." · ..... t:l..
..: . ... · . ,... It~e ~'OdUr~E~ or~'~r~'~;,===~ '.' ................... ' · ' .... · · "'
· ,?:-""-: ..... ": = : :~ '~ .... ' ......... ~t~[lt::. ..... · ' . . . .""~ · ' ~-":" -' .,,' ..... :...; ........... .... : ..... :'
?.::=..:. ::.......:...~:~:~.~ ;..: .... ~........'~.,,~ :.:.=~.=~='..: .... ~ ...,..' .~. · ....=.., .,..: .... ~.~ .........:....~ ..... ...: ...... .......:..
': ::.'..'= .' . , .' . Ie~mant, :' ~ :' :....'..' .:'....'- :': · ' '.- . .' · . .: .~-~ .' .'.:.:~, .:'..? ?.. ': .... :..:...'.:-..~ ~'..:.....'.,,~ .....
. .... , ........, ,...
.... ; .... ...:'~ .~,.. '~' . ~ ~ . · . · . , ,. .... ~. -.- :. .,, .... .'¥ .. ....:.~:.' ~.:
:......:.-....:.. ~u~,:..- ...,~.,~~~ ~ t~. ~j~'~:~..~ ...... .. ......... ..... . ..:....
:. . .' . · ' . ~' .... . · t~'~/....' .'/~ '~ ~'~,= · · · ~~ ', .'.2 · ': · · .~. · " '' ...:.:"
.. · · .... ......' ~:'~'-~.~- ..~. . ....... ~ __ _ ; .... ~ .:.....-.,.,.'. -. ...... '. ..:. .... ·
~=..:=........~ . ........~~~~~~.,.....,..,.. ~. ~. ~........~......
~.~:?...:.,..~-.:~...?:.:,,;~.:.~.~ .~..~;..:.~...~.~.....~:~:.=..,.~.;..:...... .... ...,. ~::...~.::-~~..' ..~..~ ~.~~.... -,......~..
=~......., ....... ...... .... ~ .... ~ .,, .,.:.:..:..........: ...... ......,=.~..........~:
~-:-:; ..:.~ ..".... :.'.. ~. ,~,: ~;.:::_.-....: .., ~ ..... : .' .::.;..:.'.'.' : .. ..... :-.~.~, ~ ~_ .
-,.....~.. ....... ... ...... -~ ..~,~.~.,~_ ~, '..~::.': ..., .. . · .. ~: :...~ .~.~~.. ,..... . . . ':,".. , ... . .. ~ . ...
,~ ......,;~.......:,..~:,'-...; : .... ~ '~:-. ..... . . . .~~.: ....... . . ~. ...'. .-~ . .., ,......'~~: · · ..,...
'... :.'~. :' ~ ~.,.a~:-:~ · %....:. . . . :. . ..e.... '.'' ..~ .. . · . ~~~ . ' . · . . · . ~% · ..... , .... . .... ~f~ . . ...
· ~ ..; .. -,-:.-:..-:.,-e~s.~.~,h.~%,~Z.~':~.~.. :~'~::":.. ...... . .' :. .......'~- ~', : -... :,..~: .. : · ~:'.: ...*. ,....~ . :.:...:.,.~ ·.
. ~ .....: , . · . ~ .. .... . .:': . .. ~..: ~-.,-~-,~.t p~o~llt~..Ul~.~l~:.:b:..., ..:........ . .. ........ . .... · ~,~:~.;.~...-.~ ·. ~.~.. :...~. .
· '~ ...~. '...:....~'..':.+' ::.. ..... .- . .~ ...,~ ::~..' ,:.~.".:.~.y..: '~'?,~ a~s~ms?ic~s i6'~'~ ....... : "' ' ...... ' .' '"
::~:?,--.~:~-.~',..:.-~ , ~ ....~*'.' .. *~:~ ...~ ..... .. ~, :.'...,~. · ... · · . . ........ ~:. ':.. -.'....- *.. ... . . .. ................ ~.-
.: .. .... ,...: .... .. :.N,~.~u ef~roo~:~:~,~.::':.,,=,:~ .......... ~ - · . ,..' .... · .... .. .. ' ..... : ~ '.' ...... .;... .' .... ". '* ·
~..~,.~: .... ..~....,. .... ,:,...-.. . - ~,,~~~ ,... ... ...... . .~: . · ..... . ...........~..: ........ ....~.. ........,,....:, ..............
- :~-~..:.: ...... ca~, , .: · .. ~ ~e · · ...... : .... .*:..*
~.* ::.. , .'..' ~.~.--,' * .~.. ........ . . '.'..~='... . · ........ ~0 I~. : .. .' .. .- . .. ., .'~ .~.
':... ~....~.~. ;.,........~..... .~-:~:.~,~ '~~ .... ~ '....' :~ ..... ~...
, , . :. . . . ..... . . . .. · .,: ,.~ ,: . . . . . . · . .. .,. *.~ . ~ .. ..,..,.~
,..~ ...... . ..... , .... .., ..... ~.~:: ... ....... ~...~-..~_.~. ~ ...... .... ... -. .... ~., .....
· ~... :...: ..... -,......: ....... ___ .~..,, .... ~,~...,. . . ...-.. .~,?.. :..:.... .... ..:......
~.:...:?? '~.:.~'::..:.¥.:.~,:", ,:.~::.' ::..~:,.,..: ..= . .,: .:-.:, ~. ::. .... ':.., :-::...:.. ~.: · .-.-... .... -~~,~.~.', ..~ ~:' ,:~~~.: :...... ,..-~ :~, ... ~'.~=., .
. :.....::,~.. .,... ..~ ~,:~':~..~... .. .. '.... . ~.~ ~:~:;~/,~ . ...............:....: .. ~ .... . . ~,~~~.... ~:~ ..... ..:...?:..~.. .....
~ . · ,. =. . . . . .' ., .. · · . .~,..... · . ..... ~.. . * . . . ., , .. ~ · : .~.,~ ....... ...~. . ... ~ ~ .*'~ .'... ~ ,.~:~:' ...
,~~~.~,~ .~... ...... . .....=.~ .:..: ~.... =.. .. ~,,~.,.. . :.. ..... .~ ..~ ........ ~:-' ~.~...~... ,.-,:, ...~ .,,.~:.:....
~. ~~~' ~'~~'0~~~· ' _',V,~= ..... ~*'" ~*-~,~:~ ~~;' " ~: - '~ '". ........ '~ ~' '.~. ~.* ".'..'.: .".: ::: ·
' *~ ..... : '' ' .'.' '~'~4~ ' * "'' ~ '. ~~~ ..... '~'"* *"~ .... ~ ...... ':. '""~ '
...... · . ," · ~ [~0 ~rr~-~'--~, ..... · · · ~ '~-- .....~"~ .... ~ ..... -
'~ ~ .: . .... .. ., : .* . ., .. .~. .. . . ~:. ., · . '.~-~.~,,~ ~ · · .... ,.............? .. ~~. , .- .~. ....
~ :."~'~'c'-'.~' =:.::~ ~ " ':~' '.' ' '. ,.',. ' : · · , Whl~' 'i ..... ' ::' ~ '".' "; "". ....
............. · .... ~ V~ .. _ .....
........ ..: ..... ~:. : ...,... · ....~:.,.. ....... .. ~0 he,. '. · ': ..=-~,
.. ?.. .... ..... ~... .... , ..... ....: .. ~.:....-,..~.,.?~-~, ..,,=.~::~ .. ..~:~ ,, ~~:. ~. ~,.~...~
· ; : '-'..... .' . ~ ', ~ · ... :. ', :..,~.,=... :~.-~.,'~...~ -.....~. ?. ..-~.: :';'~. ,..: ... . .-..'
,.:' .,~:... ~ .. . ~ ~ .. · .....~- .. .:.:~ .,.'.-?.: .. · ..-. · .... . '.: .: · .L..~?~.-.
; :=~.'~:.'.~'...- · ': ; · · ~m~.0~ O~e~'~ ...... ...:..:~::' .
~;=.=..= :. . J ~ · . ....... . ... :..,...:,-. ·
· ... ·~ , . ~: · · ..., ..~ .
. ~.~ . .
, . : ,
. .
:.~.:..: :'~'"'.'~' ·
· .. :..~.. :'..'~ .. , ·
· :..':~::?.~.....:( , .....
~ .....', ...
~ :~ :..~:.:, ' ~.'-. · ~..
. .... ':-~. . ,. .
.. .~'~ - .' .*. .
.. ,..., ..,...: ~.. ,', .. , .
., ..'~: · ...~ .
:.~. ~:~: .~-~..:. ~~,~ ~;,~.-....~=.. ~. :~:~ :.~.~. ,., ~ .., ::~:~ :,~.:~~~~..,~ ~. ~. ~::.:,: :-~... :.:.:.~.. ~ ~.~:~ ~,~:~:....
· · ,...:..', ' ..: · m~o~ ." ' :'":'...."'.'..': '...' ............... ...' · :~,',~. '.. : ~ '".:.. ,. ~ '~:
.. · :... - ... . ..... ~ ~. ~ub~C~n I .............. · . .' . "'.:...' . ~'~.. :. ,':~ ,~.:~ :'..': ....... --..
· .. · · · ...... ~ ..... ~....P~,orem ~ae~ ' '- .... ". · . .... , "..-'. .~ · .'
· .,~ .. ..... ~.~~~ ,... .. ..~ ..p ~ ~u,,~,.., .~ ...... : ...... ,....:. ........ . ..
.. ....... :..~.~.. ........ .__~.~ .... ... .~. . . ,~¥~,,,~..~., . ..... ........~......
......... ~ .... --. ......... ~ .... ~ · ~ I~ss ......
....... · ..... · .~--~- ..~ ... - · ~ . .~. -.... · ~o . . ·
..... ,...,,,.?..
:.~.~.=~:. -.~..~ .': .~'... .... -.:.... · ...~. ....'..,...~ ..: ...... . .._:...... .. :. · ,: ,. .. .. . .~. , .'..:,~'~..: .... ~..~.~..'~,'..: .... :..
~..;..:.~:;.~:.?:: ~ ':.::..~'. ~.: ...., ~:,:. ~ ..~ ~. ~;-.:,..-.~.~.:.~ .~ :..~~:~. :~.:_ ~ ..:.......~:'.~ ~ ~::::..~ .::::....
.:.:~:.~:.~."":. :~:.'..'-' .~ ...: .'.' .... ~'~ . ':.. ' ': ~:c:~:.' :"': ?~ ~ .... '.:~' :..~ ..... ' .. :...~..~ ~. :' .. ~_ ..': .' ~,': '.: ~.::.~.. :_':':.-:.~... :~.... ~:~.: .:'.~;. ~...
~?~,..:..~:.:~'..:~.':.' .-.... ..~...-.~:~'.:..::.: ~... ~'..::-:?,~~.'...:'.':.... · :...~.:.:.:::..~........ ~.:_-.:...~.~..:.../:'~':.. ~.:~...~.:
~O'd ~O:~L ~00~ ~ =ca ~/~/~q~:xa~ ..... ~' '"" '"'' :' ""':?'""'
, !
· CLAiM.FOR MONEY OR.. ~O..
· 'DAMAGES'AGA!. NST.. -. D E'C ..-' ~"~4 .~
· K .H'
; ',
.
~-'~" '".,' " P. 03 ·
/ ·
,
:' · / . .°am~9?.er foss, i~soto~ ~s ~jM~ ~.~r_ ~ clap, ~n~u~i~ ~e ~/imat~ a~ I. _ P. ~..~ thousand dollars. .
· ':./I .- . ~r~t~on. o~ ltl~:n ~,~,'~.:~=~ ~'uwq az. O~e ~lhe oI the' ~ . . d ~nmun: ~f. any pro~pecl~vo ~n
:~~....~...: ....... "*~"~~~:~,,~a~'~;~~~;~,:~.~ ~. '._ ' "' '" "~"'~' ~"'~ ''~ ~' o~.....-.-'
.~ ./ . .. , ...... . . :.n...~,,~,,?z,~ea.' ~ P e~e~tal~n of tl~e c'a~m' ~-*,,,~ ........ : . ' ~u~, '. . ·
Z.:....: .... .....
:'-'"-' '-' :'.
'-": -- '.-'""'-" '; ....'-"'~~ ' '1'~ .~' .- ' . ' ~ ' · '
' ';.'".lf~o,;~tc~aim~d.,x~ · - . · .....-. ., . . ~ ;.~. -....
. . .... .... : - ~ ~e wh~re D~e' ' ' · , ~ ~e~h~..~e · .. · .. ,.....~no .~o11,, ....
' U~.~ ' ' · ..... -~o ~ ~e/11' m]~',~_ _" · ·..Y.' e , mi.,rest an ~'i,~ ;~';;~:. ;..,-... ~ - ·
L- - . . " .'.', ".' · : . --,-~['me recog~ --~,Ah)-,~'::' ".:" ~.~,-,uat= 'daes ~o ' '-.
.:" · .' · .. ' :.' .. - -.. .. · ' · · ... -,'"-:~ .... ~'m~re~l~a~'.$2'S, OOO~&oe:.CCp,~[ '"."~'"
:....: ~..: ::..,~:-',- . -.. ............. - ,...:: .". · .. ';...." :............-~ -,:.. ....,....,'.
':".'~ .... ' "~':~'~'"' "~,~ :*o ,~a~'~~- ...... "~~" :'""'::'" "~: ' :, :., "'.':. .~. .. ~.':'~ 7: · .~. :.-:::.'~. :.'
':'"' '- ''" -,'~, " ." -' : .... ~ ~"' ' '"- · . ' ' " ' " ' .' " .~' "~OVOF~ ' · ' .:'~."":""
:... - .... .... · :., . ..... .... .....~~ . ~.. . .:...?.....? ........ -.. ......aoAt:C~a ..~ :..
::-'"' " "': .... · ~'~' ~"'"""~zts): (~oo~" · ...... :' '.'',-.'" .... ~~ ".: ....
·' · · · ... ' · '' · · · . . · ' · · . . ' . .. ~...' . ' .. · . . · · · . · ·. . . .' . · ' ' .. . L · '. · ... --- ': -. P..-
'' '" ' ..... '"" ;"~--" ' '"' : ' ' ' ' : ' " ...... ' ' "'" ' .... " ":. ::'' .'-': ." .' '. ":"'~ ' :" ' "'i .'
~;-~. . .~: ......... ;...- :.r. ~:.~' ; .... ~ . '. . . .
· . .. . . :..:.~... ..~.. .. .t.e ~ .. .. I- ... .' . . . . .. · *. .. · ..: ~-
. · '..· ' ~ .. - · . ~' ·"" · · .' .'. . ~ '-~~-.~ .. '. ' "- ~~ · .'~ '.. .. ': ' · . . ' · ' · · .e · .' '
. .. ~ .... ~ - . . . ~..... . .. . . .. . ..........~ .. ..... . . . ... · . .
~;~::'".:'.~: .......... ~.~~,,,~:~,..~:~1 ..... .: .... .. . . ' .. · : . , . . . ... ......... ::... .. -,,~ ~ .,~ .... ..~ .
'r-~ · "?.-." '.'..' ~:{("'~::' '7~.. g . ' -' ~" . ~ ' . .... .- .'".Z' '"T.L:2..:. :Z~'.."'"~: ~" ' .; ' :'-..", ,.., .:. ~ ?-:.-,.'-. :' ~'.:. ..: :..- ~ .' . .' · . ' · '. :" :~.'7 ..
::~:. ~:.~..:~ .. ~: .~.' ';~a~.?.:_',.L. :.:'. :...., -........,, ,. :.~:. ~:-;,~,~ ",: ...;-..~:~:-,:~:..:~,~:~:.:...~: ..:,:.: .~ ,. :::.:....~.. :.:.: :..,.:,~}~.~...
'-"' ".' ' . 'Y~.',' ~:':' ~ ~*~'~,~el~, ~,,.;;~.~.':' ..... ' .- ? -"'-: ....... . ' · ..... :':' - ' ~ -", . · .' .' ..... . ..... -":.':..':
· ,, : . ~Ai~ ,;, ~. · . ,' 0I~!1 ~ . .....- '.. ,.;'..,...:.~:' .. -~.....' ;.'..'. '... : · .'~,~..:.:.,.',.-.~
~. j' ' :. ? · ~'~~ ' .';. k..". · .· . ' · · · ' " ~.'-~. ~'. .' . ' .' .' , . .. '.:Z"' ' .'"~. .-....3%. ·..... *..' · ' . . ' ' ..' · ~ :~ '~
.~.%: ..... · ..... " ~ . '..*_.: ...*' .m~~. ' .' : · .-. .' .... ..... " . ~'me ~ ' ..... - ~. .'' ' "*' ''- ' · .... * ' ..'..~'-'':
· : "'' ;'" ' "~" ~ ' ~ ' : "- ' '~"~ ' '~~~ '-'- ''' ' ' ' · " ~'X~' ';'~'* ~'" "':~ I' '' '' ' : ""'T' '''
..'..'.. ~ .''/. ' -..~ . ~ ' . .' · : .. '~-~. . :' . ~; '~-=';"''.. ~.*~.'..~. .... . ........ ~'.;.~ ...... ..~ ....
. ~ ....... . · .:.. ;.~~"~-~..~.~ .' . ':... .. .... ~.~.~ . '~ ; * .. . · ...~ '*..... . ...... . ..... '.~ ... .''~.~ ~ ....
:.''~'~.:*. :': .:'.'.~'.. :~*.:... ' : .*. . '*~"~-~~'~.'--~~,.~,. '~ *'. ~ '. ;~~~ :".~T'. .' :~.-' *' '. .' '..."-~'-:~*...
· ~.. . ..... .; '. . - . . . . . . . ~.~~ . ~~.~. . . ....~ '.~.--~% · .~_ . · · : . .
· ' '~.0. '.' ~. '", ..... . . ... .... · : .... · .. -~.~ ...... ~~~~ .......... -..' .....
'.. ' ..... ". ..... x~ .. ~qlV~ ~ : ......... · ........ . ~ ~ . .,. .. .. .., ...........
. · -. . ~ ........ ~r~ ~ · . ., ............................ ·
· ". I~[g/l~r.O . " - · . · . · ~ ~1 f~ .... · . . '. ..... ........ . ..... ..--~ ..... ' .. · ,.
..' ' .:.. · :-'. .... - .. ~ ~n~lor~ or h0~i~/~ -~ ..... a. ~ed. I~l~u~. ~i~s~' ~:.~ :':.- ', :,-'.. '.'"... '.. '~ · ·" ' ' '..-'.,'~","': ·
?:.',~. :. ' ..'..~-~.'..~.~..~,A;. '- .'..::~' . ~-'~"'~~g ~h~ ...... ' ~ ".?.~,~y~e'.:~' n~.' ~i'es~'".~; '- , '~..":' '"' '.' "";'~. '
,:..,, -,--' .... ~,~.'-.~ .:~ '..'.'. ' ..' ". .... · . .: ". ": ::... ' ..... ' ..... '. · · .:.. '. ".. ~':..~'...'.,' .?:..~. ....... · :- ..~. ~e~¢~no.: . · '.:.' .
:;~.:~.:~:~: ,~':....- ~:.-....~' .....'-...~..,...~ ... : .. ~.,. ;. ', :..., .'. .... · :. . ..', .. ,~.',.... ~:.-" . ..~.. :,,... :;.Z.,~:.~..·
-w.,,'.. '.'...~.~,.~,. *-~ '~ ...... · .'.. ' ....... ~_.~ · ...... .. ~.. .:.:.. ~.. '...:'.'..:?..~.' .....',. ....... · .... . ...
· ~~.,~ .....:.
· .... ~ · .~ ~.,., ,: ~ .,., .... .. ,,., ,. . ..... . .... . . , ..~.
~.y~. -,~. ;-..~-~.~-.t?~ ..- .. ~:- ~_~ .. . . . · ..... . :., ........ ~ .~,- · .. .. .. ,.... · ....,..,..
. ,.: · .' . .' ' ~'. '.· ~ % ".' '... .'--~,, .... .'~. ~ ........ ' ...' .'C. ~' . :-' ...... .~' · ' · ~ .... -.. ~ ' . ' '..'
:..~.. -..~.....'.:: .~.::~..: ~,. ..~.". . .... . · ~.--.~~'.~ : . . :' . ........... -...~;*...:..~.,: ......... ~ ............. ~'_...~
... ~. . , ,..,.~.~....~ . ~ ~~ ~ . ~ · ., , : · , ,. ~,- .~. ,, ..-, ,, . ·., ~ ,. ,-. .,... ~ ·. · . .... . . ...~, ~. · ,
· ",.- .' ,'~ - ... ~," ~':". ' '' · -'~ ~'. '. ...... · .' ·-' ·~~~' ~'.''~ , ~ · " ''. · : ..~t'~,~ *
· . · ...... ~'..- ..,~..: ...'... ~ ......... .. . :.~~ ...... . ~ '... , '..."' · .. .. ~ · . .-....~....,.~'~. _ .'~ . ... .... .. · .. -~,,~-~ ~ ~.
~::: ~."~:'~:~"~.':~!"~/i~l~'pl6~b.~:,:"~-'."": '.'~...'~:' · · .~'- ~.~. ~'; "<~'" ,':'~ .~'~:- ""7- ":..:':.?'?"~.~.. :':'~'-- ':..?'?::.
~ ": · ,- ....:'~:,' ': ' .. ~1.~ ~ .... ' ,~* '~ "' ' ...... "· '"*" '~', · '" .:' '..' ~"" TM - " -~'. ', ~ -':" ' · . ~ '.~"'. '.. :.~ '.;" '"
· · ..... . ...... ~ ed~a~. . , .. · .... , ............. ~~. .. ........ ~.~ ....
... ...... ...... . . b;/i~ o~ ~ . · ........ . .....,.. . .... ~ , ...... ..,....
· .'.-.- .......... · · ~,~/~ · '. · · ........ · · · , · ..........
· -4-T-',.'.,:.~. ~,-..,..-... ..... ..,, , . · . · af~u~ ~ · · · . · ... · ...... · .-.:,..,.....
.... ~ ~-c/n,m. ~ ..... , .....,- .. ....... ' ....... · . ~ ~ ~ a ~ ' ~ ..... '.. ,
.,., , .-..,. .. .~l~s.~ · . ....... . .............. ~ ~,~ · .- · . ... ·
...... · ,. .... ,: , .~~ · . . .. · . ~.. .. . .. .... . ....... . ~ ~ ....... ........ .:....~,.. . .
.... - .. . .~:,.:....: ...... :: ,~ n~bd~a~~ · .. · . . · .. .............. ,...r...... .... , .... - ~ ,........,......
· ~.~.: ,. ~.~.:.... ~.,,;~.~ ,~.~.. .:; .~.. ;~ .~. :.'. . ..... ~,~. , ;~ -.. . · . · . .. .. .. ~ '.,: . , ~ · ~. . ..: ~.....
'.' .* ~'~,.~.' ' , ~~"~'~.~ ..'~ ..~.' ~ ' v'" '. ~, ,~. ,. ' · = ~.,; · ~ , . · . ~, ' . . ~.. ' ~ .... "..'. , , ,'-': · ' ' ' '.· · ' ' · ·. "."
~,- ~-~-~ ~ · ~ . . ~. . ~. ~ .. , - ., . ,,, . .....,.. , . ,,., ~... , ¥ . · , .~ · , · . . ~ .... : ·
--..: ........ ~.~ ~-~ ..... . ..... ~, ...... ,..... .... .. : · ..~ ......... ...,. :.~. ,.. : . .,..:'~ ..... ~.,~-~ ·
· ...,, .~ ........ ,...~ ~ ~6~.. . .............. .... .... ..... · ............. . ............ .,~..,.
~ · . ....%~ .~.:_ *:~ .. --. ... . . ... .. '... · ,~ .... ~.. ..~ .... '~.:. . .-..;...~.. -. . -.'~.,~. .. . . ...: ';. · .~ .~:.~ .
'. '? '*.,,' ."~ ,~:'~~, ~ .~t ...~t~ · .'~ ~'~~~~ ~'e~e~n~nc, ' ~. ': ~:'*'~'~' 7;' 1 - :" '.-~:~...~c:'."
· . - -.t · .L~,~. ·.' ' . ' ~- ~ . "' ~'~ * ~ -~ · · ' · ·
· *.. .......-..*.- : .. . · ..... ~.. ,~~~t,_t.~ ~. ~,~~~:~~~:. · . .... :
-. ~: --'*'". ~-~.~--. ~ ~ .*..~ ..' · . ," ,' : "~.~~J t I .'1~. f..~'~'~ I V' ' '~~--~ '. ' ' '.' : *"-*' -
· .., .- .... ~. .:.-~...:' :.-.~:~.,,~. ~.~...., ~... .. ,. ..,.: . .: . .... ~:~~~ ~~ ~.'? '., .., .... ~.-~ ~.'. :
. ~ ..,. ,.., -.'.. .... .: .. · .. · · .~ ...... ,~:. ~ · ..~ ..... , : ,...:...~./~ '.~~..~..:...:.~.:..~< ,*..' ~:~ ..... ~:. '. ..... ~,.;:~. ~ .
'..:.:..~. .:?~:~,~.~ .'.:.~, :** ....**:* .~ · . · ..-~..~~ . ,. . .~uran~:PO/r~:~~~.._~: .. ,,.. :.~..:~ ...... .
. .... ~..~ .: - .. -~:.*.., ~ ~~ ........... ..~ ......: . · . · . · . ,~ ~, . ... ~- ~' · -- . . .....
· '.~ "'.~s,:~:~r ....... ~ ....... · .". ' : ..... :. .... : ......................... '~ .... '~.-~~V~ , - ' .... :' '
· .........-.....,. .. ~~,~. ~:~,.~.,.. ~ ..... ..... *...,,- .:. ~ .:.. ..... ....~..., .... ......
.... ~ '.~..~--. ~ · . '~ . ~ · . . ~-..- , .. ,. . .· . :.~. · .... . .' . -..~ .~ ~ :~' .:.-..
· . ..... :.* ....... .~ .... _.~ ~V~ ..... ~ . . ~.. .... .... ,...... . .... - ... * .. ....?.-..
· .. ~ ~ . . .. ~~ ...... ~ ..... . . ... ........ .
~ .. . ~o~ .... _ ~ ...... . ...... ;... . ....... ~ ..
Tcre hene, ' · -= ..... ' ': '--," '
........... · ,, . · , t~... · . .-,. ..... ~ ,... ., · ..... . .... ,
:...... ~::::...? ,.,, ~..:,,.....~-..,,: .~_..~.~~~.. ~~, .- _ ~,..~ :...~
· ' .'~" ......~ ", · ' · ' " · '' ~~ -~ ,. ~ ' '' ' '.. ~ .~" ~~-- '1" "' · · '
'-~- ..~.' .'~-:~Z~.~'..-~ · .. " -. · ..' · . ' ' ' · ~'-~ ~'- . .' ...... . ...... . . ~' , .~.-
; ~ '.':' ', ::"~t~ .;i;'.'~ -~:;,'.~'"."~' '..: ..... :: :".:"" ': -..'.'. ~~. -~'~ ': ..'-' .'.". · .:. ' · .' '." "' ~::'.: ':
............ ~...:~.!~.~c~:-E~c N,,.. ~. ~ ,~~ '" ," · · ...... . ........ ,..'..: ...... ~':.. _ · ':-"'" -. '--'. :' . · :.,'-~' ·
' - :.'r' ' ",' .' ' ........ -~~. .' .... · ....... ~ ~'-''~' .......' .... ". '.' .' ..... .'-' .'
...c~,~,,~,~,~,.... ..,.~~ ;_~:~7 ... ,......~,.~ .~, .... ... .... ,:.. .... ..,.,.....
. ..... · .. . .... ,....
.... . .... ~ ........ . ~ ~o.. - _ . -~ . Veh~e~ ... . -~ .... ...,...
........ ~ ,: ...... ~ ..... _.. .... , .~ ~ ..... ~ ~: ....... . ..... ·
- . .... .'? .... ,...'.. '. .. .... · · · -' :'"~ - ~-.". ?-- '~q~'~2~~.v. · .-'. .......
. · . · .. , ......· . · ,~ ~ , .. ... . ~ - . ... .... .~~ · . .
..:..~...I~1~ ~ , · · ;... ~ . · '.. · - ...... '; , ' ' D~a~O '.' '. ' ~ .' ....... '. "'.', "':.
...,.....,.. ~....~,.~.~ ... .... :: .., .,, . ..:....... .,~--.~,_;......, . . ...... ,...'q~ . ..
~,~ ......... ~ .. · · &l ~ · ,. ~ · ., - .. , ..-.. ........ ~ ....,:., .... ; ......... ..-
.... ~~ ..... · .~ ~a~L~ ~ . ... . .... ' .......... · ....- ....:. ..... - ........
· . *, .... - ...... -.~ .~ . ~. · ... , ~mate~ ~m~,~r da~ ..... ~. ". · · ' .....
. .:. ..~...,~.. . , ..... .: · . . . ~. . · ...... . .. ~ · · .... ~ ... . · .. . .. . .... . . .
'. ;,: ~..:.':~..."..:..., '. ,'.. ., ' :~* . . · . .~'~ ,~ .....'.....",.. · · ~U~~q:~[ cl~;~ '" '. ' .' ..... '
"~ ': ~e~'.';~:"."',~'X.'.~.'~' ' : .L · · ' · ' ' . · ' ' " '-~' "':' "''".:'--~ .~'.~'~*~'. · .. ' ". ".~'.'
~.~::~,;.....:;~:~,..::."~';:~:'.', ,..' .... ......' ". ... ",'. ':~:~'U~,.....'. ",'."... .~'. ~~'.~-'.'" .... "~':,..~' '.": : :.';~:'.7~:.,'
~O'd ~:gL ~ / 'oe~ ~/~/~:xe~ "
.... · --..'For-,di..,,cck~-nt.cl~lr~. ,",,a'~'o~',~,,. ~=,~-:. ......... R .F-~_'.O ~.'AREF..~.j.L¥.. ' .' ' . .'... · .... ' ................
· ' . " .. · ' , ' ' ', '.'-~",. ~a.~e.~ · ' ' : chr~le, lock,on ir ' . · - "
al-ur.¢)~ :hi I~ ~ 8rid l)v ~0,.'~1,', ..... '- ........ (, mq .~a. le. pi~ce ~cddenl b" - ._ o .CRy. or Uk~ah
· . , . ,, I,,.,,.,~ ,,um,~(~m or a,~ . : . . y A-1 a'tcl loc.~t~On o ...... .. ! . of.
. .s~.? com~,~. If C.'i~y. of u-~m~ ,;~hi~j,,, .... :.. _;._ :... ~.~F~s ~o ~me ~he acm, .; _ ~ . .~:y_,_urs?!r or. your v..eh,~e ~. ..
' -uy ~,~t~,r'A" lochs,on' o~'.'~i~., o'lr u~,~,~ :~7.';.~'._''~ ,.,,,,.-n,-.,~,_' .d~.a~o . . .(:.hi by IB 1 an..d ,,~ ~,n, or imp_.,c~ b "x - ~e ;
· ' · ai,$ h 'IT' Jac' ' ; .... .,-~n,~.m W,~'Jn you hrsl. S.3W il ' ' ' . ' ' · ' · ' . . · - y '
-.-..: .:. ;.. ........... ... .' .. .. '.s!-~por ar.,ggrnm signed by cl~m.3~! ...... ¥;,. u~c..~cn ~!oro!~1 ii · ·
' ' ' . ' . - .*""-"~-*~.~*.e.~,~,.,=.,~... =,' · , . ' . . ' ' ' · .. ~, ..
'~N*d liN:Gl ~Nrl? I :3ar1
'2.
o
',
,5
File With:
City Clerk's Office
City of Uktah
300 .Seminary Ave
Ukiah, CA, 95482
CLAIM FOR NEY' '~R -
MO R
DA~GES AGAINS
~ K
' DEPARTME~
A claim must be presented, as prescribed by tho Government Code etr the State o1: California, by the claimant ora pers¢
acting or] his/her behalf and shall sinew the following:
' .
If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(,,
being answered,
Name and address of tile Claimant:.
Name or Claiman L-
Addre~:
"q "'' "'"'------,--,--, i- __. ,--- __
Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent:
Address:.__: - ·
...................... ..........
1 ho dale, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or ~ansac~on which gave rise to ~e claim asserted.
"~ion' '-~~"~- "~-~ ~' ~~ ~ ~me ofO~urren~. ~'
_~~ .~~ ~~ ~ ~ :"~ -- _..~. . ~..
........... . .. ~.~ ~~.~ ~ ~.. _' %_ .
· .
General description of the indebtedness, oblige[ion~ inju~, damage or loss incurre~ ~ far as it may be kno~ a
the limo of t~ presentation of the claim.
6 ~ ........... . ~ ~ .e~ _ ·
~ .... 7 -~ ~ ..... ~~ .: , ....... . ,, ' _ , . '
P~je 1 of 3
.
.
10.
if amount claimed totals, iess tllan $10,000: The amount claimed, il: it totals less than .[an tl~ousand dollar
($10,000) a.~ of the date of presen~tion of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospect~e ~nju~
dam.~ge, or loss, ii,solar as it may be ~own at ~e time of the Presentation of the claim together WJti~ [ho basis
compub~[ion of U~e amount claimed. ,
.
.
.
If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: ir BIo amount c~aimed exceeds ten thou~nd dollars ($10,0~o ~
amount shah bo incJudod in the claim. Howoveq i~ sha~! indicate whe~er the da~m would be a limited civil
A limited civil casa is one where
exceed $25,000. ~ unlimited cml case is one in ~ich lho recove~ sought is more than $25,0~. (Sea CCP
8~.) tt~o rccove~ sought, exclu~e of attorney f~s, infarct and court costs does no~
-~"~r}~~fd to P~i~e t~e informat~ reque~a~ a~ve-J~rder t~comply ~h
__ ,
Claima.nt(s) ~ociaf Secur[iy Number(s}: (optional)
............... ...........
. --*
.
Claimant(s) Date(s) o~ B~HI~: .... - .....
Name, address and telephone number o[ any witnesses to lbo occu~ence or tra~saction ~ich gave rise to the
claim asserted:
· ~ ....
If tile clRim involves medical troatmenl rot a claimed injury, piease provide the name, address andtcrephone
nu~T~bor et'any doctors o¢ hospitals prey[din9 treatment: .
11.
If applicable, please attaci2 any medical b/ll,~ or reports or similar docurnentg ~uppofling your claim.
]t' the ctoim relate..; to an automobile accident:
Claimant(s) Auto Ins. Co.: ~ O
Address: ' -' ' ............. _ ~.,_ Telephone:
- ~_ ~.~ .
....... Insurance Policy ~.:'
Address: ' , · ~.
· ----.-.....
Clai~mnl;'s Veh. Lic. No'.~ ....... --'-'--'--'-'--
Clain~ant's Drivers Lic, No.:
Veil/de Make/Year:
............. . · Expiration:
· · -- . ,~.~.~., ..
if aPpl~cahle, P/ease a~hmh any repair bills, esti~nates or s/mi/ar documents SUpporting your claim.
--
Page 2 of 3
P~/Oo
READ CAREFULLY
Fo;' aJ! nccide~l claims.' pl:~ce on ~ho fottowlng diagram the n~me City of Utdeh vehicJe; location of City oi' Ukiah ¥chicle at time
of :~tree[;;, includil~7 Noi(h, E.~.~t, $ouih, and Wc,~t;, indicate place - accident by "^-1" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the
of ~CcJdcnt by 'X"-and by chowin9 house numbers or d/stances to
.~in;et corners. Il' Cily of U~nh vehicle w~s Involved, d~ignate
by ~eller 'A" loca~on o~ CJly o~ Uk~h vehicle when you flint saw
;~nd by "B" location 9[ youmelr er your vehicle when you:first saw
time of the aCcident by 'B-l" and lhe point of impact by 'X."
NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the 's~tuat/on a[lnch hereto a
proper-diagram signed by claimant.
Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant tO California Civil Pmdecures
{}1038, the Cily/Agency may Seek to recover at~ Cosl~s of defense in [he event an action is filed which is later
detormir]cd not [o have been brought Jn good faith and with reasonable cause,
ITEM NO.
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING RECORDS DESTRUCTION
The Finance Department has reviewed Records Destruction Notices encompassing 238 boxes
and identified these record boxes as ready for destruction. Two boxes of archival files have
been taken out of archival storage and are now in active files in the Finance Director's office.
The City's Records Retention Schedule was adopted by City Council in 1999. The City Attorney
has reviewed the Records Destruction Notices for each archival box and has approved those
boxes designated for destruction. Funds have been allocated in the City Clerk's budget for
shredding of documents.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Destruction of Certain Records
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
N/A , . ·
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ,~//__Z.~~.~ ' '~
Candace Horsley, City Manager and David Rapport, City Attorney
1. Resolution with attachment authorizing the destruction of certain records
APPROVED: (-~'.-.~-~~ ~~. _
Candace Horsley, City I~anager
ASR: Records Destruction 2004 Finance
A'I-rAcHI~ENT ~
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS
WHEREAS, the City Clerk's Department has reviewed and approved the list of
records provided by the Finance Department that are ready for destruction; and
WHEREAS, the attached list of City records represents records which are no longer
necessary and may at this time be destroyed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council hereby
approves the destruction of certain records, contained in Exhibit A of this Resolution, and
authorizes the City Clerk to destroy the records.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of January, 2005, by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Mark Ashiku, Mayor
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Resolution 2005-
Page 1 of 1
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction. ____....--.~-_.......~
Instructions' 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
19 2065 Utility Records - Aged AR 5/9~ - 2001
reports, UVSD on/off svc tacjs. 12/98
20 1600 Payroll Benefit Distribution Rpts. 12/94-12/95 2003
21 2066 Utility Records - UB ledger bal. 8/94 - 2002
1/30/99
27 2050 Paid parking from 7/1/98 to 7/98 - 2/99 2002
2/28/99. DMV for 7/1/98 - t2/98
29 2051 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 4/20/99 - 2003
5/18/99
31 2069 Confidential Parking Tickets 3/99 - 2002
12/99
33 2070 Confidential UK cash post 1/99- 2003
10/99
34 1790 Disconnect list, delinquents, final7/g3 - 6/97 2000
notices
41 2071 Confidential utility receipt stubs 5/99 - 6/99 2004
44 2052 Confidential utility pmt stubs 3/99 - 4/99 2003
65 2075 Utility billin9 - UVSD 1/99 - 8/99 2003
83 2081 Billing records - receipt stubs 8/98 - 2003
10/99
138 1669 Bad debt writeoffs (A - J) 7/93 - 6/94 2004
139 2083 A/R billing registers 10/1/99 - 2003
3/30/00
142 1940 Utility Records 7/93 - 6/99 2004
152 2082 A/R billing registers 7/1/99- 2003
9/30/99
156 2102 Utility service ta~s-routes 1 - 26 1/00-6/00 2002
Signatures Authorizin9 Destruction
Date:
City Clerk
Date:
Ci~Attorn/e~)
Destroyed By
Date:
Reports: Destroy-FinanCe 2004
Date. August 17, 2004 Department: Finance Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
167 2032 Confidential Parking 10/97-2/98 2001
Enforcement
168 2093 A/R DUI & Misc. 1/9-12/97 2003
173 2029 Duplicate deposit slips, cancelled 4/92- 2003
checks 4/22/93
178 2027 Closed Business License (A-M) 1/96-12/96 2001
.180 2095 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 5/99 - 6/99 2004
190. 1215 . Warrants Pd,_Util. Refunds C-Z, 7/1/89 - .. 1995
Home weatherization loans A-Z 6~30~90
192 2105 Confidential Billing Registers 1/99-3/99 2004
195 2107 Utility service tags-routes 27-71 1/00-6/00 2002
203 2112 Sewer receipt stubs 4/98 - 3/99 2004
219 1667 Bad debt writeoffs (A-H) 7/91-6/93 2003
227 1819 UVSD payment stubs 101/96-8/97 2003
247 2129 Electrical Statistics Reports 7/94-10/97 2003
251 1920 Confidential Utility Payment 12/97-12/97 2003
Stubs
253 2133 Electrical Statistics Reports 4/98-12/98 2004
282 1951 Sewer payment stubs 5/97-4/98 2001
284 2149 Electrical Statistics Reports 7/96-2/98 2003
291 1631 Bad Debt Write offs (H-N) 7/91-6/93 2003
294 1955 Commercial Garbage pmt stubs 4/97-8/98 2003
307 1658 Bad Debt Write offs (O-Z) 7/91-6/93 2003
352 1935 Confidential Business License 1/94-6/98 2003
Records
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Department Head
Date: ,/~_/~//~/./z
City Clerk
Destroyed By
Date'
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004
Department: Finance
Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions:
1. Review this listing.
2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
359 1958 Benefit Distribution 3/98-12/98 2003
369 1934 Confidential Utility Payment 4/98-5/98 2002 '
Stubs
384 2187 Payroll Validation 10/99-6/00 2003
392 1915 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 9/97-10/97 2001
407 2200- Labor Distribution 1/00-9/00 2004
410 2204 Confidential Utility Receipt Stubs 5/00-6/00 2004
419 2207 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 9/99-9/99 2003
422 2208 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 1/00-2/00 2004
424 2214 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 10/99-12/99 2004
426 2216 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 3/00-5/00 2004
429 2212 Confidential Utility Receipt Stubs 7/99-8/99 2003
430 2217 Confidential Utility Receipt Stubs 2/00-3/00 2004
432 2213 Confidential Utility Receipt Stubs 8/99-9/99 2003
439 2220 Confidential Utility Receipt Stubs 12/99-1/00 2004
440 2219 Confidential Credit Card pmts 5/99-1/00 2003
441 1931 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 2/98-2/98 2003
442 - 2218 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 6/99-7/99 2003
443 1921. Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 5/98-6/98 2001
506 1369 Bad Debt Write offs (F-L) 7/88-6/91 2001
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
artment Head
Date' /~~
/Cit.y Clerk I. City Attorney/-% / Destroyed By
: IOate..'T z./ 2,'')Date:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004 Department:. Finance Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice', signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
507 1370 Bad Debt Write offs (A-E) 7/88-6/91 2001
509 1372 Bad Debt Write offs (M-R) 7/88-6/91 2001
513 1743 Utility Pmt Stubs 6/96-7/96 2000
514 1779 Financial Statements-Interim 7/92-12/92 2002
515 1378 Bad Debt Write offs (A-Z) 7/88-6/91 2001
520 1706' Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 9/96-10/96 1999
522 1927 Confidential Employee Dist. 10/20/96- 2002
6/6/97
531 1394 Warrants Paid 6/91-7/92 2002
534 1753 Warrants Paid (J-MBNA) 7/95-6/96 2001
535 1925 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 8/97-9/97 2001
539 1755 Utility Pmt Stubs 5/96-6/96 2000
540 1756 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 5/97-6/97 2000
541 1758 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 11/96-12/96 1999
545 1750 Warrants Paid (Pafford-PZ) 7/95 - 6/96 2001
549 1744 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 1/97 - 2/97 2000
550 1924 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 1/98 -1/98 2002
553 1745 Utility Pmt Stubs 3/9 6- 4/96 2000
555 1759 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 7/96 - 8/96 1999
557 1751 Warrants Paid (A-BL) 7/95- 1/96 2001
558 1768 Journal Vouchers 7/92-3/94 2004
561 1778 Financial Statements-Interim 7/94-12/94 2004
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Department Head
D ate:x/',~,~~.~7-~ I D ate.:~/~../z.~/,~ ~ I Date'
Destroyed By
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004
Department:' Finance
Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions' 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
563 1808 Utility Pmt Stubs 5/97-6/97 1999
564 1809 Utility Pmt Stubs 6/97-7/97 1999
568 1811 Utility Pmt Stubs 12/94-5/96 2000
569 1432 Journal Vouchers 7/85-8/89 1999
570 1433 Journal Vouchers 9/89-6/92 2002
572 1810 Utility Pmt Stubs 7/97-8/97 1999
591 1806 Utility Pmt Stubs 3/97-4/97 1999
593 1742 Utility Pmt Stubs 1/96-2/96 2000
, ....
595 1916 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 10/97-11/97 2001
12/24/92
598 1918 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 10/97-10/97 2001
607 1746. Utility Pmt Stubs 12/95-1/96 2000
609 1829 Confidential Bad Debt Write offs 7/94-6/95 2002
(A-L)
610 1830 Confidential Utility Reports-Fixed 1/96-6/96 2000
Charges Listing-Routes 1-71
611 1831 Confidential UVSD Payments 5/96-6/97 2000
612 1832. Confidential UVSD Payments 5/96-12/96 1999
613 1833 Confidential Bad Debt Write offs 7/94-6/95 2002
(M-Z)
614 1834 Confidential UVSD Billing List 11/95-6/96 1999 .
615 1835 Confidential UVSD Billing List 7/96-1/97 2000
621 1841 Warrant Register 1/95-6/95 2000
622 1842 Warrant Register 1/96-6/96 2001
623 1843 Warrant Register 7/94-12/94 1999
624 1844 Warrant Register 7/95-12/95 2000
625 1845 ' Golf Course Weekly Reports 7/97~1/98 2003
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
I] _~pa_rtment Head Ci,ty CI rk
Destroyed By
Reports: Destroy-FinanCe 2.004
'RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
I
Date' August 17, 2004 I Department:' Finance Records Coordinator:
I
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
626 1846 Golf Course Weekly Reports 10/96-7/97 2002
627 1847 Parking Tickets 3/97-9/97 2000
630 1850 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 9/97-10/97 2000
631 1851 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 7/97-8/97 2000
647 1867 Confidential Billing Registers 3/93-12/94 1999
648 1923 Confidential Payroll Records 12/95-7/97 2002
650 1870 Confidential Business Licenses 1/95-12/95 2000
(N-Z)
651 1871 Confidential Business Licenses 1/95-12/95 2000
(A-M)
653 1873 Confidential Business Licenses 1/94-12/94 1999
664 1884 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 1/98-2/98 2001
665 1885 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 3/98-4/98 2001
666 1886 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 11/97-12/97 2001
669 1889 Bad Debts 7/91-6/97 2004
670 1890 Bad Debts 1/92-8/96 2003
671 1891 Confidential Bad Debt Write offs 6/96-7/97 2004
(N-Z)
672 1892 Confidential Bad Debt Write offs 7/96-6/97 2004
(A-M)
673 1893 Warrants Paid (A-BO) 7/96-6/97 2002
674 1864 Warrants Paid (BR-DE) 7/96-6/97 2002
675 1895 Warrants Paid (DI-F) 7/96-6/97 2002
676 1896 Warrants Paid (G-J) 7/96-6/97 2002
677 1897 Warrants Paid (K-Mc) 7/96-6/97 2002
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Departm~
Date: //~~/~
Date:
Destroyed By
Date:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004
Department:' Finance
Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
678 1898 Warrants Paid (Me-N) 7/97-6/97 2002
679 1899 Warrants Paid (O-Pac Bell) 7/97-6/97 2002
680 1900 Warrants Paid (P) 7/96-6/97 2002
681 1901 Warrants Paid (!,R,S-SC) 7/96-6/97 2002
682 1902 Warrants Paid (Se-Ti) 7/96-6/97 2002
683 1903 Warrants Paid (To-Ukiah) 7/96-6/97 2002
684 1904 Warrants Paid (Un-Z) 7/96-07/96 2002
685 1905 Warrants Paid 1990-10/95 2000
686 1906 Financial Reports 7/96-6/97 2002
687 1907 Warrants Registers 7/96-6/97 2002
688 1908 Warrants Registers 7/97-12/97 2002
689 2609 Warrants Registers 1/96-6/98 2003 '
690 1960 Confidential Labor Distribution 2/98-12/98 2003
Reports
693 1963 Confidential Payroll 7/97-3/98 2003
Interfaces/Authorizations
694 1964 Confidential Utility Reports 7/96-6/98 2001
697 1967 Utility Reports 1/97-3/97 2000
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Department Head
Date:
City Clerk
~,,~t~( Date:
Destroyed By
Date:
Reports: Destroy-FinanCe 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004
Department:' Finance
Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions:
1. Review this listing.
2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
mm{
702 1972 Confidential Payroll 4/98/12/08 2004
704 1974 Confidential Payroll Records 7197-12/98 2003
705 1975 Purchase Orders 7/95-6/98 2003
706 1976 Confidential Cash Receipt 12/97-6/99 2004
Registers
710 1980 Utility Records 7/96-12/98 2003
712 1982 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 11/98-12/98 2002
713 1983 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 12/98-1/99 ' 2003
714 1984 Utility Records 11/97-8/98 2002
715 1985 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 8/98-9/98 2002
716 1986 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 6/98-7/98 2002
717 1987 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 10/98-11/98 2002
718 1988 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 9/98-10/98 2002
719' 1989 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 7/98-8/98 2004
720 1990 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 3/99-3/99 2003
721 1991 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 7/98-8/98 2001
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Date: ~-~--P~-~,~z~ ~te: ate:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Rec. . .
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004. to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
_OCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
722 1992 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 1/99-2/99 2002
723 1993 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 9/98-10/98 2001
724 1994 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 3/99-4/99 2002
725 ' 1995 Cash Receipt Stubs - Counter 11/98-12/98 2001
726 1996 Utility Records 6/97-10/97 2002
727 1997 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 2/99-2/99 2003
728 1998 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 1/99-2/99 2003 _
731 2001 Confidential Landfill Charge Tags 7/98-6/99 2004
732 2002 Daily Cash Receipts/Transaction 1/96-6/97 2003
Lists/Financial Reports
735 2005 Confidential Billing Registers 11/98-6/98 2003
738 2008 Utility Svc Call Tags Routes 1-20 7/94-6/95 1998
739 2009 Golf Course Reports 1/98-8/98 2000
741 2011 Confidential Utility_.Pmt Stubs 5/98-6/98 2002 ~
Recruitment Files
747 2017 Confidential Utility Pmt Stubs 2/98-4/98 2002
748 2018 Confidential Payroll Records 12/97-06/98 2003
765 2241 Utility Records - Receipt Stubs 7/00-8/00 2004
- 766 2242 Utility Records - Receipt Stubs 5/00-7/00 2004
767 2243' Utility Records - Receipt Stubs 11/00-12/00 2004
768 22~.· Utility Records - Receipt Stubs 10/00-11/00 2004
771 2247 Utility Records - Receipt Stubs 8/00-10/00 2004
Si natures Authorizin Destruction
Department Head
Date:
. Ci~ Clerk
~i~torn
=Date~
Destroyed By
Date:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date' August 17, 2004
Department: Finance
Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
776 2252 Confidential Utility Records - 2/00-11/00 2004
Receipt Stubs
790 2266 Confidential Business Licenses 1/98-12/98 2003
791 2267 Confidential Business Licenses 1/97-12/98 2003
792 2268 Confidential Billing Registers 6/99-12/99 2004
795 2271 Utility Deposits Refunded 1990-1994 1999
799 2275 Confidential Billing Registers 7/97-6/99 2004
802 · 2278 Refunded Deposit Cards 12/94-6/97 2000
803 2279 Utility Deposit Listings 1/88-12/95 1998
807 2283 Confidential Business Licenses 1/99-12/99 2004
809 2285 Parking Permit Records 1'0/92-11/97 2000
812 2288 Confidential Business Licenses 1/99-12/99 2004
814 2290 Confidential Business Licenses 1/97-12/97 2003
820 2296 Confidential Business Licenses 1/97-12/97 2003
821 2297 Confidential BuSiness Licenses 1/01-12/01 2004
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Department~ad
Date:
Ci,ty Clerk
Date :/.~//~/./~
Destroyed By
Date:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
Date:
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
August 17, 2004
Department: Finance
Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working, smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
837 · 2313 UVSD Service Orders 1/92-12.94 1999
840 2316 Confidential Billing Records 1/01-3/01 2004
841 2317 Confidential Billing Records 1/00-6/00 2003
842 2318 Confidential Billing Records 7/00-9/00 2003
843 2319 Confidential Billing Records 10/00-12/00 2003
848 2324 Utility Records 8/94-4/97 2000
849 2325 Golf Records. 1/92-12/94 1997
862 2338 Confidential Billing Records 4/01-6/01 2004
928 2404 Financial Records 1985-1988 1998
929 2405 Grants, Loans, Financial Reports 6/85-10/92 2002 /,~f'#,~)-~--l) ~'.~f~= ~
930 2406 Financial Records 6/85-9/91 2001
950 2426 Billing Records 7/01-9/01 2004
983 2459 Warrants- Paid 7/89-6/90 2000
989 2465 Accounts Receivable 1987-1995 2000
Invoices/Ledger Cards
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Department Head
Date' /~/~/-~ ~/
C. ity Clerk . _
D ate ~../~,~////~-/*~
Destroyed By
Date:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004 Department: Finance Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the reCords listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions: 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
I1'
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
1018 2494 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1020 2496 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1021 2497 Warrants - Paid 7/91-6/92 2002
1022 2498 Warrants - Paid 7/91 - 6/92 2002
1024 2500 Warrants - Paid 7/93,6/94 1999
1025 2501 Warrants - Paid 1/99-1/01 2004
1039 2515 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92-6/93 1998
1040 2516 Billing Records 11/99-2/00 2003
1041 2517 Utility Fixed Charge Listings 1/99-6/99 2004
1042 2518 Utility Fixed Charge Listings 7/99-12/99 2004
i 043 2519 AR/Septic Disposal Tags 12/91-7/93 2004
1044 2520 Warrants - Paid 7/91-6/92 '2002
1045 2521 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2001
1046 2522 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1047 2523 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1048 2524 Warrants - Paid 7/93-6/94 1999
1049 · 2525 Warrants - Paid 7/91-6/92 2002
Signatures Authorizing Destruction
_..._~.~_.~p.~~,a rt m ent Head'
Date:
City clerk
Date:
Destroyed By
Date'
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
I
Date: August 17, 2004 I Department: Finance Records Coordinator:
I
-- Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions' 1. Review this listing. 2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES' RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
1051 2527 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1052 2528 Warrants - Paid 7/93-6/94 1999
1053 2529 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92-6/93 1998
1054 2530 Warrants - Paid 7/91-6/92 2002
1055 2531 Warrants - Paid 7/91-6/92 2002
,
1056 2532 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92o6/93 1998
1057 2533 Invoices 7/91-6/92 1998
1058 2534 Invoices 7/94-6/95 2000
1059 2535 Paid Parking] Violations 11/95-2/96 1999
1060 2536 Utility Records 3/97-12/97 1999
1061 2537 Warrants - Paid 7/91 - 6/92 1997
1062 2538 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1063 2539 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92-6/93 2003
1064 2540 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1065 2541 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92-6/93 1998
1066 2542 Warrants - Paid 7/93-6/94 1999
1067 2543 Warrants - Paid 7/93-6/94 1999
Signatures Authorizing DeStruction
Department Head
City Clerk
Date'/_~.,~//~
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
Destroyed By
Date:
RECORDS DESTRUCTION NOTICE FOR CITY OF UKIAH
Date: August 17, 2004 Department: Finance Records Coordinator:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Current retention schedules show that the records listed are now ready for destruction.
Instructions:
1. Review this listing.
2. Obtain Department Head's Signature.
3. Return this notice, signed, no later than Sept. 16, 2004 to City Clerk.
Thank you for your cooperation in keeping our records management system working smoothly and
legally.
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
LOCATION BOX RECORD TITLE DATES RETENTION COMMENTS
DATES
1068 2544 Warrants - Paid 7/94-6/95 2000
1069 2545 Warrants - Paid 7/93-6/94 1999
1070 2546 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92-6/93 1998
1071 2547 Demand Payments - Paid 7/92-6/93 1998
1072 2548 Warrants - Paid 7/91-6/92 1997
1111 2587 Confidential Business License 4/91,2/92, 2002
3/96
.Signatures Authorizing Destruction
Department Head City Clerk
~~'ty ,Attorn
Date: l ~/'z~/, ~
Destroyed By
'Date:
Reports: Destroy-Finance 2004
ITEM NO.
5c
DATE' January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: REJECT PROPOSALS RECEIVED FOR CONFERENCE CENTER ROOF
OVERLAY
SUMMARY: In response to the City's request for proposals (RFP) for the roof overlay of
the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, the City Clerk received six proposals by the deadline
of 2'00 p.m. on October 13, 2004. The RFP was sent out and noticed according to the
bidding requirements required by Section 1522 of the Ukiah Municipal Code.
At the time the bids were received, the lowest bidder at $83,400 was not certified by the
membrane manufacturer to install its products and therefore did not satisfy all of the
requirements specified in the RFP. The five remaining qualified proposals ranged in price
from $106,875 to $207,450 and were higher than the $75,000 budgeted in the current
budget for the re-roof project.
After talking with the membrane manufacturer and the City's Building Department, there
may be modifications to the bid specifications that could be implemented to lower costs
and/or disburse costs over time by prioritizing sections for replacement. Since the qualified
bids were significantly higher than the budgeted amount for project, staff is recommending
that the Council reject all proposals and allow staff to issue a revised RFP.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Reject proposals received for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center Roof Overlay
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS'
1. Determine that the rejection of all bids is inappropriate and award bid to a qualified
bidder.
2. Determine that the rejection of all bids is inappropriate and remand to staff with
further direction.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments'
N/A
N/A
Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Supervisor and Larry W.
DeKnoblough, Community Services Director
Candace Horsley, City Manager and Mary Horger, Purchasing
Supervisor
N/A
APPROVED: '~"~.~'.'~L~'~.
Candace Horsley, City I~nager
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO: 5.d.
DATE: January 5 2004
REPORT
SUBJECT: NOTIFICATION OF PURCHASE OF 18 WILDLAND FIRE SHELTERS IN
THE AMOUNT OF $5,575.86
The fire department is in the process of replacing its OSHA mandated Wildland Fire
Shelters. The purchase of 18 Fire Shelters from GSA will complete phase 2 of our 3
phase program.
Section 1522 of the Municipal Code requires that a report be filed with the City Council
regarding purchases between $5,000 and $10,000. In accordance with the subject
section, this report is submitted to the City Council regarding the purchase of the
mandated Fire Shelters.
Fire Fund -100.2190.690.002 ................................. $5,575.86
The Fire Shelters are priced at $288.83 per shelter and GSA was the Iow bidder in the
competitive bidding process.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding the purchase of Fire Shelters
from GSA in the amount of $5,575.86
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizens Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
City Council
Kurt Latipow Fire Chief
Candace Horsley, City Manger
None
Approved' ~.~~.~
Candace Horsley, City'~nager
ITEM NO. 5.e.
DATE:
January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF BUDGET AMENDMENT OF $18,720 TO THE CITY OF UKIAH
WATER STORAGE EXPANSION PROJECT, ACCOUNT #840-3850-250-000, FOR
INCREASED COSTS FOR QUALITY CONTROL TESTING BY RAU AND
ASSOCIATES.
REPORT: Rau and Associates, Inc. were hired to perform soil compaction testing and concrete
compression testing for the Water Storage Expansion Project. They have submitted a request for
a contract amendment to their Professional Consulting Services Agreement for increased testing
costs in the amount of $18,720. The increased costs resulted from: 1) an increased number of
compaction tests in the spoils disposal site for the Zone 1 tank due to the discovery of a slip plane
during construction, 2) a greater number of concrete pours than estimated by Rau and 3)
significantly longer concrete pour times than estimated by Rau.
The amount of the original contract agreement was $26,780. The contract amendment would
increase the maximum amount to $45,500. The increase of $18,720 would be divided between
$6,500 for additional compaction testing and reporting, and $12,220 for additional quality control
work on the concrete.
RECOMMENDED ACTION'
Approve amendment to 2004/2005 budget increasing expenditures in
account #840-3850-250-000 by $18,720 for increased costs for quality
control testing by Rau and Associates for the Water Storage Expansion
Project.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS' Direct staff as to alternatives.
Citizen Advised' N/A
Requested by: Bernie Ziemianek, Director of Public Utilities
Prepared by: Ann Burck, Project Engineer/Manager
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments: None
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley, Cit~ Manager
1-I'E H NO: ?a
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUB3ECT:
ADOPTI'ON OF RESOLUTTON CERTTFYTNG THE ENVTRONMENTAL
I't4PACT REPORT FOR THE ORR CREEK BRTDGE AND ORCHARD
AVENUE EXTENSI'ON PRO.1ECT
SUMMARY: On December 15, 2004, the City Council conducted a public hearing, discussed a
number of environmental and land use planning issues, and tentatively certified the Final
Environmental Impact Report for the Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension project. In
taking this action, the Council directed Staff to return on January 5, 2005 with the Required
Resolution formally certifying the EIR, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and
responses to four comments made by Vice-Mayor Baldwin. The Resolution with the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program is provided as Attachment No. ! to this report, and the consultant
responses to Council comments are provided in Attachment No. 2.
The Council also directed Staff to include the reasons or findings as to why the mitigation measure
requiring a Specific Plan or other type of comprehensive planning document not be required prior to
the development of the RCHDC affordable housing project be included in the Resolution. This has
been accomplished on page 18 of the Resolution. Consultant Leonard Charles also addresses this in
the last paragraph of his response to the December 15th City Council comments (Attachment No. 2).
(continued on page 2)
RECOF41~IENDED ACI'ZON: Adopt the Resolution certifying the EIR for the Orr Creek Bridge and
Orchard Avenue Extension project.
ALTERNATZVE COUNCZL POLZCY OP'I'ZON: Do not adopt the Resolution and provide direction
to Staff.
Citizens Advised: Interested persons and groups noticed according to the requirements of the
Ukiah City Code.
Requested by: Planning and Community Development Department
Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager
Attachments:
1. Resolution certifying the Environmental Impact Report (Mitigation IVlonitoring
and Reporting Program attached)
2. Consultant responses to December 15, 2004 City Council Comments
Candace Horsley, City ager
1
The RCHDC Project: As Consultant Leonard Charles indicated at the December 15th meeting, and
reiterates in his response to City Council comments (Attachment No. 2), the EIR Addendum reached
the conclusion that area-wide impacts could still be reduced to less than significant levels even if the
RCHDC project were developed without preparation of a Specific Plan because of where the project
is located. The residential project would not interfere with any future open space, recreation,
drainage plan, or circulation plan for the Study Area. It was also concluded that it would not
interfere with an overall design motif for the area since commercial development was
assumed/planned for most of the Study Area.
Specific Plan: The Council also discussed the issue of requiring a Specific Plan vs. another type of
planning document for the Study Area. ]:t was generally agreed that while a Specific Plan would be
one method of long-range planning for the Study Area, it may be impractical because of its cost and
inflexibility.
Revised I~litigation t4easures: The applicable mitigation measures have been modified in the
IVlitigation IVlonitoring and Reporting Program (IVllViRP) to address these issues. For example,
Mitigation Measure 3.17-D.1 (page 21 of the MMRP has been modified from:
"Develop a Specific Plan for the Study Area prior to allowing new development."
"Prior to approving any new development in the Study Area, other than residential development on the
8-acre RCHDC property (APN 002-101-17), the County or City (depending on which entity has
jurisdiction) shall require the development and approval of a Specific Plan or other comprehensive
planning document for the Study Area.
SIGNIFICANT IMPACT THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED: As discussed at the December 15, 2004
meeting, the EIR identifies one significant growth-inducing impact that cannot be successfully
mitigated or avoided with build-out of the Brush Street Triangle.
"Build-out traffic would result in insufficient vehicular storage capacity on East Perkins Street
between Orchard Avenue and the Southbound Highway 101 ramps to accommodate
eastbound traffic."
Statement of Overriding Consideration: CEQA requires the decision-making agency to
balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks. In order to proceed with a project when an
unavoidable significant impact has been identified, a statement/finding overriding the impact
must be adopted. Included in the attached Resolution is the following language:
"For the reasons as further stated below, the City Council finds that the economic, social, technological
or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable environmental risk arising upon build-out
within the Study Area of insufficient vehicular storage capacity on East Perkins Street between
Orchard Avenue and the Southbound Highway 101 ramps to accommodate eastbound traffic.
The project will reduce existing traffic impacts on Ford and Clara Streets within the adjacent
residential area known as the "Wagonsellers' Addition." ]:t will provide an alternative to the State
Street for north and south bound traffic within the City, thereby improving traffic conditions on State
Street. ]:n fact, the development of that alternative route for traffic is identified as a goal in the City
of Ukiah General Plan, adopted on December 6, 2005 ("GP'~, and could lead to an extension of
Orchard Avenue to Ford Road with additional long term benefits for traffic circulation in the City.
(See GP, p. V.5.30-38.) In addition, Ford and Orr Streets as well as Brush Street already provide
access to the Study Area, allowing for development in the Study Area without the construction of the
project. The project will provide an alternative access to the Study Area that will avoid or lessen
adverse traffic impacts on Orr and Ford Streets within the Wagonsellers Addition. At the same time,
the project will provide superior traffic circulation within the Study Area as it develops."
"These benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse traffic impact on East Perkins Street. The Study
Area could build out, if the project were not constructed, creating the same traffic impact on East
Perkins Street with no compensating project benefits."
CONCLUSION: On December 15, 2004, the City Council tentatively certified the Environmental
Impact Report for the Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension project. Staff was directed
to prepare the Resolution and Mitigation Monitoring Program for the Council's adoption to formally
certify the EIR. At the Council's direction, Consultant Leonard Charles also prepared responses to
four comments made by Vice-Mayor Baldwin. The Resolution, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and responses to Council comments have been completed, and are ready for final
consideration.
RECOI~II~IENDA'I'~ON: Adopt the Resolution certifying the EIR for the Orr Creek Bridge and
Orchard Avenue Extension project.
RESOLUT/ON NO.
RESOLU'rZON
UKZAH MAKI'NG FTNDI'NGS
RESOURCES CODE ("PRC")
CALTFORNTA ENVI'RONMENTAL
GUTDELTNES SECTZON :!.5091
OVERRZDTNG CONSTDERATZON
OF THE cTrY COUNCTL OF THE CZTY OF
PURSUANT TO PUBLTC
SECTZON 21081 AND
(~UALI'rY ACT ("CE(~A")
AND A STATEMENT OF
TN ACCORDANCE WI'I'H
PRC §21081(b) AND GUI'DELI'NES §15093 TN CONNECT/ON
WI'TH THE DECTS]:ON TO CER'I']:FY AN ENVTRONMENTAL
I'F,1PACT REPORT AND APPROVE THE ORR CREEK BR.I:DGE
AND ORCHARD AVENUE EXTENSI'ON PRO.1ECT
WHEREAS:
1. The City Council has certified as adequate and complete an Environmental Impact Report
("EIR") for proposed roadway improvements and the extension of Orchard Avenue and the
construction of a bridge over Orr Creek. The EIR consists of a Draft Environmental Impact Report,
dated October 2002, ("DEIR"), a Final Environmental iImpact Report, including a response to
comments, dated December 2002, ("FEIR'~, and an EIR Addendum, dated November 2004,
("Addendum'~; IVlitigation IVlonitoring and Reporting Program; and
2. The project includes the extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to Brush Street,
and the construction of a 62-foot wide, 95-foot long bridge over Orr Creek ("the Project"). The
roadway would be striped; and
3. The EIR has identified significant environmental impacts of the Project; and
4. The EIR has determined that all of the project specific adverse environmental impacts can
be mitigated to acceptable levels; and
5. The Final ETR has found that one adverse environmental impact from the growth the
project may induce within the Study Area that cannot be mitigated to a level considered insignificant.
Study Area as used in this Resolution is defined as the "Brush Street Triangle'; an area bordered by
U.S. Highway 101 on the east and north, Orr Creek on the South, and the NWP railroad tracks on
the west; and
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
Affachment ~P
6. As stated below, the City Council has made the findings and the statement of overriding
considerations required, where, as here, a project has an adverse environmental impact that cannot
be mitigated to a level of insignificance; and
7. The City hereby undertakes a legally binding commitment to comply with the mitigation
measures under the City's control, which are incorporated into the Project; and
8. The City Council has determined to approve the Project; and
9. The City Council has based its decision on the record which includes those items identified
in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e), including, but not limited to, the ETR, including the
appendices to the ETR, the ETR Addendum, and the staff report; and
10. The record of proceedings upon which this decision is based, including the Orr Creek
Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension project file, is maintained in the office of the Director of Planning
and Community Development, as well as the office of the Public Works Director/City Engineer, Civic
Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482, as the custodians of the record, and is available for
public inspection upon request of the Director of Planning and Community Development, the Public
Works Director/City Engineer or their designee; and
11. PRC section 21081 and CEQA Guideline section 15091 provide that the City shall not
approve or carry out a project for which an ETR has been completed which identifies one or more
significant environmental impacts, unless it makes specified findings; and
12. PRC section 21081(b) and CEQA Guideline section 15093 require a Statement of
Overriding Considerations for a project that will have any unmitigated adverse environmental
impacts;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE ~ RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah finds as follows.
1. The ETR was prepared and made available for public review and comment in full
compliance with the procedures set forth in CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
3anuary 5, 2005
Attachment #
2. The EIR was considered by the City Council at public meetings on December 15, 2004 and
.lanuary 5, 2005.
3. The City Council has considered all documents submitted during the public comment
period for the EIR and all testimony presented during its meetings as well as the EIR, the Staff
Reports, dated December 15, 2004 and January 5, 2005, and the Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue
Extension File. The Staff Reports are incorporated herein by reference. The City Council has
independently reviewed and analyzed this resolution and the EIR.
4. The Project is described in the EIR, including the DEIR at pp. 7-8. This description is
incorporated herein by reference.
5. The EIR evaluated the impacts of the Project itself as well as its impacts in combination
with impacts from past, present and probable future projects. Those impacts, both individual and
cumulative, as well as growth-inducing impacts, along with recommended mitigation measures and
suggested conditions, are summarized in the Impact and Mitigation Summary Table in the DEIR pp.
27-52.
6. Measures designed to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects
of the Project as identified in the EIR are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
("Plan"), attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The measures
constitute binding commitments of the City, if the Project is approved by responsible agencies upon
acceptable conditions and undertaken by the City and those measures shall be incorporated into the
Project and monitored in accordance with the Plan.
7. Geology.
Project Specific :Impacts: The E:IR determined that the project, if improperly constructed, could
cause landsliding and soil erosion, could fail in the event of an earthquake, and could fail due to
overall soil constraints. The E:IR proposes that the City prepare and implement a comprehensive
erosion control plan to ensure no significant soil erosion. The E:IR also proposes that the final bridge
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
Attachment #
design include a hydrologic study to determine if additional rock armoring of the north stream bank
will be required to protect the bridge abutment. :It also proposes that the City enter into a Streambed
Alteration Agreement with the State Department of Fish and Game, as required by State Law. The
City Council commits to these mitigation measures. The City Council finds that these mitigation
measures will avoid or reduce to insignificance the adverse environmental effect of potential
landslides and soil erosion, project failure in the event of an earthquake, and potential failure due to
overall soil constraints.
Growth-:Inducing :Impacts: The E:IR determined that future development in the unincorporated
Study Area could be subject to damage from earthquakes; that site soils could pose constraints to
future development; and construction of improvements could cause soil erosion. The document
proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels considered less than
significant. However, the project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts
because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2)
even if the City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area
properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the
unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures
discussed in the E:IR will provide guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts,
when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The City has negotiated a Road :Improvement
and Land Use Agreement (''Land Use Agreement'~ with the County that requires the County to adopt
an ordinance requiring discretionary review of such projects. The Land Use Agreement partially
mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in compliance
with CEQA and to comply with CEQA in reviewing and approving them.
8. Hydrology.
Project Specific :Impacts: The E:IR determined that runoff from the new street (Orchard Avenue
extension) would transport pollutants to Orr Creek. The E:IR proposes that a stormwater interceptor
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
.lanuary 5, 2005
Attachment #
be constructed to intercept runoff from pavement before it enters Orr Creek. The stormwater
interceptor shall be of a type and design to be approved by all applicable State and Federal agencies.
The City Council commits to these mitigation measures. Under the Land Use Agreement, the City
will construct these improvements in the unincorporated area which will allow the City to comply with
these requirements. The City Council finds that this mitigation measure will avoid or reduce to
insignificance the adverse environmental effect of potential pollution from the new street being
transported into Orr Creek.
Growth-Tnducing Impacts: The EIR determined that future development in the unincorporated
Study Area would be located in the 100-year floodplain; that construction of new buildings and roads
would increase flooding; and that runoff from paved areas and roofs would transport pollutants to
Orr Creek. The document proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels
considered less than significant. However, the project approval does not require the City to mitigate
these impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing
impacts and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these
Study Area properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate
impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation
measures discussed in the EIR will provide guidance to the County of IVlendocino in mitigating these
impacts, when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use
Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the
County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
9. Wildlife and Vegetation.
Project Specific l~mpacts: The E1~R determined that construction of the project improvements could
adversely affect water quality, which could lead to impacts on wildlife and its habitat along Orr Creek.
To offset this impact, the ETR proposes that the City, in consultation with applicable agencies,
identify and prioritize specific stream enhancement projects between Highway :L01 and Orr Street.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
.lanuary 5, 2005
5
Attachment
The E:IR suggests that the enhancement projects could be funded by future development in the
Study Area with the establishment of an impact fee program pursuant to AB1600, Government Code
Section 66000. The City Council commits to these mitigation measures. The City Council finds that
this mitigation measure will avoid or reduce to insignificance the adverse environmental effect of
project construction on wildlife and vegetation.
Growth-Tnducing :Impacts: The E:IR determined that future development in the unincorporated
Study Area could result in impacts to Orr Creek and its riparian vegetation that could eliminate
wildlife habitat. :It also determined that future development could affect wetlands. The EIR
proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels considered less than
significant. These mitigation measures include the erosion control measures described for the
project specific impacts to be applied to all future development, not allowing development within
100-feet of the top of the bank of Orr Creek, landscaping the 100-foot "buffer zone" with native plant
species, ensuring that lighting does not cast glare on the riparian "buffer zone'; requiring future
development to contribute financially to creek restoration projects, protecting the valley oak trees in
the Study Area, incorporating an open space plan for the Study Area that establishes open space
areas along the drainages and creek, and requiring future project sites to be surveyed for
jurisdictional wetlands. However, the project approval does not require the City to mitigate these
impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts
and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area
properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the
unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures
discussed in the E:IR will provide guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts,
when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement
with the County which partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to
evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
3anuary 5, 2005
6 Affachment #
10. Cultural Resources.
Project Specific Impacts: The ETR determined that the bridge and street improvement project could
potentially damage cultural resources. To address this potentially significant impact, the E1~R
proposes that if cultural resources are discovered during site preparation or project construction, all
work shall be halted immediately, and the City shall engage the services of a qualified professional
archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance and to develop a precise mitigation program, if
necessary. The City Council commits to these mitigation measures. The City Council finds that this
mitigation measure will avoid or reduce to insignificance the adverse environmental effect on cultural
resources.
Growth-]:nducing Impacts: The E]:R determined that future development in the unincorporated
Study Area could result in potentially significant adverse impacts on cultural resources. To mitigate
this growth-inducing impact, the ETR proposes that as part of the subsequent environmental review
for future development, the Mendocino County Archaeological Commission shall review the project
site to determine whether there is a possibility of archaeological resources being present. The
Commission shall determine whether field surveys are warranted and required. Tf such a survey is
required, then the survey shall be conducted and recommendations shall be made for recording and
preserving artifacts. Future development would then be planned and constructed consistent with
the recommendations of the archaeologist. The E]:R further proposes that the archaeological
surveys and work be done as part of a comprehensive planning process for the Study Area.
However, the project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because
(1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the
City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are
outside the City limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated
area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the ETR
will provide guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report /--7
City Council Resolution '~ Affachment #
.lanuary 5, 2005 -- - ' '
projects proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County
which partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
11. Air (~uality.
Project Specific Impacts: The EIR determined that the construction of the bridge and street
improvements would generate significant amounts of dust (particulate matter), which would
degrade air quality. To address this potentially significant impact, the EIR proposes that control
measures be incorporated into the project that would reduce the impact to a level that is considered
less than significant. These measures include watering all active construction areas twice daily,
covering all soil hauling trucks, pave, water and/or apply non-toxic soil binders to unpaved roadway
areas and exposed soil stockpile areas, sweep all appropriate areas daily, limit traffic speeds on any
unpaved surfaces, and replant vegetation in disturbed areas as soon as practical. The City Council
commits to these mitigation measures. The City Council finds that these mitigation measures will
avoid or reduce to insignificance the adverse environmental effect on air quality.
Growth-Inducing Impacts: The EIR determined that future development in the unincorporated
Study Area would generate potentially significant amounts of particulate matter (dust) and
substantial amounts of other air pollutants that could cause both health and nuisance impacts. The
EIR proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels considered less than
significant. These mitigation measures include controlling the dust resulting from site preparation
and construction activities in the same fashion as described for project specific impacts above. It
also suggests that reasonable and feasible measures to reduce air pollutant emissions from
automobiles be imposed on future development in the Study Area. These measures include
transportation management and improvements, provision of transit services, construction of transit
facilities, coordination of development design with transit facilities, allowance for and
encouragement of mixed land uses, and provision of bicycle and pedestrian access and facilities.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
8 Attachment
However, the project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because
(1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the
City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are
outside the City limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated
area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the E]:R
will provide guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates
projects proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County
which partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
12. Noise.
Project Specific Impacts: The E:[R determined that the construction of the project would cause
potentially significant adverse noise impacts in the area. To reduce the noise impacts to levels
considered less than significant, the ETR proposes a number of reasonable and feasible mitigation
measures. These measures include limiting noise-generating construction equipment to certain days
and times, properly muffling and maintaining all construction equipment powered by internal
combustion engines, locating any stationary noise-generating equipment as far as practical from
nearby residences, and notifying all neighboring property owners within 500-feet of the construction
site of the construction schedule. The City Council commits to these mitigation measures. The City
Council finds that these mitigation measures will avoid or reduce to insignificance the adverse
environmental effects on noise.
Growth-Inducing Impacts: The EIR determined that future construction activities in the
unincorporated Study Area would generate potentially significant amounts of noise that would
adversely impact neighboring residential areas. ]:t also concluded that future development would
increase noise levels on Orchard Avenue and Brush Street to potentially significant levels, which
would adversely impact residents living along the west side of Orchard Avenue between Clara
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
c~ counc~. ~e~,ut~on 9 Attachment
.]anuary 5, 2005
Avenue and Orr Creek. The EIR proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts
to levels considered less than significant. These mitigation measures include the same mitigation
measures described for project specific impacts above, as well as reducing the speed limit near
residences, utilizing rubberized or open-grade asphalt, and constructing a sound barrier on the west
side of Orchard Avenue south from the bridge maintenance ramp to Ford Street. This sound barrier
could be an earthen berm, a wall, or a combination of the two. These potentially significant adverse
noise impacts would occur within the City Limits. Therefore, the City Council commits to the
proposed mitigation measures, if cooperation from the land owner along the west side of Orchard
Avenue can be attained.
However, for noise impacts within the unincorporated Study Area, the project approval does
not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the
mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these
growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks
the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section
151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the EIR will provide guidance to the County
of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The
City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-
inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
13. Fire Protection.
Growth-Inducinq Impacts: The EIR concludes that future development in the unincorporated Study
Area would increase the calls for service for the Ukiah Valley Fire District. The EIR proposes a series
of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels considered less than significant. These
mitigation measures include requiring sprinkler systems to be installed in all new buildings, new
hydrant construction, the extension of water mains with adequate fire flow, adherence to State law
for the storage and use of hazardous materials, and requiring project applicants to pay pro rata
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January S, 2005
l0
Affachment #
shares of the expenses of adding new equipment/personnel to serve the project. The document also
suggests that the County adopt mitigation fees for the Fire District, and that if the City decides to
annex Study Area properties, it should confer with the UVFD to determine revenue-sharing
procedures to minimize fiscal effects on the UVFD. The E]:R notes that a 2-acre parcel in the Study
Area (southeast corner) is situated within the City limits, and that the above mitigation measures,
excluding County adoption of mitigation fees, should be imposed on new development in this area.
For the 2-acre property within the Study Area that is situated in the City limits, the City
Council commits to the applicable mitigation measures contained in the ETR, and concludes that they
will eliminate or reduce identified adverse impacts to levels considered less than significant.
For mitigation measures in the unincorporated Study Area, the project approval does not
require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the
mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these
growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks
the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section
151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the ETA will provide guidance to the County
of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The
City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-
inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
14. Police Protection.
Growth-:[nducing :Impacts: Future buildout in the unincorporated Study Area would significantly
increase the demand for police response from the County Sheriff's Department. The ETR proposes
a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels considered less than significant.
These mitigation measures include requiring that development permit applications to be referred to
the Sheriff's Department, who would establish final conditions regarding security, lighting, roadway
access, building and parking lot security, signing, addressing, and other measures to ensure safety
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental [mpact Report
City Council Resolution
3anuary 5, 2005
Attachment #
standards. It also suggests that as the County revises its General Plan, it consider the adoption of
a Police Service Mitigation Fee for new development.
For the small 2-acre piece of property in the southeast corner of the Study Area or if the City
annexes property in the Study Area, the EIR proposes that development permit applications shall
be referred to the City Police Department for the same review as described for the County Sheriff's
Department above. It also proposes that in this case, the City Police Department monitor the
number of calls for assistance in this area, and if the calls begin to affect the ability of the Department
to provide satisfactory service, additional police officers must be hired. The City commits to these
mitigation measures, and concludes that they will eliminate or reduce identified adverse impacts to
levels considered less than significant.
For mitigation measures in the unincorporated Study Area, the project approval does not
require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the
mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these
growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks
the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section
151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the EIR will provide guidance to the County
of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The
City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-
inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
15. Sewage Disposal.
Growth-Tnducing Tmpacts: The ETR concludes that future development in the Study Area, including
the recently proposed Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation ("RCHDC'~ project,
could generate approximately 67,500 gallons of wastewater per day. This could potentially have an
adverse impact on the wastewater treatment plant. The ETR proposes to mitigate this potentially
significant adverse environmental impact by requiring the Sanitation District or City (if proposed
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report / ""' / ~
City Council Resolution '] 2 Aftoohmenf #
.lanuary 5, 2005
development is in the City limits) to confirm that the plant has the capacity to serve each proposed
project prior to approval of any future development proposals. Tt also requires that: (1) future
development include water conservation fixtures, (2) sewage collectors be sized and constructed per
District or City requirements, (3) all proposed development pay the prevailing connections fees, (4)
all heavy commercial uses be required to meet pre-treatment requirements, and (4) no future
hook-ups be approved unless there is adequate treatment and disposal capacity.
As these mitigation measures apply to the City, the City Council commits to implementing
and monitoring them, and concludes that they will eliminate or reduce the potentially significant
impacts to levels considered less than significant.
For mitigation measures in the unincorporated Study Area, the project approval does not
require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the
mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these
growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks
the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section
151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the EIR will provide guidance to the County
of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The
City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-
inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
16. Public Water.
Growth-:[nducing ]:mpacts: Future development of the Study Area would require approximately
199,900 gallons of water per day. The E]:R concludes that this represents a potentially significant
adverse impact on the Millview County Water District, which may not have the capacity to serve the
build-out of the area. The EIR also concludes that future development in the Study Area would
require the extension of water mains throughout the Study Area. This also represents a potentially
significant adverse impact. The EIR proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these
OrrCreekBridge/OrchardAvenueExtension /
Environmental ~'mpact Report
City Council Resolution ~- 3 Attachment #
January 5, 2005
impacts to levels considered less than significant. These mitigation measures include allowing future
development only if an adequate water supply is available to serve the proposed projects, and
installing a new water main of 10 to 12 inches in diameter to the north end of the Study Area. The
E:IR proposes that each applicant be required to pay its fair share of water system improvements
required to serve its property. Tf public water is requested of the City for development in the
unincorporated Study Area, the City shall not commit to serve the development unless it has
adequate water supply to do so. The City commits to this mitigation measure, and concludes that
it will reduce, but not necessarily to insignificance, this potentially significant impact.
To the extent that mitigation of these impacts requires action by lVlendocino County or
Millview County Water District, the project approval does not require the City to mitigate these
impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts
and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, the City lacks the
legal authority to mitigate these impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section
:151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the E:IR will provide guidance to the County
of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects proposed for that area. The
City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-
inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
1_7. Schools.
Growth-:inducing :Impacts: The E:IR notes that over the past five years, school enrollment has
declined approximately 10%. :It notes that while some of the local schools have some capacity
remaining, others are currently at capacity levels. The E:IR concludes that build-out of the Study Area
would have a potentially significant adverse impact on the Ukiah Unified School District be adding
approximately 279 students. The E:IR indicates that this impact would be mitigated to a level
considered less than significant by future developers paying the required developer mitigation fees
established and collected by the School District. :It also suggests that the School District monitor
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
]anuary 5, 2005
3_4
Attachment
student enrollment, and if enrollment exceeds capacity, the District should request that the
governing governmental agency establish additional school mitigation fees, to the degree allowed
by State law.
To the extent that mitigation of these impacts within the unincorporated Study Area requires
action by Ukiah Unified School District or IVlendocino County, the project approval does not require
the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA requires a discussion, but not the mitigation
of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were required to mitigate these growth-inducing
impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City limits, and the City lacks the legal authority
to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The
mitigation measures discussed in the EIR will provide guidance to the County of Mendocino and
Ukiah Unified School District in mitigating these impacts. The City has negotiated the Land Use
Agreement with the County which partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the
County to evaluate them in compliance with CEQA.
18. Solid Waste.
Growth-Tnducinq Impacts: The ETR determined that future development in the unincorporated
Study Area would generate a substantial amount of solid waste that is considered a potentially
significant adverse impact on solid waste collection and processing services. To mitigate this impact,
the ETR proposes to require all businesses to recycle per the requirements of AB 939, and that this
recycling program be formalized in a recycling statement that is approved by the County and/or the
Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority. Tt also proposes that future developers be required
to recycle scrap timber and metal products, wherever feasible, and that future buildings be insulated
with recycled material, if feasible.
Project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA
requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were
required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
.lanuary 5, 2005
Attachment #
limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See
CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the E:IR will provide
guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects
proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which
partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
19. Energy Use.
Growth-:inducing :Impacts: The E:IR concludes that the operation of future businesses would require
the use of substantial amounts of energy that would represent a potentially significant adverse
impact on the environment. The E:IR proposes a series of mitigation measures to off-set these
impacts to levels considered less than significant. These mitigation measures include enforcing the
energy efficiency standards contained in the California State Building Code, Title 24 of the Code of
Regulations on all future development in the Study Area. lit also proposes that all future buildings
be heated with "clean air" heat sources, that electrical transmission lines and gas lines be extended
through the Study Area per PG&E requirements, and that solar access be protected for all future
development.
Project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA
requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were
required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City
limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See
CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the E:IR will provide
guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects
proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which
partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
.lanuary 5, 2005
16
Attachment #
20. Recreation.
Growth-Tnducinq Impacts: Future development in the Study Area will substantially increase the
demand for parks and recreation facilities, and the ETR concludes that this represents a potentially
significant adverse impact on local parks and recreation facilities. The ETR proposes that the
mitigation measure (Aesthetics)suggesting that a coordinated site development plan or specific plan
be required for the Study Area to include provisions for public parks and trails. Tt suggests further
that the public parks and trails could be incorporated into the site development or specific plan
component for open space recommended in the discussion of Aesthetics below. The E]:R proposes
a series of mitigation measures to off-set these impacts to levels considered less than significant.
Project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA
requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were
required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City
limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See
CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the E]:R will provide
guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects
proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which
partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
21. Land Use.
Growth-Tnducinq Tmpacts: The ETR concludes that the future development of the Study Area could
be inconsistent with the Ukiah Valley Area Plan because the Plan calls for all future development to
include open space, a stream access plan, have an attractive US Highway 101 viewshed, etc. To
mitigate this potentially significant adverse land use and aesthetic impact, the ETR suggests that a
Specific Plan be prepared for the Study Area prior to allowing new development. On .lanuary 15,
2005, the City Council adopted alternative language for this mitigation:
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
Attachment #
/-17
Prior to approving any new development in the Study Area, other
than residential development on 8-acre RCHDC property (APN
002-101-17), the County or City (depending on which entity has
jurisdiction) shall require the development and approval of a
comprehensive planning document for the entire area.
Later under the same mitigation measure, the Council added:
This comprehensive planning document should be prepared for and
adopted by the County (or the City if the area is annexed to the City)
prior to approving new development other than residential
development on the RCHDC parcel (APN 002-101-17).
The City Council based the decision to adopt this language on the following: 1) the site is adjacent
to the City limits and all public infrastructure is available to serve it; 2) the site is adjacent to other
residential land uses; and 3) the proposed RCHDC residential development project would not conflict
with Study Area circulation, drainage, open space areas, and other components envisioned for the
comprehensive planning document.
Project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA
requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were
required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City
limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See
CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the ETR will provide
guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects
proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which
partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
22. Aesthetics.
Growth-:inducing :Impacts: The E:IR determined that future development of the approximate 95-acre
unincorporated Study Area would substantially alter views in the area, and that this represented a
potentially significant adverse impact.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
.lanuary 5, 2005
To mitigate this impact, the EIR suggested that a site
18
Attachment#
development or specific plan be developed and approved before any new development occurs. The
City Council certified the EIR with the mitigation measure described in the discussion of Land Use
above.
Project approval does not require the City to mitigate these impacts, because (1) CEQA
requires a discussion, but not the mitigation of growth-inducing impacts and (2) even if the City were
required to mitigate these growth-inducing impacts, these Study Area properties are outside the City
limits, and the City lacks the legal authority to mitigate impacts in the unincorporated area. (See
CEQA Guidelines Section 151264(a)(5).) The mitigation measures discussed in the EIR will provide
guidance to the County of Mendocino in mitigating these impacts, when it evaluates projects
proposed for that area. The City has negotiated the Land Use Agreement with the County which
partially mitigates these growth-inducing impacts by requiring the County to evaluate them in
compliance with CEQA.
23. Traffic and Circulation.
Growth-Tnducinq Impacts: The EIR concluded that there would be potentially significant adverse
impacts to traffic and circulation resulting from the extension of Orchard Avenue to Brush Street and
up to Ford Road, and from Study Area build-out. The intersections that would be impacted are North
State Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps; North State Street/Low Gap Road-Brush Street, East
Perkins Street/Orchard Avenue, East Perkins Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps, East Perkins
Street/U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps-Pomeroy Avenue, Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps,
Orchard Avenue/Ford Street, North State Street/Ford Street, Orchard Avenue/Clara Avenue, Orchard
Avenue/Gobbi Street, and the East Perkins Street Corridor (Orchard Avenue to U.S. 101 Northbound
Ramps).
The EIR recommends a series of mitigation measures designed to reduce the impacts at
these intersections to levels considered less than significant. These mitigation measures are listed
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
Attc~chment # / "' / ~
on pages 38-42 of the Impact and I~itigation Summary Tab/e contained in the DEl:R, and are
incorporated herein by reference. The City Council finds that these mitigation measures would
reduce the impacts at these intersections to levels considered less than significant.
The ETR also concluded that future development in the Study Area will substantially increase
the demand for alternative means of transportation. Mitigation measures are proposed that would
reduce this impact to a level considered less than significant. These mitigation measures include the
construction of bike lanes, routes, and sidewalks, requiring bicycle parking facilities with new
development, and the development of bus stops, bus turn-outs, and new transit routes.
The E]:R also concludes that future development in the Study Area would require wider
curb-to-curb Study Area roadways, and that this represented a potentially significant adverse
impact. The ETR proposes mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a level considered
less than significant. These mitigation measures include reserving right-of-way along Orchard
Avenue and Brush Street, requiring shared driveways where feasible, and the development of a
monitoring program as build-out occurs to determine if fewer improvements would actually be
appropriate.
The Road ]:mprovement and Land Use Agreement (Exhibit B) requires Mendodno County
and the City to consider the EIR as well as the Mendocino County Council of Governments study of
traffic impacts in the Study Area in devising traffic mitigations for development in the Study Area.
The Road Tmprovement and Land Use Agreement requires the County and the City to evaluate and
mitigate the individual and cumulative traffic impacts of each project approved for development in
the Study Area and to make each project pay its proportional share of the cost of these mitigations.
The Road ]:mprovement and Land Use Agreement imposes binding legal obligations
on the City and the County to mitigate these impacts. The City Council finds that the implementation
of the Land Use Agreement will mitigate adverse traffic-.impacts to a level that is not considered
significant.
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
.lanua~/5, 2005
2.0 Affachment # /- ~,O
FZNDZNGS REGARDTNG UNMI'rZGATED ADVERSE ZMPACT
The ETR has identified one significant growth-inducing impact that cannot be successfully
mitigated or avoided with build-out of the Study Area.
Build-out traffic would result in insufficient vehicular storage
capacity on East Perkins Street between Orchard Avenue and the
Southbound Highway 101 ramps to accommodate eastbound traffic.
This impact does not result from the project itself but rather from the growth-inducing impacts
of the project. While the City Council may not be required to mitigate growth-inducing impacts,
it nevertheless elects to make the finding required by Public Resources Code Section 21081 and
14 California Code of Regulations ("CCR'~ Sections 15091 that"[s]pecific economic, legal, social,
technological or other considerations.., make infeasible the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the EIR." (§15091(a)(3).)
For the following reasons, the City Council finds that specific economic, legal, social,
technological or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the EIR.
A. The Project Objectives.
The primary objectives of the proposed project, as explained initially in the Negative
Declaration for the K-Mart Project, see Resolution No. 94-47, on file with the City Planning
Department, are to provide a north-south arterial street alternative to State Street, which will
improve City-wide traffic circulation, and to reduce traffic through nearby residential neighborhoods
along Ford Street and Clara Avenue. The project will also provide a southern access to the Study
Area which will facilitate traffic flow as that area develops.
B. Generally, Project Alternatives are Unavailable and ]:nfeasible. The traffic
impact that cannot be mitigated results from development within the Study Area; not from the
construction of the bridge. Any bridge and extension of Orchard Avenue that facilitates development
within the Study Area will have the same growth-inducing impacts. Accordingly, there are no project
alternatives that would avoid or render less significant the one unmitigated traffic impact from that
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
2 ]_ Attachment
development. Only limitations on the development itself could reduce this traffic impact. Since this
development will take place within the unincorporated area, it is not legally feasible for the City to
impose such limitations.
C. Infeasibility of Project Alternatives Discussed in ETR. The following social,
economic, legal, technological, and other considerations make the three alternatives identified in the
E1~R infeasible. The three alternatives are: 1) no project alternative; 2) alternative location; and 3)
free-span bridge.
1. No Project Alternative. The no project alternative is not feasible, because it would
not achieve any of the project objectives, including the reduction of existing traffic congestion
problems (See DETR p. :178). Moreover, none of the project specific impacts is significant and
adverse after mitigation.
2. Alternative Location. Because the bridge and roadway extension are proposed as an
"enhancement" for a previously approved project in the City, there is no alternative location where
these improvements could be made. There would not be traffic congestion relief south of the Study
Area if the bridge and roadway improvements were constructed elsewhere. Thus, an alternative
location alternative is not feasible for the specific improvements proposed. There is also no
alternative location for constructing a roadway extension into the area. Orchard Avenue is the logical
road to be extended, and is so recommended in the Ukiah General Plan. Moving the bridge to the
east or the west would not reduce or render less significant the unmitigated traffic impact.
Moreover, the road extension cannot be moved to the east of the proposed location, because
Highway 101 is about 300-feet away. ]:t cannot be moved to the west, because of existing residential
development to the west of the proposed location.
:3. Free-Span Bridge. This alternative would include a free-span bridge at the site.
According to the calculations prepared by the project engineer, a 95-foot long free-span bridge
would need to be supported by girders as deep as four-feet. Because the bottom of the bridge must
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
January 5, 2005
22
Attachment #
I-ZZ-
be one-foot above the i00-year flood elevation, the bottom of the free-span bridge with four-foot
deep supports would need to be at least 7.3 feet above the existing ground surface at the abutment
locations.
This alternative would have no affect on the unmitigated traffic impact. It would avoid
driving of pile bents within the stream channel, but the adverse environmental impacts of
constructing these pile bents can be reduced to a less than significant level by mitigation measures
already included in the proposed project and the EIR. The alternative would have slightly greater
potential erosion and visual impacts. There is no substantial environmental advantage to this
alternative, and it is not considered environmentally superior to the project as proposed.
The City Council finds that the proposed project represents the environmentally superior
alternative.
STATEMENT OF OVERRZDING CONSTDERATZONS
For the reasons as further stated below, the City Council finds that the economic, social,
technological or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable environmental risk arising
upon build-out within the Study Area of insufficient vehicular storage capacity on East Perkins
Street between Orchard Avenue and the Southbound Highway 101 ramps to accommodate
eastbound traffic.
The project will reduce existing traffic impacts on Ford and Clara Streets within the
adjacent residential area known as the "Wagonsellers' Addition." It will provide an alternative to
the State Street for north and south bound traffic within the City, thereby improving traffic
conditions on State Street. In fact, the development of that alternative route for traffic is identified
as a goal in the City of Ukiah General Plan, adopted on December 6, i995 ("GP'9, and could lead
to an extension of Orchard Avenue to Ford Road with additional long term benefits for traffic
circulation in the City. (See GP, p. V.5.30-38.) In addition, Ford and Orr Streets as well as Brush
Street already provide access to the Study Area, allowing for development in the Study Area
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution 2 3 Attachment #
3anuary 5, 2005
without the construction of the project. The project will provide an alternative access to the Study
Area that will avoid or lessen adverse traffic impacts on Orr and Ford Streets within the Wagonsellers
Addition. At the same time, the project will provide superior traffic circulation within the Study Area
as it develops.
These benefits outweigh the unavoidable adverse traffic impact on East Perkins Street. The
Study Area could build out, if the project were not constructed, creating the same traffic impact on
East Perkins Street with no compensating project benefits.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of January 2005 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mark Ashiku, Mayor
Ali-EST:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Orr Creek Bridge/Orchard Avenue Extension
Environmental Impact Report
City Council Resolution
3anuary 5, 2005
Attachment #
EXHTBZT A
Resolution No.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Orr Creek
Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension Project
The following table lists all the mitigation measures recommended in the Orr Creek Bddge
and Orchard Avenue Extension Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR). The table
lists each mitigation measure and describes when the mitigation measures must be
completed, who is responsible for implementing the measure, and which City department
or other governmental entity is responsible for ensudng compliance.
Many of the mitigation measures included in the EIR address future growth-induced
impacts from future development in the Study Area. Because all of the Study Area other
than two acres is in the jurisdiction of the County of Mendocino, the City cannot require
that these EIR-recommended mitigation measures be implemented. The table explains
which mitigation measures would be at the County's discretion to require.
Attczchment # //" ~"'
A~achment # /~~
0
0
A. achment #
·
A. achmenf # /-~
'C:: 0
Attachment #/-z I~
z
Attaahment #/-'~/
Attachment # /
Attachment #
).
Attachment #
z
z
~ 0 '~ .,-, ._ 0.,., 0
.--, o om _c
- - §
,, .e'E ,- o .o
- -,= .E '- '-' '~
.~. p ~.- oe
~0 '-
=.,, 0 .<0 ,,, ~- n~ nmn,' ~nmc~
0 C:: ~'- ,F
c ~= ~e .,., ,-~ = '~o c ,.. c~ c '"' o o
,- -- o o,~ 0 <~ 0
131 l~l ,..1:::
c ~ ~ >'c - .o. ,~ ._ '~ · 'E '~ ~e '~ "" ~ =..__. co ,--
.o. · - - o'"§ - o~::fi
x ~ c.c e-~o " "" - -- · e-° .c: c p -- __ p
z · § _eZ: .-~o c e '- '- _.e'E · -~_o "~ e
~_~ ~ ~8 ~.8~,-
I:: '~'; o'*'' t~l 0 0 ~D--- .1: 0 ~--- ~. 0 ~).--.~ ~
,,= ~:~,._ ,.,.--' o ~: ~ ~*- e o ~. o ,_,"
-' ,8 ~.__.o. ,,~ o~ 'a'>.~ '- "= " ~""o5
oo
_~ ~ _-,-.- · - · ~ 'F ~'F A-~_~';~o_~_~-''-'-'~'''il~ -', ~,,_ ~ .; ~.,_ ,,
*° i
~ o ,~
.--'~'2-E~ : ~e ~-=> ,-e
~ cc: ~_,,.,s: ,.;= --_ ~-,-. ·
~.. ..~, ~,.~. .; z--- L.
'0 '
e ,,. ..c .__ e_,~.,-e~ 'oEe~ 'U..-.
,,..e~ .e _ ~: o ,>, e o °,, 2e .-
· . .
· .
Attachment #
Attachment #
Attachment #
/-77
Attachment #
n,
0
O.
0
~EO~
Attachment #
i
._o .t~ ._o ~ ~ ._o ~ .~ ._o ~ .o_ ~ ._o ~ .~ ~
,0 0 0 ~-~,
0 I0 0 0
o o ~ ~ _ ~o
~o ~ o ~
............ ~ _ ~ 8
.... ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ ~o~ ~
.... ~ .... ~ .~-.~- .. o.o
o.~ .,~ ~._~ . ~~~ ~o. .
2~E eE
._ 0 ~-~ ~ '
._ -- owe m~ =~'-' w c-- ~9 oE
Affachment #
IlL 0 0 0
ZZ ~
~m~ ~ 8m'
' ~~' 0 ~ .~..~ 0 ~[
~ '~ o
.~o--e
- ~ - .:
o ~ '~ ~" . oe
~ ~ ~ O~ 0
~ ~ ~00..~ ~ '--
oz .~ ~ :~ ,~
~c ~ ~-- ~ E
.~ o -
.. = ~-~ ~ ~ ~ -= ~
Attachment #
Attachment #
Attachment #
Attachment #
E
UJ
Attachment #
~ ~ '5~ o~ o~
~ ~ ~ .~<
o
o ~ '~ ~ c
w w w m ~ '~ '~ ~
_ _ _ -.~ ~
~ ~ .~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ---~ ~ -- .--
~ g~ -- <'~'~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E < ~ ~- o o E~.~
.~ ~.~ o ~ ~.- > ~ ~
o~ ~ o o~ ~ ~.~=~ ~_
=~=~-=e=~o '~ 8 ~'~=
-- 0~.~ E 0~ ~ ~ ~-- E
~ o ~'- ~-= ~!~ o
~ '~ 0 ~ ~ U ~u ~ ~
~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
_~ a ~ E O~- ~ ': E ~ ~
-
-- -- ~ ~ X~ v ~
Affachment ~
EXHZBTT B
Resolution No.
ROAD IMPROVEMENT AND LAND USE AGREEMENT - 8/25/04
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 Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension project under the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") which has determined that the
construction of the Orrs Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension 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 potential 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 certify 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.
^ttachment #
7. Pursuant to Streets and Highways Code § 1810, the County has no objection to the
City acquiring right 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 within any right of way acquired for the extension of
Orchard Avenue or for the construction of the Orchard Avenue Bridge Improvements, lying
north of the 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
north of the north bridge abutment 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 Road Improvements located outside City
limits, 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, indicating County's share as one-half the expenditure amount. 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; likewise, if the entire bridge is annexed into the County,
all future maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement costs shall be borne entirely by the
County.
4. Construction of improvements. The City shall construct the Orchard Avenue
Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension 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.
2
^ttachrnent #
5. Future County land use approvals. Prior to issuing any building permit for
construction within the Brush Street triangle, the County agrees to adopt and apply to each
development proposal in the Brush Street triangle land use regulations that: (1) 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 design principles
contained in Pages 18 through 22 (Design Guidelines-Commercial Development Projects
Outside the Downtown Design District) of the Commercial Development Guidelines attached
hereto as Exhibit C. The discretionary approval by the County for commercial developments
shall, at a minimum, include findings as set forth in 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 notify 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 with the amended land use regulations, 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, as well as other
development areas, 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 E 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
Attachment#
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 Orchard Avenue Extension and shall, in compliance with CEQA, mitigate
project-related traffic impacts within the City as well as in the unincorporated area,
comprising 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 of jurisdiction 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 alternative. 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; or, the jurisdiction or jurisdictions where the development
triggering the need for the mitigations has occurred may proportionally fund the shortfall
with a 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 71.
7.4 The foregoing provisions of this paragraph shall not preclude either the City
or the County from adopting a statement of overriding consideration for specific projects
4
Attachment #_ ~'-'-.~'"0
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 the City or the County complies with its obligations under Section 7.3,
above and further provided that each project pays its proportional share of the mitigation
costs identified in the MCOG study or other study under paragraph 7.1.
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 both 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:
Attachment #
/-77
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
Attachment #
ATTEST:
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to form:
County Counsel
Attachment #
EXH. IBiT A
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS
The City of UkJah is proposing to construct a roadway improvement project This projec~
was proposed as "projec~ enhancements" when t~he City approved ~he KMART project on
Orchaad Avenue to the south of lJ~ study Area. The KMART project resulted in traffic
traveling through residential areas north and west of tJ~ KMART Store. The City agreed
to investigate the possibility of constructing the currenlJy proposed project as s means of
alleviating those traffic effects. "FhJs EIR is the futfillment of the City's irrtentior, regarding
that pasi project The proposed project improvements (as shown on Figures 4 and 5)
include the following:
1. Extend Orchard Avenue to Brush Street from its current northern terminus at Ford
Street. Improve Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to the bridge to provide two
travel lanes and dirt shoulders plus adequate taper to the bridge'
Construct a concrete bridge across Orr Creek. The bridge would be
appro>dmatety 95 feet long. It would have a total width of 62 feet to allow four
travel lanes plus 4-foot wide bike lanes and 5-foot w~de sidewalks on both sides.
Initially, only two travel lanes would be constructed on the bridge.
The bridge would include a middre suppod which would be constructed in the
lower portion of the north bank as shown on Figure 5. The support would be a
"pile bent" system (i.e., piers set in the ground to support the bndge structure)
using 13 15-inch diameter piles placed in a single row parallel with the stream
channel.
It is possible that the final geotechnical design report will recommend armoring of
the north bank to prevent erosion.
Nor't~ of the bridge, Orchard Avenue would be exlended to Brush Street. The
extension would include two 12-foot wide travel lanes with 6-foot wide dirt
shoulders.
South of the southern bridge abutment, ramps would be construcled on the east
and west side of Orchard Avenue. The 16-foot wide ramps would be
constructed to allow City maintenance vehicle access to City-owned property on
the south side of Orr Creek. The ramps would be gated and not allow public
aCC,~SS.
A storm drain would be constructed that would collect runoff from ditches south
of Brush Streel and north of Orr Creek. Roadside ditches would be constructed
adjacent to the Orchard Avenue Ex'tension north of Orr Creek. The runoff i~
these ditc..~hes would be directed to a s~orm drain inlet located about 120 feet south
of Brush Street. A 48--inch underground storm drain would then transport runoff
to a discharge point beneath the north abutment of the proposed bridge. Runoff
would then discharge down the north bank of the creek beneath the bridge to Orr
Creek. A rock outfall would be constructed beneath the storm drain outlet to
prevent streambank erosion. The drainage pipe has been designed to handle
flows from possible future development in the Study Area.
A 12-inc,h waler Ii'ne would be exlended from its current nodhem terminus on
Orchard Avenue north to Brush Street along the east side of the future Orchard
Avenue Ex'tension/Public Utility Easement nght--of-way. The water line would be
attached to the east side of the bridge above the 100-year flood elevation. The
new water line is proposed to provide adequate fireflows along Ford Street (i.e.,
allowing the water lines to be "looped"). No new service would be provided off
this new water line.
A 130-foot retaining wall would be constructed along a portion of the west side
of the Orchard Avenue Extensioq. The retaining wall would Start about 270 feet
north of Ford Street and extend about 115 feet north and then turn west for al)oLd
30 feet along the south side of the proposed maintenance ramp road. The
retaining wall would have a maximum elevation of about 5 feet.
The bridge structure would include conduits to accommodate future electrical and
commun~at~On lines.
EXHIBIT B
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
t~ 0 0
o '-r ~:
(.3 I! II
il ~) ~)
'0
(.) 0
I
iea~l$ qsrua
~J~) uO
..
NOTE: The source of this map is Figure 6 of the Revised Draft EIR dated October 2002.
Affochment # //"~'-~'-
_
EXHIBIT C
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
PUrpose & Intent
On May 20, 1992, the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency adopted Design Guidelines for the
Downtown Design District. Three years l~ter, in i 995, the City adopted a new General
Plan, which called for the adoption of Design Guidelines for all commerdal development
within the Ci~ limits. After considerable discussion, it was decided that the most
appropriate way to proceed was to simply augment the existing Downtown Design
Guidelines for application to commercial development projects outside the existing
Downtown Design District.
The existing Design Guidelines for the downtown area remain unchanged and are
included in this document as they were adopted in 1992. They will continue to be
applied within the Downtown Design District as they have since their formal adoption.
New guidelines more applicable to the outlying commercial areas and commercial
gateways have been prepared and are included as a separate chapter in this document.
The purpose of the Design Guidelines for projects outside the Downtown Design District
is ;~ to implement the goals and policies of the Community Design Element of the
General Plan; 2~ to provide design guidance and criteria for commercial development;
.' ' to provide site planning and architectural excellence, as well as unity and integrity in
the commercial urban.scape outside of the Downtown core; and .ti to provide attractive
commercial areas along the major transportation corridors outside the downtown that
will stimulate business and city-wide economic development. 5i to provide property
owners, developers, architects, and project designers with a comprehensive guide for
building design.
The Design Guidelines are intended to address the concerns expressed by the Planning
Commission and City Council regarding a lack of design guidelines for commercial
development within the City. and to fulfill the direction contained in the Community,
Design Element of the Ukiah Gener~al Plan.
The Design Guidelines are applicable to all commercial development outside the existing
Downtown Design District. and are intended to be applied in a fair and reasonable
manner, taking into consideration the size. configuration, and location of affected and
surrounding parcels, as well as the size, scope, and purpose of the individual development
projects. Attachment # ,,/-~"'~
Architects, proiect designers, and/or project applicants are expected to make a strong
and sincere effort to comply with the Design Guidelines and contribute to the
improvement of the City's physical image. Proiect applicants, with the assistance of
their architects and building designers, are expected to put forth a convincing crealive
effort w~hen planning development and designing buildings.
Site Planning
I
I ii I
Natural Site Features
Generally, a designer should p!an a project to fit a site's natural conditions, rather than alter a site to accommodate a stock
building plan.
Significant existing site features such as mature trees/landscaping, lot size and configuration, topography, and the relationship
to surrounding development should be compelling factors in determining the development capacity and design of pro]eels.
All required Grading and Drainage Plans shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or other qualified professional
acceptable to the City Engineer.
Parking
The number of parking stalls'and overall parking iot design shall generally comply with the requirements of the Ukiah
Municipal Code (LIMC.). Deviation from the parking requirements of the UMC. can be approved through the discretionary
review process provided a finding is made that there is a unique circumstance associated with the use of the property that
results in a demand for less parking than normally expected. These circumstances may include uses that would attract
young teenagers, bicyclists, or a high number of drop-off patrons.
Parking facilities shall be aesthetically screened and shaded with shrubs, trees, and short walls and fences according to the
requirements of the Zoning District in which the property is located.
The visual prominence of parking areas should be de-emphasized by separating parking areas into small components. The
practice of placing the majority of parking areas beween the building(s) de-emphasized by separating parking areas into
small components. The practice of placing the majority of parking areas between the building(s) and the primary street
frontage should be avoided.
Pedestrian Orientation
Pedestrian walkways should be included that directly link all parking areas with building entrances, off-site transportation
facilities, established sidewalks, and adjacent public rights-of-way. They should also be consisten with uses and architecture
from both a functional and aesthetic standpoint.
Outdoor pedestrian spaces should be landscaped and include such features as planters along sidewalks, pedestrian oriented
signs, attractive street furniture, low-level lighting, and outdoor seating areas. Affachment #
Site Planning
-- -- i i i I ~111 I I I I II II iiiiii i
Compatibility With Surrounding Development
The placement and layout of buildings, parking areas, landscaping, exterior lighting, and other site design features should
be compatible with surrounding land uses and architecture from both a functional and aesthetic standpoint.
Development should not create unattractive views for neighbors or traffic corridors. Ail exposed elevations should maintain
consistent architectural character. Service areas, trash enclosures, utility meters, and mechanical and electrical equipment
should be screened from view.
Proper~y owners are strongly encouraged to develop shared facilities such as driveways, parking areas, pedestrian walkways,
and outdoor living areas to maximize usable areas and create unique design opportunities.
Setbacks for new development should consider the 'character of existing frontages. Setbacks deeper than the minimum
required are encouraged only in order to allow for sidewalk widening or the creation of special pedestrian areas such as
entryways, courtways, outdoor cafes, and other features intended to enhance the pedestrian environment.
Building Design
I I II I ~ I ~ I I I II I II L I II ! Il! I I I I I
Architecture
Monotonous box-like structures devoid of variety and distinctiveness, and without openings and changes in wall planes are
discouraged. Architectural features such as arches, raised parapets, decorated cornices, eaves, windows, balconies, entry insets,
a variety of roof angles and pitches, and the inclusion of relief features in wall surfaces a~e strongly encouraged when tied into a
comprehensive design theme.
Building Colors
The t,se of ~trong or loud colors, especially those with no tradition of local usage, should be reviewed in context with the overal
asthetic of the area.
Colors should be compatible with adjoining buildings. Color work on the side and rear walls should be compatible with the colors
on the front or street side walls. Decoration and trim should be painted in order to call attention to it.
Building Materials
The creative use of wood, stucco, masonry (brick, stone, tile), and recycled materials are strongly encouraged. The use of metal
buildings is discouraged, unless they are designed in a creative and unique way, that meets the purpose and intent of the Design
Guideline"s.
Concrete block and exposed concrete are generally acceptable building materials, provided they are treated, textured, painted.
and/or used in a pleasing aesthetic way consistent with the design guidelines. Materials should be selected to create compatibility
between the building and adjoining buildings.
Lighting
Exterior lighting should be designed lo enhance building design and landscaping, as well as provide safety and security. Generally,
exterior lighting should be subdued. It should not spill out and create glare on adioining properties, and should not be direr-ted
towards the night sky. ~
Light standard heights should be predicated on the lighting need of the particular location and use. Tall
lighting fixtures that illuminate large areas should be avoided.
Lighting fixtures, standards, and all exposed accessories should be harmonious with building design, and preferably
historic and innovative in style. All pedestrian and building access areas should be adequately lighted to provide safety, security.
and aesthetic quality.
Attachment # //--~'"~
, ,
ii ,. I i ii i i i I i t i I i i I
Site Planning (¢o,-',t.)
I I I ii iii i II I I I I II I I iii
Energy Conservation
Both active solar (collectors) and passive solar (building orientation, landscaping, etc.) design are encouraged. Natural ventilation
and shading should be used to cool buildings whenever possible, and the use of sunlight should be used for direct heating and
illumination whenever possible.
Solar heating equipment need not be screened, but should be as unobtrusive as possible and complement the building design.
Every effort should be made to integrate solar panels into the roof design, flush with the roof slope.
Solar collector cannot Solar collector
be seen from street, is visible from street.
Signs
I II _ I I I I II II
The amount, type, and location of signage on a site shall generally comply with the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code.
However, sign programs should be designed tastefully and in a way where the overall signage does not
dominate the site.
Sandwich board signs shall conform to the requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code, and shall be tastefully
des4gned with subdued colors, minimal sign lettering, and a creative appearance. Every sign should be designed in scale and
proportion with the surrounding built environment. Signs should be designed as an integral architectural element of the
building and site to which it principally relates.
The colors, materials, and lighting of every sign should be restrained and harmonious with the building and site. No sign shall be
placed within the public right-of-way without the securement of an Encroachment Permit.
Outdoor Storage & Service Areas
I I
Storage areas should be limited to the rear of a site, and from public view with a solid fence or wall using concrete, wood. stone.
brick, or other similar material and should be screened. Ail outdoor storage areas and enclosures should be screened, when
possible, with landscaping.
If trash and recycling areas are required in the discretionary review process, the desing and building materials for these areas
shall be consistent with the buildings and landscaping on the site. It shall also Dc- consistent with the requirements of the Ukiah
Municipal Code. Aftochment # / - ~'
Where common mailboxes are provided, they should be close to the front entrance of building(s), in a location approved by the
US Post Office. The architectural character should be similar in form, materials, and colors to the surrounding buildings.
i~.~11!i~111 _ i I I I iii I I I I II I II
·
Fences & Walls
I! I i I i
All sides of perimeter fencing exposed to public view should be
finished in a ntanner compatible with a project's materials,
finishes, colors, and architectural styling. Large blank fence walls,
and fences and walls that create high visual barriers are strongly
discouraged. Ali proposed unpainted wood surfaces should be
treated or stained to preserve and enhance tkeir natural colors.
No portion of a wall or fence should be used for advertising or
display. No barbed wire, concertina wire, or chain link should be
used as fencing material if the fence is visible from the public
right-of-way. ^11 fencing and walls shall comply with the
provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code. No fencing or wall shall
obstruct the sight distances of motorists, as determined by the
City Engineer. (See Illustration)
Chain link
......
Landscaping
II I
All landscaping shall comply with zoning code requirements. Landscaping shall be proportional to the building elevations.
Landscape plantings shall be those which grow well in Ukiah's climate t~ ithout extensive irrigation. Native, habitat-friendly
flowering plants are strongly encouraged. ^11 plantings shall be of sufficient size, health and intensity so that a viable and
mature appearance can be attained in a reasonably short amount of time.
Deciduous trees shall constitute the majority of the trees proposed along the south and west building exposures; non-
deciduous street species shall be restricted to areas that do not inhibit solar access on the project site or abutting properties.
All new developments shall include a landscaping coverage of 20 percent (20%) of the gross area of the parcel, unless
because of the small size of a parcel, such coverage would be unreasonable. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the
landscaped area shall be dedicated to live plantings.
Projects involving the redevelopment / reuse of existing buildings shall provide as much landscaping as feasible. Landscaping
Plans shall include an automatic irrigation system and Lighting Plan. All required landscaping for commercial development
projects shall be adequately maintained in a viable condition.
Parking Lots
Parking lots with twelve (I 2) or more parking stalls shall have a tree placed between every four (~t) parking stalls with a
continuous linear planting strip, rather than individual planting wells, unless clearly infeasible. Parking lot trees shall
primarily be deciduous species, and shall be designed to provide a tree canopy coverage of 50% over all paved areas within
ten years of planting. Based upon the design of the parking Iot, a reduced number of trees may be approved through the
discretionary review process.
Parking lots shall have a perimeter planting strip with both trees and shrubs. The planting of lawn areas with the trees and
shrubs is acceptable, provided they do not dominate the planting strips.
Parking lots with twelve (I 2) or more parking stalls shall have defined pedestrian sidewalks or marked pedestrian facilities
within landscaped areas and/or separated from automobile travel lanes. Based upon the design of the parking lot, and the
use that it is serving, relief from this requirement may be approved through the discretionary review process.
Street trees are required. ]'hey may be placed on the property proposed for development instead of within the public right-
of-way if the location is approved by the City Engineer, based upon safety and maintenance factors.
Species of street trees shall be selected from the Ukiah Master Tree List with the consultation of the City staff. All street trees
shall be planted consistent with the Standard Planfing Detail on file with the City Engineer. A.J-J'achmen
! ii .il I I i i I I
EXHIBIT D
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
The Zoning Admini~ator and/or Planning Commission shall make findings when acting
to approve any disc?etionary permit within the Brush Street triangle. The findings shall not be
vague and conclusionary. The findings shall be sulTiciently detailed to apprise a reviewing court
of the basis of the action by bridging the gap between the evidence and the decision-maker's
conclusions, and shall be based upon evidence contained in the administrative record. Failure to
make findings that support the following determinations shall result in a denial of the site
development permit application'
1. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the County General
Plan.
2. The location, size, and intensiU, of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or
inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern.
3. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect
to traffic on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconverdent condition to adjacent or
surrounding uses.
4. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening
the proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoining building sites, and bre 'aking up and
screening large expanses of paved areas.
5. The proposed development will not restrict or cut out light and air on the property, or on
the property in the neighborhood; nor will it hinder the development or use of buildings in the
neighborhood, or impair the value thereof.
6. The improvement of any commercial or industrial structure will not have a substantial
detrimental impact on the character or value of an adjacent resident/al zoning district.
7. The proposed development will not excessively damage or destroy natural features,
including trees, shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of the site.
8. There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the
structure(s) and grounds to avoid monotony and/or a box-like uninteresting external appearance.
Aftochrnent # /- ~;,,/
EXHIBIT E
Road Improvement and Land Use Agreement
Introduction and Summary
Introduction
This report presents an analysis of the anticipated traffic impacts anticipated in the northeast area of Ukiah
due to cumulative land use development and completion of an extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford Street
to Brush Street. Cumulative development included a number of undeveloped parcels in this area of the City
as well as the development of a 95-acre area in the Brush Street Triangle area which is generally bounded by
U.S. 101 to the north and east, Orr Creek to the south and the railroad right-of-way to the west. The traffic
study was completed in accordance with evaluation criteria specified by the. Mendocino Council of'
Government 0vlCOG), and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques. This plan includes a
property assessment/fee structure and an associated draft AB 1600 ordinance which provides a 'structure for
funding the recommended improvements.
A previous traffic analysis for this area was completed as part of the Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue
Extension Revised Draft EIR, Leonard Charles and Associates, October 2002 (Section 3.5 - Traffic and
Circulation, completed by Crane Transportation Group). A peer review of this previous traffic analysis was
completed as part of this process and is included in Appendix A.
Summary
Traffic Growth Assumptions
City ofUkiah staffprovided a list of undeveloped parcels w/thin the study area that could potentially increase
traffic levels within the study area. These parcels are projected to generate approximately 12,165 new trips
to the surrounding street network on a daily basis.
Since no traffic model is currently available for the City of Ukiah, long-term background traffic growth was
determined through the use of a growth factor. A background growth rate of 1.0 percent per year for 10 years
(total growth increase of approximately 10 percent) was applied to the existing traffic volumes. This growth
rate is intended to represent land development in other areas of Ukiah and intensification of existing uses.
Three alternative land use patterns were developed for the traffic analysis of the Brush Street Triangle area.
The alternatives were crafted in order to obtain a range in vehicle trip generation and travel patterns to/from
the site, and to assist with prioritizing the improvement projects of the circulation plan. It was assumed that
the Brush Street Triangle area includes 95.71 acres of gross land area. The three alternatives consisted of the
following.
Alternative 1 - DEIR Land Use: The first alternative represents the same land use that was evaluated in
the Orr Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension Revised Draft EIR. This land use consisted of
641,728 square feet of retail space, 241,461 square feet of industrial space and 56 apartment units.
Development of Alternative 1 would be expected to result in approximately 18,189 new vehicle trips per
day on the surrounding street network.
Alternative 2 - Airport Business Park 2002 Equivalence: In order to assess a less intense retail
alternative, or one which represents an earlier phase of Alternative 1, it was assumed that the Brush Street
Triangle area may experience comparable 1 O-year levels of development as the Airport Business Park.
In the 10 years since its initiation, 37.80 acres have been developed at the Airport Business Park. The
resulting 326,330 square feet of new building space was assumed to consist of both retail and industrial
Attachment # /- ~ ~
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
Page 1
Mendocino Council of Governments
May 30, 2003
.. ·
uses at a similar ratio to Alternatives 1. Alternative 2 is projected to generate substantially fewer trips,
at approximately 8,218 vehicle trips per day.
Alternative 3 - Mixed Use: The third land use alternative is based on a mixed use concept consisting of
50 percent residential uses (47.9 acres), 25 percent commercial uses (23.9 acres) a~d 25 percent industrial
uses (23.9 acres). The resulting land use mix consists of 536 multi-family units, 48 single-family units,
312,720 square feet of retail uses, and 208,480 square feet of industrial uses which would be expected
to generate approximately 12,251 trips per day.
Need for Interchange Modifications
In order for the Perkins Street interchange area to operate with acceptable conditions between Orchard
Avenue and the U.S. 101 ramps, one of the following two alternatives would need to be implemented.
A) All conflicting movements at the Perkins Street/U.S. 101 southbound ramps intersection would need
to be prohibited through the use of a median on Perkins Street.
B) The southbound ramps at the Perkins Street interchange would be eliminated, and new southbound
off and on ramps would be relocated to the eastern terminus of Brash Street.
Due to the high cost of this alternative and long lead time in completing modifications to the State Highway
system, it is recommended that mitigation measures to serve traffic growth in northeastern Ukiah be
formulated to operate with ramp alternative "A" first, followed by alternative "B" in the future.
Recommended Mitigation Measures
Based on the operational analysis presented in the report, the following intersection improvements were
recommended.
North State Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps - Install a traffic signal.
North State Street/U.S. I01 Southbound Ramps - Consider prohibiting the left-turn movement from the
off-ramp.
North State Street/Brush Street-Low Gap Road- Widen the westbound approach to two lanes and
provide for protected left turn signal phasing
Main Street/?erl~qns Street - Either install a traffic signal or modem roundabout.
Main Street/Gobbi Street - Install either a traffic signal or a single-lane modem roundabout to mitigate
deficient operation. A roundabout with an inscribed diameter of 110 feet would operate acceptably.
Orchard Avenue/Brush Street - Install a modem roundabout.
Orchard Avenue/Ford Street and Clara Avenue - Provide a center two-way leg-turn lane on Orchard
Avenue to facilitate left tums onto Ford Street and Clara Avenue.
Orchard Avenue/Perl~'ns Street- Widen the eastbound and westbound approaches to provide separate
right-mm lanes and implement right-mm overlap signal phasing on all four approaches.
Attachment # /-
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study
~tlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. Page 2
Mendocino Council of Govermnents
May 30, 2003
Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street - Either install a traffic signal or modem roundabout.
Perla'ns Street/U.S. lO1 Southbound Ramps - Install a raised median on Perkins Street to eliminate all
conflicting movements. Most of the prohibited movements could be accommodated via a return U-turn
on the east side of the interchange. Begin the process of relocating the southbound ramps to the terminus
of Brash Street and closing the southbound U.S. 101/Perkins Street ramps. It is expected that this process
would take approximately 10 years.
Perla'ns Street/U.S. 101 Northbound Ramps - Install a modem roundabout to serve U-tum movements
back to the southbound ramps.
Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 Southbound Ramps - Install a traffic signal.
Mitigation Funding
The total mitigation cost varies from $6,880,000 to $7,550,000. Almost one-half of this cost, $3,300,000 is
for the interchange ramp relocation to Brush Street. The cost to provide acceptable traffic operation at all of
the study intersections is essentially the same under all three land use alternatives for the Triangle Area.
In order to finance the mitigation measures which would be required to accommodate the future traffic
growth, traffic impact fees have been developed. It is assumed that the cost of the mitigation measures would
be allocated to anticipated development in the study area including:
- identified potential projects on vacant parcels in the City of Ukiah
development at the Brush Street Triangle area
- background land use intensification in the City or County which impacts the study area
Assuming that local development would not fund any of the interchange ramp relocation to Brush Street, the
resulting fee varies between $1,149 and $1,547 per p.m. peak hour trip generated. If the local development
funds 50 percent of the $3,300,000 interchange relocation cost, the fee would vary between $1,596 and
$2,148 per p.m. peak hour trip. In order to gain adequate funds to complete the capital projects and due to
the uncertainty of the amount and type of land use to be developed on the Brush Street Triangle site, it is
recommended that the traffic impact fees be based $2,148 per p.m. peak hour trip.
Affachment # ,/- ~' x~'
Brush Street Tria.ngle Transportation Study
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
Page 3
Mendocino Council of Governments
May 30, 2003
Study Parameters
Study Area
The study area is located in the northeast section of the City of Ukiah including U.S. 101 and the City arterials
of North State Street, East Perkins Street and Gobbi Street. The Brush Street Triangle development site is
bounded by U.S. 101 to the north and east, Orr Creek to the south and the raikoad right-of-way to the west
is unincorporated County of Mendocino land.
Freeway
U.S. lO1 provides travel two lanes in each direction and serves as the primarily link to other regions to the
north and south. Interchanges in the study area include North State Street, Perkins Street, and Gobbi Street.
All of the ramp intersections at the three interchanges are uncontrolled on the main street with stop controls
on the ramp approaches to the arterials.
Arterial Streets
State Street is the primary north-south arterial in the City of Ukiah. This arterial intersects with the U.S. 101
interchange at the north end of the City and extends to an interchange with U.S. 101 at the south end of
Ukiah. Within the study area, State Street provides four travel lanes.
Perkins Street is an east-west arterial providing access between U.S. 101 and residential areas to the west.
East of U.S. 101, Perkins Street becomes Vichy Springs Road which provides access to large unincorporated
residential areas. Between State Street and Orchard Avenue there are four travel lanes. East of Orchard
Avenue, Perkins Street includes two travel lanes.
Gobbi Street is a two-lane arterial providing access between U.S. 101 and residential areas to the west.
Collector Streets
Orchard Avenue is a two-lane major collector providing north-south access between Ford Street and
residential areas south of Gobbi Street. This study assumes the extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford
Street north to Brush Street.
Empire Drive - Ford Road is an east-west two-lane minor collector providing access at the north end of
Ukiah. It is assumed that Orchard Avenue will be extended north from Brush Street to an intersection with
Ford Road near an overcrossing of U.S. 101.
Low Gao Road - Brush Street is a two-lane major collector street providing east-west access from
unincorporated areas to the west, the high school, County Administration Center and residential areas to the
development area known as the Brush Street Triangle Area.
Clara Avenue, which is classified as a minor collector street, provides access through a residential
neighborhood fi.om North State Street to Orchard Avenue.
Residential Streets
Ford Street is classified as a residential street and provides access through a residential neighborhood from
North State Street to Orchard Avenue Attachment -//- ~__/~ ~
1
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
Mendocino Council of Governments
May 30, 2003
Page 4
· ·
Orr Street is a minor residential street over Orr Creek which currently sen, es as a diversion route from
Orchard Avenue to State Street. The extension of Orchard Avenue is expected to relieve this street from
through traffic.
The study area includes the following study intersections and is shovm in Figure 1.
1. North State Street/U.S. 101 NB Ramps 11. Orchard Avenue/Ford Road (future)
2. North State Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps 12. Orchard Avenue/Brush Street (future)
3. North State Street/Ford Road-Empire Drive 13. Orchard Avenue/Ford Street
4. North State StreeffBrush St-Low Gap Road 14. Orchard Avenue/Clam Avenue
5. North State Street/Ford Street 15. Orchard Avenue/Perkins Street
6. North State Street/Clara Street 16. Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street
7. North State Street/Perkins Street 17. Perkins Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps
8. South State Street/Gobbi Street 18. Perkins Street/U.S. 101 NB Ramps
9. Main Street/Perkins Street 19. Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 SB Ramps
I 0.Main Street/Gobbi Street 20. Gobbi Street/U.S. 101 NB Ramps
As shown in Figure 1, study intersections which are controlled by traffic signals include North State Street/
Ford Road-Empire Drive, North State Street/Brush Street-Low Gap Road, North State Street/Perkins Street,
South State Street/Gobbi Street, and Orchard Avenue/Perkins Street. Intersections controlled by all-way stop
signs include Main Street/Perk/ns Street, Main Street/Gobbi Street and Orchard Avenue/Gobbi Street. The
remaining study intersections have uncontrolled conditions on the main street and are controlled by stop signs
on the minor street approaches. Intersection turn lane configurations for the study intersections are included
in Appendix B.
Time of Day Analysis Periods
This analysis focused on intersection operation during two peak hours of the day. Based on an analysis of
existing traffic counts, which is shown in the following section, the a.m. peak hour volumes are generally
15 to 30 percent lower than the p.m. peak hour volumes while the midday volumes range from 5 percent less
to 5 percent higher in some cases in comparison with the p.m. peak hour volumes. Therefore, the weekday
midday and p.m. peak hours were included in the analysis. Typically the midday peak hour occurs between
12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m. while the p.m. peak hour is the highest volume hour between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.
Study Analysis Scenarios
Thc following scenarios were assessed in the traffic analysis.
I. Existing Traffic Operations - These conditions are based on existing weekday p.m. peak hour volumes
that were first collected in August of 2002 and were sample counted again in January of 2003 together with
midday peak hour traffic counts derived from the previous p.m. peak hour counts as well as daily machine
counts collected at sample locations in January of 2003.
II. Existing plus Cumulative Ci_ty Projects - This scenario includes the addition of the traffic anticipated
to be generated by the development of currently undeveloped parcels in the northeast study area of the City.
The extension of Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to Ford Road and its associated traffic diversion was
assumed to be completed for this scenario.
III. Future without Triangle Development - This scenario, which does not include the Triangle Area
development, includes the addition of cumulative traffic anticipated,~t~Cgl~t~y ~e.~un~/d~veloped
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
Page 5
Mendocino Council of Governments
May 30, 2003
Background Traffic Conditions
Future Road Modifications
For all future traffic analyses it was assumed that Orchard Avenue would be extended from Ford Street
through Brush Street to Ford Road. Traffic was diverted from several routes to this new connection including
Perkins Street to North State Street, Orchard Avenue to Clara Avenue to North State Street, Orchard Avenue
to Ford Street to North State Street and Orchard Avenue to Ford Street to Brush Street via Orr Street.
Cumulative City Development Projects Trip Generation
City ofUkiah staffprovided a list of undeveloped parcels within the study area that could potentially increase
traffic levels within the study area. These parcels, including their Assessor Parcel number and land use are
summarized in Table 4.
'l
Based on the ITE trip generation rates, these 12 parcels are projected to generate approximately 12,165 new
trips to the surrounding street network on a daily basis, with 760 of these trips occurring during the a.m. peak
hour, 806 during the midday peak hour and 1,172 occurring during the p.m. peak hour. These trips were
distributed to the surrotmding street network in the traffic analysis. Additional cumulative development
project details including location maps and a trip generation summary are included in Appendix E. For the
purposes of this study, it was assumed that these cumulative projects would develop within a ten year period.
Table 4
Cumulative City Development Projects Trip Generation
P.M. Peak Hour'
Site i APN Land Use Units
Trip Rate Trips
1 001-36-039 General Light Industrial 141.06 ksf 0.98 138
--2-"- 002-09-316 ]Church I 12ksf .. 0.66 8
---~4-' [002-03-006 [Retail 94.09 ksf [ 2.43 229
-7'-] 02-16-o12 &-Ol3 Medical Office , 79.80ksf I3.66 292
........
__6___[ 002-x6-0x0 I Medi l Office 22.30 ksf [ 3.66 82
1002-:o-03s ]Retail ?.~4 ksf ] 2.43 ___. 17
Retail 29.45 ksf 1.94 57
002-23-212 & -213
8 Office 29.45 ksf 1.49 44
002-28-218 & -219
Light Industrial 117.79 ksf 0.98 115
_
- 9f-l(s v )o02-34-x x ]orate I 3.94 ksf x.49 .._,
10 (several) 003-58-xxx Retail 26.14 ksf 1.95 51
11 003-04-070 & -075 Retail 22.30 ksf 1.93 43
.........
12 003-04-030 Apartment 64 units 0.62 40
Total Trips 1,172
Note: APN = Assessor's Parcel Number At~ochmont # ,/'--~ 7
ksf= thousand square feet
Brush Street Triangle Transportation Study
Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc.
Page 16
Mendocino Council of Governments
May 30, 2003
December 21, 2004
Charley Stump
Senior Planner
Ukiah Planning Dept.
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
Dear Chadey,
The following responses are to questions and concerns raised at the Public Headng.
Response to Comments Received at the December 15, 2004 Public Hearing
How will the bddge and road extension improve traffic on Ford Street when the
EIR says that a signal will be needed at the Intersection of Ford Street and North
State Street?
Response: As shown on Table I on page 86 of the RDEIR, in 2012 without the
project this intersection would operate at Level of Service F (LOS F) with a 69.5
second average delay. With the bridge and Orchard Avenue extension, the
same intersection would operate at LOS E with a 39.2 second delay. The project
would improve operations through 2012. If one then adds traffic generated by
projected future development of the Study Area, the intersection would operate at
LOS E or F (depending on the amount of development) as shown on Table 2 on
page 88. At worst, the intersection would operate at LOS F with a 58.3 second
delay. With complete Study Area buildout and extension of Orchard Avenue to
Ford Road, the intersection would operate at LOS F with a 50.5 second delay.
So, the intersection would operate with less average delay with the project, even
with the additional traffic generated by Study Area buildout, then it would by 2012
without the project and area buildout. A signal will be needed at this intersection
even if the project is not built and no additional development of the Study Area
were to occur.
.
The EIR is contradictory when recommending new highway ramps at Brush
Street and then stating that it is unlikely that Caltrans would approve such ramps.
Response: The EIR provides a range of mitigation measures that the County or
City might require for future projects developing in the Study Area and elsewhere
in the area. New southbound ramps at Brush Street are a possible mitigation
measure for some impacts. While the EIR does not state so, Caltrans could be
opposed to such ramps unless there was a complete interchange at this location
and the Perkins Street interchange was closed, thus providing adequate space
between the Brush Street Interchange and the interchanges at North State Street
and Gobbi Street. Such an interchange would be very expansive. Providing
southbound ramps at Brush Street and closing the southbound offramp at
Perkins might be acceptable. The MCOG study also recommends southbound
ramps at Brush Street. The issue of what improvements should be done to
Attachment # ~--' /
.
.
highway interchanges should be examined throughout the Ukiah area, rather
than one interchange at a time, as is suggested in the EIR (page 104).
The new Brush Street ramps would reduce the impacts as stated. However,
none of these roadway or highway improvements is needed for the project
assessed in the EIR, namely the construction of the bddge and road extension.
The improvements would be needed when the Study Area and other areas in
and near Ukiah are developed. The actual roadway and intersection
improvements needed will be determined when project applications are made.
By that time, the City will have completed its citywide traffic study and will know
what improvements it wants to make to accommodate future traffic volumes.
This may or may not include new ramps at Brush Street. The City could also
change the land use designations for the Study Area to allow land uses that
generate less traffic. Many of the impacts identified in the EIR are the result of
the high traffic generating commercial uses assumed for the Study Area. If the
area were developed with more residential and less commercial uses, as
appears may be the case, the impacts would be reduced.
The EIR calls for signalizing the intersections of the highway ramps with Perkins
Street and North State Street. This would cause a secondary impact of
inadequate stacking space on the offramps that could result in traffic extending
out to the highway.
Response: It is true that in the future there could be inadequate stacking space.
The signalization would address the unsafe conditions of turns at the
intersection. It is possible that there could be inadequate storage on the
offramps in the future, and traffic could extend out to the highway. The mitigation
solves one problem but may cause another problem. Again, the EIR suggested
a range of mitigation measures. The MCOG study's recommendations are
similar. The final word will be the recommendations of the citywide traffic study
that is being completed. Again, these mitigation measures are not needed for
the bridge and road extension project, but for future development. That future
development will need to undergo CEQA review, and that review will include
consistency with the City's new traffic plan.
The EIR is inconsistent in calling for development of a specific plan prior to any
new development in the Study Area in the Draft EIR and then stating that a multi-
family housing project in the southwest comer of the Study Area could occur
without the need for a specific plan.
Response: This concern was raised by a number of citizens during the public
hearing. As was stated in the Addendum, it was assumed that virtually all the
development in the Study Area would be commercial development. The
recommendation for a specific plan was to ensure a coordinated commercial
development of the area so that it did not become another Redwood Business
Park. VVhen it became known that RCHDC sought approval to build an
affordable housing project in the southwest corner of the plan area, County and
City staff requested that we re-examine the EIR to determine whether it
adequately assessed such a project. It must be remembered that the EIR
assesses the impacts of building the bridge and road extension. This is the
project. Future development that ,may occur in the Study Area was discussed as
Attachment
growth-induced impacts. Though not required, the EIR provided recommended
mitigation measures which, at a program level, could reduce significant impacts
of that future development to a less than significant level. However, each of
those future projects would need to undergo CEQA review to ensure that they
actually could be conditioned, or mitigated, to reduce all impacts to a less than
significant level.
The Addendum concluded that the mitigation measures included in the EIR could
continue to reduce Study Area buildout impacts to a less than significant level
(except for the one traffic impact) even if that buildout now included a 153-
apartment unit project replacing a mixed use apartment/commercial project on
that site. This conclusion does not mean that this EIR recommends approval of
that proposed project nor that the project would not need to undergo its own
CEQA review. It simply means that as far as an assessment of future growth-
inducing impacts, this new project would not cause significant changes in the
conclusions of the EIR. The RCHDC project will have a project-level EIR
prepared for it. That EIR will assess whether the RCHDC project would cause
any significant environmental impacts. It is possible that the RCHDC project EIR
will discover project-specific and site-specific impacts not foreseen in the
program-level bridge/road EIR that will need additional mitigation measures
and/or more specific mitigation measures than identified in the EIR. It is possible
that some of these impacts may not be mitigated to a less than significant level.
It is further noted, as stated at the public headng, that the Addendum reached the
conclusion that area-wide impacts could still be reduced to a less than significant
level even if the RCHDC project were developed without preparation of a specific
plan because of where the project was located. We concluded that residential
development of that site, including a proposed 100-foot setback from the creek,
would not interfere with any future open space, recreation, or circulation plan for
the Study Area. The project would be analyzed to ensure that it did not interfere
with any area-wide drainage plan. As was discussed in the EI R, it would not
interfere with an overall design motif for the area since most of the Study Area
was planned for commercial development. If it turns out that more of the Study
Area is developed for residential use than assumed in the EIR, then it is possible
the County and/or City would want a coordinated design motif for that residential
development.
Sincerely,
Leonard ChaHes
Attachment
Ken Anderson
Susan Sher
Diane Zucker
624 Joseph St.
Ukiah, CA 95482
467-9798
DEC 2~1 2004
UKIAH
CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
12/28/04
Dear City Council members,
Thank you for spending considerable time discussing the Orr
Creek Bridge and Orchard Avenue Extension Project issues at the
December 15th meeting. As you may be aware, many of us in the
Wagonseller neighborhood feel strongly that development of the
Brash Street Triangle should not begin before completion of the
Orr Creek Bridge and surrounding improvements.
We understand the need to approve the original EIR in order to
access fimding to build the bridge in a timely manner. We do not
understand, however, 'why the Council would favor Cotmty-City
planning for the entire Triangle, but at the same time exempt from
that process the proposed 8 acre Rural Communities Housing
Development (RCHDC) housing project. RCHDC is presently
responsible for 195 housing units in the Wagonseller
neighborhood, plus the 30 planned units at the comer of Orchard
and Clara Streets. The additional 153 unit proposal located just
north of Orr Creek brings RCHDC's affordable housing units in
our neighborhood to a total of 378. Why shouldn't the largest
landlord in our neighborhood be part of the planning? Why is
RCHDC permitted exemption fi'om this crucial process?
We agree that people need affordable housing, but they also
deserve a quality neighborhood. Where are the playgrounds?
Where'.are the parks and schools? Where is the mixed housing and
mixed-use planning? Where is the planning needed to ensure the
health and viability of Orr Creek, and at the same time provide
trails to allow public access?
At the December 15th City Council meeting some speakers
expressed concem that landowners and developers would be
unnecessarily restricted by a Brush Street Triangle planning
document. We disagree. We believe that all concerned parties can
sit down together and come up with an agreed upon vision and
planning document that will not hinder developers, but will instead
lead to a livable and functional neighborhood that will enhance the
Ukiah Valley.
Let's all slow down, take a breath, and plan together before it's too
late.
Sincerely,
/-"7/- ....
.., ?," ,/; ......-'
·
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
City of Ukiah, Mayor and City Council
William W. Randolph
12/27/04
As the Council knows, I have been involved in the Triangle Area development project
since its Draft EIR was released to the general public for comment in October, 2002.
Moreover, I have lived in the "Triangle" neighborhood for nearly 18 years, and I am
familiar with my neighborhood - both its problems and its amenities. I am also very
familiar with the Triangle Area and its surrounding lands.
Basically, I like the community interaction and high energy level that my neighborhood
provides; and from the high rate of home restoration I have seen over the years, I like the
neighborhood's sense of pride to.
I have many issues with the original Draft EIR and the "tentatively adopted" Final EIR
which the Council took on December 15, 2004:
First, the City has disregarded the DEIR's recommendation that the entire 95 acre
Triangle Study Area be planned subsequent to a joint City/County "Specific Plan" to
identi~ impact thresholds of resources regarding water, sewer, traffic circulation,
existing wildlife, habitat protection and aesthetics. This single mitigation is by far, the
strongest, most comprehensive approach to impact mitigation in the DEIR; and I applaud
the City's insight to install intelligent, land use planning in the Triangle Study Area.
It is truly ironic that after this praise to the City I must withdraw it due to the Council's
action on the matter December 15, 2004. According to City staff, from 2002 to 2004, the
City's message for planning the Triangle Study Area was to prepare the Specific Plan
jointly with the County, landowners, and the general public. All parties would coordinate
as equal partners to assure that the Specific Plan would represent all community interests,
together with meeting the needs of the land itself. But, this may no longer be the plan...
On December 15, 2004, the Council seems to have reversed itself on the matter of
Specific Planning.
This action, i.e. allowing an applicant, Rural Community Housing Development Corp.
(RCHDC) to apply for and receive water allocations in Mendocino County's jurisdiction
for the purpose of developing an apartment complex of 153 units along the north bank of
Orr Creek, covering an eight-acre parcel, a relatively small part of the Triangle Study
Area is 95 acres that are slated for assessment in the Specific Plan, as recommended in
the 2002 DEIR. It should be noted that this water extension action was superseded by the
City's denial of a former request for water for housing development in the same general
area. In essence, the City is accommodating RCHDC's project scheduling by removing it
from the Specific Plan process. The City's findings to support the p~ject's n...ew status
are nebulous, at best. According to the City findings, as noted in the Final ElR, Ihe
proposed project would not. increase the density or development impact intensity allowed
by the sites current General Plan and zoning density. The County's General Plan and
Zoning Code offer a fairly wide range of land uses, all of which would be comparatively
evaluated via the Specific Plan process as required by law. The Specific Plan is to define
impact thresholds first - then allow development that fits within the thresholds.
Moreover, if I were a nearby landowner to the RCHDC project site, I would certainly be
interested in the exclusion of the proposed apartment complex project from the Specific
Plan process.
Basically, the City's move to exclude the RCHDC project from the Specific Plan process
is unfair, and I am opposed to it. A second issue which is related to both the DEIR and
the FEIR that needs to be addressed involves the City's minimal attention that both
documents give to the land on the south bank of Orr Creek - my neighborhood.
The neighborhood extends from the Creek's south bank, it is not physically attached to
the RCHDC parcel on the northside of Orr Creek, it will be directly affected by all
development activity and traffic that uses the proposed arterial Orchard Avenue Road
and bridge extensions. The DEIR does provide a presentation of traffic impacts, related
noise impacts, and recommended mitigations. However, we who live south of the creek,
know the noise from Highway 101 traffic begins at 5:30 a.m. every day and is continuous
until 1:00 a.m. As far as I am concerned, the noise is ubiquitous. I recognize that
projecting noise impacts and mitigations using decibel "change" of increases or
decreases related to project development is technically precise, but to the average lay
person like myself if it is difficult to translate the changing decibels into "what do these
noise levels really mean to me". Currently, the background noise levels that I am
subjected to from Highway 101 traffic are approximately 362 feet east of Orchard
Avenue..
The DEIR' s recommendation miti gati ons, while technical ly accurate, would have better
served the neighborhood's interest if graphics depicting the sound burms and walls had
been included in the "Noise Impact Section".
-2-
Recommended FEIR Work Needed
FINAL EIR Addendum
Orchard Avenue Bridge Extension DEIR and FEIR
ISSUES NOT RESOLVED
In DE1R AND FEIR ADDENDUM
--
Define and discuss the long-term implications on water uses that development on the
proposed apartment site that employs native vs. non-native species as landscaping.
Orr Creek, the biologically richest and longest fishery stream through the City of
Ukiah. Members of the Mendocino County Fish and Game Commission plant
steelhead that spawning the channel to augment "native" spawning runs.
Impacts need expansion by the City and California Department of Fish and Game.
Run-off and disturbance by bridge pilings in stream bed, which may pose impacts to
spawning steelhead trout.
· Define and discuss impacts of"Fragmentation,, of Orr Creek habitat and mitigations
that address stream restoration on banks and channel bottom w/estimate.
· Expand and define impacts of increased human access to Orr Creek caused by
approximately 380 residents who will be living adjacent to the Creek's north bank.
Oils, Chemicals
and Other Toxins:
Define impacts and mitigation regarding storm run-off (before, during and post
development) conditions as Regional Water Quality Cortrol Board staff say that the
only way to be assured that runn-off is clean is to run all storm water through the
City'sewage treatment plant system.
Proposed Road/Bridge Extension - Needs expansion of impact that development of
the 6.0 acre parcel from Orchard Avenue (proposed) west to Hwy. 101.
Define change in neighborhood long-term character, i.e. increased traffic hazards to
children, who use the field and existing road "half section"that adults and children
for cutting fresh wild mustard, fly kites and run their dogs and pick ben-/es and wild
flowers.
Define and discuss impacts of traffic flows based on "high, medium, low County
density traffic potential of "average daily trips", plus peak hour trip rates both.
Define impacts to address loss of open space/recreation of this site to the public who
have used it for over 25 years on north and south banks of Orr Creek.
Define and discuss impacts that the bridge brings to approximately 600 residents in
the neighborhood of Iow-moderate income; and how 153 new families will affect
them aesthetically and economically.
As this option was not analyzed in the Draft EIR, 2002, Define and discuss how the
proposed apartment project without the Bridge Extension impacts traffic movement
and congestion in the neighborhood streets at State Street, Orr Street, Ford Street,
Clara Street, Joseph Street, Sidnie Street and Sidney Court.
Discuss how the City's General Plan Policy that has a goal objective of providing
open space/recreation to the existing neighborhood is affected. How can the City
mitigate this situation in the neighborhood? Such an open space/recreational should
occur in the City, not in County jurisdiction:
Develop an aspect to the project that offers alternatives to bridge size and proposed
location either with or without the bridge extension.
Describe what actions are necessary to development, employ a "Specific Plan as
recommended in the D1R with a "Narrative Master Plan" as its lead document, as
approved by the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors October 2004.
As recommended in the DEIR to mitigate impacts posed to the Study Area, to
define the proposed projects resource thresholds of geology, hydrology, habitat,
and conservation.
Evaluate the feasibility of the bridge realignment, as sent to the City June 2004.
Compare impacts and mitigations with the original Road/Bridge extension defined in
the DEIR, 2000.
Note: Threatened/Endangered species which are known or thought to exist in the
Triangle Study Area
1. Steelhead Trout, spawning and survivor of young "fry" (threatened species).
2. Redlegged Frog, survives as "endangered species" potentially Orr Creek habitat.
-2-
Recommended FEIR Work Needed
FINAL EIR Addendum
Orchard Avenue Bridge Extension DE1R and FEIR
ISSUES NOT RESOLVED
In DE1R AND FEIR ADDENDUM
_
Define and discuss the long-term implications on water uses that development on the
proposed apartment site that employs native vs. non-native species as landscaping.
Orr Creek, the biologically richest and longest fishery stream through the City of
Ukiah. Members of the Mendocino County Fish and Game Commission plant
steelhead that spawning the channel to augment "native" spawning runs.
Impacts need expansion by the City and California Department ofFish and Game.
Run-offand disturbance by bridge pilings in stream bed, which may pose impacts to
spawning steelhead trout.
· Define and discuss impacts of"Fragmentation,, of Orr Creek habitat and mitigations
that address stream restoration on banks and channel bottom w/estimate.
· Expand and define impacts of increased human access to Orr Creek caused by
approximately 380 residents who will be living adjacent to the Creek's north bank.
Oils, Chemicals
and Other Toxins~
Define impacts and mitigation regarding storm run-off (before, during and post
development) conditions as Regional Water Quality Cortrol Board staff say that the
only way to be assured that runn-off is clean is to run all storm water through the
City'sewage treatment plant system.
Social:
Proposed Road/Bridge Extension - Needs expansion of impact that development of
the 6.0 acre parcel from Orchard Avenue (proposed) west to Hwy. 101.
Define change in neighborhood long-term character, i.e. increased traffic hazards to
children, who use the field and existing road "half section"that adults and children
for cutting fresh w/Id mustard, fly kites and run their dogs and pick berr/es and wild
flowers.
AGENDA
SUMMARY
ITEM NO. 8a
DATE: January 5, 2004
REPORT
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RENEWAL OF SUN HOUSE GUILD & CITY OF UKIAH
AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZATION FOR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENT
The City of Ukiah acquired legal title to the Sun House and the Carpenter-Hudson Estate
in 1975 for the purposes of "an art and historical museum" dedicated to the memory of
artist Grace Carpenter Hudson, ethnologist Dr. John W. Hudson and the pioneer
Carpenter family. In 1978, the City helped to establish an independent nonprofit public
benefit corporation, the Sun House Guild, to assume exclusive development and volunteer
responsibility for the Estate, and formalized that relationship in the attached former Sun
House Guild-City of Ukiah 25 year Agreement. As that agreement is scheduled to expire,
it is now necessary to adopt a new agreement.
The Guild's original primary objective was to raise enough private sector funds to build a
modern museum to house, preserve, and exhibit the significant family collections. By
1985, the Guild had raised more than $1 million and began construction of the Grace
Hudson Museum which opened its doors to the public in Oct. 1986. In 1990, the Museum
operation was fully integrated into the municipal structure as a division of the City of
Ukiah's Community Services Department. (Continued on Page 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve proposed Sun House Guild/City of Ukiah agreement
and authorize City Manager to execute.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. Determine agreement requires further revision and remand to staff with
direction.
2. Determine approval of agreement is inappropriate at this time and do not move
to approve.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Sun House Guild
Sun House Guild
Sherrie Smith-Ferri, Museum Director and Sage Sangiacomo,
Community Services Supervisor
Candace Horsley, City Manager and Larry DeKnoblough, Director
of Community Services
Attachments:
,
Proposed Sun House Guild - City of Ukiah Agreement
Former Sun House Guild - City of Ukiah Agreement
Grace Hudson Museum Information Package
APPROVED:
LD/C
GuildAgr. Asr
Candace Horsley, City I~nager
Staff has had several meetings with Guild representatives to review and revise the former
agreement to reflect these changes. The proposed Agreement attempts to retain the key
elements of that successful relationship while updating the old Agreement to reflect current
realities and future possibilities. The agreement has been reviewed and approved as to
form and content by the City Attorney and was unanimously approved by the Board of
Directors of the Sun House Guild at their December meeting.
Over the last 25 years, the relationship between the City and the Guild has been very
successful and instrumental in the growth and development of the Museum. Many of the
issues and circumstances present twenty-five years ago have changed, however, the
Guild-City partnership underlying the original agreement has been a fruitful one. The
Guild provides an excellent level of stewardship of the Museum and Grace Hudson
collection and is an excellent volunteer and fundraising source for maintenance and
improvements to the Museum and Sun House. Staff believes the partnership between the
City and Guild over the last twenty-five years has been significantly beneficial and is
recommending approval of the proposed agreement continuing that partnership.
Attachment
Proposed Guild-City Agreement- accepted by Sun House Guild
Board on Dec. 14, 1004
This Agreement, made and entered into in duplicate by and
between the City of Ukiah, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
called "City" and the Sun House Guild, Incorporated, a non-profit
public benefit corporation, hereinafter called "Guild."
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City owns the facility commonly known as the Sun
House, which has been declared California Historical Landmark No.
926, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and is an
Associate Site of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, along
with the Grace Hudson Museum, its collections and the 4.5 acre
Carpenter-Hudson Park grounds, and
WHEREAS, the Sun House and Grace Hudson Museum complex have
continuing interest to the public as an art, history and anthropology
institution whose mission is to "preserve, document, research and
interpret the Hudson-Carpenter collections for public benefit, with
emphasis on the lifework of artist Grace Carpenter Hudson (1865-
1937) and her husband, ethnologist Dr. John W. Hudson (1857-1936).
The Hudson-Carpenter family's contributions to the understanding
and development of the artistic, historical and cultural heritage of
California's North Coast during the late 19th and early 20th century
guide and inform the Museum's activities. A living cultural resource
for the entire community, the Museum continues the Hudson-
Carpenter family legacy by producing related programs,
publications and exhibitions that provide quality educational
experiences in the arts and humanities for all visitors," and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to have the Sun House and Grace Hudson
Museum complex available to the public in an orderly and
meaningful manner, and
WHEREAS, the City purchased certain real and personal property
from the Hudson-Carpenter Estate a portion of which is "to be used
for the sole and exclusive purpose of an Art and Historical Museum,"
the remainder of which is "to be used for purposes related to an Art
and Historical Museum" as outlined respectively in 1975 Grant Deed
(15359) and 1975 Grant Deed (15360), and
WHEREAS, the Guild is a volunteer-based non-profit public benefit
corporation dedicated to the preservation of and development of
the Sun House and Grace Hudson Museum complex.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The Guild is given the authority to the exclusion of others except
the City, subject to the approval of the Museum staff, to do the
following with respect to the Sun House and Grace Hudson
Museum complex:
a. Develop a long-range plan for the Grace Hudson
Museum complex to be presented to, reviewed and
approved by the Ukiah City Council at no more than five
year intervals,
b. Conduct Docent guided tours of the Sun House and
Grace Hudson Museum complex on a regularly
scheduled, requested, or special event basis;
c. Operate a gift shop on Grace Hudson Museum complex
premises for the benefit of the Sun House Guild, to enable
the Guild to help meet the Museum's needs;
d. Coordinate the restoration and preservation of the Sun
House and artifacts related to the Grace Hudson Museum
complex and its collections;
e. Coordinate and conduct the promotion and publicizing
of the Sun House and Grace Hudson Museum complex;
fe
Receive gifts of whatever nature solely for the benefit of
the Sun House and Grace Hudson Museum complex;
g. Undertake the continuous development and expansion of
the Sun House and Grace Hudson Museum complex;
h. Coordinate and support the public programs and
exhibitions at the Sun House and Grace Hudson Museum
complex;
Reproduce, after receiving specific permission from the
City, for the benefit of the Sun House and Grace Hudson
Museum complex, artifacts and paintings which are part
of the Museum's collections.
The Guild shall devote its energies to the raising of funds for the
Grace Hudson Museum complex's annual programs, the
acquisition of art and artifacts, and shall set aside the maximum
amount of funds possible to build an Endowment Fund to
assure self-sufficiency in the future. The City shall have the right
to demand at its discretion an audit of all financial operations
of the Guild at Guild expense.
3. The Guild shall have sole responsibility for its own financial
operations and shall not look to the City for payment for any of
its financial losses.
4. If at any time in the future the Guild shall dissolve, its assets,
accounts, stock in trade and property of whatever nature shall
become the property of the City to be used only for the
development and preservation of the Sun House and Grace
Hudson Museum complex.
5. The Guild, with the assistance of Ukiah City Staff as needed,
may propose amendments to this Agreement at the same time
that the long-range plan of the Grace Hudson Museum is being
revised, and may present both to the Ukiah City Council for
consideration.
6. The term of this Agreement is 25 years, commencing on
and terminating on unless extended by
written agreement of the parties. This agreement is subject to
being terminated upon either party giving to the other in writing
a 5 year notice of termination.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement has been duly executed by
the Guild this
by the City this
2005.
"CITY"
day of ,2005, and
day of ,
"GUILD"
FROM ' Grace Hudson Museum PHONE NO. ' 707 467 2835 Nov. 09 2004 ll"32AM PI
Attachment #
_
INC~III~ORATED FOR AI-~r'IINZSTi~i,i, iV[ AMD
PUBLIC..S~RVZCg FUNCTIONS
,,
· 4 This Agreement, made .and entered into in duplicate by and
/5 between the City of Ukiah, a municipal corporation, hereinafter
8 called "City" and the Sun' l{ou~e Gull4, ~ncorporated, .a
ic benefit, hereinafter called "Guild"-
..
T s S
~'~I]~REA$, City owns the facility commonly known as the Sun
"' .
l0 lOUSe which has been declared a S~a'te Historical ~lGnument, and
·
WHEREAS, the Sun llouse and Museum Complex has continuing in~
'12 let. est to the public as a museum-.and h'istoric and local interest
, ·
]~ center (,representing Indian culture an~ th~ art of Grace ~ud~on,.
WHEREAS, the City w/shes to have the Sun }louse. a.~d HUseum Com-
15 X available to the public in an orderly and meaningf~1 manner.,
17
1'8
WHEREAS, Guild is a non-profit publi'c benefit corporation
·
ted 'to the .preservation of and devel,~pment of the Sun House
l 9 HUSeum Complex..f..ac.i'~'ity.
20 NOW, TIIEREFo~E, the partie~ }lereto aqree as follow~:
...
I. Guild is given .to /he ~xclus'i0n Of others .except the City,
22 tim exclusive authority to d~ thc following with respect to
9.3 Sun liouse and Museum Complek:
24 a. Conduct Docent guided tours of' the Sun llOuse and
·
·
25 Museum Complux on a regularly scheduled, requested or specia~
'
26 event basks; ....
-.
27 b. Operate a gift s[]o? on t],c Sun Housc ~rounds for tile
·
28 bunufit of tl~e Sun ~;0use museum; '
-1-
FROM ' Grace Hudson Museum
PHONE NO. ' ?0? 467 2835
Nov. 09 2004 ll:32AM P2
c. Coordinate. the .rc._.;Loration and preserYation of thc
9. Sun House dnd i tem~ .rela~ed to the Sun House and MUSeum Complex
3 prog ram;
·
·
· 4 d. Coordinate and conduct th'e promotion and publicizing
· ,
.S of t~ Sun.'IlOuse an, d Museum Complex;
·
, e. To receive gi'fts of whatever natur~ SOlely'for the
benefit of the Su,~ "tlouse. and Museum
· .
·, ~ ~ '. ,%, . . '
8 f T6 undertake the development"and conb'tructioq
museum comp. l~x; . of m- ·
· g- ':'Td.c?ordi~ate and direc~ th~ presentations .and
,.
plays at the Su~. HOuse and Mus~'
12 ~omp 1 e ~;
.
h. To reprod'u6e, after ~e~eiving Specific ~rmis~sion from
·
~it¥ for the benefit of the Sun H~use and Museum Complex,. ar~i-
, ,
]4 fact~ and paintings WhiCh a~e Part of the. Sun HOUSe.co~/leQtion. _
'~5 2. Cit~ shall provide on .the Sun H~u~e complex p-roper~y a
16 Site for the location of a museum e0mplex.
17 3. .Guild shall deVOte its 'enekgies 'to the acquisition of
· ·
18 fund~: for' ~he development of the Snr~ HOuse and associated museum
·
and ~ereby pledges all its net revenues fFom whatever Sources to
90 ~hat goal. City shall have the right to demand a~ its discretion
.
21 an audi.{: of all financial, operations of thee Guild at Guild expense
29_ 4 Guild shall bo toEally responsible for its opera~i6n"~>~
,.
~3 City ,)ropcrty a, hall not look to City for Payment fdr~any
24 losses 4~f w~-ra~-e. .~, , ·
'-~' ~z~a-i----u~"~--sOS~aine~ by virtue of its opera.rich
5. At such time as Guild may dissolve, the assets, aCCOunts,
stuck in trade ~nd PrOperty of w]~atever nature sba'l], become the
PrOperty of City to be Used o~ly for the development a~d Pre~erva-
FROM ' Grace Hudson Museum
/
PHONE NO. : 787 467 2835
Nov. 09 2004 11: 33AM P3
1
~ion of tho Sun llouso' .and Mus.,:,~m Coniplex.~
6. Thc ter~n of this agreement sllall~25 years beginning
January 1, 198.0 with option to renew for an additional 25 Year
.
term upon agreement of the parties. Both the original term aud
any option, are subject to being terminated upon either party
.
~iving to the other in writing a 5. year notice of termination.
.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreen%ent has been duly executed by
..... ~, 19~ and by City
this 5th day of D~cember 19 79
,
Il , "CITY"
,
City of Ukiah
"G U ILD"
SUn House Guild, Incorporate.
Pre en t
Secretary
20
21
22"
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3--
Affachment #_
GRACE HUDSON MUSEUM
MUSEUM INFORMATION PACKAGE
Developed and Provided by
The Sun House Guild and
Grace Hudson Museum Endowment Board
Prepared December 18, 2004
Sun House Guild
GRACE HUDSON MUSEUM
431 8, MAIN STREET
UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482
707-467-g838
8TORE 487-2856
GRACE HUDSON MUSEUM
MUSEUM INFORMATION PACKAGE
CHRONOLOGY:
1975
October 16th the City of Ukiah purchased the 4½-acre Hudson-
Carpenter estate and the Sun House and its grounds for the sum of
$115,000. The stipulation in the contract between the Carpenter
family and the City of Ukiah was that the Sun House (Parcel 26) is
"to be maintained perpetually by buyer solely and exclusively as
an Art and Historical Museum." The remaining property in the
Grace Hudson estate (Parcel 27) is "to be maintained perpetually
by buyer for purposes related to an Art and Historical Museum."
Agreement for Sale - Breach of Conditions: Paragraph 3h states if
the conditions of the sale are breached the property shall revert to
either the California Historical Society or the State of California,
providing they are willing to accept the same conditions, or else it
shall revert to the seller, her heirs or assigns.
1978 Sun House Guild formed as a result of a mandate from the City of
Ukiah.
1979 March 14th City Manager, Jim. Swayne, commits to "the
maintenance and operation of the Museum complex." The
commitment was reiterated in 1984 by City Manager, D. Kent
Payne. (Both letters are on file) December 12th, the City of Ukiah
and the Sun House Guild enter into a 25-year agreement beginning
January 1, 1980.
1981
Fundraising begins for construction of the Museum named after
Ukiah artist, Grace Carpenter Hudson. By 1985, $1,000,000 of
private sector funds was raised.
Revised 12/17/04
1 of 7
IBM 12/20/2004
1985
The City approved full time staffing of a Director and Curator in
anticipation of the completion of the Museum.
1986
In August, the Museum construction was completed and the Sun
House Guild gift deeded the 8,000 square foot Grace Hudson
Museum to the City of Ukiah. A Museum Assistant and
Receptionist were added as support personnel in September
bringing the Museum headcount to four.
1989
November 15th the Grace Hudson Museum Five Year Plan was
adopted by the City Council.
MISSION STATEMENT: The Grace Hudson Museum and the Sun House
preserve, document, research and interpret the Carpenter-Hudson collections
for public benefit, with emphasis on the lifework of the artist Grace Carpenter
Hudson (1865-1937) and her husband, ethnologist Dr. John W. Hudson (1857-
1936). The Hudson-Carpenter family's contributions to the understanding and
development of the artistic, historical and cultural heritage of California's
North Coast during the late 19th and early 20th century guide and inform the
Museum's activities. A living cultural resource for the entire community, the
Museum continues the Hudson-Carpenter family legacy by producing related
programs, publications and exhibitions that provide quality educational
experiences in the arts and humanities for all visitors.
1990 Museum operation was fully integrated into the municipal structure
as a division of the new Depar~ent of Community Services, staff
becoming City employees.
1992
Grace Hudson Museum Endowment Fund Board of Directors was
formed to ensure the furore financial security of the Museum. Its
specific objective was to raise funds and invest those funds or
other bequests for this purpose. Initial endowment investment
balance was $69,000 with an established goal of $1M.
1998 Plans are made to reconfigure the present Museum, increase size
of secure art & basket collection storage, and add gallery space to:
Permanently display Grace Hudson's works which now
number 50+ oil paintings
Feature Pomo basketry in anticipation of receiving the
Stone family Pomo basket collection
Dedicate viewing space for the Hudson-Carpenter family
history
Revised 12/17/04
2 of 7
JBM 12/20/2004
Approval was given to hire a new part-time position, Curatorial
Assistant.
2000
An additional $1,000,000 of private sector funds is raised enabling
construction to begin. $600K is allocated to the building project
and $400,000 is to be administered by the Endowment Fund to
reimburse the City of Ukiah, from the earnings, for increased
energy cost, incremental labor and facilities insurance resulting
from maintenance and operation of the new Museum wing.
Accordingly, approval was given to hire a new part-time position,
Registrar.
2001
In June, the Sun House Guild/Endowment Fund Board sponsors
the new wing dedication. The Museum improvements were gift-
deeded to the City of Ukiah.
2005 The 25-year support agreement between the Sun House Guild and
the City of Ukiah is renewed with an effective date of January l,
2005.
MUSEUM BENEFIT TO TI-tF~ CITY OF UKIAH:
Increased tourism, with its associated business and city revenues.
Museum attendance for FY 2003-2004 reached 12,000.
3,000 students, mostly from Mendocino County, either visit the
Museum or are visited by Museum staff at no Charge during FY 2003-
2004. Educational Exhibition-related materials and teacher's packets
are supplied to the schools at no charge.
Over the past 20+ years, the Sun House Guild/Endo~ent Fund have
raised private sector funds in excess of $3,500,000 on behalf of the
Museum, resulting in a 10,000 square foot Museum being built and
gift deeded to the City. For the initial investment of $115,000 in
1975, the City now owns assets conservatively valued at
$10,500,000:
- Land $3.5M
- Buildings 2.0M
- Collection 5.0M
· Any art items either purchased or donated to the Sun House Guild or
Grace Hudson Museum Endowment Fund, including paintings and
Revised 12/17/04 3 of 7 JBM 12/20/2004
baskets, are gift deeded to the City thus increasing the asset value of
the Museum complex.
The Museum exhibitions and public programs enhance the quality of
life and cultural life of the community.
SUPPORT FOR MUSEUM:
On the average some 80 active volunteers commit their time to
Museum activities representing an annual non-cash value of more
than $100K. This includes such things as professional services (e.g.
commercial photography, tax preparation, web site development);
services as docents and Museum store clerks, and on the Guild and
Endowment Boards; auction items, flower arrangements and
refreshments for receptions, etc.
The City of Ukiah regularly contributes $190,000 annually for the
support and maintenance of the Museum. (<3% of the market value of
the Museum and its collection)
The Sun House Guild consistently raises $30,000 in operational funds
each year for promoting and sponsoring four exhibitions and
associated public programs each year, Museum promotional material
and advertisements, conservation and restoration of the paintings and
artifacts from the Museum's collection, care of the Sun House, and
occasional acquisitions for the Museum's collections. The only debt
incurred by the SHG at present is for acquisition of art.
The Sun House Guild's non-profit organization status provides the
conduit for Museum staff to apply for and receive grants to augment
the support of the Museum and the Sun House preservation projects.
The Sun House Guild is also called upon to raise funds for matching
fund grants.
· As a part of the Museum expansion in 2001 the Sun House
Guild funded many improvements, which reduced the Museum's
future maintenance expenses, to the benefit of the City. For example,
the aging Museum lighting system was replaced ($100K), floor
covering replaced throughout ($80K), interior/exterior painting
throughout ($20K), upgraded security system ($60K), and re-ducting
and adding to the existing heating and cooling system to make it more
efficient ($30K), entire building wired for intemet capabilities
($10K), sound systems wired and installed throughout ($15K) and
Revised 12/! 7/04 4 of 7 JBM 12/20/2004
new state of the art metal mesh sliding art storage system ($38K), just
to name a few.
$20,000 is withdrawn from the Museum Endowment Fund each year
and given to the Sun House Guild to reimburse the City for operating
expenses related to the 2001 Museum addition. Specifically, these
funds are to be used for increased energy, labor and insurance costs.
An additional $25,000 was committed to the City by The Sun House
Guild as a one-time payment to reimburse the City of Ukiah for
support expenses during the 2004-05 fiscal crisis.
The Sun House Guild and Grace Hudson Museum Endowment Fund
have been instrumental in the receipt of 40 pieces of Grace Hudson's
original oil paintings either through fundraising or bequests. In the
last four years, three pieces of art valued at $150,000 have been
acquired and donated to the collection by the Sun House Guild and
Endowment Fund.
REASONS FOR MUSEUM'S SUCCESS:
Stability - potential donors want to know the Museum is funded
adequately and is professionally staffed so as to ensure the proper and
responsible care of their donations. In the past we have received a
number of unsolicited positive comments about our volunteer
organization and our relationship with the City of Ukiah.
Others Envy Partnership- The relationship formed with the Sun
House Guild, Museum Endowment Board and the City of Ukiah,
particularly with Museum staff, has made major accomplishments, as
noted earlier. Our success has a positive impactYinfluenee on those
considering future donations of money or art.
Commitment to Education - Many of the programs funded by the
Museum are targeted to our youth. A recent grant from the
Department of Interior has allowed the Museum to develop and
conduct in-classroom presentations, as well as several educational
"kits" teachers may check out and use in their classrooms..
Historic Artists Home and Studios Program - The Museum is one of
only a few museums that still maintain the artist's home and studio on
the premises. The National Trust for Historic Preservation selected it
Revised 12/17/04
5 of 7
JBM 12/20/2004
as a founding site in their Historic Artists Homes and Studios
Program, the only site on the West Coast. Through this program, the
Museum has received several grants for professional staff training, as
well as a $1 OK matching funds grant for an Architectural Assessment,
restoration plans, and as-built blueprints for the Sun House. The Sun
House Guild assumed responsibility for the $1 OK matching funds.
Ouali _~ of Facility and Exhibits - the Museum has professionally
trained and experienced staff with a commitment to excellence in
producing diverse, high quality exhibits and public programs, and
comments written by those who attend the Museum exhibits and
public programs reflect an appreciation of this professionalism. Our
small town museum has the reputation equal to that of museums from
much larger municipalities, as demonstrated in the Museum being
repeatedly awarded the Institute of Museum and Library Services
General Operating Support grant, based on peer-reviewers'
acknowledgement of general excellence.
Museum Volunteers - It's fair to say that without the commitment of
the volunteers who work in the store, set up and tear down exhibits
and conduct Sun House and gallery tours, the Museum would not mn
as smoothly as it does. We are proud of the fact that 80+ volunteers
donate their time in a variety of positions to help make the Museum
successful.
ENDOWMENT FUND:
Formed in 1992 with ultimate objective to raise $1M, feeling the
investment return on that principal balance would serve to sustain the
Museum. In today's dollars with expected returns, the investment
portfolio balance needs to be $3.5 million. The five-year plan is
being revised to reflect the Museum's growth and market conditions.
The initial value of the investment portfolio was $69,000 and twelve
years later almost $865,000 of private funds has been raised bringing
the principal value to $933,135.
Endowment Fund Investment Policy dictates a conservative
investment strategy with compliance to all the laws of prudence being
maintained.
· The investment portfolio is being managed by Vanguard Asset
Management Services with the following asset mix guidelines'
Revised 12/17/04 6 of 7 JBM 12/20/2004
Up to 60% of the portfolio value will be invested in U.S.
Equities with no more than 10% being invested in
international equities
Up to 40% of the portfolio value will be invested in fixed
income instruments and cash
Informal reviews take place with the Vanguard investment advisor on
a quarterly basis, or more frequently, as necessary.
Rebalancing of the portfolio is done quarterly from investment results
or new funds being invested.
SUMMARY:
The partnership made up of the City of Ukiah, the Sun House Guild and
Endowment Fund has been enormously successful over the last 25 years.
The parmers have contributed their talents and finances to achieve this
success. We must continue this commitment for support of the Grace
Hudson Museum and Sun House while building the Endowment principal to
assure self-sufficiency.
Revised 12/17/04
7 of 7
JBM 12/20/2004
Growth in Museum Complex Value (expressed in $000)
,
[
C::
C~
m
C::
0
Z
0
0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
o
0
Principal Balance
CD 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
m
z
ITl
Z
--4
-ri
CZ
Z
0
ITEM NO. 8b
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF POLICY RESOLUTION FOR
AMPLIFIED SOUND IN PARKS AND OUTDOOR CITY OWNED FACILITIES
At the last meeting, Council discussed several issues related to noise control within the
City including a revised ordinance and a policy resolution for amplified sound in the City's
parks and other outdoor City-owned facilities. At that time Councilmember Baldwin
expressed concern that consideration of the proposed resolution would require more
extensive discussion and requested the item be continued. The Council voted to introduce
the ordinance which is on this agenda for adoption.
Current city policy only requires a permit to be issued by the Community Services Director
when amplified music is played by a group which has reserved a park site. This
requirement does not apply if a park site is not reserved. These policies also provide time
limits as to when and how long the music can be played. Other than these limitations, the
citywide noise ordinance is the only other restriction on amplified sound in the parks.
(Continued on Pa.qe 2)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution establishing policies for amplified sound in
the parks and outdoor city owned facilities.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
1. Determine resolution requires further consideration and remand to staff with
direction.
2. Determine adoption of resolution is inappropriate and do not move to approve.
Citizen Advised: N/A
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
.
Councilmember Baldwin
Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director
Candace Horsley, City Manager, David Rapport, City Attorney, and
Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Supervisor
Proposed Resolution
Councilmember Recommendations
APPROVED:
LD~C Candace Horsley, City Manger
AmplifiedSoundPark05.Asr
The proposed resolution requires a permit for all amplified sound in the parks and other city-
owned outdoor facilities, limits the number of permits which can be issued for events that
continue past 8:00 p.m., and provides that such events cannot last longer than four hours. The
resolution also declares that violation of the resolution or the terms of a permit issued under the
resolution constitute violations of the City noise ordinance and are subject to the penalties for
violating the ordinance.
Councilmember Baldwin has submitted a list of recommendations, identifying a specific number
of allowable events for Todd Grove Park and Alex R. Thomas Plaza. He also recommends
prohibiting all amplified sound at Vinewood, Orchard, Observatory, McGarvey, River Park, or at
any other City owned open space or property. Council should note that Observatory and
Orchard are not officially parks and River Park is only partially developed and not generally
open to the public. Councilmember Baldwin's recommendations are provided as Attachment #2.
While the use of City parks in the peak summer season is extensive and many private and
community events occur each weekend, staff has received less than 5 complaints over the last
three to four years regarding the use of amplified sound at these events and only two of these
were based on volume or frequency.
Staff is returning this item to Council for further discussion and possible adoption of the
proposed resolution.
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF UKIAH ESTABLISHING POLICIES REGULATING AMPLIFIED SOUND IN
PARKS, STREETS, AND OTHER CITY OWNED OUTDOOR AREAS
WHEREAS, on the City Council adopted Ordinance No. amending
Ukiah City Code ("UCC") Sections 6058 and 6060 entitled "Noise Regulation" and Section 1985,
entitled "Parks and Recreation Facilities, for the purpose of better regulating noise throughout the
City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to preserve a reasonable balance between the need to
protect the quiet enjoyment of residential neighborhoods and the use of City parks, streets (when
used pursuant to a City issued encroachment permit) and other City-owned outdoor facilities for
community events; and
WHEREAS, to achieve this objective the City Council of the City of Ukiah wishes to establish
specific policies for the regulation of amplified sound in parks, streets, and other City owned
outdoor facilities. "Amplified sound" is defined as any sound that is broadcast through
electronically amplified equipment or sound that is electronically enhanced.
NOW, ,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that to provide guidance in the implementation of
the City s Noise Ordinance (UCC Sections 6045-6062), the City Council of the City of Ukiah
does hereby adopt the following policies and regulations for the use of City parks, streets, and
City-owned outdoor areas. The regulations numbered 1-7, below, will apply to the use of City
parks pursuant to a permit issued in accordance with UCC Section 1922 as well as all other users
of City parks, streets (when used pursuant to a City issued encroachment permit) and City-owned
outdoor facilities. They do not apply to City sponsored events:
There shall be no amplified sound from live music, disc jockeys, bullhorns or public
address systems without a prior approved permit from the Director of Community
Services.
.
Amplified sound is prohibited prior to 10:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m., Sunday through
Thursday and 8:00 p.m. on Friday and Saturday, unless authorized by a permit issued
pursuant to this resolution.
.
There shall be no more than three (3) permits issued for any single location in any
single year which authorizes amplified sound from live music, disc jockeys, bullhorns
or public address systems after 8p.m. Any such event shall not use amplified sound
from such sources after 10 p.m.
.
No event, group, or individual shall be permitted to produce amplified sound for a
period greater than four (4) hours.
.
Any use of amplified sound, including at permitted events, shall be maintained at a
level that does not unreasonably interfere with the overall enjoyment of a park or
public area by others.
.
In issuing a permit pursuant to this resolution, the Director of Community Services
shall not consider the content of the sound being amplified or the identity of the
individual or group submitting the application, the sole concern of this resolution being
the time, place and manner in which amplified sound is used on City-owned outdoor
property. Any applicant who believes a permit has been denied based on the content of
the sound it seeks to produce or the identity of the applicant shall have a right to an
immediate appeal of that decision to the City Manager who must decide the appeal
within twenty-four hours after it is filed. The appeal may be made by filing a written
request for an appeal with the City Clerk. The City Manager's decision shall be final
for the City and shall be subject to immediate judicial review.
.
Failure to comply with these regulations shall be deemed a violation of the Noise
Ordinance and UCC Section 1985 and may result in either summary revocation of the
subject party's permit or a fine pursuant to UCC Section 6060 or both.
BE IT FURTItER RESOLVED that City sponsored events shall be conducted so as to not
unreasonably interfere with the quiet of residential neighborhoods, while, at the same time,
making City parks, streets (when used pursuant to a City issued encroachment permit) and
City-owned outdoor facilities reasonably available and useful for community events, such as,
but not limited to, the summer Concerts in the Park.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
AYES'
NOES:
ABSENT:
~day of ,2005
ATTEST:
Mark Ashiku, Mayor
Marie Ulvilla, City Clerk
LD/C
Noise04.Res
To: Ukiah City Council
From: Phil Baldwin
Date: December 18,2004
Affachment # ~
A Suggested City,Policy on AmplifiedMusic
Allowable _Outdoor Amplified Sound Events in City Limits of Ukiah.
Todd Grove Park (15 days)
1. Six City Sponsored Concerts
2. July 4th Celebration by permit application
3. Memorial Day Celebration by permit application
4. Veterans Day Celebration by permit application.
5. Mothers Day Celebration by permit application.
6. Two Theatrical Performance in the Park by permit application.
7. One City Sponsored Ukiah Symphony Orchestra Concert in the Park
8. Two day Traditional Ukiah Swim Meet by permit application
There should be NO amplified sound (which can be heard from
100 feet)from any source for private parties and picnics allowed in
Todd Grove Park. No permits should be issued for amplification
beyond the fifteen noted above. Four tasteful signs in English and Spanish
should be placed at the Park perimeter to this effect.
Downtown Plaza & School Street (38 days)
1. Cinco de Mayo Celebration
2. Taste of Downtown
3. Pumpkin Festival
4. Five Summer City Sponsored Movie or Concert Nights
5. 30 additional days by permit application.
Fair Grounds: A problem but controlled by State appointed Fair Board
Them should be NO amplified sound at the following Parks: Vinewood, Orchard,
Observatory, McGarvey, River or any City owned open space or property.
(Conceivably there might be exception at River Park but ~ for BMX and baseball
events.)
ITEM NO. 8c
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE AS INTRODUCED
AMENDING SECTIONS 1985, 6058, AND 6060 OF THE UKIAH CITY
CODE REGARDING NOISE REGULATIONS
At the City Council meeting of December 15, 2004 a report regarding possible
amendment to the City Noise Regulations Ordinance was introduced. The Ordinance
was introduced by a 5 to 0 vote of the City Council.
Since Council's introduction of the Ordinance, staff realized that under 'Section Two,
Section 1985: Amplifiers', that the Ordinance did not reflect the proposed resolution
regarding Amplified Sound in City Parks and therefore, staff has revised this section of
the Ordinance. If the Council agrees with this amendment they will need to approve this
change at tonight's meeting and adopt the Ordinance at the January 19, 2005 Council
meeting.
Attached is the report and revised Ordinance to amend Ukiah City Code Sections 6058
and 6060 in Division 7, Chapter 1, Article 6, entitled "Noise Regulation" and Section
1985 in Division 1, Chapter 12 entitled "Parks and Recreation Facilities".
Staff is recommending the amendments to the City Ordinance be approved as written.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Amendments to Ordinance as Introduced Amending City
Noise Regulations and Noise Regulations for City Parks and Facilities.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS:
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
City Council
Patsy Archibald, Risk Manager
Candace Horsley, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney
1. ASR from December 15, 2004 meeting for introduction of Ordinance
Amending City Noise Regulations and Noise Regulations for City Parks
and Facilities.
2. Ordinance Amending Sections 1985, 6058 and 6060.
APPROVED: ~"(~ -~
Candace Horsley, ~ty Manager
Attachment # /
ITEM NO.
DATE: December 15, 2004
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE
AMENDING CITY NOISE REGULATIONS AND CONSIDERATION AND
POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF NOISE REGULATIONS FOR CITY PARKS
AND FACILITIES
The City Council requested a review of the City's noise ordinance and the City policies
governing the use of amplified sound in City parks and other outdoor facilities. The
Council wanted to make the noise ordinance more effective and to address concerns
expressed about the impact of amplified sound on neighborhoods where City parks and
other outdoor facilities are located.
Based on that direction, City staff, including the City Attorney, Police Chief, City
Manager and Parks and Recreation Director, conducted a review of the noise ordinance
and noise regulations affecting City parks.
The City has an ordinance regulating noise in the City limits. (See Ukiah City Code
(UCC) Sections 6045-6062. (Copies attached as Attachment 1.) That ordinance
regulates sound in two principal ways: (1) it imposes decibel limits in different zoning
districts, based on time of day (see {}6048), and (2) it establishes a "general noise
regulation" which makes it unlawful for any person to willfully make "... any loud,
unnecessary, or unusual noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood
or which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal
sensitiveness residing in the area." (See Section 6058.) As currently written Section
6058 requires the use of ten listed "standards" to determine whether a violation has
Continued on Page 2
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Introduce by title only the ordinance amending Sections 6058,
6060 and 1985 of the Ukiah City Code and introduce the ordinance, after the title is read by the
City Clerk
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Leave these sections unchanged or propose
alternative amendments to the City noise regulations.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
City Council
David J. Rapport, City Attorney, Larry DeKnoblough, Director of Parks
and Recreation
Candace Horsley, City Manager, John Williams, Police Chief
1. UCC Sections 6045-6062, 2. Ordinance Amending Sections (Clean),
3.Ordinance Amending Sections (Redlined)
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley, City Manager
CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION - SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
December 15, 2004
Page 2 of 2
occurred. In practice, the Police Chief reports that his department would not issue a
citation for a violation of this section, unless several residents of a neighborhood
complained about a particular incident.
In reviewing the noise ordinance the City staff concluded that it would be more
enforceable, if three changes are made.
1. Objections could be made that Section 6058 is too vague to be enforceable because
of the language requiring the use of all ten of the listed standards and because the
standards themselves are unclear as written. Accordingly, staff proposes amending
the section to make use of one or more of the standards permissive rather than
mandatory and the description of some of the standards is revised to make them clearer
and easier to apply.
2. Currently, Section 6060 makes a violation of the noise ordinance a misdemeanor
punishable by a fine, imprisonment in the County jail or both. As a result, if a citation is
issued for a violation of the ordinance, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial. If a trial is
requested, the district attorney must prosecute the case. To reduce the time and cost of
prosecuting such violations, staff proposes amending Section 6060 to make a violation
an infraction punishable by a fine only. The fine goes up for multiple offenses within
one year. With this change most violations can be resolved in court without the
participation of lawyers and the defendant is not entitled to a jury trial.
3. Section 1985 addresses the use of amplifiers in City parks and provides that the
noise ordinance will apply to that use, unless the City Manager or the Director of
Recreation and Parks has issued a permit pursuant to Section 1992 which allows for the
exclusive use of all or a portion of a park. If the permit is issued, the use of amplifiers,
including decibel limits, is regulated by conditions in the permit. No provision is made
for the Concerts in the Park or other City sponsored events. To avoid the complaint that
City sponsored events may violate the decibel limits in the noise ordinance or the
general noise regulation, Staff proposes amending this section to make an exception for
City sponsored events and to authorize the City Manager to adopt regulations for City
sponsored events.
A copy of the ordinance amending these sections in a clean and a redlined version is
attached as Attachments 2 and 3, respectively.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UKIAH AMENDING UKIAH CITY CODE SECTIONS 6058
AND 6060 IN DIVISION 7, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 6,
ENTITLED "NOISE REGULATION " AND SECTION 1985
IN DIVISION 1, CHAPTER 12 ENTITLED: "PARKS AND
RECREATION FACILITIES."
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE
Sections 6058 and 6060 in Division 7, Chapter 1, Article 6 of the Ukiah City Code,
entitled "Noise Regulation" are amended to read as follows:
§6058: GENERAL NOISE REGULATIONS: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this
Chapter, and in addition thereto, it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully
make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, any loud, unnecessary, or unusual
noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes
discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in
the area.
Standards which may be considered in determining whether a violation of the provisions
of this Section exists include, but are not be limited to, the following:
A. The level of the noise;
B. The intensity of the noise;
C. Whether the nature of the noise is unusual;
D. Whether the noise stands out against the level and intensity of the background noise,
if any;
F. The proximity of the noise to residential sleeping facilities;
G. The nature and zoning of the area within which the noise emanates;
H. The density of the inhabitation of the area within which the noise emanates;
I. Whether the noise occurs at a time of day when most people expect relative quiet;
ORDINANCE NO.
1
J. Whether the noise occurred only once for a short period of time or occurs more than
once and for longer periods of time' and,
K. Whether the noise is produced by a reasonable commercial activity during normal
business hours.
6060: VIOLATIONS; INFRACTION: Any person violating any of the provisions of this
Article shall be guilty of an infraction, punishable by a fine not exceeding one
hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation; two hundred dollars ($200.00) for a second
violation within one year; and five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each additional violation
within one year of committing the first offense.
SECTION TWO
Section 1985 in Division 1, Chapter 12 of the Ukiah City Code, Entitled "Park and
Recreation Facilities" is hereby amended to read as follows.
1985: AMPLIFIERS: The Noise Ordinance of the City shall be effective in City parks and
other City owned outdoor facilities unless a permit has been obtained or the park
is being used by the City for a City sponsored event. The City Manager or the Director of
Recreation and Parks shall have the authority to issue the permit described herein and to
establish policies for City sponsored events under reasonable decibel limitations. Any
person failing to abide by the decibel limitations in the conditions of such permit may have
the permit summarily revoked by a police officer or other duly authorized City
representative.
SECTION THREE
This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City of Ukiah.
SECTION THREE
This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption
Introduced by title only on
,200_, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Adopted on
AYES:
,200_ by the following roll call vote:
ORDINANCE NO.
2
NOES'
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN'
, Mayor
ATTEST:
, City Clerk
I It I I Iltl _
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UKIAH AMENDING UKIAH CITY CODE SECTIONS 6058
AND 6060 IN DIVISION 7, CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 6,
ENTITLED "NOISE REGULATION "AND SECTION 1985
IN DIVISION 1, CHAPTER 12 ENTITLED: "PARKS AND
RECREATION FACILITIES."
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE
Sections 6058 and 6060 in Division 7, Chapter 1, Article 6 of the Ukiah City Code,
entitled "Noise Regulation" are amended to read as follows:
§6058: GENERAL NOISE REGULATIONS: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this
Chapter, and in addition thereto, it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully
make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, any loud, unnecessary, or unusual
noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes
discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitiveness residing in
the area.
Standards which may be considered in determining whether a violation of the provisions
of this Section exists include, but are not limited to, the following:
A. The level of the noise;
B. The intensity of the noise;
C. Whether the nature of the noise is unusual;
D. Whether the noise stands out against the level and intensity of the background noise,
if any;
E. The proximity of the noise to residential sleeping facilities;
F. The nature and zoning of the area within which the noise emanates;
G. The density of the inhabitation of the area within which the noise emanates;
H. Whether the noise occurs at a time of day when most people expect relative quiet;
ORDINANCE NO.
1
I. Whether the noise occurred only once for a short period of time or occurs more than
once and for longer periods of time: and,
J. Whether the noise is produced by a reasonable commercial activity during normal
business hours.
6060: VIOLATIONS; INFRACTION: Any person violating any of the provisions of this
Article shall be guilty of an infraction, punishable by a fine not exceeding one
hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation; two hundred dollars ($200.00) for a second
violation within one year; and five hundred dollars ($500.00) for each additional violation
within one year of committing the first offense.
SECTION TWO
Section 1985 in Division 1, Chapter 12 of the Ukiah City Code, Entitled "Park and
Recreation Facilities" is hereby amended to read as follows.
1985: AMPLIFIERS: The Noise Ordinance of the City shall be effective in City parks and
other City owned outdoor facilities unless a permit has been obtained or the park is being
used by the City for a City sponsored event. The City Manager or the Director of
Community Services shall have the authority to issue the permit described herein and to
establish policies for City sponsored events. Any person failing to abide by the
conditions of such permit may have the permit summarily revoked by a police officer or
other duly authorized City representative.
SECTION THREE
This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City of Ukiah.
SECTION THREE
This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption
Introduced by title only on
,200_, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Adopted on
AYES:
NOES:
,200_ by the following roll call vote:
ORDINANCE NO.
2
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN-
, Mayor
ATTEST:
, City Clerk
ITEM NO. 8d
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON MARIJUANA ORDINANCE
At its November 3, 2004, meeting, the City Attorney presented the City Council with
various options for regulating the growing or dispensing of marijuana in the City limits.
A copy of the Agenda Summary Report for that item is attached as Attachment 1.
Of the different options discussed, the City Council directed staff to develop an
ordinance which allowed marijuana cultivation in residential zoning districts in
compliance with the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, subject to a limit of 3 plants per
parcel, and permitted cultivation in other zoning districts pursuant to a major use permit.
A copy of a draft ordinance implementing that policy choice is attached as Attachment
2.
Since its consideration of this issue on November 3, the Supreme Court heard oral
argument in Raich v. Ashcroft, 352 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. granted 124 S. Ct.
2909 (June 28, 2004). Staff is providing this update to see if the City Council wants to
provide additional direction to staff in light of this development.
As noted in Attachment 1 (page 2, fn 1), while the Compassionate Use Act has
legalized the possession and cultivation of marijuana for personal medical purposes,
marijuana remains a controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act.
As a result it is legal under state law to possess and cultivate marijuana for medical
purposes but it is still illegal to do that under federal law.
Congress has the authority to regulate interstate commerce and relies on that authority,
when it enacts laws like the Controlled Substances Act. As long as a connection can be
established between the subject matter of the federal legislation and interstate
commerce, the legislation is within Congressional power under the Commerce Clause in
Continued on Page 2
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consider recent developments and provide staff with further
direction
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/a
Citizen Advised' None
Requested by: City Attorney
Prepared by: David J. Rapport, City Attorney
Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, John Williams
Attachments: 1. November 3, 2004, Agenda Summary Report, 2. Draft marijuana ordinance
--
Candace Horsley, G, ity Manager
Marijuana update
January 5, 2005
Page 2 of 2
the U.S. Constitution. Federal laws enacted under the congressional authority to
regulate interstate commerce prevail over conflicting state laws.
In Raich, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal held that the Controlled Substances Act
cannot be constitutionally applied the cultivation of marijuana for the personal medical
use of the grower, because the growing and use of marijuana had no connection to
interstate commerce. Attorney General John Ashcroft appealed that decision to the
United States Supreme Court which agreed to hear the case. The Court heard oral
argument on November 29, 2004. By all accounts, the questioning of the attorney
representing Raich was much more hostile and vigorous than the questioning of the
lawyer representing Ashcroft. A majority of the high court seemed skeptical of Raich's
claim that control over the cultivation and possession of marijuana under the Controlled
Substances Act was beyond Congress's Commerce Clause authority. The Court is
likely to issue a decision by mid-March 2005. While questioning during oral argument
does not reliably predict how the Court will decide the case, most observers were
surprised by the tenor of the questions. There is now, at least, a possibility that the
Court could reverse the Ninth Circuit and uphold the application of the Controlled
Substances Act to marijuana cultivation in California.
Even if that happens, the local district attorney is unlikely to enforce it and the United
States Attorney is not likely to enforce it against everyone who has a backyard
marijuana garden. However, the fact that the use of marijuana for medical purposes is
not entirely legal, despite the Compassionate Use Act, might affect how the City Council
chooses to regulate cultivation under its zoning ordinance.
For example, despite the Compassionate Use Act, the City Council might choose not to
allow marijuana cultivation at all as long as it is prohibited under the Controlled
Substances Act, arguing that the federal law prevails over inconsistent provisions of
state law and the City will not sanction a use of property that violates federal law, even if
it is not a violation of state law.
As another example, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.77 provides that a medical
marijuana patient may possess no more than six mature or twelve immature marijuana
plants. The City's decision to limit the cultivation of marijuana in residential
neighborhoods to no more than three plants per parcel might be challenged by the
argument that the City's limit conflicts with this state statute. For that reason, Willits is
considering an ordinance that allows six mature or twelve immature plants per patient
but requires that it be grown exclusively indoors.
Whether the City Council adopts the Willits approach or continues with its decision to
impose a stricter limit in its regulation of property under its zoning authority might be
influenced by the Supreme Court's decision in Raich.
The staff would appreciate any direction the City Council considers appropriate,
including any comments on Attachment 1.
Attachment # I,, ,
ITEM NO. lOa
DATE: November 3, 2004
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: REGULATION OF GROWING MARIJUANA AND MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES
UNDER COMPASSIONATE USE ACT
SUMMARY: Recent events have focused attention on City residents who are growing marijuana
in their backyards. There have been publicized complaints about the odor of mature marijuana
gardens that has created a nuisance for neighbors and persons in the neighborhood. A resident
was recently shot in the hand by a man who had allegedly climbed the fence into his backyard for
the purpose of. stealing marijuana plants he was growing there.
There are also two medical marijuana dispensaries operating within the City limits that we know
of.
The purpose of this Agenda Summary Report is to describe the law, the City Council's options, if it
chooses to regulate this activity, and report what some other cities are doing.
THE LAW
Proposition 215 or the Compassionate Use Act (Health and Safety Code ("H & S Code")
{}11362.5, declares that: "seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana
for medical 'purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been
recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from
the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity,
glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief."
The Act provides that H & S Code §11357, making it a crime to be in possession of marijuana,
and §11358, making it a crime to cultivate marijuana, "... shall not apply to a patient, or to a
patient's primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical
purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician."
[Continued on page 2]
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review alternatives and provide direction to Staff.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
City Council
David J. Rapport, City Attorney
Candace Horsley, City Manager; John WilliamS, Police Chief
Marijuana Dispensary Ordinance, City of Citrus Heights
APPROVED:
Cand Manager
The Act defines ".primary care giver" as "... the individual designated by the person exempted
under this section who has consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or
safety of that person." ....:.?
The Act also states that: "Nothing in this section shall-be construed to supersede legislation
prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that endangers others, nor [sic] to condone the
diversion of marijuana for non-medical purposes."
The Compassionate Use Act legalized the cultivation, possession and use of marijuana by
patients and caregivers for medical purposes. It did not legalize the sale of marijuana which is
a crime under H & S COde § 11360. (See People ex reL Lungren v. Peron (1997) 59 CaI.App.4th
1383. But also see._People v. Konow (2004) 32 Cal. 4th 995, 1003, which suggests that a
primary caregiver might be entitled to recover from his patient the actual cost of growing
marijuana.)
Because of the uncertainty in Proposition 215 as to how much marijuana a patient or a primary
caregiver can possess for the medical use of the patient, the state legislature has weighed in
with a program requiring county health departments to issue medical marijuana identification
cards to patients and caregivers. The patients and-caregivers are not required to use the ID
cards and their failure to have one doesn't mean they are not protected by the Compassionate
Use Act. Moreover, local jurisdictions aren't prohibited from establishing their own programs
and from using more generous standards than the state legislation uses.
For'purposes of this discussion, the important provision of this recent legislation is Health &
Safety Code §11362.77 which establishes a base number of plants a patient or primary
caregiver can possess as follows: "... no more than six mature or 12 immature marijuana
plants per qualified patient." In addition, if a"... qualified patient or primary caregiver has a
doctor's recommendation that 'this quantity does not meet the qualified patient's medical
needs, the qualified patient or primary caregiver may possess an amount of marijuana
consistent with the patient's needs."
The possession and cultivation of marijuana still violates the federal Controlled Substances Act
(21 U.S.C. § 801 et seq.) and the interplay between the federal law and the Compassionate
Use Act has been the subject of several recent court decisions.~ Other than to note this
conflict, I will not discuss the issue further in this report.
OPTIONS
The City's options with respect to 'backyard marijuana gardens and marijuana dispensaries
range from doing nothing to the outright banning of the cultivation of marijUana and/or the
operation of marijuana dispensaries within the City.
~ See, e.g. Raich v. Ashcroft, 352 F.3d 1222 (9th Cir. 2004), cert. granted 124 S. Ct. 2909 (June 28, 2004) [Court
of Appeal ruled that Controlled Substances Act is unconstitutional as applied to possession or cultivation of
marijuana for personal use under the Compassionate Use .Act, because this purely intra-state activity in
compliance with state law is beyond reach of Congress under the Interstate Commerce Clause. The activity has
no connection with interstate commerce, since the possession, growing and use all takes place exclusively within
California. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear this case which is pending before the high court.]
2
In between those two extremes, the City could enact Zoning regulations which allow either or
..:-:.~,.. both activities subject to regulation.
· .
I'~' '"-:
1. Regulation of backyard marijuana gardens
With respect to backyard marijuana gardens, the regulations could take any or all of the
following forms:
1. Limit to specific zoninq districts. The City might designate the zoning districts in
which marijuana can be grown under the Compassionate Use Act. For example, it could limit
such activity to agricultural and/or residential districts and prohibit it in all other zoning districts;
2. Limit to areas within zoninq districts. The City could permit it in residential districts
but not within 500 feet of schools or parks or in areas with highe, r crime rates, for example;
3. Establish requlations for the use. The City could, make the activity an allowed use in
certain zoning districts but only in compliance with certain requirements, such as limiting the
number of plants to six mature .plants and 12 immature plants per patient, requiring the plants
to be located so they are not visible from neighboring properties or public property or streets,
and/or requiring the plants to be enclosed and secure from unauthorized entry;
4. Require a use permit. The City could make the growing of marijuana a permitted
activity in designated zoning districts, requiring a use permit. Through the process of applying
..· .. ~'·....for and being granted a use permit, the City could verify that the marijuana is being grown in
· -""compliance with the Compassionate Use Act and the City's zoning regulations, In addition, the
permit could be revoked, if the user violates the conditions in the permit.
Example of how a use permit miqht work. One possibility for the use permit could
work as follows. The zoning ordinance oould be amended to provide that growing
marijuana in the City requires a minor use permit which may be issued by the zoning
Administrator, subject to conditions set forth in the-ordinance. An applicant would
have to submit an ID card or a doctor's recommendation with his or her application
for the use permit. If claiming to be a primary caregiver, the applicant would have to
submit this information for each patient as well as a statement by each patient under
penalty of pedury that: (1) the patient lives in an apartment or in housing where
marijuana cannot be grown for his or her personal use, and (2) the caregiver has
consistently assumed responsibility for the housing, health, or safety of that person.
As one means of limiting the number of properties where more than 12 immature
plants and six mature plants can be grown, the. ordinance could require that
marijuana be grown at the patient's residence whenever possible. A primary
caregiver could plant and tend the plants on the patient's property rather than grow
marijuana on one lot for multiple patients.
The application could be required to include a diagram of the property showing the
location where the marijuana will be grown and that the area is fully enclosed and
secure from unauthorized entry.
The permit would be personal to the person in lawful possession of the property and
would terminate, if that person no longer retained that possession.
The permit could specify the number of plants authorized based on the standards in
H & S Code §11362.77.
2. Marijuana dispensaries
Similarly, with respect to dispensaries, the City could limit the zoning districts in which the
dispensaries are allowed and impose requirements with or without a use permit. (See, for
example, the ordinance adopted by the City of Citrus Heights, attached as Attachment 1.)
3. Problem with outright ban of backyard marijuana gardens
An outright ban on backyard marijuana gardens might conflict with the declaration in the
Compassionate Use Act that "seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use
marijuana for medical purposes." Since backyard gardens are normally an accepted use
associated with a single family residence and marijuana growing by a Patient or his or her
primary caregiver is allowed under state law and, in fact, a patient has a right under state law
to obtain marijuana for medical purposes, it could be argued that an outright ban conflicts with
controlling state law and is preempted by state law.
,,
At the same time, the City clearly has the police power author_ity to adopt zoning regulationS
which determine where certain otherwise lawful uses are allowed or permitted within the City in
order to avoid incompatible or conflicting land uses. It may also regulate to avoid public
nuisances and activities that create public safety concerns. The recent events concerning
backyard marijuana gardens indicate that both public nuisance and public safety concerns are
associated with this activity.
The Compassionate Use Act itself states that it is not intended to "... supersede legislation
prohibiting persons from engaging in conduct that endangers others, nor [sic] to condone the
diversion of marijuana for non-medical purposes." The proposed City zoning legislation would
be intended to prevent conduct that endangers .others and the diversion of marijuana for non-
medical purposes.
Moreover, there are certain practical considerations in deciding whether to ban the activity or
to allow it subject to regUlation. While banning the activity will require patients and .primary
caregivers to obtain marijuana by growing it somewhere other than in their backyards,
regulating the backyard growing of marijuana is problematic. If the City requires permits, it
could create an accessible public record of the location where marijuana is being grown in the
City which could be useful to potential thieves. If the City begins issuing use permits, the
processing of those applications and the enforcement of permit conditions could tax limited
resources in the City's planning department.
The City might defend a decision to ban backyard marijuana gardens on the grounds that they
create public nuisance and public safety problems which might be reduced by regulation but
because of the practical problems with regulation, the City has elected to ban marijuana
gardens as the more feasible method of addressing those problemS.
.~.-..~ The issue of state law preemption could be avoided entirely by reasonable regulation of
~' "~'" marijuana growing in residential districts rather than imposing an outright ban.
..
4. Ban or moratorium on marijuana dispensaries
..
An outright ban or moratorium on dispensaries poses a lower risk of conflict with state law,
since the sale of marijuana is still illegal and'the definition of primary caregiver appears to
require that the caregiver have consistently assumed responsibility for the patient's housing,
health, or safety; something an operator of a dispensary would have difficulty establishing for
every customer.
OTHER JURISDICTIONS
I have not been able to identify any other city or county that has attempted to regulate
backyard marijuana gardens. I know that the City of Willits will be considering either a ban or
regulation.
A number of other jurisdiCtions have either banned or adopted .ordinances regulating marijuana
dispensaries. As an example of an ordinance regulating dispensaries, attached as Attachment
1 is the ordinance from Citrus Heights which requires a "medical cannabis dispensary" to apply
for and receive a permit jointly issued by the City Manager and the Police Chief. It is a one
year permit. Other cities which are regulating marijuana dispensaries with similar ordinances
or under their zoning ordinances include Elk Grove, Berkeley, Oakland, Sacramento, Redding,
R0seville, Plymouth, Dixon, and Woodland.
Cities which have banned or imposed a moratorium on marijuana dispensaries include Rocklin,
San Rafael, Fremont, and Temecula.
It is recommended the City Council discuss these issues and provide direction to Staff.
Attachment # ~
1111 II
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UKIAH ADDING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED: "MARIJUANA
CULTIVATION," TO DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 19
OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows:
1. In November 1996, the voters of California approved Proposition 215, the
Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which enacted Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5.
Under the Compassionate Use Act, Health and Safety Code Section 11357, making it a
crime to the possess marijuana, and Section 11358 making it a crime to cultivate
marijuana, shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient's primary caregiver, who possesses
or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written
or oral recommendation or approval of a physician.
2. Since the enactment of the Compassionate Use Act, 264 persons with
residence addresses in the City of Ukiah have been issued medical marijuana
identification cards by the Mendocino County Sheriff's Department.
3. The number of parcels in the City used to grow marijuana has increased
substantially. The City Police Department estimates that, at least, 250 parcels are
currently being used to grow marijuana throughout the City's residential neighborhoods.
4. Marijuana plants as they begin to flower and for a period of 2 months or more
during the growing season produce an extremely strong odor, offensive to many people,
and detectable far beyond property boundaries. One popular strain of marijuana is called
"Skunk" or "Super Skunk" and has a strong odor that resembles the smell of a skunk.
5. The strong smell of marijuana advertises its presence in the neighborhood and
creates both an attractive nuisance and the risk of robbery and armed robbery.
6. Recently, the City planning and police departments have received numerous
odor complaints related to the growing of marijuana in residential neighborhoods. The
Mendocino County Air Quality Management District ("MCAQMD") reports an accelerating
increase in formal air quality complaints associated with the growing of marijuana in
ORDINANCE NO.
1
residential neighborhoods in the City of Ukiah. In 2002, the MCAQMD received two such
complaints; in 2003, five complaints; and by October 31, 2004, it had received over 20
formal complaints for 2004. In addition, in 2004 MCAQMD received an additional two
dozen informal calls complaining about marijuana odor in residential neighborhoods in the
City.
7. Several highly publicized recent events have called attention to the impact on
public safety caused by the growing of marijuana in residential neighborhoods of the City.
In one recent incident a property owner was shot in the hand by an intruder caught
stealing marijuana from the property owner's backyard. The intruder gained entrance
through a neighboring property and passed the neighbor's bedroom window, carrying a
loaded handgun. In 2004 the City police department reports numerous calls to the
department to respond to incidents related to the growing of marijuana in residential
neighborhoods.
8. ,At a City Council meeting on November 3, 2004, several members of the public
testified to problems in their neighborhoods related to marijuana cultivation, including
impacts associated with intense cultivation of as many as 100 mature plants, growing as
tall as 14 feet, within a 100 square foot area. These impacts ranged from increased traffic
to acts of violence and intimidation.
9. The Mendocino County District Attorney refuses to prosecute persons who
grow marijuana as long as the person claims to be growing it pursuant to Proposition 215
and within a 100 square foot area on his or her property. ,As a result, City Police have
been unable to take enforcement action, even where cultivation of marijuana for sale is
suspected.
10. The City of Ukiah is a relatively small city with a population of approximately
15,000 people. It has three full-time planners in its Planning Department, one part-time
code enforcement officer and one building inspector. It has limited resources available to
engage in extensive regulation of marijuana cultivation.
11. Limiting the number of plants per parcel that can be grown in residential
neighborhoods by medical marijuana patients should alleviate a number of the
above-described problems. It should substantially reduce the public nuisance caused by
the odor of mature plants. It should make marijuana cultivation less visible and less
attractive to young people or potential thieves. It should prevent cultivation for sale and
the associated public safety problems. ,At the same time, a simple limit on the number of
plants should keep administration and enforcement of this ordinance within the limited
resources of the City's planning, building, and police departments.
12. The US government has established a medical marijuana dose range of
between one half and three quarters of a pound per patient per month.~ After reviewing
1 See: Chronic Cannabis Use in the Compassionate Investigational New Drug Program: An Examination of
Benefits and Adverse Effects of Legal Clinical Cannabis.
ORDINANCE NO,
2
the dose range established by the federal government, the Oakland City Council adopted
a limit of three pounds per year per patient, with a related plant-count limit for cultivation.
In Sonoma County medical marijuana patients are allowed to possess enough cannabis
to support their personal use of up to three pounds per year. Other communities have set
limits per patient of between one-half to two pounds.
13. According to Cannabis Yields by the DEA, various types of outdoor cannabis
plants under various outdoor planting conditions may yield averages of 236 grams, or
about one half pound, to 846 grams, or nearly two pounds. A weighted average results in
an average domestic plant yield of 448 grams, or approximately 1 pound per plant.2
14. While a particular patient under Health and Safety Code Section 11362.77
may be exempt from criminal prosecution, if he or she possesses six or more mature
plants, three plants can yield three to six pounds of marijuana which should provide
access to sufficient marijuana for the medical use of most patients under the
Compassionate Use Act. Any additional marijuana required by a patient can be obtained
from other sources, including marijuana dispensaries in the Ukiah area, or from cultivation
permitted under this ordinance in non-residential zoning districts.
15. Given the above-described public nuisance and public safety problems
associated with growing marijuana in residential neighborhoods within the City, a three
plant per parcel limit strikes a reasonable balance between a medical marijuana patient's
requirements and the quality of life in the City's residential neighborhoods.
SECTION TWO
Section 9254 is hereby added to Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 19 of the Ukiah City
Code to read as follows.
§9254: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION: Marijuana can be grown in the zoning
districts of the City of Ukiah only in accordance with the provisions of this Section.
Cultivation of marijuana on parcels within the City that does not comply with this Section
constitutes a violation of the zoning ordinance and is subject to the penalties and
enforcement as provided in Article 22, commencing with § 9350.
A. Definitions: For purposes of this Section, the following terms shall have the
following meanings:
1. "Cultivation statement" means a form developed and adopted by the
Planning Department which calls for the information required by subsection B.5 below.
2. See study at: Cannabis Yields, June 1992, DEA. Information from Marijuana Patient
Use And Cultivation Limits, Martin Martinez, Lifeline Foundation at
www.cannabismd.orq/foundation.
ORDINANCE NO.
3
2. "Evidence" means with respect to a qualified patient, the information
described in Health and Safety Code §11362.715(a)(2) or a medical marijuana
identification card issued by the Mendocino County Health Department or Sheriff's
Department, and with respect to a primary caregiver, evidence that the caregiver's patient
is a qualified patient and a written designation from the caregiver's qualified patient
designating him or her as that patient's primary caregiver, and additional information
demonstrating that the primary caregiver satisfies the definition of primary caregiver in
Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(d).
3. "Parcel" means property assigned a separate parcel number by the
Mendocino County Assessor;
4. "Person in lawful possession" means the person who has the legal right
to occupy and use a parcel on which medical marijuana is cultivated.
5. "Primary caregiver" means a "primary caregiver" as defined in Health
and Safety Code Section 11362.7(d).
6. "Qualified patient" means a "qualified patient" as defined in Health and
Safety Code Section 11362.7(f).
7. "Secure location" means a space within a building or structure which can
only be entered through a locked door that requires a key or combination to open and
which is secure against unauthorized entry.
B. Marijuana cultivation is allowed in the R-l, R-2, and R-3 districts of this City, but
only in compliance with the following requirements.
1. No more than three marijuana plants may be grown on a parcel.
2. The person with legal possession of the parcel must be a qualified
patient. Only the qualified patient may grow marijuana on a parcel. Growing marijuana by
a primary caregiver is deemed a commercial use of residential property and is not
permitted by this Section or otherwise permitted in an R-l, R-2 or R-3 district.
3. The parcel must be located not less than 1,000 feet from the grounds of
an educational facility, park or recreation center, religious assembly, or building or facility
catering to children between the ages of 8-18, unless cultivation occurs in an indoor,
secure location on the parcel.
4. The plants are not visible from any public street or public property.
5. The person in lawful possession of the property has filed with the City
planning and police departments, a "cultivation statement," containing or attaching the
following information:
ORDINANCE NO,
4
plants;
a.
Name, address, Assessor's Parcel Number, and number of
b. Statement under penalty of perjury that the person submitting the
statement is in lawful possession of the parcel;
c. Evidence of status as qualified patient; and
d. Consent to inspection of parcel by City employee with
responsibility for verifying compliance with this Section.
C. Marijuana cultivation may be permitted in the C-N, C-1, C-2, M, A, and A-E
zoning districts in the City, subject to first securing a use permit pursuant to the provisions
in Section 9262 and compliance with the following additional requirements.
1. No more than twelve immature and six mature plants per qualified
patient may be grown on a parcel.
2. The person with legal possession of the property must be a qualified
patient or a primary caregiver. If the person is a primary caregiver:
a. the limits in subsection C.1 above apply to each qualified patient
he or she is a primary caregiver for; and
b. a use permit shall not be approved, unless the City makes a
finding based on the recommendation of the Police Chief that the applicant is a person:
(1) of good character, honesty, and integrity,
(2) whose prior activities, criminal record ( if any), reputation,
habits, and associations do not pose a threat of marijuana sales, the diversion of
marijuana to non-medical uses or of conduct that endangers others.
3. The parcel must be located not less than 1,000 feet from the grounds of
an educational facility, park or recreation center, religious assembly, or building or facility
catering to children between the ages of 8-18.
4. The plants must be grown indoors in a secure location.
5. The facilities or equipment used in the indoor cultivation must comply
with the Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Electrical Code, and not be deemed to create an
undue fire hazard by the City's Fire Marshall, or a health or safety hazard to persons
present in the building or structure where the marijuana is being grown.
6. Marijuana may not be distributed, smoked, or consumed on the parcel.
ORDINANCE NO.
5
7. As a condition of receiving a use permit, the applicant must sign an
agreement that, for the entire time that the permit application is pending and the permt is
in effect, consents to inspection of the parcel and any building or structure on the parcel
by any City employee with responsibility for verifying compliance with this Section.
D. Applications for Use Permits under Subsection C. In addition to complying with
the provisions of Section 9262, applications for a use permit under Subsection C, above,
shall comply with the following requirements.
1. The use permit shall be considered a major use permit and the Planning
Commission shall conduct the initial public hearing.
2. The application shall be accompanied by an additional fee established
by resolution of the City Council that covers the full cost of the background investigation
required by Subsection C.2.b.
3. A primary caregiver applicant must (1) submit to the City Police
Department his or her fingerprints, (2) complete a background investigation questionnaire
developed by the Police Department, and (3) consent to the release of information sought
in connection with conducting a background investigation of the applicant. A public
hearing shall not be scheduled until the Police Chief, or his designee, submits to the
Planning Department his or her written recommendation concerning the findings required
by Subsection C.2.b, above.
4. The application must include all of the following information:
a. Name, address, Assessor's Parcel Number and number of plants;
b. Evidence that the applicant is in lawful possession of the parcel;
c. Evidence of status as a qualified patient or evidence of status as
a primary caregiver as to each patient the applicant claims to be a primary caregiver for.
d. Site plan showing location of plants and plans demonstrating
satisfaction of the requirements of Subsections C.4 and C.5.
e. Sufficient information to determine that a primary caregiver will
only receive payments from a qualified patient that constitute bona fide reimbursement for
his or her actual expense of cultivating and furnishing marijuana for the patient's approved
medical treatment.
5. The use permit granted pursuant to this Section is personal to the
applicant, cannot be assigned or transferred and does not run with the land.
ORDINANCE NO.
6
SECTION THREE
1. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof
to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the
application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected
thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and
any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that
any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared
unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a
newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30)
days after its adoption.
Introduced by title only on
,200_, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Adopted on
,200_ by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mark Ashiku, Mayor
ATTEST:
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO.
7
ITEM NO. 9a
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
At its June 2, 2004 meeting, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1055, amending Sections 1151
and 1152 of the Ukiah City Code concerning the appointment of Commissioners to the Planning
Commission and their terms of office.
Each member of the City Council shall appoint one Commissioner. A Commissioner's term of office
shall coincide with the term of the City Councilmember, including the Mayor, who appointed that
Commissioner.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Each City Councilmember make an appointment to the Planning
Commission and that the term of office shall coincide with the term of the City Councilmember making
the appointment.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Provide direction to Staff.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Ukiah City Council
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Candace Horsley, City Manager and David Rapport, City Attorney
1. Ordinance No. 1055 pertaining to Planning Commission Appointments
2. Terms of City of Ukiah Boards and Commission
APPROVED: ;~~'~~-'~
Candace Horsley, City Man'~er
ASR:Planning Commission Appointment 2005
ATTAOt-~ENT
ORDINANCE NO. 1055
AN ORDINANCE OFTHE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UKIAH AMENDING SECTIONS 1151 and 1152 OF THE
UKIAH CITY CODE CONCERNING THE APPOINTMENT
OF COMMISSIONERS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
AND THEIR TERMS OF OFFICE.
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows:
SECTION ONE
Sections 1151 and 1152 in Article 4, Chapter 4 of Division I of the Ukiah City Code
are amended to read as follows:
§ 1151: MEMBERS; APPOINTMENT:
Said Commission shall consist of five (5) members who shall be residents of the City.
Each member of the City Council, including each newly elected or appointed City Council
member, shall appoint one Commissioner. A new City Council member selected to fill a
vacancy on the Council and serve out an unexpired term of office may replace the
Commissioner appointed by that Council member's predecessor in office. If a
Commissioner vacates his or her office before the expiration of his or her term of office,
the appointing City Council member of that Commissioner shall appoint a replacement to
serve the remainder of that Commissioner's term of office, if a City Council member fails
to appoint a Commissioner within sixty (60) days after the vacancy occurs, a majority of
the City Council shall fill the vacancy following the procedure used to appoint members to
other City commissions and boards.
§ 1152: TERMS OF MEMBERS:
A Commissioner's term of office shall coincide with the term of the City Council member,
including the Mayor, who appointed that Commissioner.
SECTION TWO
This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City of Ukiah.
SECTION THREE
This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption. Planning
ORDINANCE NO. 1055
1 of 2
Commissioners who are in office, when this Ordinance becomes effective, shall remain in
office until January 1,2005, even if, prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, their term
would have expired on or would have extended beyond that date. If a vacancy occurs
on the Commission prior to JanUary 1, 2005, it shall be filled by a member of the City
Council, including the Mayor. The member of the City Council with the most seniority on
the Council shall appoint a Commissioner to fill the first such vacancy. The next most
senior City Council member shall appoint a Commissioner to fill the next such vacancy.
Any additional such vacancies shall be filled by individual members of the City Council in
order of their seniority on the Council. The terms of any such appointees shall end on
January 1, 2005. After January 1,2005, a Council member may reappoint to a full term
of office a Commissioner he or she appointed prior to January 1,2005.
Introduced by title only on May 19, 2004, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmembers Rodin, Smith, and Vice Mayor Baldwin.
None.
Councilmember Andersen and Mayor Larson.
None.
Adopted on June 2, 2004 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES: Mayor Larson
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Councilmembers Rodin, Andersen, Smith, and Vice Mayor Baldwin
Eri~ ~arson, Mayor
ATTEST: ~
Gordon Eltoh, City Clerk
ORDINANCE NO. 1055
2of2
TERMS OF CITY OF UKIAH BOARDS AND COMMISSION MEMBERS
As of December 28, 2004
~TTACHMENT ,~
Date
ADDOinted
Investment Oversight Committee - Public Member 2-year term - (Crane)
Mark Ashiku - Mayor
Marl Rodin - City Councilmember
Candace Horsley - City Manager
Mike McCann - Finance Director
Allen Carter- City Treasurer, Chair
Monte Hill- Public Member 6/30/04
Present Term
Expires
6/3O/O6
Library Advisory Commission - City Representative
Councilmember Philip Baldwin
Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission - 3-year term** - (McCowen)
Shirley Ann Dietrich - Women's Golf Club 7/17/02
**Melody Ann Valles - Public Member
**Fredrick Koeppel- Public Member
Chamise Cubbison
Robert Beltrami, Interim Chairman
Joe Chiles - Men's Golf Club
Jonah Freedman
7/17/02
7/17/02
7/7/04
7/7/04
7/7/04
9/1/04
** Two Commissioners may reside within the Sphere of Influence
6/3O/O5
6/30/05
6/3O/O5
6/3O/07
6/30/O7
6/30/07
6/30/07
Paths, Open Space, & Creeks Commission (POSCC)' (Crane)
Date Appointed
James Connerton 5/21/03
Howell Hawkes 5/21/03
*Dan Holbrook 5/21/03
*Fred Koeppel 5/21/03
William Randolph 5/21/03
** Two Commissioners may reside within the Sphere of Influence
Term Expires
6/3O/O5
6/3O/06
6/30/05
6/30/06
6/30/06
*Plannin.q Commission-3 year term - (Mayor Ashiku) Date Appointed
James Mulheren, Chairman 7/17/02
Kathleen Edwards, Vice-Chair 7/17/02
Kevin Jennings 7/16/03
I,-,nnif,',,' D, ,~-,',,' '7/t
vv, ,, ,,,,,.,, , ,.,..~v, ! ,'~ vv
Term Expires
6/30/05 1/1/05
6/30/05 1/1/05
~/30/?. 1/1/05
~/3O/O~. 1/1/05
~/30/0~, 1/1/05
*Effective January 1, 2005, each Planning Commission appointment will be made by individual City Council
members
Traffic En.qineering Committee - (McCowen)
Benjamin Kageyama (Public Rep.), Chairman
*Steve Turner (Public Rep.)
*Bruce Richard (MTA Rep.)
Risk Manger- Patsy Archibald
City Engineer- Diana Steele
Deputy Public Works Director - Rick Seanor
Police Captain - Dan Walker
Associate Planner- Dave Lohse
Superintendent of Public Works - Jerry Whitaker
Appointment
10/06/99
2/4/04
Term Expires
Terms: December 28, 2004
Page 2 of 2
TERMS OF CITY OF UKIAH BOARDS AND COMMISSION MEMBERS
As of December 28, 2004
*Next City Councilmember to nominate for appointment to this Commission/Board.
Date
Airport Commission - 3 year term ** - (Mayor Ashiku) Appointed
**Ken Fowler - Chairman 7/7/04
.M=rk ?~h!ku 6/30/0! & 5/!9/0'!.
**Michael Whetzel 6/30/01 & 5/19/04
Bill Beard 7/17/02
Dottle Deerwester 7/7/04
** Two Commissioners may reside within the Sphere of Influence
Present Term
Expires
6/30/07
~ l~r~ ll'~
6/30/05
6/30/05
6/30/07
Civil Service Board
Albert Beltrami (reappointed by Council 9/6/95)
Bob Warner (appointed 2003)
Ron Caudillo (appointed 2003)
Cultural Arts Advisory Board - (Mayor Ashiku)
Currently Inactive
Demolition Permit Review Committee - 2 year term (McCowen)
Director of Community Development
Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Building Official
Chair of Design Review Committee
Mendocino County Historical Society rep, - Judy Pruden (Chairperson)
City of Ukiah Resident- William D. French, Jr.
7/7/04 6/30/06
7/7/04 6/30/06
Design Review Board - (Ukiah Redevelopment Agency - 3-year term - Commissioner Baldwin)
*Donna Berry, Chairperson 7/18/01 6/30/04-05
*William P. French, Jr. 7/18/01 6/30/04-05
*Estok Menton 7/18/01 6/30/04-05
*Richard Moser 7/18/01 6/30/04-05
**Marge Boynton Monahan 7/18/01 6/30/04-05
Five persons with design experience: four shall reside, or own real property or a business within the
City of Ukiah City Limits;*one shall represent the community at large with no ownership or residence
requirement,
Disaster Council - City of Ukiah
Councilmember- Marl Rodin
City Manager - Candace Horsley
Police Captain - Chris Dewey
Fire Operations Captain ~
City Attorney - David Rapport (no vote)
Federal, State and Local Organizations:
American Red Cross
California Dept. of Forestry
Mendocino Emergency Services Authority
Mendocino Transit Authority
Pacific Bell Pacific Gas and Electric
12/02/98 Second Vice Chair
2000
11/05/97
Ukiah Chamber of Commerce
Ukiah Unified School District
Ukiah Valley Medical Center
Emergency Services Coordinator
Radio Amateur Civic Emergency Services (R.A.C.E.S.)
Terms: December 28, 2004
Page 1 of 2
ITEM NO.
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT:
APPROVAL OF ORCHARD AVENUE ORR CREEK BRIDGE AND STREET
EXTENSION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZATION TO SECURE REGULATORY
PERMITS AND SOLICIT COMPETITIVE BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION
The City of Ukiah entered into a contract with Winzler and Kelly Consulting Engineers (W&K), of
Santa Rosa, dated June 27, 2002, to perform the necessary studies and compile the
construction documents for the Orchard Avenue Orr Creek Bridge and Street Extension Project.
W&K completed the design work to the point that the construction documents are approximately
90% complete.
In the interest of time, it was the project team's objective to complete the documents to this point
and then apply for the necessary permits from Army Corp of Engineers and the Department of
Fish and Game. Upon receipt of comments and conditions from those agencies, the
construction documents will be completed and the project advertised for competitive bids.
Acquiring permits and approvals from other agencies, making modifications to construction
documents, allowing adequate time for contractors to prepare complete cost estimates in
response to the bid solicitation, and ultimately making a contract award are all time consuming
tasks. Under ideal circumstances it will be difficult to complete this major project over the
course of one construction season. At this time it is likely that this project will need to be
phased over two seasons. If permits are not acquired in a timely manner, and a construction
season is missed, it could result in a one year delay in the completion of the project.
The EIR for this project was tentatively certified by Council at its December 15, 2004 meeting
and scheduled for formal certification at this January 5, 2005 meeting. Attached is a project
description as well as reduced size drawings of the project which were also included in the
Revised Draft Environmental Impact Report.
Staff recommends approval of the project by Council, and requests authorization to proceed
with securing the required regulatory permits and soliciting competitive bids for the construction
project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Orchard Avenue Orr Creek Bridge and Street Extension
Project and authorize staff to secure regulatory permits and solicit competitive bids for
construction.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Choose not to approve the project and provide
direction to staff.
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
APPROVED:
None
Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engineer
Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engineer
Rick Kennedy, Consultant
Candace Horsley, City Manager
1. Project Description
2. 1 lx17 Plan Sheets
--Cand~ce Horsley'~ty Manager
Attachment
1.5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Proposed Project
The City of Ukiah is proposing to construct a roadway improvement project. This project
was proposed as "project enhancements" when the City approved the KMART project on
Orchard Avenue to the south of the Study Area. The KMART project resulted in traffic
traveling through residential areas north and west of the KMART Store. The City agreed
to investigate the possibility of constructing the currently proposed project as a means of
alleviating those traffic effects. This EI R is the fulfillment of the City's intention regarding
that past project. The proposed project improvements (as shown on Figures 4 and 5 )
include the following:
.
Extend Orchard Avenue to Brush Street from its current northern terminus at
Ford Street. Improve Orchard Avenue from Ford Street to the bridge to provide
two travel lanes and dirt shoulders plus adequate taper to the bridge.
,
Construct a concrete bridge across Orr Creek. The bridge would be
approximately 95 feet long. It would have a total width of 62 feet to allow four
travel lanes plus 4-foot wide bike lanes and 5-foot wide sidewalks on both sides.
Initially, only two travel lanes would be constructed on the bridge.
The bridge would include a middle support which would be constructed in the
lower portion of the north bank as shown on Figure 5. the support would be a
"pile bent" system (i.e., piers set in the ground to support the bridge structure)
using 13 15-inch diameter piles placed in a single row parallel with the steam
channel.
It is possible that the final geotechnical design report will recommend armoring of
the north bank to prevent erosion.
.
North of the bridge, Orchard Avenue would be extended to Brush Street. The
extension would include two 12-foot wide travel lanes with 6-foot wide dirt
shoulders.
.
South of the southern bridge abutment, ramps would be constructed on the east
and west side of Orchard Avenue. The 16-foot wide ramps would be constructed
to allow City maintenance vehicle access to City-owned property on the south
side of Orr Creek. The ramps would be gated and not allow public access.
.
A storm drain would be constructed that would collect runoff from ditches south
of Brush Street and north of Orr Creek. Roadside ditches would be constructed
adjacent to the Orchard Avenue Extension north of Orr Creek. The runoff in
these ditches would be directed to a storm drain inlet located about 120 feet
south of Brush Street. A 48-inch underground storm drain would then transport
runoff to a discharge point beneath the north abutment of the proposed bridge.
Runoff would then discharge down the north bank of the creek beneath the
bridge to Orr Creek. A rock outfall would be constructed beneath the storm drain
outlet to prevent streambank erosion. The drainage pipe has been designed to
handle flows from possible future development in the Study Area.
,
A 12-inch water line would be extended from its current northern terminus on
Orchard Avenue north to Brush Street along the east side of the future Orchard
Avenue Extension/Public Utility Easement right-of-way. The water line would be
attached to the east side of the bridge above thel00-year flood elevation. The
new water line is proposed to provide adequate fireflows along Ford Street (i.e.,
allowing the water lines to be "looped"). No new service would be provided off
this new waterline.
,
A 130-foot retaining wall would be constructed along a protion of the west side of
the Orchard Avenue Extension. The retaining wall would start about 270 feet
north of Ford Stret and extend about 115 feet north and then turn west for about
30 feet long th south side of the proposed maintenance ramp road. The retaining
wall would have a maximum elevation of about 5 feet.
,
The bridge structure would include conduits to accommodate future electrical and
communication lines.
133
,13 ..........................
MATCH
E"~V a02.92
PO:I'HOLE
SD
,Po,'nto~.~:
,
ELKV 80~L80
3+60 SEE DW~ 0-3
/
~z
z
z
z
ol33
ITEM NO. 9c.
DATE: January 5, 2005
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF AND POSSIBLE INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
REGULATING PAN HANDLING AND CAMPING IN THE CITY OF
UKIAH
In August 2004, after receiving numerous complaints from the community regarding the
increasing numbers and aggressive behavior of the transient population in Ukiah and a
significant increase in calls for service to the police department (from 1.87 a day in 2003
to 5.15 a day in 2004) regarding the behaviors of these individuals (aggressive
panhandling, trespassing, drunkenness, and camping), Sgt. Taylor of the Ukiah Police
Department began meeting with community groups, private property owners and
business owners. Examples of specific concerns included aggressive behavior when
donations were not given such as spitting on cars, having dogs attack, verbally abusive
behavior to women and children in front of businesses and to school children in the park
to the point where the teachers had to take the class away from their picnic lunch. Staff
has also received calls from individuals in adjacent areas stating that they no longer
want to shop in Ukiah due to the aggressive pan handling. In addition, City park and
street crews are spending approximately 30 hours a week in cleanup of trash and
human waste due to camping in parks and culverts.
The Police questioned many of the new transients in the area and were told they had
come to Mendocino County due to the lack of regulations that have been adopted and
enforced in other counties. Unfortunately, the increase call volume involving transients
Continued on Page 2
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Pass a motion to introduce the camping and panhandling
ordinances by title only and introduce the ordinances.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Revise either ordinance before introducing it or
decide not to introduce the ordinance
Citizen Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
Homeless Services Planning Group
Sergeant Trent Taylor, Homeless Service Planning Group
Sergeant Trent Taylor; David J. Rapport, City Attorney; Candace Horsley,
City Manager
John Williams, Police Chief
1. Proposed Camping Ordinance;
2. Proposed Panhandling Ordinance
3. Letter of Support from Homeless Services Planning Group
APPROVED:
Candace Horsley, City M~,~,ger
ASR- Introduction of Camping and Pan Handling Ordinances
January 5, 2005
Page 2 of 4
is overburdening a police force that is already understaffed and who are unable to assist
citizens in many cases due to the lack of regulations regarding these issues.
Sgt. Taylor attended a meeting of the Buddy Eller Center Advisory Board (the new
Homeless Shelter on Brush Street). During that meeting it was suggested that Sgt.
Taylor begin attending the Homeless Services Planning Group (HSPG) monthly
meetings to address the problems associated with the transient population of Ukiah.
Representatives from nearly all of the Social Service Providers in the County as well as
community members and volunteer organizations that provide services to the homeless
make up the HSPG.
Based on discussions at this meeting an ad hoc committee was formed to discuss the
specific problems with the transient population, particularly in the Ukiah Valley. The
committee was to discuss the problems, work on solutions and report back to the HSPG
with recommendations. As a result of these meetings over several months, the
committee determined a need for ordinances related to aggressive pan-handling and
camping. Draft language for these ordinances was written based on examples from
other communities and the committee recommended that the HSPG support the
implementation of these ordinances by the Ukiah City Council. The HSPG, based on the
committee's recommendations, has indicated that it will provide a letter of support.
Sgt. Taylor also has been meeting on a regular basis with the North Coast Railroad
Authority (NCRA), the Pear Tree Center Association Property Manager, Wal-Mart and
many community members who have expressed support for these ordinances as the
behavior of these transient individuals has had a negative effect on business and quality
of life in Ukiah.
In the opinion of the Police Department and the ad hoc Committee, the proposed
ordinances will provide the police with useful tools to alleviate some of the problems
discussed above and which are also described in the "Findings" contained in each
ordinance.
THE CAMPING ORDINANCE
The proposed camping ordinance does two things: (1) it prohibits camping in the City,
except as allowed under proposed Ukiah City Code ("UCC") Section 6081(b),
subsections (1)-(4); and (2)it repeals obsolete sections of the City Code regulating
"trailer camps."
If the proposed ordinance is adopted, the City police can cite anyone who camps on
public or private property in the City, except as specifically allowed by the ordinance. A
first offense is an infraction punishable by a fine. A second or subsequent offense is a
misdemeanor. (See proposed UCC §6085.)
The proposed ordinance also prohibits the storage of camping paraphernalia, as
defined in the ordinance, on public property, or in the open on private property without
ASR- Introduction of Camping and Pan Handling Ordinances
January 5. 2005
Page 3 of 4
the owner's written permission. The police can cite for a violation of this prohibition as
well.
A. When camping is allowed under the proposed ordinance.
Under Section 6081(b)(1)-(4), camping is allowed: (1) on private property with the
owner's permission; (2)in Mobile Home Parks and Special Occupancy Parks;~ (3)in
city parks in connection with a program sponsored or co-sponsored by the City under
Ukiah City Code Section 1967; or (4) on public or private property with a special event
permit issued under proposed UCC Section 6082.
B. Special event permits.
The ordinance authorizes the City Manager to issue a permit for overnight camping on
public or private property in connection with an event sponsored by the City or a non-
profit or community-based organization of not more than 72 hours duration which is
conducted for the purpose of promoting sports, education, or other charitable activities.
The City Manager may only issue the permit, if she or he can make a finding that the
event will not cause public or private nuisance impacts. The applicant must agree to
comply with permit conditions intended to avoid nuisance impacts.
C. Repeal of UCC Sections 2450-2470, regulating Trailer Camps.
The Legislature has preempted the local regulation of businesses which rent space for
recreational vehicles or tent camping. The City's local ordinance is no longer
enforceable as written. Under the Mobile Home Park Act, the state Department of
Housing and Community Development licenses mobilehome parks and special
occupancy parks. For these reasons, the proposed ordinance repeals the obsolete
sections from the City Code.
THE PANHANDLING ORDINANCE
The proposed panhandling ordinance prohibits "aggressive panhandling" in the City.
"Aggressive panhandling" is defined in proposed UCC Section 6090 as asking for
money or anything else of value under specific circumstances related to the time, place
I "Recreational Vehicle Park or Mobile Home Park" means any area of land within the City licensed
pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code as a Mobile Home Park, as defined in California Health
and Safety Code Section 18214, or a Special Occupancy Park as defined in California Health and Safety
Code Section 18862.43, which has a currently effective City business license, and in which space is
rented or held out for Camping. H & S Code Section 18214 defines Mobile Home Parks as any area or
tract of land where two or more lots are rented or leased, held out for rent or lease, or were
formerly held out for rent or lease and later converted to a subdivision, cooperative,
condominium, or other form of resident ownership, to accommodate manufactured homes,
mobilehomes, or recreational vehicles used for human habitation. Under H & S Code §18862.43
a "Special occupancy park" means a recreational vehicle park, temporary recreational
vehicle park, incidental camping area, or tent camp.
ASR- Introduction of Camping and Pan Handling Ordinances
January 5, 2005
Page 4 of 4
and manner of making the request. It includes: (1) asking in a way that would cause a
reasonable person feel threatened or intimidated; (2) approaching an occupied vehicle
on the street; (3) knocking on the window or reaching toward or into an occupied
vehicle; (4) continuing to ask after the person has refused the request; (5)intentionally
touching the person being asked without his or her consent; (6) intentionally blocking
the movement of the person or vehicle being asked; (7) using profane, offensive or
threatening language in connection with the request; (8) asking while under the
influence of alcohol or drugs; or (9) following the person being asked.
After defining aggressive panhandling, the proposed ordinance in proposed UCC
section 6091 prohibits aggressive panhandling in any public place, which is defined in
proposed UCC section 6090.4 as including any street, highway, parking lot, plaza,
transportation facility, shopping center, school, place of amusement, park, or
playground.
In addition, Section 6091 prohibits panhandling, regardless of whether it is aggressive:
(1) within twenty feet of any entrance or exit to any check cashing business,
supermarket, retail store, or automated teller machine without the consent of the
owner/agent of the property or another person legally in possession; (2) of an operator
or other occupant of a motor vehicle while the vehicle is located on any street or
highway on-ramp or off-ramp; or (3) in any public transportation vehicle, or in any public
or private parking lot or parking structure.
The City police can cite for any violation of the ordinance. A first offense is an
infraction, punishable by a fine up to $300. A second or subsequent offense is a
misdemeanor.
The ordinance is based on the ordinance adopted by the City of Los Angeles which was
upheld by the California Supreme Court against a First Amendment challenge in Los
Angeles Alliance for Survival v. City Of Los Angeles (2000) 22 Cal. 4th 352. Under the
First Amendment a City can regulate the time, place and manner of expressive activity
but not its content. The proposed ordinance was held to regulate the time, place and
manner of panhandling but not the content of that expressive activity.
Staff is requesting Council's discussion and consideration of the two attached
ordinances.
ORDINANCE NO.
Attachment #
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF UKIAH REVISING THE UKIAH CITY
CODE BY REPEALING DIVISION 2, CHAPTER 4,
THEREOF, ENTITLED "TRAILERS AND TRAILER
CAMPS" AND ADDING THERETO DIVISION 7,
CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 8, ENTITLED "CAMPING"
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows.
SECTION ONE. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS
The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows.
1. Within the last two years, Ukiah has seen a dramatic increase in the number of
persons traveling to the City who do not have a place to live.
2. Many of these transients do not take advantage of public services available to
persons who are sometimes called "homeless."
3. The transient homeless who do not avail themselves of temporary shelter or
other local social services camp on public and private property, creating a number of
public nuisance impacts, including:
a. Unsanitary conditions resulting from human waste and trash;
public;
b. Interference with the use of public property by other members of the
c. Interference with the use of commercial property by businesses located
there and other private property by owners or others in lawful possession; and
d. A risk of uncontrolled fires from camp or cooking fires.
4. The problems described in items 1-3 above result from camping in cars, trucks
and other vehicles as well as from camping in the open.
5. State law now comprehensively regulates commercial camping in organized
camp grounds and Recreational Vehicle parks, making the provisions of the Ukiah City
Code regulating "trailer camps" obsolete.
6. The streets and public areas within the city should be readily accessible to
residents and the public at large.
7. Private property within the City should be reserved for lawful use as approved
by the owners of said property.
8. The use of public and private property within the City for camping purposes or
storage of camping paraphernalia and related personal property interferes with the rights
of others to use these areas for the purposes for which they were intended.
9. Such activity frequently lacks adequate provision for fire safety, sanitation and
refuse disposal and therefore constitutes a public health and safety hazard which
adversely affects the public health, safety and welfare of the community, as well as
private property rights.
10. The purpose of this Ordinance is to maintain streets, parks and other public
and private areas within the City in safe, clean, sanitary and accessible condition in order
to adequately protect the health, safety and public welfare of the community, and to limit
camping to circumstances that do not create public and private nuisance and adverse
public safety impacts.
SECTION 2
Sections 2450-2470 in Chapter 4, Division 2 of the Ukiah City Code are hereby repealed.
SECTION 3
Article 8, entitled "Camping," is hereby added to Chapter 1, Division 7 of the Ukiah City
Code to read as follows.
{}6080: DEFINITIONS: The following words shall have the following meaning,
when used in this Article, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
"Camp" or "Camping" means the activity of living temporarily in the outdoors, including
to place, pitch, or use camp facilities or camp paraphernalia for such purposes.
"Camp facilities" include, but are not limited to, tents, huts, motor vehicles, Recreational
Vehicles or temporary structures, when established, maintained or operated to Camp
"Camp paraphemalia" includes, but is not limited to, bedrolls, blankets, tarpaulins, cots,
beds, sleeping bags, tents, hammocks, items used for cooking food or similar equipment.
Camp paraphernalia also includes other personal effects, when used or stored with Camp
paraphernalia as described herein.
"Establish" means setting up or moving equipment, supplies or materials on to public or
private property to Camp.
"Human Habitation" means use of a parked motor vehicle or Recreational Vehicle to
Camp.
"Maintain" means keeping or permitting equipment, supplies or materials to remain on
public or private property in order to Camp or operate Camp facilities.
"Operate" means participating or assisting in establishing or maintaining a Camp or
Camp facility.
"Private property" means all private property including, but not limited to, streets,
sidewalks, alleys, and improved or unimproved land.
"Public Property" means all public property including, but not limited to, streets,
sidewalks, alleys, and improved or unimproved land and parks.
"Recreational Vehicle" means a Recreational Vehicle as defined in Califomia Health and
Safety Code Section 18010.
"Recreational Vehicle Park or Mobile Home Park" means any area of land within the
City licensed pursuant to the California Health and Safety Code as a Mobile Home Park,
as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 18214, or a Special Occupancy
Park as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 18862.43, which has a
currently effective City business license, and in which space is rented or held out for
Camping.
"Store" means to put aside or accumulate for use when needed, to put for safekeeping, to
place or leave in a location.
"Street" means a street, alley, way or place of whatever nature, publicly or privately
maintained for purposes of vehicular travel. "Street" includes highway, as that term is
defined in the California Vehicle Code.
{}6081: UNLAWFUL CAMPING: Except as provided in Subsections B. 1-4,
below, it is unlawful and a public nuisance for any person to
Camp, establish, maintain, operate or occupy Camp facilities, or use Camp paraphernalia
in the following areas:
A. Any public property; or
B. Any private property, provided, however, that this prohibition does not apply to:
Overnight camping on private residential property by friends or family of
the property owner or person in lawful possession of the property, so long
as the owner or lawful occupant consents, and the camping does not create
a public or private nuisance;
2. Mobile Home Parks and Special Occupancy Parks;
3. Camping in public parks pursuant to Section 1967; and
4. Camping on public or private property in connection with a special event,
when authorized pursuant to Section 6082.
{}6082: SPECIAL EVENT PERMT: The City Manager or his or her designee
may issue a permit pursuant to this Section authorizing overnight camping
on public or private property for a special event, provided he or she can find that the
event will not cause a public or private nuisance, when conducted in accordance with
reasonable conditions intended to avoid nuisance impacts. "Special event," as used
herein, means an event sponsored by the City or a non-profit or community-based
organization of not more than 72 hours duration which is conducted for the purpose of
promoting sports, education, or other charitable activities.
The City Manager or his or her designee shall require a written application
from the sponsoring organization for camping in connection with a special
event. No such application shall be required for a City sponsored event.
The application shall contain such information as the City Manager shall
determine necessary in order to assure compliance with this Section.
e
The sponsoring organization must agree in writing to abide by any
reasonable conditions imposed in connection with the issuance of a
permit, which shall include, at a minimum:
a,
Special event insurance with coverage and policy limits
determined to be adequate by the City in consultation with its
liability insurer;
b. An agreement to indemnify and defend the City against any
claims arising out of the event;
c. Provision for adequate sanitation and trash collection facilities;
and
d,
Measures to control noise and other conditions which could
disturb the peace and quiet enjoyment of neighboring
properties.
,
Any failure to comply with a condition imposed on a sponsoring
organization shall be considered a violation of this Article, shall entitle
the City Manager to deny a future application by such organization,
and shall be subject to any other remedies authorized by this Code or
other provisions of law.
{}6083:
STORAGE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY ON PUBLIC OR
PRIVATE PROPERTY: It is unlawful and a public nuisance for any
person to store camp paraphernalia in the following areas:
A. Any public property; or
B. Outside a structure on any private property without the prior written consent of
the owner.
{}6084: USE OF VEHICLES FOR HUMAN HABITATION: It is unlawful
for any person to use any motor vehicle or Recreational Vehicle for human
habitation on or in any public or private street, alley, or parking area or any public or
privately owned off-street parking facility/area which is held open for common public
use.
{}6085: PENALTY FOR VIOLATION: Any violation of this Article shall
be deemed an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed three
hundred dollars ($300.00) for a first offense, and, for a second or subsequent offense, a
misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) or
imprisonment in the County jail for a period not to exceed three months or by both fine
and imprisonment.
SECTION 4
The provisions of this Article are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of
any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this Article, or the
invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the
validity of the remainder of this Article, or the validity of its application to other persons
or circumstances.
SECTION 5
Nothing in this Article shall limit or preclude the enforcement of other applicable laws.
SECTION 6
This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption and shall be published
as required by law.
Introduced by title only on
,200_ by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
Adopted on
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
,200_, by the following roll call vote:
ATTEST:
Mark Ashiku, Mayor
Marie Ulvila, City Clerk
Attachment #
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF UKIAH ADDING DIVISION 7, CHAPTER
1, ARTICLE 9, ENTITLED "AGGRESSIVE
PANHANDLING" TO THE UKIAH CITY CODE
The City Council of the City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordain as follows.
SECTION ONE. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS.
1. Within the last two years there has been a substantial increase in aggressive
panhandling in the City of Ukiah.
.
The number of people engaging in this activity has increased in parking lots,
at entrances to business establishments, such as grocery stores, and on streets
and major intersections and freeway on- and off-ramps in the City.
.
This activity when it occurs in such places interferes with the safety, privacy,
and security of the people who are approached for contributions of money,
goods or services.
.
Panhandling of operators or other occupants of motor vehicles on public
streets or freeway on- or off-ramps impedes traffic and endangers those who
may enter the roadway to negotiate or complete an exchange of money, goods
or services.
.
Panhandling in parking lots or within close proximity to the entrance to
financial institutions, supermarkets or retail stores can be intimidating or
threaten people using such facilities and undermine their sense of safety,
privacy and quality of life.
o
Reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on panhandling will avoid
these negative effects, and will not unreasonably restrict the expressive
activity of people engaging in aggressive panhandling.
SECTION TWO
Article 9, entitled, "Aggressive Panhandling," is hereby added to Chapter 1, Division 7 of
the Ukiah City Code to read as follows.
{}6090:
Definitions: For purposes of this Article the following words shall have
the following meaning, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
1. "Aggressive manner" shall mean:
A. Approaching or speaking to a person, or following a person before, during or
after panhandling, if that conduct is likely to cause a reasonable person to:
(i) fear bodily harm to oneself or to another, damage to or loss of property, or
(ii) otherwise be intimidated into giving money or other thing of value; or
if the conduct is intended to have these effects.
B. Approaching an occupied vehicle by entering into the roadway when traffic is
either stopped or moving, before, during or after panhandling;
C. Knocking on the window of, or physically reaching toward or into an occupied
vehicle before, during or after panhandling;
D. Continuing to solicit from a person after the person has given a negative
response to such panhandling;
E. Intentionally touching or causing physical contact with another person
without that person's consent in the course of panhandling;
F. Intentionally blocking or interfering with the safe or free passage of a
pedestrian or vehicle by any means, including causing a pedestrian or vehicle operator to
take evasive action to avoid physical contact before, during or after panhandling;
G. Using violent or threatening gestures toward a person before, during or after
panhandling;
H. Using profane, offensive or abusive language toward a person before, during
or after panhandling;
I. Panhandling while under the influence of alcohol or any illegal narcotic or
controlled substance; or,
J. Following a person while panhandling, with the intent of asking that person for
money, goods or other things of value.
2. "Panhandling" shall mean asking for money or objects of value, with the intention that
the money or object be transferred at that time, and at that place. Panhandling shall
include using the spoken, written, or printed word, bodily gestures, signs, or other means
with the purpose of obtaining an immediate donation of money or other thing of value or
soliciting the sale of goods or services.
3. "Public place" shall mean a place where a governmental entity has title or to which the
public or a substantial group of persons has access, including, but not limited to, any
street, highway, parking lot, plaza, transportation facility, shopping center, school, place
of amusement, park, or playground.
4. "Check cashing business" shall mean any person duly licensed by the Attorney General
to engage in the business of cashing checks, drafts or money orders for consideration
pursuant to Section 1789.31 of the California Civil Code.
5. "Automated teller machine" shall mean a device, linked to a financial institution's
account records, which is able to carry out transactions, including, but not limited to,
account transfers, deposits, cash withdrawals, balance inquiries, and mortgage and loan
payments.
6. "Automated teller machine facility" shall mean the area comprised of one or more
automatic teller machines, and any adjacent space that is made available to banking
customers after regular banking hours.
{}6091:
Unlawful Aggressive Panhandling: It is unlawful and a public nuisance
for any person to:
A. Panhandle in an aggressive manner in any public place.
B. Panhandle within twenty feet of any entrance or exit of any check cashing
business, supermarket or retail store, or within twenty feet of any automated teller
machine without the consent of the owner/agent of the property or another person
legally in possession of such facilities; provided, however, that when an
automated teller machine is located within an automated teller machine facility,
such distance shall be measured from the entrance or exit of the facility.
Co
Panhandle an operator or other occupant of a motor vehicle while such vehicle is
located on any street or highway on-ramp or off-ramp, for the purpose of
performing or offering to perform a service in connection with such vehicle or
otherwise soliciting donations or the sale of goods or services; provided, however,
that this paragraph shall not apply to services rendered in connection with
emergency repairs requested by the operator or passenger of such vehicle.
D. Panhandle in any public transportation vehicle, or in any public or private parking
lot or parking structure.
{}6092: PENALTY FOR VIOLATION: Any violation of this Article shall
be deemed an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed three
hundred dollars ($300.00) for a first offense, and, for a second or subsequent offense, a
misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) or
imprisonment in the County jail for a period not to exceed three months or by both fine
and imprisonment.
SECTION 3
The provisions of this Article are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of
any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this Article, or the
invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the
validity of the remainder of this Article, or the validity of its application to other persons
or circumstances.
SECTION 4
Nothing in this Article shall limit or preclude the enforcement of other applicable laws.
SECTION 5
This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption and shall be published
as required by law.
Introduced by title only on
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
,200_ by the following roll call vote:
Adopted on
,200_, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Mark Ashiku, Mayor
Made Ulvila, City Clerk
HOMELESS SERVICES PLANNING GROUP
A Mendocino County partnership dedicated to creating an effective continuum of outreach,
housing, and support services ;for the homeless
P.O. Box 839
Ukiah, CA 95482 ~TTA~
707-463-7968
December 29, 2004
Ukiah City Council
300 Seminary Ave
Ukiah, CA 95482
To Honorable Mayor Ashiku and City Council Members:
DEC 2 9 2004
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT
Subject: Proposed Ordinances for Aggressive Panhandling and Camping
The Mendocino County Homeless Services Planning Group (HSPG) wishes to extend its
support for approval of the proposed ordinances, addressing aggressive panhandling and
camping within the City of Ukiah.
The HSPG is the countywide, multi-agency partnership that acts as the policy making body,
responsible for coordinating and planning services, for the Mendocino County Continuum of
Care to end chronic homelessness. The HSPG formed an Ad-Hoc committee to work with the
City of Ukiah Police Department (UPD) for the specific purpose of addressing the increasing
problem of homeless transients. UPD Sergeant, Trent Taylor presented statistics highlighting
increased calls for service regarding aggressive panhandling and camping within the City of
Ukiah. At this time, the current ordinances addressing this type of behavior are outdated and do
not provide law enforcement with the leverage needed to stop this activity.
The HSPG has voted unanimously in support of the new proposed ordinances. The intent of
these ordinances is not to criminalize these behaviors, but to give officers the authority to
enforce laws to stop aggressive panhandling and camping. The HSPG is also in support of the
possibility that similar ordinances may be implemented on a countywide basis.
'~,~.
RespectfulJ~ ~
Kelsey Rivera, on behalf of the Mendocino County Homeless Services Planning Group
Housing Coordinator
cc: Alison Glassey
AGENDA
ITEM NO: (~ ~
MEETING DATE: January 5, 2005
SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE SALES TAX BALLOT MEASURE--
ASHIKU
Mayor Ashiku has asked for the Council's discussion regarding a possible sales tax
ballot measure.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss possibility of a future sales tax ballot measure and
provide direction to staff.
ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A
Citizens Advised:
Requested by:
Prepared by:
Coordinated with:
Attachments:
N/A
Mayor Ashiku
Candace Horsley, City Manager
N/A
None
Approved:
4:CAN/ASR.SalesTxBallotMeasDisc.010505