Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2005-10-19 Packet
*AMENDED 10/18/05 CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 October 19, 2005 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PRESENTATIONS/INTRODUCTION Presentations: a. Presentation: Regarding Emergency Preparedness - Chief Latipow b. Presentation: Discussion of 2005 Mendocino Homeless Census and Survey- Councilmember Rodin Introductions: c. Introduction of New Employee: David Willoughby, Building Inspector d. Introduction of New Employee: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of September 21,2005 1 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. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Approval of Disbursements for Month of September 2005 b. Adoption of Resolution Requesting 5% Matching Grant Funds from Caltrans in the Amount of $5,716 to Complete Storm Drain Study at Ukiah Airport and Authorize the City Manager to Sign Grant Documents c. Authorization for City Manager to Execute a Professional Service Agreement with Kimley-Horn & Associates for a Lump Sum Amount of $89,158 to Complete Comprehensive Study of $89,158 to Complete a Comprehensive Study of the Storm Drain System at Ukiah Regional Airport d. Reject All Bids for 12 Ton Dual Tandem Equipment Trailer for the Parks Division e. Award of Bid for the Roof Overlay at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center to Hemminger Construction in the Amount of $91,900 and Approve a Budget Amendment in the Amount of $16,900 Plus Up to 10% Contingency f. Adoption of Resolution Removing 226 Lineal Feet of On-Street Parking Along Clay Street Near Sun House Park g. Award of Bid for Purchase of Two Patrol Car Vehicles in the Amount of $57,699.38 to Ukiah Ford h. Approval of Notice of Completion for Street Striping 2005, Specification No. 05-06 i. Adoption of Resolution Removing On-Street Parking And Establishing A Bus Loading Zone At 548 Ford Street 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 8. PUBLIC HEARING (6:15 P.M.) a. Approval of A Minor Subdivision Map With a Subdivision Requirement Exception to Driveway Access Requirements for a Property At 432 McPeak Street Sm UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Introduction of Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Adding a New Article 7 Entitled "Tobacco Retailer's" to the Ukiah City Code b. Discussion of Proposed Revision to Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance and Possible Referral to Planning Commission c. Review and Approval of Staff Comment Letter Concerning the Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report 10. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Possible Direction on Mendocino Council of Governments Funding Commitment for the Willits and Hopland Bypass Projects b. Award of Bid for Mobile Digital Video Units to Global E Point in the Amount of $123,165 c. Consideration of Timer System for the Ukiah City Council Chambers 11. COUNCIL REPORTS 12. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORT '13. CLOSED SESSION Conference with Labor Negotiator~ Government Code 54957.6 Employee Negotiations: Miscellaneous Unit and *Fire Unit Negotiator: City Manager 14. ADJOURNMENT I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 24 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 18th day of October, 2005. E y: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. REVISED 1, CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CiViC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 October 19, 2005 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATIONS/INTRODUCTION Presentations: a. Presentation: Regarding Emergency Preparedness - Chief Latipow b. Presentation: Discussion of 2005 Mendocino Homeless Census and Survey- Councilmember Rodin Introductions: c. Introduction of New Employee: David Willoughby, Building Inspector d. Introduction of New Employee: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of September 21,2005 5. 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. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Approval of Disbursements for Month of September 2005 b. Adoption of Resolution Requesting 5% Matching Grant Funds from Caltrans in the Amount of $5,716 to Complete Storm Drain Study at Ukiah Airport and Authorize the City Manager to Sign Grant Documents c. Authorization for City Manager to Execute a Professional Service Agreement with Kimley-Horn & Associates for a Lump Sum Amount of $89,158 to Complete Comprehensive Study of $89,158 to Complete a Comprehensive Study of the Storm Drain System at Ukiah Regional Airport d. Reject All Bids for 12 Ton Dual Tandem Equipment Trailer for the Parks Division e. Award of Bid for the Roof Overlay at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center to Hemminger Construction in the Amount of $91,900 and Approve a Budget Amendment in the Amount of $16,900 Plus Up to 10% Contingency f. Adoption of Resolution Removing 226 Lineal Feet of On-Street Parking Along Clay Street Near Sun House Park g. Award of Bid for Purchase of Two Patrol Car Vehicles in the Amount of $57,699.38 to Ukiah Ford h. Approval of Notice of Completion for Street Striping 2005, Specification No. 05-06 i. Adoption of Resolution Removing On-Street Parking And Establishing A Bus Loading Zone At 548 Ford Street 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 8. PUBLIC HEARING (6:15 P.M.) a. Approval of A Minor Subdivision Map With a Subdivision Requirement Exception to Driveway Access Requirements for a Property At 432 McPeak Street 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Introduction of Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Adding a New Article 7 Entitled 'q'obacco Retailer's" to the Ukiah City Code b. Discussion of Proposed Revision to Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance and Possible Referral to Planning Commission c. Review and Approval of Staff Comment Letter Concerning the Mendocino County Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report 10, NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Possible Direction on Mendocino Council of Governments Funding Commitment for the Willits and Hopland Bypass Projects b. Award of Bid for Mobile Digital Video Units to Global E Point in the Amount of $123,165 c. Consideration of Timer System for the Ukiah City Council Chambers 11. 12. 13. COUNCIL REPORTS CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORT CLOSED SESSION Conference with Labor Ne.qotiator~ Government Code 54957.6 Employee Negotiations: Miscellaneous Unit Negotiator: City Manager 14. ADJOURNMENT The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. AGENDA ITEM NO: 3.a MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: PRESENTATION REGARDING EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS - CHIEF LATIPOW Fire Chief Kurt Latipow will present a brief overview on the status of emergency preparedness for the City of Ukiah. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and possible direction ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mayor Ashiku Candace Horsley, City Manager Kurt Latipow, Fire Chief Approved: Candace Horsley,' City Manager~. AGENDA ITEM NO: 3.b MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION OF 2005 MENDOCINO HOMELESS CENSUS AND SURVEY- COUNCILMEMBER RODIN The Mendocino County Department of Social Services has released a survey conducted by Applied Survey Research of Watsonville, California, of the Homeless population in our County. Sponsors for this project were the Cities of Ukiah, Willits, Fort Bragg, the County of Mendocino and the Community Development Commission. Councilmember Rodin has requested this matter be agendized for discussion on the results of survey. A copy of the census and survey will be available for public viewing on October 18, 2005, at the City's Administrative office. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Homeless Census and Survey Discussion and acceptance of the 2005 Mendocino ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Councilmember Rodin Candace Horsley, City Manager 2005 Mendocino County Homeless Census and Survey Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manager AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 3c. DATE: October 19, 2005 REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE- DAVID WILLOUGHBY, BUILDING INSPECTOR The City of Ukiah is pleased to introduce our new Building Inspector, David Willoughby, to the Council. David was hired as a fully certified Building Inspector on August 22, 2005 and has already become a valuable addition to the City's Planning and Building Department. Mr. Willoughby worked as a general contractor for fifteen years prior to accepting his first building inspection position with the City of Rocklin. He was a Building Inspector for the Mendocino County Building Department for the past seven years. Since joining our Department, David has initiated a number of changes related to the tracking of permit applications, permit filing, and inspection documentation. David and I are currently evaluating the Building Division procedures and discussing possible changes to improve public service. In addition to his familiarity of the Ukiah area and rapport with local contractors and developers, Mr. Willoughby's professionalism and approachability make him a tremendous asset to the City of Ukiah. Please join staff in welcoming David Willoughby to the City of Ukiah team. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council welcome Building Inspector David Willoughby to the City of Ukiah. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Planning & Community Development Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning & Community Development Coordinated with: Melody Harris, Personnel Director Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager~ 3:PER~,SRWilloughby AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 3. d DATE: October 19, 2005 REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE - SUE GOODRICK, RISK MANAGER/BUDGET OFFICER The City of Ukiah has been given the rare opportunity and distinct pleasure of "welcoming back" a valued, former City employee to fill the Risk Manager/Budget Officer position, following the recent retirement of Patsy Archibald. Sue Goodrick was previously employed by the City from 1990 - 1998 in various positions including Administrative Analyst, Public Works Administrator, and Compliance/Customer Relations Officer. In each of these positions Sue provided high quality administrative analysis, budget preparation, public relations, and oversight and coordination of internal department operations and external programs, such as recycling and landfill issues. Sue was hired by Mendocino County as a Deputy County Administrative Officer from 2000 - 2004. During this time she directed staff in budget development and management, and served as budget liaison to management staff and elected officials. Special assignments included CAO Liaison for departments within the Criminal Justice and Health and Human Services functional areas, county- wide Budget Coordinator, liaison to the Grand Jury, and Interim Department Head for the Information Services Department. Just prior to returning to the City of Ukiah, Sue Goodrick worked as an Administrative Analyst for the County of Sonoma and was responsible for working collaboratively with staff, department heads, outside agencies, and the Board of Supervisors for review and oversight of general government and internal support of departmental budgets, staffing, programs, systems, and procedures. The City of Ukiah is pleased to introduce Sue Goodrick as the Risk Manager/Budget Officer. Her multi-faceted administrative and budgetary skills, as well as her public agency experience will be a tremendous asset to the City. Please join City staff in welcoming Sue to our team. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Welcome Risk ManagedBudget Officer Sue Goodrick to the City of Ukiah. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Melody Harris, Personnel Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A Candace Horsley, City Mana~r 3:PER~SRGOODRICK ~ MEMO Agenda Item: 4a TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers City Clerk Marie Ulvila ~ ~ SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes: September 21, 2005 DATE: October 14, 2005 Every effort will be made to deliver the Draft Minutes of the September 21, 2005 City Council meeting to Council on Tuesday, October 18, 2005. Memos: Council minutes ITEM NO.: DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2005 Payments made during the month of September 2005, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedule of Bills, representing the five (5) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 64659-64719, 64720-64812, 64886-65003, 65006- 65108, 65209-65321 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: 65004 Payroll check numbers: 64558-64658, 64813-64885, 65119-65183 Payroll Manual check numbers: 65005, 65184 Void check numbers: 65109-65118, 65185-65208, 77030-77039 This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the month of September 2005. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: Kim Sechrest, Accounts Payable Specialist Coordinated with:Mike McCann, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: Report of Disbursements APPROVED: ~ (~F"~ ~~ ~-~n~ce Horsi'e~/, City Manager KRS:WORD/AGENDSEPT05 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER 2005 Demand Payments approved: Check No. 64659-64719, 64720-64812, 64886-65003, 65004, 65006-65108, 65209-65321 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $277,799.37 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 140 Park Development $870.16 141 Museum Grants $1,946.01 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant 150 Civic Center Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants $600.00 205 Sup Law Enforce Srv. Fd (SLESF) $7,618.04 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint $613.31 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund $37.00 250 Special Revenue Fund 260 Downtown Business Improvement 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 315 Airport Capital Improvement $15,847.26 330 Revenue Sharing Fund 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant 333 Comm. Development Block Grant 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 335 Community Dev. Comm. Fund 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 341 S.T.P. 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief 345 Off-System Roads Fund 410 Conference Center Fund $9,939.20 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 575 Garage $1,455.50 600 Airport $19,537.84 611 Sewer Construction Fund 612 City/District Sewer 620 Special Sewer Fund (Cap Imp) 640 San Dist Revolving Fund 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund 661 Sanitary Disposal Replace 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 670 U.S.W. Bill & Collect 678 Public Safety Dispatch 679 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) 695 Golf 696 Warehouse/Stores 697 Billing Enterprise Fund 698 Fixed Asset Fund 699 Special Projects Reserve 800 Electric 805 Street Lighting Fund 806 Public Benefits Charges 820 Water 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) 900 Special Deposit Trust 910 Worker's Comp. Fund 920 Liability Fund 940 Payroll Posting Fund 950 General Service (Accts Recv) 960 Community Redev. Agency 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. 975 Russian River Watershed Assoc 976 Mixing Zone Policy JPA PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 64558-64658 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 25252-25389 PAYROLL PERIOD 8114105-8127105 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 64813-64885 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 25390-25520 PAYROLL PERIOD 8128105-9110~05 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 65005, 65119-65183, 65184 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS: 25521-25652 PAYROLL PERIOD 9/11105-9124105 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 65109-65118, 65185-65208, 77030-77039 $9,914.53 $36,860.16 $228.02 $1,587.50 $21.981.07 $1660.21 $163 483.53 $27 690.86 $1 273.73 $12 236.82 $26 691.48 $8 977.28 $671 906.79 $12 240.29 $10,127.15 $220,971.06 $435,403.19 $28,297.21 $494.54 $399,764.33 $5,179.28 $145.23 $27,046.58 $7,227.00 $2,468,575.53 $60,008.88 $205,750.87 $512,820.30 $3,247,155.58 CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on City Clerk APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance m ~J · o > 0 O0 O~ 00000000 00000000 00000000 ~~~oo o 00000000 0000 °~° o o °g t~ t~ o o oo o o oo r-t ~---i ,-i o o ooo o oo 0 0 o o · ~l ~: o o ~ o ~ c~ c~ · ~ ° o o~oo~oo~ 0 O0 O0 00 0 0 0 C~ 0 0 · C~ o~ oo~ ooo ooo ~o~ ~0 ~ 0 000 000 0000 HHHHNHH rJ 0~ 00000000000000000 ~oo§oo~oo~oo~§oo 0 0 o o o o o o · 0 c~ c~ o o · o o · 0 c~ c~ c~ o ~ o oo~oo~o~oo§~oo~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000000 oo~~~°~°oo~ o~oo~ ~ 000000000~~0000 000000000~~~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 © ~ ~H ~ ~0 00000000000 00000000000 O0 O0 O0 ~ooo~oo~oo~oo§ooo~oo§~oo 000 O0 O0 O0 000 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000 0 0 ~0 O0 O0 O0 O~ ~0 ~000000000000000000000000 ~0~0~00000~000000000000 O~ 0 oo~oo~o o o~ o o o o ~q c~ o o ooo o o o o o ID{DC> o oo o o o o co co o o o o o o ~ {:2> 0 0 o~oo~ 000000~ ~ o~o o ~° oo ooo ~o o o. ~oo~ o°o o · ~ o u~ L~ 0 ~ 0 O~ o~ rJ . o o o o ooo oo o o o0o ooo oooooooooooooo oooooooooooooo ooo o o o o oo~ O0 0~ DD~ 0 0 0 ~3 0 O~ 0 ~ O~ F-I o~oo§~oo~o~o 0 O0 O0 O0 0 00000000000000 .............. 0 ~ ~0 O0 0 0~~00~0~ ..... ..... .... °~°°~°°~°~2° 0 O0 O0 ~0 ~ OOoO 000 · , · , ~-q r.-I ~--.I o~ o ~o om o00 0000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000 O000000000000000OO0000000000000000 00 O00 00 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 ~0 O~ ~ ~0 O0 ~ O~ O0 00000000000000000000~0~0~~00000 oo§ o o · 0 0 ooo ooo o ~o 0 0 H ~ ~000 o~ rj · o > 0 00000000000000000 0 00 0 oo 0 ~ 00 o 0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000 000 o~og~oo~oo ~oo ~ O0 ~ 00~0~ ~ ~ H~ 0 0 o o ~o CJ . o o o ooo 000 c> <2> 00000 00000 0 0 OOoO o o oo o · 0 oo o · , · 0 © o~oo 0 CJ OO U~ ~:o ~0 or~ H r~ i,-i > rJ · > o o rj . OO rj~ ~:o o o oo oooo oooo oooo o o o o o o o o o o o o 00 o o ~o <2> ~ o o ooo c~ o <2, ~ 0 0 ~° o o o · · 0 o u3 o o~ ,-t ~o ooo 0 0 0 ~oo~ 0 HHHH ~DDDD 0~ ~oo~ooo~o O0 000 0 oo~ ~ o ~~~g~oo oo o ~~o~o O0 O~ ~ 000000000 oo o oo~oo~oo 000000~0 oo~oo~oo O0 O0 O0 o n~ o~ O~ oo o o o o o o ~0 co o o o o 120 CO o o m~o 000000 000000 000000 0 0 0 ~ o 0~ o ~ 0 0 0~0 oo o oooooo ...... o ~/~ o O~ 0000 0 0 H ~ H H 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 0000000000 00 o'~ o~ o o o c~ o o o0 o o o oo ooooo ooooo oo ~ooo ooooo oo oo oooooooooo ~oo~oo~oo 00~00~0~ 00000000~ 0000000~ O0 0 o o o0 0 HNNHHHHHHNH o~o ~ O~ ~J · o o o o o o o o o ooo o oo o ooooooo ooooooo o oo oo ~ ~c~ ~ ~ ~:,~:~ ~:~:~ ~-~l~l~-~l~l~~l~-~l~ oooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooo ~~~~oooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooo o~o o o · 0 0 ~° ~0 ~oo~ oo§Ooo~Oo~oO~oo ~ oooo ~ o oo ~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~o ~,,~ ~ 0 ~ o~ ~o~ ~0 mm ~oooooo i O0 O0 000000000 000000000 000000000 00 00 0 00 0 00 O0 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 0 0 O0 000000 000000 000000 000000 0 0 o o ..1{ i.-.] ~ 0 r,./'} r~ 0 ~o~ oo ooo ~° 0000 0000 O0 O0 o OO r,_)m ~o o ~ 01-41-4 ~0000 000000 o o o o o o o ~0 co ~~~oo o o ~o~o ~ 00000000000 O~ 0 ~ 0 00 00 CO O0 o o 0 0 o~ o o o · o o o o o~ 00000000000 0000000000~ o~oo§~oo~o 0 O0 ~ ~ O0 888° o ~~ ~HO 0 OH ~]o o o o o 0 0 o o o o o o · · o o 00 co L~ L~ · {"' o ~0000 0 H rD · c> 0 0 o 0 E~ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ooo o o o o°OO~oOOO O0 O0 0000000 0000000 0000000 0 0 o o o o · o o · o o o o · 0 o o o o o o ~ · o o o o o o o · o o · 0 o o · 0 ~ o ~-I o o o ooooooo ~ oo ~ o o 0000~0 0000~ 0 ~U O~ {s} H 0~ o oo o ooooo o o ooo o oo o oo 0 0 oo ~°°~ o~o~ O~ OH ~0 ~ m 0 H 0 0000 rJ · O C~ oo§ oo ~§oo oo ~~ o oo o o~ O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OO O0 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOO o o O OOO 0 0 0 0 C> · 0 C~O C~ O~ ~:o 0 ~:H o~ ~o ~rj o ~~~~~:~oo oo ~HHHHHHHHHHHH~0 ~OOOOOOOOOOOO~U o L~ 0000 ~ ~ ~ ~ O0 o§oo§oo~oo§ooo~~ 0 O0 O0 O0 000 O0 00000000000000000000 ~oo~o~oo~oo~o~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00000000000000000000 O0 O0 O0 · . O0 ~O~o o~O'~oo o o oooo · . . . 120 ~ · . . . . . ,r-'q ~ 0'3 oo~o~oo~o§~oo§oo: O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000~ °~°~~°~°°2~°~°° ~0 ~0 O~ ~ O~ ~ 0~000~~00~00~ ~~~~00~00~ .................... O0 0 O0 0 O0 ~ O~ ~J~ ~:0 000 O~ H 0 o oo ooooooooooo oo oo oo o oooooooooo oooooooooo o o o o o oooooooooo o oo oo o ~ oooooooooo oo 0 0 oo oo oo o ooooooooooo ~ooooo~oo ooo~~o~ oo o c~ co 0 0 0 O~ ~00 00 00 00000 ooo oo~ 0 0 ooo 0 00 · °~ · · o 0 O0 m mo ~ ~ o ~ 0 O0 00 0 ° m~mmo ~oo~ oo O~ ¥ ~ ~0~ ~ HO 00 00 00 00 C~ C~ {2) 00 o~ 000 000 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 00 C~ O~ · 0 0 0 0 0 · 0 O~ ~ · 0 0 ~ ~00 · 00 C~ 0 H H O~ o ooo ~¢8~S~~S ~8~ ~ H 00000000 7~° o o ooo o o oo o o o oo oo o · ~o~o~o ~ooo~o~o o ooo · , ooo o · 0 o~ ,, ~~o ~0 ~ 8 ~D D H H 0 H o oo oo oo oooooooooo o o oooooooooo o o ooo o o o o o o ,--I oo ooooo 0 0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000 oo~oo~oo~ ~~oo~ o~ooo~o~ oo~~oo~ oo ~ oo ~oo o o o · o (~ c,,} o (:0 c0 o · ~000000~0~ H o O~ ~j · o > o o oo oo oo o oo oo ooooooooooooooooooooooooo oo oo oo oo oo oo ooo oo oo oo ooo oooooooooooooo ~°°~°~°°~°~~ ~ ~ O0 O0 O0 O0 oo~oo~oo~oo~ 00000000000000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000 ~o~o~~o~o~~~o~ O~ O~ O0 0 ~0 O0 00~ O0 O0 O0 O~ O0 ~ 00~~00000~00~~~ 000000000000~00~~0000 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000 oo~oo~oo~oo~ oo ~ oo ~o o~~oo~o~o oo§~oo8oo8~o~ O0 O0 O~ ~ ~0 O~ 0 00 0 O0 o,? 00 0 O0 0 C~I ~q 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 · · 000 mmmo ~0 o~oo 0 0 .w oo8 O~ ot~ o~ o~ ~J oo E~ 0 OH O~ ~0 ~E~ ~888 o~ rj . 0 0 O0 O0 oo~~ ~o~oo~~ ~ O0 O0 0000 0 000 77° L~ 000 O0 00 O00 00 000 o o ~o~oo O0 O0 0000000 ooo~oo 0~00~ 00000~0 o§§o 0 0 0000 0000 ~~0 ..... ~0000 0~~ 00,~ 000 000 · . . 000 . . . C~ ~ · 0 o o o ~ o o o o o o 0 0 o o o o o o · . o ~q · . o o o o · . o o o o ~o H~o o o o · o . o · o o o~ O~ o o o(;3o o o c3 (~ o o co ~0 cr~ [13 o o o [,~ o 0 0 O0 U ~J ~-I }--t o o o · o · o o , o o 0 o o o · o ~:~ o · O~ ~o 0 ~ ~ ~0 O~O ~ 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ~ t~ 0 0 OoO o o o U3 [13 {2:> ~ c0 o~ o o o · o · o 00 · c~ U o o ~D , r....t ooo · . . · . ~o~ ooo o~ . . o o O0 ~0 ~.q r-d o ~ o H O H O H CNi H ~ O~ O~ ~0 (.9O © ~0 H 0 ~°°~ 0000000000 0000000000 o o D'- [.... CD 0 ~° 0 O0 O0 0000000 0000 oo~ o oo o o o o oo t~ ~ 0 0 oo oo oo ~ooooo~o~ ~o~~~o o~ ~ oo O0 O~ U~ ~ U~H o~§ CD 0 0 0 · · 0 , o o o o o o · , o o · o ~ oo~ o oo o oooo ~oo~o~ O0 O0 0000000 0000000 OUO000~ oo~ o o o o o · · ~ oh · , co 120 I--t 0 0 H ° ~ o ~000 o ~0 0 r.z.1 rj H ~00 O0 O0 00 00 00 O0 O0 00 00 00 00 00 00 O0 O0 0000000 0000000 O0 O0 00000 ~0000 ~~° oo~ O~ 0 fJ . o o o o o o o o o o,?o, 000 t~ o o o o o o ~ [-.. L.N LA 0 0 0 0 0 oo~o °~ o 00 ~ o~ · 0 0 o oo o ~ o o o ~ · o o (N] o · , 0 o o o · o · o o 0 ~N 0 · ~,~ 0 ~.~ 0 ~ O~ Oc~ ~:o 0 0 0 L~ ~.D m 0 0 0 0 000 0 000 o0o O0 0 <2> oo~°°~oo 0 , 0 0 0 0 © 0 0 0 0 0 0 · 0 · · © 0 0 0 O~ ~ 0 O~ ~ u~ 0 0 °~ · , O0 0 000000000 .... o ~ d ~ i O~ 0 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH O0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 o~~ o~~o 0000000 0000000 0000000 00 o 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000 O0 00000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000 ~ 0 ~0 O0 ~ ~0 O0 0000000000~0~~00~000 o H H H H H O0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 0 00~0000 0 ~o~o ! 00~ ~ 0 ~0 i ~ ~ H~ ~~ o O~ O~ , . O0 · 0 ~o 0~0 O~ OO~ O~ ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH i i i H i i Hi 0 OO OO ~0000000 m ~ Om o o ~J . > 0 00 t~ t~ 00 ~0 ~ r~ 0'3 c~ ~ o 000000 000000 0 000 0 ~° 0')0303 0 0 O00 O0 0 O0 000000000 O0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 O0 00 00 0 00 00 I I o 0 0 O0 00000 000000 0 . . · 00 · 0 0 · 0 mmo oo~oo~oo O0 O0 O0 ooo 00 0 0 o~ ~oooooo 0 ~ ~0 O~ I-4 o~: r,j . > L~ u'~ O O OO OO O0 O0 O OOO O ~ ~ OO H~H~HHHHH oo~ SS OO OO OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO o o OO OO OOOOOOO O~OOOOO ~O~OOO OO~~ ~oo§~o~ OO ~ O ~ OO · O OOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOO ~00~0~ OOO~OO~O ......... ~oo~oo~o O0 O0 0 HH~HHHHHH O~ O ¢4r.J o~ f,,/'J H ~ o r.4o ~H © ~OOOOOOOOO HHHHHHHHH ~HHHHHHHHH ~ooooooooo ooooooooo o H O OO OOO [FI ti3 o~o o ooo o o o oo t~ t~ OOO <2> C> O O o o o ¢4 (~ {2o o°~° o oo o , , 0 , 0 o o o o ~o,~ ('4 , · , o ~-I ~ o o · 0 O~ z H ~ ~O~O O O~ ~ H O n~ O ~J O-~. ~O i O~ HHHH 0~~ ~OOOO ~OOOO H I-t ~ o cD 000000 ,< © oo o ~~oo ~°°~ 000000 '000000 r~ · 0 0 r~ , > ~J . > {:22> ~ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ~o o o ooo c~ o o 0 0 o o o o o o · 0 03 0'3 · · 00000 00000 ~oo~ oo oo~ ooo o~ o o o · , 0 0'3 · OH HO o~ 0 0 O0 o88o o oooo o o o oo o oo <2> ~ o o o o o o o o <2> C> C~ 1:2> ~o~ 0000 0000 0000 m~mm 0000 0 0 oo ooo 0,, O0 o8o o ~ o8 o o o · 0 o , 0 O~ O0 O~ 0 ~0000 H ~ > oo o o~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~~~ 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 O~ ~ O0 ~0 O0 0~ O0 ~ ~0 0 ~ O0 0~0~~0~~00~0~0~~0~0~0~~0~ 000000~00~0~000000000000~0~0000~000000~00~0 00000~00~0~0000000~00~0~00~00000~00~ OC~ O0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 i O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O0 0 0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 0 0 O0 O0 O0 0 ~~JJ~J~~~J~J~o oo oo oo o oo~~o~JJ~J~ oo o o o o oo O0 0 O0 O0 O0 0 0 O0 O0 o~~~~~~~~~~~~o oo oo oo oo oo oo oo o oo~ o o ~~~ o o o oo o o oo o o o o o o o 0 0 oo~o~oo~oo~oo~oo§oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~ O0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 .............0.. ..... .................... ....... . 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0~0~~000~~0~0~~000~~0~0~000~~0~ ~~o~~~§o~o~oojo~oo~o~~o~o~oo~o~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O~ O~ ~0 ~ ~0 ~ O~ ~ ......0.......... .... ............ ............... . ~0000000000~00~0~0000000000~00~0~00000000~000~0~0 ~0~0000000~00~0~0000000~00~0~00000~000~~ rjo'~ ,<o 0 r~ O0 O0 O0 O0 ~~~~~~000000000000 I.-I ~ r,j . ~~000000000000000000~~ 0000000000000000000000000000 0 0 O0 0 ~~°°~°~°°~°°~°~~~oo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00000000 o 0 000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000 oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~§oo§ ~oo~OOoooo 00000000 ~~o~o o ~: o~ ~~~~~~~~o oo oo oo o oo~oo~o~o °:°°:~° o o o o 0000 co c0 O0 H H ~ cC} 0000 0 0 O0 ~~~o o ~oo~oo O0 ~ ~H o ~oo o o ooo oooooo oooooo H~HHH~O ooo o o o ~ o I:z:: rJ 0 ~ O00HHH 0 R O~ O~ 0,< i ~D rj . ',4:) 0 0 LC} r....- o o o o 0 0 · ~'~ ['"'- ["-,. ~ ' . [lq ~0 oO 120 0 ~ ~ · · 0 Cq 0 0 0 H H H o o O~ o o o oo ~ ,...] © o~ o o 120 o o L~ l~ 0 0 0 0 120 O0 o o o IX) o o o o o o o o · 0 o~ o o o · °~ · 0 ~.o {2) , o o ~° · oo o oooo o oo °°°° ~ o 00 O~ ix: 0 ~ d ~ i ~0 i ~ © © 0 ~]c~ O0 rj · o > o o o o o 00 co 6o 00 o o i.D [13 oo o oooooo 0 0 H ~ ~O ~° °8~°°8 o oo oooooo o~oo~ OO~OOO O o~oo~ o oo o 0'/ 00 o ~o ,..., o C~ ~ 04 O ~ IJ~ 00 O ~O r-~ H ~ H O i . ::]::: O © H ~¢.., i O0 © O~ © o O~ H ~ 0 C~ C~ 0 0 0 0 o~ 0 0 o~oo~oo~oo 0 O0 O0 ~oo~o~oO~~o ~ oo o o o o o o o o · 0 · 00~ 0~0 ~rj Or~ E~H H ~ ¥ o o o 120 CO o o $$° cq 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0 0 oo ooooo 0 ~ 0 H r.,j . 0 > 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 0000000000000000000 0000000000000000000 0000000~0~0~~000 oooooo o ~ O0 O0 O0 O0 0 O0 O0 O0 000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000 0~~~~~0~0~00~0~ ~o~oo~oo~oo~o~~~o~oo ~0 ~ ~ O~ O~ ~ ~ ..0 ........ 0..00.00 oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~o~ ~0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O~ ~0000000000000000000 0 oo ooooooooooo o oo oo o o o O0 O0 O0 ooooooooooo ~oo~oo~oo~ © o o o · o o · · r-q ~ HMO -~ ~000 ~000 ~0000000000 o o o o o oooooo oooooo 000000 0 O0 0 0000000 0000000 ,-~ ,-~ 00 00 0'3 1:2> o o <2> C~ 0 0 oo oo oooooo ~~o ~ o o°~°°~~ o o o o © · 0 0 · rJH~ mo · , .; .; 0 ~J H <2> · 0 0 o HHHHHH O0 ~ 0 CD ~ 0 CD 0 0 ITEM NO. 6b DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION REQUESTING 5% MATCHING GRANT FUNDS FROM CALTRANS IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,716 TO COMPLETE STORM DRAIN STUDY AT UKIAH AIRPORT AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN GRANT DOCUMENTS SUMMARY: On August 3, 2005, the City Council accepted a grant from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the amount of $114,285. This grant will be used to complete a storm drain study for the airport, and crack seal the runway and taxiway. Under the grant rules, CALTRANS will provide 5% matching funds in any FAA grant. Now that the grant has been approved by the FAA and accepted by City Council, the City must apply for the 5% matching funds from the state. Staff is requesting the Council approve the attached resolution and authorize the City Manager to sign the grant documents. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Adopt Resolution and authorize the City Manager to sign grant documents. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine grant request is not appropriate and provide direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Paul Richey, Airport Manager Paul Richey, Airport Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager Draft Resolution Grant Application Candace Horsley, City Manager RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION, ACCEPTANCE OF AN ALLOCATION OF FUNDS AND EXECUTION OF A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, FOR A MATCHING GRANT FOR FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) APPROVED PROJECT UNDER AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (ALP) NO: 3-06 0066-04 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 21683.1 of the Public Utilities Code (PUC)the California Transportation Commission (CTC) is authorized to allocate funds for a portion of the local match for Airport Improvement Program (ALP) grants; and WHEREAS, the California Department of Transportation, acting on the authority of the California Transportation Commission, may provide five percent (5%) for that portion of the FAA grant which is for airport and aviation purposes; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah is submitting an application for matching funds for an FAA project to crack seal the runway and complete a storm drain study for the Ukiah Airport, which is included in the state's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), at Ukiah Regional Airport. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ukiah, State of California: . Authorizes filing the application for matching funds for the FAA Grant No. 3- 06-0066-04 project. . Authorizes accepting the allocation of funds for the project at the Ukiah Regional Airport. 3. Authorizes execution of the Grant Agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby authorize the City Manager to sign any documents required to apply for and accept these subject funds on behalf of the City of Ukiah. PASSED AND ADOPTED on this 19th day of August, 2005, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mark Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk, STATE OF CALIFORNIA - DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION State Matching Grant for F.~u~ Airport Improvement Program (ALP) - Application DOA-0012 (Rev. 8/02) Please print or type and complete Part I. Airport Information PUBLIC ENTITY City of Ukiah CONTACT NAME Paul Riehey AIRPORT NAME I PERMIT NO. Ukiah Airport I 23-3 TITLE Airport Manager BUSINESS ADDRESS 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, California 95482 BUSINESS PHONE 707 467-2855 Part II. Project Information TITLE OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT (as Shown on page one of the executed AlP grant): FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS $114,285. APPLICANT FUNDS $ 331. Reconstruct storm drainage system Phase 1(design only) Rehabilitate runway 15/33 and taxiways(Crack Seal and repairs) Note: If construction starts prior to the execution of the State Matching grant, the project will be ineligible for State reimbursement. i i i ii i ii i I i il I i ii i i i II i iii i i i i . STATE MATCHING FUNDS * $ 5,716. TOTAL COST OF PROJECT $120,300. * Maximum is 5% of IY~ Federal Funds Part III. Additional Required Documents Pursuant to Public Utilities Code § 21681-21684 and ,~,064 of the CAAP Regulations, please submit the following documents with this application: x Local government approval (reso/ut/on or minute order) authorizing this application. x FAA Grant (with FAA and sponsor signatures). Please do not submit FAA grant assurances. x Documentation evidencing full compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): 1. Copy of Notice of Exemption or Categorical Exemption Class # CCR 15321 (CEQA § 15300-15332) or 2. Copy of Notice of Determination (NOD) or provide the following information: ~ EIR (Title/Date) State Clearinghouse (SCH) # or ~] Negative Declaration (Title/Date) State Clearinghouse (SCH) # x Sketch or Layout Plan showing project location(s) and dimensions. [] Completed Certification of Airport Eligibility for CAAP funds (Form DOA-0007) if not submitted earlier for this fiscal year. [] Application for Amended Airport Permit (Form DOA-0103) or Airport Site Approval Permit (Form DOA-0100), if runway is new, to be realigned, shortened or lengthened. [] Additional documentation may be required if items in the FAA grant are not eligible for CAAP funding. Part IV. Authorization PRINT NAME TITLE Candace Horsley City Manager AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL'S SIGNATURE DATE SEND COMPLETED APPLICATION AND ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS TO: California Department of Transportation Division of Aeronautics - MS P.O. Box 942874 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 AGENDA ITEM NO: 6c MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION FOR CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES FOR A LUMP SUM AMOUNT of $89,158 TO COMPLETE A COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM AT THE UKIAH REGIONAL AIRPORT On August 3, 2005, the City Council accepted a grant in the amount of $114,285 from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to crack seal the runway and complete a storm drain study for the Airport. The amount of the grant for the crack sealing project is $26,125, with the remaining funds available for the storm drain study. Staff received four responses from engineering firms responding to the request for proposals for this project. Engineering and Airport Staff have reviewed the proposals based on FAA requirements, and recommend the selection of Kimley-Horn & Associates to perform the Airport storm drain study. Staff is requesting Council approval of this recommendation and authorization for the City Manager to execute a professional service agreement with Kimley-Horn & Associates for a lump sum of $89,158 to complete the Airport storm drain study. The professional service agreement will be funded through the FAA grant #3-08-0268-08, CalTrans grant match funds, and $331 from Airport operating funds. The CalTrans matching funds are contingent upon Council approval of Agenda Item 6b authorizing Staff to request matching funds from CalTrans. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Service Agreement with Kimley-Horn & Associates in the amount of $89,158 to complete a Storm Drain Study for the Ukiah Regional Airport. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine agreement is not appropriate and provide direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Paul Richey, Airport Manager Paul Richey, Airport Manager Diana Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer and Candace Horsley, City Manager FAA grant offer Draft agreement Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manager DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION · GRANT AGREEMENT Part 1 - Offer Date of Offer July 7, 2005 Uk/ah Municipal Airport/Planning Area Project No. 3-08-0268-08 Contract No. DTFA08-05-C-31590' Page 1 of 6 all as more particul arly described in the Project Application. TO: City of Uk~.'ah (herein cai:led the "Sponsor") FROM: The Unite~ States of America (acting through the Federal Aviation Administration, herein called the "FAA") WHEREAS, the SPonsor has submitted to the FAA a Project Application dated April 29, 2005, for a grant of Federal funds for a project!at or associated with the Uldah Municipal Airport/Planning Area which Project Application, as approved by the F,AA, is hereby incorporated herein and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, the tJAA. has approved a project for the Airport or Planning Area (herein called the "Project") consisting of the follOwing: Reconstruct storm drainage system-phase I (design only); rehabilitate Runway 15/33 and taxiways (~rack seal and repairs) AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES This Agreement, made and entered into this day of ,2005 ("Effective Date"), by and between City of Ukiah, California, a general law municipal corporation ("City") and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ("Consultant"), a North Carolina Corporation. RECITALS This Agreement is predicated on the following facts: a, City requires consulting services as described in the Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. bo Consultant represents that it has the qualifications, skills, and experience to provide these services, and is willing to provide them according to the terms of this Agreement. c. City and Consultant agree upon the Scope of Work attached hereto as Exhibit A. 1.0 2.0 3.0 TERMS OF AGREEMENT Description of Project. The Project is described in detail in the attached Scope of Work (Exhibit "A"). SCOPE OF SERVICES 2.1 As set forth in Exhibit "A". 2.2. Additional Services. Additional services, if any, shall only proceed upon written agreement between City and Consultant. The written Agreement shall be in the form of an Amendment to this Agreement. CONDUCT OF WORK 3.1 Time of Completion. Consultant shall commence performance of services as required by the Scope-of-Work upon receipt of a Notice to Proceed from City and shall complete such services within six months from receipt of the Notice to Proceed. ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 1 OF 8 4.0 COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES 5.0 6.0 4.1 Basis for Compensation. For the performance of the professional services of this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated in a lump-sum amount of $89,158.00, which shall include all charges for work within the Scope of Work, including labor and expenses. 4.2 Changes. Should changes in compensation be required because of changes to the Scope of Services of this Agreement, the parties shall agree in writing to any changes in compensation. "Changes to the Scope of Work" means different activities than those described in Exhibit "A" and not additional time to complete those activities than the parties anticipate on the date they entered this Agreement. 4.3 Sub-contractor Payment. The use of sub-consultants or other services to perform a portion of the work of this Agreement shall be approved by City prior to commencement of work. The cost of sub-consultants work shall be included within the lump-sum payment set forth in Section 4.1. 4.4 Terms of Payment. Payment to Consultant for services rendered in accordance with this contract shall be based upon submission of monthly invoices for the work satisfactorily performed prior to the date of invoice based on the percentage of the work satisfactorily completed. Invoices shall be accompanied by documentation sufficient to enable City to determine progress made. ASSURANCES OF CONSULTANT 5.1 Independent Contractor. Consultant is an independent contractor and is solely responsible for its acts or omissions. Consultant (including its agents, servants, and employees) is not City's agent, employee, or representative for any purpose. 5.2 Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibility is solely to City. Consultant has no interest and will not acquire any direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of the Agreement. Consultant shall not in the performance of this Agreement employ a person having such an interest. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION 6.1 Insurance Liability. Without limiting Consultant's obligations arising under Paragraph 6.2 Consultant shall not begin work under this Agreement until it procures and maintains for the duration of this Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with its performance under this Agreement. ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 2 OF 8 ^. Minimum Scope of Insurance Coverage shall be at least as broad as: o Insurance Services Office ("ISO") Commercial General Liability Coverage Form No. CG 00 01 11 85. , ISO Form No. CA 0001 (Ed. 1/78) covering Automobile Liability, Code 1 "any auto" or Code 8, 9 if no owned autos and endorsement CA 0025. , Worker's Compensation Insurance as. required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability Insurance. , Professional Liability Insurance covering damages which may result from negligent errors, omissions, or acts of professional negligence by Consultant. B. Minimum Limits of Insurance Consultant shall maintain limits no less than: o General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the prescribed per occurrence limit. , Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. . Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability: Worker's compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employers Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. , Professional Liability Coverage: $1,000,000 combined single limit per claim. If the coverage is an aggregate limit, the aggregate limit must apply separately to the work performed under this Agreement, or the aggregate limit shall be twice the per occurrence limit. C. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 3 OF 8 D. to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. Other Insurance Provisions The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverages ao The City, it officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects; liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the' Consultant, products and completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope-of-protection afforded to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. C. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. d, The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. 2. Worker's Compensation and Employers Liability Coverage The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from Consultant's performance of the work, pursuant to this Agreement. ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 4 OF 8 3. Professional Liability Coverage If written on a claims-made basis, the retroactivity date shall be the effective date of this Agreement. The policy period shall extend from that date to a date which is not less than three years from the satisfactory completion of the Scope of Work. 4. All Coverages Each Insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. E. Acceptability of Insurers Except for professional liability insurance, insurance is to be placed with insurers with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII and who are admitted insurers in the State of California. F. Verification of Coveraqe Consultant shall furnish the City with certificates of Insurance and with original Endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. The Certificates and Endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The Certificates and Endorsements are to be on forms provided or approved by the City. Where by statute, the City's Workers' Compensation - related forms cannot be used, equivalent forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be substituted. All Certificates and Endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before Consultant begins the work of this Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time. If Consultant fails to provide the coverages required herein, the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, to purchase any or all of them. In that event, the cost of insurance becomes part of the compensation due the contractor after notice to Consultant that City has paid the premium. G. Subcontractors If Consultant uses subcontractors or sub-consultants, it shall cover them under its policies or require them to separately comply with the insurance requirements set forth in this Paragraph 6.1. ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 5 OF 8 6.2 Indemnification. Notwithstanding the foregoing insurance 'requirements, and in addition thereto, Consultant shall indemnify, and hold harmless City officers, agents and employees from and against any and all claims, demands, liability, costs and expenses, including court costs and counsel fees, arising out of the injury to or death of any person or loss of or physical damage to any property to the extent resulting from any negligent or willfully wrongful act or omission committed by Consultant or it's officers, agents or employees while performing services under this Agreement. Consultant's liability for professional negligence shall be limited to $1,000,000. As to events which occur during Consultant's performance of this Agreement, City shall hold Consultant harmless from and defend Consultant against all claims, liability, damage, or loss arising out of any injury or death of any person or damage to or destruction of property attributable to the negligent or willfully wrongful act or omission of City or its officers and employees, where the injury, death or damage to the extent caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of City or City's employees. 7.0 CONTRACT PROVISIONS 7.1 Ownership of Work. City acknowledges the Consultant's documents, including electronic files, as instruments of professional service. Nevertheless, the final documents prepared under this Agreement shall become the property of the City upon completion of the service and payment in full of all monies due the COnsultant. Deliverables are identified in the Scope of Work, Exhibit "A." All documents furnished to Consultant by City are City's property and shall be returned upon completion of services. Consultant is permitted to retain copies of documents furnished by City. If City uses any documents produced by Consultant for any purpose other than as contemplated in the Scope of Work, Consultant shall have no liability arising from said use and City agrees to indemnify and defend Consultant against any claim made against Consultant that arises out of such use. 7.2 Governinq Law. Consultant shall comply with the laws and regulations of the United States, the State of California, and all local governments having jurisdiction over this Agreement. The interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement shall be governed by California law and any action arising under or in connection with this Agreement must be filed in a Court of competent jurisdiction in Mendocino County. 7.3 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including exhibits and executed Amendments set forth the entire understanding between the parties and supersedes any other statements by or agreements or understandings between the parties concerning the Scope of Work or the performance of services by Consultant for City. ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 6 OF 8 7.4 Severability. If any term of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in effect. 7.5 Modification. No modification of this Agreement is valid unless made with the agreement of both parties in writing. 7.6 Assignment. Consultant's services are considered unique and personal. Consultant shall not assign, transfer, or sub-contract its interest or obligation under all or any portion of this Agreement without City's prior written consent. 7.7 Waiver. No waiver of a breach of any covenant, term, or condition of this Agreement shall be a waiver of any other or subsequent breach of the same or any other covenant, term or condition or a waiver of the covenant, term or condition itself. 7.8 Termination. This Agreement may be either party on seven (7) days prior written notice to the other party. City shall pay the Consultant only for services performed and expenses incurred as of the effective termination date. In such event, as a condition to payment, Consultant shall provide to City all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs and reports prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed hereunder, subject to off-set for any direct or consequential damages City may incur as a result of Consultant's breach of contract. 7.9 Duplicate Originals. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate originals, each bearing the original signature of the parties. When so signed, each such document shall be admissible in administrative or judicial proceedings as proof of the terms of the Agreement between the parties. 8.0 Notice. Whenever notice is permitted or required under this Agreement, it shall be deemed given when personally served by personal delivery, fax or overnight courier, or when deposited in the United States mail with proper first class postage affixed thereto and addressed as follows: CITY OF UKIAH C/o City Manager 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 FAX: 707-463-6204 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Either party may change its official address by giving notice as provided in this paragraph. ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 7 OF 8 9.0 SIGNATURES IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement the Effective Date: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. BY: PRINT NAME: Date IRS IDN Number CITY OF UKIAH BY: CANDACE HORSLEY CITY MANAGER Date ATTEST MARIE ULVILA Date CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID J. RAPPORT CITY ATTORNEY, CITY OF UKIAH ASR ProfSvcsAgreementKimley-Horn - Attcmt 10-19 PAGE 8 OF 8 EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT "A" - INDIVIDUAL PROJECT ORDER NUMBER 1 UKIAH MUNICIPAL AIRPORT UKIAH, CALIFORNIA SCOPE OF WORK Agreement: Describing a specific agreement between the City of Ukiah (City) and Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. (KHA) in accordance with the terms of the master agreement for continuing professional services dated ., which is incorporated herein by reference. Proiect Description The intent of the Storm Drain Improvement Study is to evaluate the current storm drain system at the Ukiah Regional Airport and develop a maintenance, repair and improvement program that best serves the interests of the City, Airport and FAA. The drainage pipe system includes portions that were constructed over 64 years ago, to the more recent areas such as that supporting FedEx (approx 1993) and the improvements designed under Airport Improvement Program Grants 06 and 07. The current system incorporates over 2-miles of various size and type of pipe, inlets, culverts and gradingl The pipe ranges in size bom approximately 12 to 36-inches including, reinforced concrete, corrugated steel and other materials. Scope of Services TASK 1.0 Program-wide project management and administration services 1.1 Communications: KHA will maintain and update schedules and budgets throughout the project. KHA will communicate regularly with the city regarding the status of the project, schedule and budget as well as new and unforeseen issues. 1.2 Quality Control (QC): The status of any actions related to QC on this project will be communicated to the city on a regular basis. KHA anticipates, as a minimum, prior to delivery of major project information to the city, KHA will conduct reviews with senior staff for quality assurance purposes. Each deliverable will be reviewed for technical content, format, and presentation conclusions versus the goals of the project. The QC program may also include periodic calls to the city by senior KHA staff to discuss project progress and client satisfaction. 1.3 Airport Improvement Program (ALP) - Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Coordination: Project files and documentation: KHA will assist the city with maintaining Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 1 of 9 Scope of Work ~i~ Kim~¥-Hom 1.4 project files for Federal compliance with the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) procedures. KHA will also assist with preparing any required project documentation, including, - Requests for Reimbursement. - Meeting Minutes - Copies of Contracts and Other Correspondence - Grant Closeout Documentation. Coordination meetings: KHA will organize and participate in up to three meetings in California. Meetings may be with the city of Ukiah or the FAA in Burlingame, CA to discuss the projects and to communicate capital needs and project approach for upcoming AIP grant cycles. Contract Administration: KHA will prepare the scope of work, engineering fee and contract. This task involves preparing the scope of work and engineering fees, and negotiations for the fees. The scope of work will be based on the information exchanged during the pre-design meeting. The scope will be prepared and submitted to the City for processing. 1.5 Kick-Off Meeting: KHA will work with the city to organize and host a project kick off meeting to discuss the project, schedule, issues and approach. It is anticipated that airport users and stakeholders may be invited to the kick-off meeting. While notification, agenda and content of the meeting will be a joint effort between KHA and the City, the City will be responsible for disseminating information and notices to users and potential attendees. Deliverables for TASK 1.0 include: Project administrative items such project scope and fee, contracts, subconsultant agreements, project invoices, request for reimbursements (RFRs), project budgets, schedules, agendas, minutes of meetings, and progress reports. Task 2.0 2.1 Information and Data Collection Visual Inspection, Site Visit and Data Collection: This subtask includes a visual inspection and site visit to establish or revalidate, to the extent possible: a. System components and lengths b. Access Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 2 of 9 Scope of Work 2.2 2.3 c. Pipe size and materials Topographic Surveys Topographic ground field surveys will be gathered to establish locations and elevations of existing storm drain inverts, culverts, drainage basins and other drainage related structures. Elevations and dimensions of existing drainage facilities including pipe and manhole inverts, grate and inlet elevations, sewer manhole inverts, and cross sections at flow splits need to be obtained and verified. Assumptions Access to the airfield will be provided during typical working hours. Survey crews will be pulled back from the runway safety areas as air operations occur. This task assumes that the city has/will provide topographic survey data to 1 foot contour accuracy in both hard copy and electronic format (AutoCAD 2004). Deliverables A surveyor's report containing the final survey control and copies of field notes will be provided. A registered surveyor will seal the report. The field gathered data will also be provided in electronic format. Included with this deliverable will be a scaled, drainage system inventory map identifying the components of the airport system including size, material and other relevant information. CCTV Inspection: This subtask includes completing a CCTV inspection of the existing, on-airport, storm drain piping system. The subtask includes completing the inspection and producing digital files in .mpg format as well as paper records of pipe conditions. Assumptions: This task does not include any cleaning of the pipelines/drainage system that could preclude full inspection by CCTV ( i.e. if the pipes are too clogged by silt/dirt/debris/etc to allow the CCTV to pass or to properly assess the structural integrity of the pipe). If pipeline cleaning is required to complete the evaluation and make the appropriate alternative recommendations, KHA will work with the City to determine the most appropriate method, timing and contract mechanism for accomplishing the cleaning process (i.e. does the cleaning need to be done to complete the Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 3 of 9 Scope of Work 2.4 Task 3.0 3.1 evaluation and recommendations or should it simply be a part of the first phase of construction.) An option to have the City of Ukiah complete the CCTV inspection has been discussed. This issue will be re-visited prior to obtaining a subcontractor to complete the work. If it is decided that the City will complete this task, the scope and fee will be amended accordingly. Deliverables: Results of CCTV Investigation Watershed Analysis, Determining Storm Drain Capacities/Needs The Consultant will complete a cursory analysis of the local hydrology and contributing areas to make sure that new pipes are sized appropriately. At this time, we do not plan to use modeling software for this cursory analysis. Our approach to the analysis will be as follows: Obtain any available topographic mapping of the site and the contributing watersheds. Most likely this will be USGS topographical maps in addition to other studies and information the City may have available. · Characterize the ground cover to determine what the potential for runoff is (versus infiltration) fi~om the watershed. · Obtain rainfall intensity curves and "design storm" requirements using FAA guidance and publicly available data available through NOAA. We will use the data above as input to basic Rational Method equations (Q=CiA). If the contributing watershed area proves too large for the Rational Method to be applicable, we will use some other appropriate calculation method to determine the calculated runoff volume and intensity. Deliverables: Written Task Summary Results Storm Drain System Engineering and Analysis Hydraulic Analysis: The Consultant will perform hydraulic analysis of the existing system in sufficient detail to determine if existing storm drain facilities are inadequate or where new facilities are needed. - KHA will allocate runoff to drainage basins and assess the capacity of Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 4 of 9 Scope of Work 3.2 each drainage pipe. Deliverables: Written Task Summary Results Alternatives Analysis: This task includes identifying up to two potential/alternative storm drain systems for the airport including simply repairing the existing system in place. The end result will be one preferred alternative. Alternative methods to correct the deficiencies in the exiting system and additional systems identified, and discussed with City staff. Elements of each alternative plan may include alternative design concepts (e.g. incorporation storage to affect peak flows, non-structural alternatives, and storm drain versus open channels), alterative alignments, and alternative construction materials. Hydraulic analysis of these alternatives will be conducted at a level of detail sufficient to compare the alternatives and. select those that are the most practical and will be limited to that necessary to size the facilities. The development and evaluation of alternatives will consider items such as: · Potential benefits · Airport Operational Impacts (construction and ongoing maintenance) · Engineering feasibility · Approximate construction cost · Long term costs and maintenance · Potential for staged construction · Acceptability · Compatibility · Desired level of flood protection · Site accessibility, inconvenience and loss of productivity · Safety · Future Airport Development (New CDF Facilities, Development of Vacant Land, etc.) The evaluation will be submitted as a working document for decision making purposes and will be included as a chapter in the final report. The Consultant will seek comments from the City on the proposed alternatives, will meet, as needed, to discuss the comments and based on the review and comments, will recommend the preferred alternative. Deliverables for the Alternatives Formulation and Alternatives Analysis will include the following: - Existing system analysis Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 5 of 9 Scope of Work - Hydraulic analysis for the existing system and the preferred alternative - Exhibits of existing system, alternatives and preferred alternative Task 4.0 Final Report and Recommendations 4.1 Airport Drainage System Capital Improvement Plan The report will include the content of all of the previous work products. In addition, it will include sections on operation and maintenance and implementation of recommended improvements. The operation and maintenance plan will include guidelines on inspections and maintenance required for the facility. The implementation plan will list major projects at the Airport in the preferred priority and estimated year of construction. Cost to construct the recommended drainage improvements will be estimated for each year of construction. Opinions of Probable Construction Cost will be prepared in current year dollars and will be inflated for proposed future year construction. A draft outline of the report follows: Table of contents Executive summary Introduction Existing condition analysis Alternatives analysis Preferred alternative Environmental compliance Implementation plan Operation and maintenance Deliverables: Draft Report - 3 printed copies Final Report - 3 printed copies Additional Information and Understanding 6.0 Special Considerations Standards: formatting standards for all drawings, documents and reports will be defined by KHA using AutoCAD 2004 software for drawings, the Microsoft Word XP software for word processing and the Microsoft Excel software for quantities and estimating purposes. All work by the KHA team will conform to or be compatible with these conventions.' Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 6 of 9 Scope of Work 7.0 8.0 9.0 10. Owner's Responsibilities Provide copies of existing records in its possession. Provide consultant access to the project. Participate in meetings and planning activities. Participate in the development of the project plans and specifications. Assist the consultant in the developing or obtaining wage rates, DBE, legal, bonding and other provisions necess~y for the contract documents. Timely review and response. Approve pre-design studies, preliminary, final design and construction contract documents. Perform additional responsibilities as detailed in contract terms and conditions. Schedule It is anticipated that this scope of work will be completed within 4-months of KHA receiving a Notice to Proceed subsequent to the execution of this contract. Method of Compensation Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. will perform the services in this Individual Project Order for a lump sum fee of$ 89~158 The project will be billed monthly on a percent completed basis. Attached to the proposal is a derivation of cost associated with this project. Federal Requirements and Contract Clauses During the performance of this contract, the contractor, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "contractor") agrees as follows: 1. Compliance with Regulations. The contractor shall comply with the regulations relative to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs of the Department of Transportation (hereinafter, "DOT") Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21, as they may be amended from time to time, (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations), which are herein incorporated by reference and made a part of this contract. 2. Nondiscrimination. The contractor, with regard to the work performed by it during the contract, shall not discriminate on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment. The Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 7 of 9 Scope of Work contractor shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by section 21.5 of the Regulations, including employment practices when the contract covers a program set forth in Appendix B of the Regulations. 3. Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment. In all solicitations, either by competitive bidding or negotiation, made by the contractor for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the contractor of the contractor's obligations under this contract and the regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin. 4. Information and Reports. The contractor shall provide all information and reports required by the regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information and its facilities as may be determined by the sponsor or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such regulations, orders, and instructions. Where any information required of a contractor is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the contractor shall so certify to the sponsor or the FAA, as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. 5. Sanctions for Noncompliance. In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of this contract, the sponsor shall impose such contract sanctions as it or the FAA may determine to be appropriate, including but not limited to-- (a) withholding of payments to the contractor under the contract until the contractor complies, and/or (b) cancellation, termination, or suspension of the contract, in whole or in part. 6. Incorporation of Provisions. The contractor shall include the provisions of paragraphs 1 through 5 in every subcontract, including procurements of materials and leases of equipment, unless exempt by the regulations or directives issued pursuant thereto. The contractor shall take such action with respect to any subcontract or procurement as the sponsor or the FAA may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions including sanctions for noncompliance. Provided, however, that in the event a contractor becomes involved in, or is threatened with, litigation with a subcontractor or supplier as a result of such direction, the contractor may request the sponsor to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the sponsor Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 8 of 9 Scope of Work and, in addition, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interests of the United States. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE (DBE) ASSURANCES 1. Policy. It is the policy of the Department of Transportation (DOT) that disadvantaged business enterprises, as defined in 49 CFR Part 26, shall have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds under this agreement. Consequently, the DBE requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 apply to this agreement. 2. DBE Obligation. The contractor agrees to ensure that disadvantaged business enterprises, as defined in 49 CFR Part 26 have the maximum opportunity to participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts financed in whole or in part with Federal funds provided under this agreement. In this regard, all contractors shall take all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR Part 26 to ensure that disadvantaged business enterprises have the maximum opportunity to compete for and perform contracts. Contractors shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex in the award and performance of DOT-assisted contracts. Accepted: City of Ukiah Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Ukiah Airport Ukiah, CA Page 9 of 9 Scope of Work ITEM NO. 6d DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECT ALL BIDS FOR 12 TON DUAL TANDEM EQUIPMENT TRAILER FOR THE PARKS DIVISION Recently the Purchasing Department issued a request for bids for one (1) 12 ton dual tandem equipment trailer for the Parks Division. After the close of bid, staff determined that the specified equipment was not appropriate for the Division's needs. Specifically, the length of the trailer was not adequate for transporting the type and size of equipment needed at various park sites. Staff is reviewing the specifications and will reissue a bid request at a later date. · RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject all bids. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager, Mary Horger N/A APPROVED: ~, - : Candace Horsley, City Manager AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. ~ ~ DATE: October 19, 2005 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD BID FOR THE ROOF OVERLAY OF THE UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER TO HEMMINGER CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $91,900 AND APPROVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,900 PLUS UP TO 10% CONTINGENCY The Ukiah Valley Conference Center is experiencing an increasing number of major roof leaks throughout the facility. The quantity and severity of the leaks is beyond that of routine maintenance or partial fixes. A complete re-roofing of the facility is needed to avoid continued water damage to the interior and interruptions to rental/tenant operations. A thermoplastic single-ply overlay roofing system was identified as the best product to address the unique problems presented by the flat roof and large HVAC units of the Conference Center. In addition, the single-ply membrane is ideal for retrofit applications. Continued Page #2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Waive bid proposal irregularity and award bid to Hemminger Construction for the roof overlay of the Ukiah Valley Conference Center in the amount of $91,900. 2. Authorize budget amendment in the amount of $16,900 plus up to an additional 10% of the total project cost ($9,190) for contingency. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine that the waiving of the bid irregularity and/or award of bid to Hemminger Construction is inappropriate and award bid to Priority Roofing Solutions for the roof overlay of the Ukiah Valley Conference Center in the amount of $99,978 and approve a budget amendment in the amount of $24,978 plus up to an additional 10% of the total project cost ($9,998) for contingency. 2. Reject all bids for the roof overlay of the Ukiah Valley Conference Center and remand to staff with directions on how to proceed. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager and Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor 1. Bid Specifications 2. Hemminger Construction Proposal 3. Priority Roofing Solutions Proposal APPROVED:('-"~,~/~~ Can'fi-dace H~rsley, Cit~[,.Manager The product offered by Duro-Last, Inc. was used as a benchmark for the bid specifications, which is included as Attachment #1. Specifically, the Duro-Last white membrane is highly energy efficient, extremely durable, and easily installed without disruption to daily building operations. The membrane is leak-proof, resistant to chemicals, fire and high winds, and virtually maintenance-free. Furthermore, the product is backed by a 15-year manufacturer's warranty for materials and workmanship without monetary limitations. The City has previously used the Duro-Last membrane product on both the Civic Center and the Civic Center Annex. Earlier this year, the City Council rejected the first request for proposals (RFP) to overlay the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. At the time the bids were received, the lowest bidder was not certified by the membrane manufacture 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. After talking with the membrane manufacture, the City's Building Department, and roofing contractors, modifications to the bid specifications were identified that could be implemented to lower costs. In response to the City's second request for proposals for the roof overlay of the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, the City Clerk received four proposals by the deadline of 2:00 p.m. on October 12, 2005. The RFP was sent out and noticed according to the bidding requirements required by Section 1522 of the Ukiah Municipal Code. The Iow bid in the amount of $91,900 was submitted by Hemminger Construction and is included in this report as Attachment #2. Upon review of the proposals, the Purchasing Department noted an irregularity with Hemminger Construction's proposal. The RFP in the Notice to Bidders indicated that "the Prime contractor for the work herein shall possess a current, valid State of California C-39 (Roofing) Contractor's License." Hemminger Construction has a Class B General Building Contractor's License without any specialty licenses. However, the two subcontractors (HLR Roofing and Steve Roberts)listed in the proposal possess the C-39 license. The City Attorney doesn't believe that the irregularity represents a competitive advantage and the irregularity could be waived by Council. The City Attorney did note, however, that it was slightly unusual for a general contractor to submit a proposal where less than two specialties are required and subcontractors are scheduled to do the majority of the work. HLR Roofing and Steve Roberts have performed other roof work for the City in the past, including the installation of the Durolast product on the Civic Center Annex. The other three bids ranged in price from $99,978 to $179,872. Priority Roofing Solutions submitted the second lowest bid in the amount of $99,978 and their proposal is included as Attachment #3. No irregularities were noted with Priority Roofing Solutions' proposal. A complete list of bid results are identified in the following bid summary table. Bid Summaq Company Fidelity Roofing Co. Hemminger Construction Henris Roofing Company Priority Roofing Solutions ! Table Amount $112,990 $91,900 $179,872 $99,978 The decision to modify the specifications and re-bid the project resulted in a $15,975 savings. The City budgeted and encumbered an initial $75,000 in Fiscal Year 2004/2005 for the project. A budget amendment in the amount of $16,900 plus up to an additional 10% of the total project cost ($9,190) for contingencies is required for the Fiscal Year 2005/06 budget if the project is awarded to Hemminger Construction. The addition of a 10% contingency is standard practice for public work projects and may be especially necessary if damage to the roof sheathing is discovered under those portions of the existing roof that have to be removed. Staff recommends waiving the bid proposal irregularity previously identified and award the bid to Hemminger Construction for the roof overlay of the Ukiah Valley Conference Center in the amount of $91,900. Staff further requests Council authorization to make a budget amendment in the amount of $16,900 plus up to an additional 10% of the total project cost ($9,190) contingency. Attachment 707/465-6203 31 Fax 707/463-6204 September 30, 2005 Re: RFB for Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center Enclosed please find a Request for Bid for Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center. Your contact person for questions regarding the specifications is Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director, (707) 463-6221. To arrange an onsite walkthrough prior to bid submittal, please contact Maya Simerson at (707)463-6701. Proposals must be received by Marie Ulvila, the City Clerk, no later than 2:00 p.m., October 12, 2005 at the Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482. Bids shall be addressed to the City Clerk and shall be endorsed "Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center." Any bids received after that time will be considered non- responsive, and will be returned unopened. Thank you, PURCHASING DEPARTMENT Cc: Marie Ulvila Sage Sangiacomo CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA ROOF OVERLAY OF UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER SPECIFICATION NO. E25629 City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Bids Open: October 12, 2005 2:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time Office of City Clerk TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NOTICE TO BIDDERS .......................................................................................................................... i INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS ........................................................................................................... ii GENERAL CONDITIONS SECTION 1. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND GENERAL CONDITIONS 1-01. 1-02. 1-03. 1-04. 1-05. 1-06 1-07. 1-08. Examination of, Specifications and Site of Work ...................................................................... 1 Proposal ................................................................................................................................... 1 Withdrawal of Bids .................................................................................................................... 1 Public Opening of Bids .............................................................................................................. 1 Qualification of Bidders ............................................................................................................. 1 Bid Guaranty ............................................................................................................................. 2 Disqualification of Bidders ......................................................................................................... 2 Identification of Subcontractors ................................................................................................. 2 SECTION 2. AWARD AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT 2-01. Award of Contract ...................................................................................................................... 3 2-02. Execution of Contract ................................................................................................................ 3 SECTION 3. SCOPE AND INTENT OF CONTRACT 3-01. 3-02. 3-03. 3-04. 3-05. 3-06. 3-07. 3-08. Definitions .................................................................................................................................. 4 Effect of Inspection and Payments ........................................................................................... 5 Effect of Extension of Time ....................................................................................................... 5 Extra Work ................................................................................................................................. 5 Assignment of Contract ............................................................................................................. 5 Subcontractors .......................................................................................................................... 6 Interpretation of Specifications and Drawings .......................................................................... 6 Liability of City Officials ............................................................................................................. 6 SECTION 4. BONDS 4-01. 4-02. 4-03. 4-04. Faithful Performance Bond ...................................................................................................... 7 Material and Labor Bond ......................................................................................................... 7 Defective Material and Workmanship Bond ............................................................................ 7 Notification of Surety Companies ............................................................................................ 7 SECTION 5. INSURANCE 5-01. Required Insurance ................................................................................................................... 8 5-02. Builder's Risk Insurance ............................................................................................................ 9 SECTION 6. RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS OF CONTRACTOR 6-01. 6-02. 6-03. 6-04. 6-05. 6-06. 6-07. 6-08. 6-09. 6-10. 6-11. 6-12. 6-13. 6-14. 6-15. 6-1'6. 6-17. 6-18. 6-19. 6-20. 6-21. 6-22. 6-23. Legal Address of Contractor ................................................................................................... 10 Office of Contractor at Site ...................................................................................................... 10 Attention to Work ..................................................................................................................... 10 Liability of Contractor ............................................................................................................... 10 Protection of Persons and Property ........................................................................................ 11 Protection of City Against Patent Claims ................................................................................ 11 Protection of Contractor's Work Property ............................................................................... 12 Regulations and Permits ......................................................................................................... 12 Construction Utilities ................................................................................................................ 12 Approval of Contractor's Plans ................................................................................................ 12 Suggestions to the Contractor ................................................................................................ 12 Termination of Unsatisfactory Subcontracts ........................................................................... 12 Preservation of Stakes and Marks .......................................................................................... 12 Assistance to Architect ............................................................................................................ 13 Removal of Condemned Materials and Structures ................................................................. 13 Proof of Compliance with Contract ......................................................................................... 13 Errors and Omissions .............................................................................................................. 13 Cooperation ............................................................................................................................. 13 Right of Contractor to Stop Work ............................................................................................ 13 Hiring and Dismissal of Employees ........................................................................................ 14 Wage Rates ............................................................................................................................ 14 Cleaning up ............................................................................................................................. 15 Guaranty ................................................................................................................................. 15 SECTION 7. RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS OF CITY 7-01. 7-02. 7-03. 7-04. 7-05. 7-06. 7-07. 7-08. 7-09. Authority of Project Manager ................................................................................................... 1 7 Inspection ................................................................................................................................ 1 7 Retention of Imperfect Work ................................................................................................... 1 8 Changes in the Work .............................................................................................................. 18 Additional Drawings by City ..................................................................................................... 18 Additional and Emergency Protection ..................................................................................... 18 Suspension of Work ................................................................................................................ 1 9 Right of City to Terminate Contract ......................................................................................... 19 Use of Completed Portions ..................................................................................................... 1 9 SECTION 8. WORKMANSHIP, MATERIALS, AND EQUIPMENT 8-01. General Quality ..........................................................................................................' .............. 20 8-02. Quality in Absence of Detailed Specifications ........................................................................ 20 8-03. Materials and Equipment Specified by Name ......................................................................... 20 8-04. Source of Materials ................................................................................................................. 20 8-05. Storage of Materials ................................................................................................................ 20 SECTION 9. PROSECUTION OF WORK 9-01. Equipment and Methods ......................................................................................................... 21 9-02. Time of Completion ................................................................................................................. 21 9-03. Avoidable Delays ..................................................................................................................... 21 9-04 9-05 9-06 9-07 9-08 9-09 Unavoidable Delays ............................................................................................................. 21 Notice of Delays ...................................................................................................................... 21 Extension of Time .................................................................................................................... 22 Unfavorable Weather and Other Conditions ........................................................................... 22 Saturday, Sunday, Holiday, and Night Work ........................................................................... 22 Hours of Labor ......................................................................................................................... 22 SECTION 10. PAYMENT 10-01. 10-02. 10-03. 10-04. 10-05. 10-06. 10-07. 10-08. Certification by City ................................................................................................................ 23 Acceptance ........................................................................................................................... 23 Final Estimate and Payment ................................................................................................. 23 Delay of Payments ................................................................................................................ 23 Extra Work and Work Omitted .............................................................................................. 23 Compensation for Extra Work or Work Omitted ................................................................... 24 Compensation to the City for Extension of Time .................................................................. 24 Liquidated Damages for Delay .............................................................................................. 25 SECTION 11. MISCELLANEOUS 11-01. Notice ................................................................................................................................. 26 11-02. Computation of Time ............................................................................................................. 26 11-03. Litigation and Forum Selection ............................................................................................. 26 11-04. Waiver ................................................................................................................................. 26 11-05. Contact Person ...................................................................................................................... 26 CERTIFICATES AND DOCUMENTS PROPOSAL ..................................................................................................................................................... 27 FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICATION .................................................................................... 29 WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE ............................................................................................... 30 CERTIFICATE OF NONDISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT ............................ ; ......................................... 31 LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS .................................................................................................. 32 BIDDER'S BOND ............................................................................................................................................. 33 EXAMPLE BOND FORMS ............................................................................................................................... 34 DIRECTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF PERFORMANCE AND MATERIAL AND LABOR BOND ............... 38 DEFECTIVE MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP (MAINTENANCE) BOND ................................................... 39 CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE TO CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA .......................................................... 40 SPECIFICATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 44 ATTACHMENT "A": SAMPLE COPY OF AGREEMENT ................................................................................ 60 CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA NOTICE TO BIDDERS FOR ROOF OVERLAY OF UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER UKIAH, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that sealed bids for "Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center" in Ukiah, 200 South School Street, will be received at the Office of the City Clerk, Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California until 2:00 p.m., Pacific Daylight Time on October 12, 2005, at which time, or as soon thereafter as possible, they will be publicly opened and read. Bids shall be addressed to the City Clerk and shall be endorsed "Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center." Bids are required for the entire work described herein. No bid will be considered unless it is made on the forms furnished within the bid documents and is made in accordance with provisions of the specifications. Each bidder-must be licensed as required by law and possess a current City of Ukiah Business License. The City of Ukiah reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to determine which proposal is, in its opinion, the lowest responsible bid of a responsible bidder and that which it deems is in the best interest of the City to accept. The City also reserves the right to waive any information not material to cost or performance in any proposal or bid. Pursuant to provisions of Section 1770, including amendments thereof, of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, State of California, has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages for straight time, overtime Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays including employer payment for health and welfare, vacation, pension and similar purposes, copies of the General Prevailing Wage Determination (applicable to the work), for the locality in which the work is to be done are on file in the office of the City Clerk.. The Prime contractor for the work herein shall possess a current, valid State of California C-39 (Roofing) Contractor's License. Each bidder must also be certified by the roofing system manufacturer, AND PROVIDE PROOF OF SUCH CERTIFICATION WITH BID RESPONSE. By order of the City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, State of California. Dated: September 30, 2005 PUBLISH TWO TIMES: Ukiah Daily Journal 10/02/05 & 10/05/05 /s/ Marie Ulvila City Clerk INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS All work shall be in accordance with the specifications therefore adopted, to which special reference is hereby made. Each bidder must supply all the information required by the bid documents and specifications. Minority business enterprises will be afforded full opportunity to submit bids in response to this invitation and will not be discriminated against on the grounds of race, color, or national origin in consideration for an award of any contract entered into pursuant to this advertisement. Women will be afforded equal opportunity in all areas of employment. However, the employment of women shall not diminish the standards of requirements for the employment of minorities. Contractor shall be responsible for securing all necessary permits. No bidder shall withdraw his/her bid for a period of thirty (30) calendar days after the date set by the City for the opening thereof. The Contractor and all subcontractors shall possess a valid City of Ukiah Business License prior to the start of any work. The Contractor must be certified by the roofing system manufacturer, and provide proof of such certification with bid response. The Contractor shall furnish a project schedule to the Director of Community Services prior to the start of any work and shall start work as scheduled. The work is to be completed within forty-five (45) calendar days, commencing no later than October 19,2005. Examination of Site, Etc. Each bidder shall visit the site of the proposed work and fully acquaint himself/herself with local conditions, construction, and labor so that he/she may fully understand the facilities, difficulties, and restrictions attending the execution of the work under the Contract. Bidders shall thoroughly examine and be familiar with the Specifications. The failure of any bidder to receive or examine any form, instrument, addendum, or other document, or to visit the site and acquaint himself/herself with conditions there existing, shall in no way relieve the bidder from any obligation with respect to his/her proposal or to the contract. The bidder shall investigate to his/her satisfaction the conditions to be encountered, the character, quality, and quantities of work to be performed and materials to be furnished, and the requirements of the, specifications, and contract. It is mutually agreed that submission of a proposal shall be considered conclusive evidence that the bidder has made such examination and has accepted the project site as a safe workplace to perform his/her work. Prior to site examination, prospective bidders shall contact Maya Simerson with the Community Services Department, at (707) 463-6701, to schedule an appointment. Location of the Work: 200 South School Street GENERAL CONDITIONS SECTION 1, PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND GENERAL CONDITIONS 1-01. Examination of S_~29_~fications and Site of Work. The bidder shall examine carefully the proposal, specifications, con. tract forms, and the site of the work contemplated therefore. It will be assumed that the bidder has investigated to his/her satisfaction the conditions to be encountered, and the character, quality, and requirements of all specifications involved. 1-02. Proposals. Bids shall be made on the blank form prepared by the City. All bids shall give the prices bid, both in writing and in figures, and shall be signed by the bidder or his/her authorized representative, with his/her address. If the bid is made by an individual or partner, his/her name and the post office address of his/her business or partnerShip, along with his/her signature or the signature of one or more partners must be shown; if made by a corporation, the bid shall show the name of the state under the laws of which the corporation is chartered, the name of the corporation, and the title of the person who signs on behalf of the corporation. Each proposal shall be enclosed in a sealed envelope, endorsed as specified in the notice to bidders. Bidders are warned against making erasures or alterations of any kind, and proposals which contain omissions, erasures, conditions, alterations, additions not called for, additional proposals, or irregularities of any kind may be rejected. 1-03. Withdrawal of Bids. Any bid may be withdrawn at any time prior to the hour fixed in the notice to bidders for the openings of bids, provided that a request in writing, executed by the bidder or his/her duly authorized representative, for the withdrawal of such bid is filed with the City. The withdrawal of a bid will not prejudice the right of a bidder to file a new bid. 1-04. Public Openinq of Bids. Bids will be opened and read publicly at the time and place indicated in the notice to bidders. Bidders or their agents are invited to be present. 1-05. Qualification of Bidders. Each bidder must be certified by the roofing system manufacturer. Each bidder shall be licensed under the provisions of Chapter 9, Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, and shall be skilled and regularly engaged in the general class or type of work called for under this contract. A statement setting forth this experience and business standing shall be submitted by each bidder on the form provided herewith. It is the intention of the City to award a contract only to a bidder who furnishes satisfactory evidence that he/she has the requisite experience and ability, and that he/she has sufficient capital, facilities, and equipment to enable him to prosecute the work successfully and promptly within the time and in the manner agreed. In determining the degree of responsibility to be credited to a bidder, the City may weigh evidence that the bidder, or his/her personnel charged with the responsibility in the work, has performed satisfactorily other contracts of like nature and magnitude or comparable difficulty at similar rates of progress. 1-06. Bid Guaranty. Each bid must be accompanied by a certified check, cashier's check, or bidder's bond executed by an admitted surety insurer, payable to the order of the City of Ukiah in an amount not less than 10 percent of the bid as a 9uarantee that the bidder will enter into a contract, if awarded the work. 1-07. Disqualification of Bidders. More than one bid from an individual business, partnership, corporation, or association, under the same or different names, will not be considered. Reasonable grounds for believing that any bidder is financially interested in more than one bid for the work will cause the rejection of all bids in which he/she is so interested. If there is reason to believe that collusion exists among the bidders, none of the participants in such collusion will be considered. Bids in which the prices obviously are unbalanced may be rejected. 1-08. Identification of Subcontractors. All bids shall comply with the Subletting and Subcontracting Fair Practices Act (Government Code Section 4100 and following) and shall set forth: (a) The name and the location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor, or render service to the prime contractor in or about the construction of the work, or to a subcontractor licensed by the State of California who, under subcontract to the prime contractor, specially fabricates and installs a portion of the work according to detailed drawings contained in the plans and specifications, in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent of the prime contractor's total bid. (b) The portion of the work which will be done by each such subcontractor. The prime contractor shall list only one subcontractor for each such portion defined by the prime contractor in his/her bid. (c) Subcontractor's City of Ukiah Business License Number. General Condit~onsSection 2 SECTION 2. AWARD AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT 2-01. Award of Contract. Award of the contract, if it be awarded, will be to the lowest responsible bidder whose bid complies with all the specified requirements. The award, if made, will be made within thirty (30) days after opening of the bids. The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids. 2-02. Execution of Contract. The contract agreement shall be executed in duplicate by the successful bidder and returned, within fifteen (15) days after written notice that contract documents are ready for execution. After execution by the City; one copy shall be filed with the City, and one copy shall be returned to the Contractor. If the bidder fails or refuses to enter into a contract to do the work, then the bid guaranty accompanying the bid shall be forfeited to the City. General ConditionsSection 3 SECTION 3. SCOPE AND INTENT OF CONTRACT 3-01. Definitions. Whenever any word or expression defined in this section, or pronoun used in its stead, occurs in these contract documents, it shall have and is mutually understood to have the meaning given: a. "Architect" shall mean the City or its architectural representative appointed by the City including the firm's principal acting personally or through agents or assistants acting on the principal's behalf within the scope of duties defined by the City under contract. b. "City of Ukiah," or "City" shall mean the City of Ukiah, Mendocino County, California, acting through its City Council or any other board, body, official, or officials to which or to whom the power belonging to the City shall by virtue of any act or acts, hereafter pass or held to appertain. C, "Project Manager" shall mean the individual duly and officially appointed by the City to supervise and direct the work of construction under this contract, acting personally or through agents or assistants duly authorized by him, such agents or assistants acting within the scope of the particular duties entrusted to them. d. "Inspector" shall mean the engineering or technical inspector or inspectors duly authorized or appointed by the City, limited to the particular duties entrusted to him or them. e. "Contractor" shall mean the party entering into contract with the City for the performance of work covered by this contract, and his/her authorized agents or legal representatives. "Date of signing of contract", or words equivalent thereto, shall mean the date upon which this contract, with the signature of the Contractor affixed, together with the prescribed bonds, shall be or shall have been delivered to the City or its duly authorized representatives. go "Day" or "days", unless herein otherwise expressly defined, shall mean a calendar day or days of twenty-four hours each. h. The term "Work" means the construction and services required by the Contract Documents, whether completed or partially completed, and includes all other labor, materials, equipment and services provided or to be provided by the contractor to fulfill the Contractor's obligations. The Work may constitute the whole or a part of the Project. "Contract drawings" shall mean and include all drawings and specifications which may have been prepared by or in behalf of the City, as a basis for proposals, when duly signed and made a part of this contract by incorporation or reference, all drawings and specifications submitted in pursuance of the terms of this contract by General ConditionsSection 3 the successful bidder with his/her proposal and by the Contractor to the City if and when approved by the Architect, and all drawings and specifications submitted by the Architect to the Contractor during the progress of the work as provided for herein. The Contract Documents consist of the Agreement between Owner and Contractor (hereinafter the Agreement), Conditions of the Contract (General, Supplementary and other Conditions), Drawings, Specifications, addenda issued prior to execution of the Contract, other documents listed in the Agreement and Modifications issued after execution of the Contract. A Modification is (1) a written amendment to the Contract signed by both parties, (2) a Change Order, (3) a Construction Change Directive or (4) a written order for a minor change in the Work issued by the Architect. Unless specifically enumerated in the Agreement, the Contract Documents do not include other documents such as bidding requirements (advertisement or invitation to bid, Instructions to Bidders, sample forms, the contractor's bid or portions of addenda relating to bidding requirements). ko Where "as shown", "as indicated", "as detailed", or words of similar import are used, it shall be understood that reference to the drawings accompanying these specifications is made unless stated otherwise. Where "as directed", "as permitted", "approved" or words of similar import are used, it shall be understood that the direction, requirements, permission, approval, or acceptance of the Architect is intended unless stated otherwise. As used herein, "provide" shall be understood to mean "provide complete in place", that is, "furnish and install". "Install" shall mean the installation complete in place of an item of equipment furnished by the City. "Shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive. 3-02. Effect of Inspection and Payments. Neither the inspection by the Architect, Project Manager, or an inspector, nor any order, measurement, or approved modification, nor certificate or payment of money, nor acceptance of any part or whole of the work, nor any extension of time, nor any possession by the City or its agents, shall operate as a waiver of any provision of this contract or of any power reserved therein to the City, or of any right to damages thereunder; nor shall any breach of this contract be held to be a waiver of any subsequent breach. All remedies shall be construed as cumulative. 3-03. Effect of Extension of Time. The granting of any extension of time on account of delays which, in the judgement of the City, are avoidable delays shall in no way operate as a waiver on the part of the City of its rights under this contract. 3-04. Extra Work. If extra work orders are given in accordance with provisions of this contract, such work shall be considered a part hereof and shall be subject to each and all of its terms and requirements. 3-05. Assiqnment of Contract. The contract may be assigned or sublet in whole or in part only upon the written consent of the City acting through its authorized agents. General ConditionsSection 3 3-06. Subcontractors. The Contractor shall be as fully responsible for the acts and omissions of his/her subcontractors and of persons either directly or indirectly employed by them, as he/she is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by him. The Contractor shall cause appropriate provisions to be inserted in all subcontracts relative to the work to bind subcontractors to the terms of this Contract which are applicable to the work of subcontractors. Nothing contained in this contract shall be construed to create or shall be relied upon to create any contractual relationship between any subcontractor and the City, and no action may be brought by any subcontractor against the City based on this contract. 3-07. Interpretation of Contract Documents. The contract documents are intended to be explanatory of each other. Any work indicated in the contract drawings, if any, and not in the specifications, or vice versa, is to be executed as if indicated in both. In case of a discrepancy or conflict between the technical specifications and contract drawings the technical specifications shall govern. All work shown on the contract drawings, the dimensions of which are not figured, shall be referred to the Architect for interpretation. Should it appear that the work to be done, or any of the matters relative thereto, are not sufficiently detailed or explained in these contract documents, including the contract drawings, the Contractor shall apply to the Architect for such further explanations as may be necessary, and shall conform thereto as part of this contract, so far as may be consistent with the terms of this contract. In the event of any doubt or questions arising respecting the true meaning of the specifications, reference shall be made to the Architect, and his decision thereon shall be final. If the Contractor believes that a clarification or interpretation justifies an increase in the contract price or contract time, the Contractor must comply with the written notice provisions of sections 9-05 and 10-07. 3-08. Liability of City Officials. No City official, nor any authorized assistant of any of them, shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under this contract. General ConditionsSection 5 SECTION 4. BONDS 4-01. Faithful Performance Bond. As a part of the execution of this contract, the Contractor shall furnish a bond of a surety company or other securities providing equivalent protection such as cash, letter of credit, or certificates of deposit, acceptable to the City, conditioned upon the faithful performance of all covenants and stipulations under this contract. The amount of the bond shall be 100 percent of the total contract price, as this sum is set forth in the agreement. 4-02. Material and Labor Bond. As a part of the execution of this contract, the Contractor shall furnish a bond of a surety company or other securities providing equivalent protection such as cash, letter of credit or certificates of deposit acceptable to the City in a sum not less than 50 percent of the total contract prices, as this sum is set forth in the agreement for the payment in full of all persons, companies or corporation who perform labor upon or furnish materials to be used in the work under this contract, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 3247 through 3252 inclusive of the Civil Code of the State of California and any acts amendatory thereof. 4-03. Defective Material and Workmanship Bond. As a condition precedent to the completion of this contract, the Contractor shall furnish a bond of a surety company acceptable to the City in an amount not less than 5 percent (5%) of the final contract price, to hold good for a period of one (1) year after the completion and acceptance of the work, to protect the City against the results of defective materials, workmanship and equipment during that time. This bond shall be delivered to the City before the final payment under this contract will be made. 4-04. Notification of Surety Companies. The surety companies shall familiarize themselves with all of the conditions and provisions of this contract and they waive the right of special notification of any change or modification of this contract or of extension of time, or decreased or increased work, or of the cancellation of the contract, or of any other act or acts by the City or its authorized agents, under the terms of this contract; and failure to so notify the aforesaid surety companies of changes shall in no way relieve the surety companies of their obligation under this contract. General ConditionsSection 5 SECTION 5. INSURANCE 5-01. Required Insurance. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, his agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Coverage shall be at least as broad as: 1. Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability coverage (occurrence form CG 0001). 2. Insurance Services Office form number CA 001 (Ed. 1/87) covering Automobile Liability, code 1 (any auto). 3. Workers' Compensation insurance as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance. 4. Course of Construction insurance covering for "all risks" of loss. Minimum Limits of Insurance. Contractor shall maintain limits no less than: 1. General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 3. Employer's Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. 4. Course of Construction: Completed value of the project. Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Ukiah. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration and defense expenses. Other Insurance Provisions. The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as insureds with respect to liability arising out of automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by or on behalf of the contractor; and with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be General ConditionsSection 5 provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor's insurance, or as a separate owner's policy. , For any claims related to this project, the Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects to the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. . Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, retain receipt required, has been given to the City. Course of construction policies shall contain the following provisions: 1. The City shall be named as loss payee. 2. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation against the City. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating of not less than A:VlI. Verification of Coverage. Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. The endorsements should be on forms provided by the City or on other than the City's forms, provided those endorsements or policies conform to the requirements. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. The City reserve the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements effecting the coverage required by these specifications at any time. Subcontractors. Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein. 5-02. Builder's Risk Insurance. The Contractor shall take out and maintain during the life of the contract comprehensive builder's risk insurance providing coverage for the actual value of the work at any time. The insurance shall protect the City and the Contractor and shall assume liability for fire damage to the work and to appurtenances, all materials, supplies, equipment, construction plant, and temporary structures. The policy or certificate of insurance shall be delivered to the City before the first progress payment will be made. General ConditionsSection 5 SECTION 6. RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHTS OF CONTRACTOR 6-01. Leqal Address of Contractor. Both the address given in the proposal and the Contractor's office in the vicinity of the work are hereby designated as places to either of which drawings, samples, notices, letters, or other articles or communications to the Contractor may be mailed or delivered. The delivery at either of these places of any such thing from the City or its agents to the Contractor shall be deemed sufficient service thereof upon the Contractor, and the date of such service shall be the date of such delivery. The address named in the proposal may be changed at any time by notice in writing from the Contractor to the City. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to preclude or render inoperative the service of any drawing, sample, notice, letter, or other article or communication to or upon the Contractor personally. 6-02. Office of Contractor at Site. During the performance of this contract, the Contractor shall maintain a suitable office at the site of the work which shall be the headquarters of a representative authorized to receive drawings, and any such thing given to the said representatives or delivered at the Contractor's office at the site of work in his/her absence shall be deemed to have been given to the Contractor. 6-03. Attention to Work. The Contractor shall give his/her personal attention to and shall supervise the work to the end that it shall be prosecuted faithfully, and when he/she is not personally present on the work, he/she shall at all reasonable times be represented by a competent superir~tendent or foreman who shall receive and obey all instructions or orders given under this contract, and who shall have full authority to execute the same and to supply materials, tools and labor without delay, and who shall be the legal representative of the Contractor. The Contractor shall be liable for the faithful observance of any instructions delivered to him or to his/her authorized representative. 6-04. Liability of Contractor. The Contractor shall do all of the work and furnish all labor, materials, tools, and appliances, except as otherwise herein expressly stipulated, necessary or proper for performing and completing the work herein required in the manner and within the time herein specified. The mention of any specific duty or liability imposed upon the Contractor shall not be construed as a limitation or restriction of any general liability or duty imposed upon the Contractor by this contract, said reference to any specific duty or liability being made herein merely for the purpose of explanation. The right of general supervision by the City shall not make the Contractor an agent of the City, and the liability of the Contractor for all damages to persons or to public or private property, arising from the Contractor's execution of the work, shall not be lessened because of such general supervision. Until the completion and final acceptance by the City of all the work under and implied by this contract, the work shall be under the Contractor's responsible care and charge. The Contractor shall rebuild, repair, restore, and make good all injuries, damages, re-erections, and repairs, occasioned or rendered necessary by causes of any nature whatsoever, excepting only acts of God and none other, to all or any portions of the work, except as otherwise stipulated. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, directors, agents, and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses, and expenses including but not limited to attorneys' fees, costs of suit, expert witness fees and expenses, and fees and costs of any necessary private investigators arising out of or resulting from ]0 General ConditionsSection 5 the performance of the work, provided that any such claim, damage, loss or expense (1) is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death, or to injury to or destruction of tangible property, other than the work itself, including the loss of use resulting therefrom, and (2) is caused in whole or in part by any act or omission of the Contractor, any subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder, or by the negligence or omission of a party indemnified herein. In any and all claims against the City or any of its agents or employees by any employee of the Contractor, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, the indemnification obligation shall not be limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable by or for the Contractor or any subcontractor under workers' or workmen's compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefit acts. The obligation to indemnify shall extend to and include acts of the indemnified party which may be negligent or omissions which may cause negligence. The City shall have the right to estimate the amount of such damage and to cause the City to pay the same, and the amount so paid for such damage shall be deducted from the money due the Contractor under this contract; or the whole or so much of the money due or to become due the Contractor under this contract as may be considered necessary by the City, shall be retained by the City until such suits or claims for damages shall have been settled or otherwise disposed of, and satisfactory evidence to that effect furnished to the City. 6-05. Protection of Persons and Property. The Contractor shall furnish such watchman, guards, fences, warning signs, walks, and lights as shall be necessary, and shall take all other necessary precautions to prevent damage or injury to persons or property. All property line fences in the vicinity of the work shall be protected by the Contractor, and, if they are injured or destroyed, they and any other property injured by the Contractor, his/her employees or agents, shall be restored to a condition as good as when he/she entered upon the work. 6-06. Protection of City A.qainst Patent Claims. All fees, royaliies, or claims for any patented invention, article, or method that may be used upon or in any manner connected with the work under this contract shall be included in the price bid for the work, and the Contractor and his/her sureties shall protect and hold the City, together with all of its officers, agents, servants, and employees, harmless against any and all demands made for such fees or claims brought or made on account of this contract. The Contractor shall, if requested by the Architect, furnish acceptable proof of a proper release from all such fees or classes. Should the Contractor, his/her agents, servants, or employees, or any of them be enjoined from furnishing or using any invention, article, material, or appliance supplied or required to be supplied or used under this contract, the Contractor shall promptly substitute other articles, materials, or appliance, in lieu thereof, of equal efficiency, quality, finish, suitability, and market value and satisfactory in all respects to the Architect. Or, in the event the Architect elects, in lieu of such substitution, to have supplied, and to retain and use, any such invention, article, material, or appliance, as may by this contract be required to be supplied, the Contractor shall pay such royalties and secure such valid licenses as may be requisite and necessary for the City, its officers, agents, servants, and employees, or any of them to use such invention, article, material, or appliance General ConditionsSection 5 without being disturbed or in any way interfered with by any proceeding in law or equity on account thereof. Should the Contractor neglect or refuse to make the substitution promptly, or to pay such royalties and secure such licenses as may be necessary, then in that event the Architect shall have the right to make such substitution, or the City may pay such royalties and secure such licenses and charge the cost thereof against any money due to the Contractor from the City or recover the amount thereof from him and his/her sureties notwithstanding final payment under this contract may have been made. 6-07. Protection of Contractor's Work Property. The Contractor shall protect his/her work, supplies, and materials from damage due to the nature of the work, the action of the elements, trespassers, or any cause whatsoever under his/her control, until the completion and acceptance of the work. Neither the City nor any of its agents assumes any responsibility for collecting indemnity from any person or persons causing damage to the work of the Contractor. 6-08. Regulations and Permits. The Contractor shall give all notices, and comply with all laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations bearing on the conduct of the work as drawn and specified. If the Contractor observes that the drawings and specifications are at variance therewith, he/she shall promptly notify the Architect in writing, and any necessary changes shall be adjusted as provided in the contract for changes in the work. The contractor and all subcontractors shall secure and maintain a City of Ukiah Business License. 6-09. Construction Utilities. The Contractor shall be responsible for providing for and in behalf of his/her work under this contract, all necessary utilities, such as special connection to water supply, telephones, power lines, fences, roads, watchmen, suitable storage places, etc. 6-10. Approval of Contractor's Plans. The approval by the Architect of any drawing or any method of work proposed by the Contractor in accordance with paragraph 8-06 shall not relieve the Contractor of any of his/her responsibility for his/her errors therein and shall not be regarded as any assumption of risk or liability by the City or any officer or employee thereof, and the Contractor shall have no claim under this contract on account of the failure or partial failure or inefficiency of any plan or method so approved. Such approval shall be considered to mean merely that the Architect has no objection to the Contractor's using, upon his/her own full responsibility, the plan or method approved. 6-11. Suggestions to the Contractor. Any plan or method of work suggested by the Architect or Project Manager to the Contractor, but not specified or required, if adopted or followed by the Contractor in whole or in part, shall be used at the risk and responsibility of the Contractor; and the Architect and the City shall assume no responsibility thereof. 6-12. Termination of Unsatisfactory Subcontracts. Should any subcontractor fail to perform in a satisfactory manner the work undertaken by him, such subcontract shall be terminated immediately by the Contractor upon notice from the Architect. 6-13. Preservation of Stakes and Marks. The Contractor shall carefully preserve bench marks, reference points, and stakes, and in case of willful or careless destruction he/she will be charged with the resulting expense of replacement and shall be responsible for any mistakes which may be caused by their unnecessary loss or disturbance. ]2 General ConditionsSection 5 6-14. Assistance to Architect. At the request of the Architect or Project Manager, the Contractor shall provide personnel from his/her force and tools, stakes and other materials to assist the Architect temporarily in making measurements and surveys and in establishing temporary or permanent reference marks. Payment for such materials and assistance will be made as provided for under the caption "Extra Work," provided, however, that the cost of setting stakes and marks carelessly lost or destroyed by the Contractor's employees will be assessed to the Contractor. 6-15. Removal of Condemned Materials and Structures. The Contractor shall remove from the site of the work, without delay, all rejected and condemned materials or structures of any kind brought to or incorporated in the work, and upon his/her failure to do so, or to make satisfactory progress in so doing, within forty-eight (48) hours after the service of a written notice from the Project Manager, the condemned material or work' may be removed by the City and the cost of such removal shall be taken out of the money which may be due or may become due the Contractor on account of or by virtue of this contract. No such rejected or condemned material shall again be offered for use by the Contractor under this Contract. 6-16. Proof of Compliance with Contract. In order that the Project Manager may determine whether the Contractor has complied with the requirements of this contract, not readily enforceable through inspection and tests of the work and materials, the Contractor shall, at any time when requested, submit to the Project Manager properly authenticated documents or other satisfactory proofs as to his/her compliance with such requirements. 6-17. Errors and Omissions. If the Contractor, in the course of the work, finds any errors or omissions in plans or instructions, or if he/she finds any discrepancy between the plans and the physical conditions of the locality, he/she shall immediately inform the Architect, in writing, and the Architect shall promptly verify the same. Any work done after such discovery, until authorized, will be done at the Contractor's risk. 6-18. Cooperation. The Contractor shall cooperate with all other contractors who may be performing work in behalf of the City and workmen who may be employed by the City on any work in the vicinity of the work to be done under this contract with the work of such contractors or workmen. He/She shall make good promptly, at his/her own expense, any injury or damage that may be sustained by other contractors or employees of the City at his/her hands. Any difference or conflict which may arise between the Contractor and other contractors, or between the contractor and workmen of the City in regard to their work shall be adjusted and determined by the Project Manager. If the work of the Contractor is delayed because of any acts or omissions of any other contractor or of the City, the Contractor shall on that account have no claim against the City other than for an extension of time. 6-19. Ri.qht of Contractor to Stop Work. Under the following conditions the Contractor shall have the right, if he/she so desires, to stop the work and terminate the contract upon ten (10) days written notice to the Project Manager, and recover from the City payment for all work actually performed and for all satisfactory materials actually delivered to the site of the work for permanent incorporation therein, all as may be shown by the estimate of the Architect: General ConditionsSection 5 (1) If the work is stopped under an order of any court or other competent public authority for a period of time of three (3) months through no act or fault of the Contractor or of anyone employed by him. (2) If the Project Manager or Architect fails to issue the monthly certificate for payment in accordance with the terms of this contract. (3) If the City fails to pay the Contractor within sixty (60) days after it shall have become due, as provided by the terms of this contract, any sum certified by the Architect or Project Manager or awarded by the City. All provided that if such action to terminate the contract be not instituted by the Contractor within ten (1 0) days after the alleged existence of such condition and if written notice of such action be not at that time delivered to the City and the Project Manager, then such right shall lapse until another occasion arises according to this section. 6-20. Hirinq and Dismissal of Employees. The Contractor shall employ only such foremen, mechanics, and laborers as are competent and skilled in their respective lines of work, and whenever the Project Manager shall notify the Contractor that any person on the work is, in his/her opinion, incompetent, unfaithful, intemperate, or disorderly, or refuses to carry out the provisions of this contract, or uses threatening or abusive language to any person on the work representing the City, or is otherwise unsatisfactory, such person shall be discharged immediately from the work and shall not be reemployed upon it except with the consent of the Project Manager. 6-21. Waqe Rates. Contractor shall pay all mechanics and laborers employed or working upon the site of the work unconditionally and without subsequent deductions or rebate on any account the full amounts due at the time of payment at wage rates not less than those contained in the applicable prevailing wage determination, regardless of any contractual relationship which may be alleged to exist between the Contractor and subcontractors and such laborers and mechanics. . Contractor shall comply with the California Labor Code Section 1775. In accordance with said Section 1775, Contractor shall forfeit as a penalty to the City, $25.00 for each calendar day or portion thereof, for each workman paid less than the stipulated prevailing rates for such work or craft in which such workman is employed for any work done under the Contract by him or by any subcontractor under him in violation of the provisions of the Labor Code, and in particular, Labor Code Sections 1770 to 1780, inclusive. In addition to said penalty and pursuant to Section 1775, the difference between such stipulated prevailing wage rates and the amount paid to each workman for each calendar day or portion thereof for which each workman was paid less than the stipulated prevailing wage rate shall be paid to each workman by the Contractor. , Pursuant to the provision of Section 1770 of the Labor Code of the State of California, City has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages (which rate includes employer payments for health and welfare, vacation, pension and similar purposes) applicable to the work to be done, for straight time work. The holiday wage rate listed shall be applicable to 14 General ConditionsSection 5 all holidays recognized in the collective bargaining agreement of the particular craft, classification or type of workmen concerned. Copies of the General Prevailing Wage Determination are on file in the office of the Redevelopment Secretary, and are available to the Contractor on request. The Contractor shall post the wage determination at the site of work in a prominent place where it can easily be seen by the workers. , City will not recognize any claim for additional compensation because the Contractor has paid any rate in excess of the prevailing wage rate obtained from the City Clerk. The possibility of wage increases is one of the elements to be considered by the Contractor in determining his/her bid, and will not in any circumstances be considered as the basis for a claim against the City. 5. Travel and Subsistence Payments. Contractor shall make travel and subsistence payments to each workman needed to execute the work in accordance with the requirements in Section 1773.8 of the Labor Code (Chapter 880, Statutes of 1968). 6. Apprentices. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1 777.5 (Chapter 1411, Statutes of 1968) and 1777.6 of the California Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of said sections in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. 6-22. Cleaninq Up. The Contractor shall not allow the site of the work or surrounding area to become littered with trash and waste material or debris resulting from the work, but shall maintain the same in a neat and orderly condition throughout the construction period. The Project Manager shall have the right to determine what is or is not waste material, debris, or rubbish and the place and manner of disposal. On or before the completion of the work, the Contractor shall without charge therefor carefully clean out all pits, pipes, chambers or conduits and shall tear down and remove all temporary structures built by him and shall remove rubbish of all kind from any of the grounds which he/she has occupied and leave them in first class condition. 6-23. Guaranty. All work shall be guarantied for a period of one year from the date of acceptance by the City. The Contractor shall promptly make all needed repairs arising out of defective materials, workmanship and equipment. The City is hereby authorized to make such repairs if within ten days after the mailing of a notice in writing to the Contractor or his/her agent, the Contractor shall neglect to make or undertake with due diligence the aforesaid repairs, provided, however, that in case of an emergency where, in the General ConditionsSection 5 opinion of the City delay would cause serious loss or damage, repairs may be made without notice being sent to the Contractor, and the Contractor shall pay the costs thereof. General Cond~tionsSection 7 SECTION 7. RESPONSIBILITIES AND RIGHT OF CITY 7-01. Authority of the Project Manager ("Mana.qer"). All work done under this contract shall be done in a workmanlike manner and shall be performed to the reasonable satisfaction of the Project Manager, if one is present, who shall have general supervision of all work included hereunder. To prevent disputes and litigation, the Manager (1) shall in all cases determine the amount, quality, acceptability, and fitness of the several kinds of work and materials which are to be paid for under this contract, (2) shall decide all questions relative to the true construction, meaning, and intent of the specifications and drawings, (3) shall decide all questions which may arise relative to the classifications and measurements of quantities and materials and the fulfillment of this contract, and (4) shall have the power to reject or condemn all work or material which does not conform to the terms of this contract. His/Her estimate and decision in all matters shall be a condition precedent to an appeal for arbitration, or the right of the Contractor to receive, demand, or claim any money or other compensation under this agreement and a condition precedent to any liability on the part of the City to the Contractor on account of this contract. Whenever the Manager shall be unable to act, in consequence of absence or other cause,-then such representative as the Manager or the City shall designate, shall perform any and all of the duties and be vested with any or all of the powers herein given to the Manager. 7-02. Inspection. The City will provide personnel for the inspection of the work. The Manager and his/her representatives shall at all times have access to the work whenever it is in preparation or progress, and the Contractor shall provide proper facilities for such access and for inspection. If the specifications, the Manager's or Architect's instruction, laws, ordinances, or any public authority require any work to be specially tested or approved, the Contractor shall give the Manager timely notice of its readiness for inspection, and, if the inspection is by an authority other than the Manager, of the date fixed for such inspection. Inspections by the Manager shall be promptly made at the source of supply where practicable. If any work shall be covered up without approval or consent of the Architect, it must, if required by the Manager, be uncovered for examination and properly restored at the Contractor's expense. Re-examination of any work may be ordered by the Manager or Architect, and, if so ordered, the work must be uncovered by the Contractor. If such work is found to be in accordance with the contract documents, the City shall pay the cost of re-examination and replacement. If such work is not in accordance with the contract documents, the Contractor shall pay such cost. Properly authorized and accredited inspectors shall be considered to be the representatives of the City limited to the duties and powers entrusted to them. It will be their duty to inspect materials and workmanship of those portions of the work to which they are assigned, either individually or collectively, under instructions of the Manager or Architect and to report any and all deviations from the drawings, specifications, and other contract provisions which may come to their notice. Any inspector may be considered to have the right to order the work entrusted to his/her supervision stopped, if in his/her opinion such action becomes necessary, until the Architect is notified and has determined and ordered that the work may proceed in due fulfillment of all contract requirements. l? General ConditionsSection 7 7-03. Retention of Imperfect Work. If any portiOn of the work done or material furnished under this contract shall prove defective and not in accordance with the specifications and drawings, and if the imperfection in the same shall not be of sufficient magnitude or importance to make the work dangeroUs or undesirable, the Manager or Architect shall have the right and authority to retain such work instead of requiring the imperfect work to be removed and reconstructed, but he/she shall make such deductions therefor in the payments due or to become due the Contractor as may be just and reasonable. 7-04. Chanqes in the Work. The Architect shall have the right, in writing, to order additions to, omissions from, or corrections, alterations, and modifications in the line, grade, form, dimensions, plan, or kind or amount of work or materials herein contemplated, or any part thereof, either before or after the beginning of construction. However, the arithmetical sum of the cost to the City of additions and subtractions from the work under this contract shall not exceed five (5%) percent of the contract price, unless based upon a supplementary agreement to be made therefor. The order of such additions, omissions, corrections, alterations, and modifications shall be in writing and signed by the Architect, and, in order, shall then be binding upon the Contractor. The Contractor shall proceed with the work as changed and the value of such change shall be determined as provided for in section 10-07 of these specifications. Such alterations shall in no way affect, vitiate, or make void this contract or any part thereof, except that which is necessarily affected by such alterations and is clearly the evident intention of the parties to this contract. 7-05. Additional Drawin.qs by City. The drawings made a part of this contract at the time of its execution are intended to be fairly comprehensive and to indicate in more or less detail the scope of the work. In addition to these drawings, however, the Architect shall furnish such additional drawings from time to time during the progress of the work as are necessary to make clear or to define in greater detail the intent of the specifications and the contract drawings, and the Contractor shall make his/her work conform to all such drawings. 7-06. Additional and Emer.qency Protection. Whenever, in the opinion of the Manager or Architect, the Contractor has not taken sufficient precautions for the safety of the public or the protection of the works to be constructed under this contract, or of adjacent structures or property which may be injured by the processes of construCtion on account of such neglect, and whenever, in the opinion of the Manager or Architect, an emergency shall arise and immediate action shall be considered necessary in order to protect public or private, personal or property interest, then, and in that event, the Manager or Architect, with or without notice to the Contractor may provide suitable protection to the said interests by causing such work to be done and such material to be furnished as shall provide such protection as the Manager or Architect may consider necessary and adequate. The cost and expense of such work and material so furnished shall be borne by the Contractor, and, if the same shall not be paid on presentation of the bills therefor, then such costs shall be deducted from any amounts due or to become due the Contractor. The performance of such emergency work under the direction of the Manager or Architect shall in no way relieve the Contractor from any damages which may occur during or after such precaution has been taken by the Manager or Architect. Ger, eral ConditionsSection 7 7-07. Suspension of Work. The City may at any time suspend the work or any part thereof by giving five (5) days written notice to the Contractor. The work shall be resumed by the Contractor within ten (10) days after the date fixed in the written notice from the City to the Contractor so to do. The City shall reimburse the Contractor for expenses incurred by the Contractor in connection with the work under this contract as a result of such suspension. If the work, or any part thereof, shall be stopped by the notice in writing aforesaid, and if the City does not give notice in writing to the Contractor to resume work at a date within ten (10) days of the date fixed in the written notice to suspend, then the Contractor may abandon that portion of the work so suspended, and he/she will be entitled to the estimates and payments for all work done on the portions so abandoned, if any, plus five percent (5%) of the value of the work so abandoned, to compensate for loss of overhead, plant expense, and anticipated profit. 7-08. Riqht of City to Terminate Contract. If the Contractor should be adjudged bankrupt, or if he/she should make a general assignment for the benefit of his/her creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed on account of his/her insolvency, or if he/she should persistently or repeatedly refuse or should fail, except in cases for which extension of time is provided, to supply enough properly skilled workmen or proper materials, or if he/she should fail to make prompt payments to subcontractors or for material or labor, or persistently disregard laws, ordinances or the instructions of the Manager or Architect, or otherwise be guilty of a substantial violation of any provision of the contract, then the City, upon the certificate of the Manager or Architect that sufficient cause exists to justify such action, may, without prejudice to any other right or remedy, and after giving the Contractor seven (7) days written notice, terminate the employment of the Contractor and take possession of the premises and of all materials, tools, and appliances and finish the work by whatever method the City may deem expedient. In such case, the Contractor shall not be entitled to receive any further payment until the work is finished. If the unpaid balance of the contract price shall exceed the expense of finishing the work, including compensation for additional managerial and administrative services, such excess shall be paid to the Contractor. If such expense shall exceed such unpaid balance, the Contractor shall pay the difference to the City. The expense incurred by the City as herein provided, and the damage incurred through the Contractor's default, shall be certified by the Architect. 7-09. Use of Completed Portions. The City shall have the right to take possession of and use any completed or partially completed portions of the work, notwithstanding the time for completing the entire work or such portions which may not have expired; but such taking possession and using shall not be deemed an acceptance of any work not completed in accordance with the contract documents. If such prior use increases the cost of or delays the work, the Contractor shall be entitled to such extra compensation, or extension of time or both, as the Architect may determine. General ConditionsSection 7 SECTION 8. WORKMANSHIP, MATERIALS, AND EQUIPMENT 8-01. General Quality. Materials and equipment shall be new and of a quality equal to that specified or approved. Work shall be done and completed in a thorough and workmanlike manner. 8-02. Quality in Absence of Detailed Specifications. Whenever under this contract it is provided that the Contractor shall furnish materials or manufactured articles or shall do work for which no detailed specifications are set forth, the materials or manufactured articles shall be of the best grade in quality and workmanship obtainable in the market from firms of established good reputation, or, if not ordinarily carried in stock, shall conform to the usual standards for first-class materials or articles of the kind required, with due consideration of the use to which they are to be put. In general, the work performed shall be in full conformity and harmony with the intent to secure the best standard of construction and equipment of the work as a whole or in part. 8-03. Materials and Equipment Specified by Name. Whenever any material or equipment is indicated or specified by patent or proprietary name or by the name of the manufacturer, such specification shall be considered as used for the purpose of describing the material or equipment desired and shall be considered as followed by the words "or approved equal". The Contractor may offer any material or equipment which shall be equal in every respect to that specified, provided that written approval first is obtained from the City. 8-04. Source of Materials. Price, fitness, and quality being equal, preference shall be given by the Contractor for supplies grown, manufactured, or produced in the State of California and, next, for such products partially produced in this State in accordance with Government Code Section 4332. 8-05. Storage of Materials. Materials shall be so stored to ensure the preservation of their quality and fitness for the work. They shall be so located and disposed that prompt and proper inspection thereof may be made. When requested by the City, sample or test specimens of the materials to be used or offered for use in connection with the work shall be prepared at the expense of the Contractor and furnished by him in such quantities and sizes as may be required for proper examination and tests, with all freight charges prepaid and with information as to their sources. All samples shall be submitted before shipment and in ample time to permit the making of proper tests, analyses, or examination before the time at which it is desired to incorporate the material into the work. All tests of materials furnished by the Contractor shall be made by the Project Manager. Samples shall be secured and tested whenever necessary to determine the quality of the material. 2O General ConditionsSection 8 SECTION 9. PROSECUTION OF WORK 9-01. Equipment and Methods. The work under this contract shall be prosecuted with all materials, tools, machinery, apparatus, and labor and by such methods as are necessary to the complete execution of everything described, shown, or reasonably implied. If at any time before the beginning or during the progress of the work, any part df the Contractor's equipment, or any of his/her methods of execution of the work, appear to the City to be unsafe, inefficient, or inadequate to insure the required quality or the rate of progress of the work, he/she may order the Contractor to increase or improve his/her facilities or methods, and the Contractor shall comply promptly with such orders; but, neither compliance with such orders nor failure of the City to issue such orders shall relieve the Contractor from his/her obligation to secure the degree of safety, the quality of the work, and the rate of progress required of the Contractor. The Contractor alone shall be responsible for the safety, adequacy, and efficiency of his/her equipment and methods. 9-02. Time of Completion. The Contractor shall promptly begin the work under this contract and all portions of the project made the subject of this contract shall be begun and so prosecuted that they shall be completed and ready for full use in the rate in the time set forth in the agreements form bound herewith. 9-03. Avoidable Delays. Avoidable delays in the prosecution or completion of the work shall include all delays which might have been avoided by the exercise of care, prudence, foresight, and diligence on the pad of the Contractor. The City will consider as avoidable delays'within the meaning of this contract (1) delays in the prosecution of pads of the work, which may in themselves be unavoidable, but do not necessarily prevent or delay the prosecution of other parts of the work nor the completion of the whole work within the time herein specified, (2) reasonable loss of time resulting from the necessity of submitting plans to the City for approval and from the making of surveys, measurements, and inspections, and (3) such interruptions as may occur in the prosecution of the work on account of the reasonable interference of other contractors employed by the City which do not necessarily prevent the completion of the whole work within the time herein specified. 9~04. Unavoidable Delays. Unavoidable Delays in the prosecution or completion of the work under this contract shall include all delays which may result, through cause beyond the control of the Contractor and which he/she could not have provided against by the exercise of care, prudence, foresight and diligence. Orders issued by the City changing the amount of work to be done, the quantity of material to be furnished or the manner in which the work is to be prosecuted, and unforeseen delays in the completion of the work of other contractors under contract with the City will be considered unavoidable delays, so far as they necessarily interfere with the Contractor's completion of the whole of the work. Delays due to normally adverse weather conditions will not be regarded as unavoidable delays. However, truly abnormal amounts of rainfall, temperatures or other weather conditions for the location of the work and time of year may be considered as unavoidable delays if those conditions necessarily cause a delay in the completion of the work, as determined by the City. 9-05. Notice of Delays. Whenever the Contractor foresees any delay in the prosecution of the work, and, in any event, immediately upon the occurrence of any delay which the contractor regards as an unavoidable delay, he/she shall notify the City in writing of the probability of the occurrence of such delay and its cause, in order that the City may take immediate steps to prevent, if possible, the 2! General ConditionsSection 8 occurrence or continuance of the delay, or, if this cannot be done, may determine whether the delay is to be considered avoidable or unavoidable, how long it continues, and to what extent the prosecution and completion of the work are to be delayed thereby. 9-06. Extension of Time. Should any delays occur which the City may consider unavoidable, as herein defined, the Contractor shall, pursuant to his/her application, be allowed an extension of time proportional to said delay or delays, beyond the time herein set forth, in which to complete this contract; and liquidated damages for delay shall not be charged against the Contractor by the City during an extension of time granted because of unavoidable delays. Any claim by Contractor for a time extension based on unavoidable delays shall be based on written notice delivered to the City within 15 days of the occurrence of the event giving rise to the claim. Failure to file said written notice within the time specified shall constitute a waiver of said claim. Notice of the full extent of the claim and all supporting data must be delivered to the City within 45 days of the occurrence unless the City specifies in writing a longer period. 9-07. Unfavorable Weather and Other Conditions. During unfavorable weather and other conditions, the Contractor shall pursue only such portions of the work as shall not be damaged thereby. No portions of the work whose satisfactory quality or efficiency will be affected by any unfavorable conditions shall be constructed while these conditions remain, unless, by special means or precautions approved by the City, the Contractor shall be able to overcome them. 9-08. Saturday, Sunday, Holiday, and Ni.qht Work. No work shall be done between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., nor on Saturdays, Sundays or legal holidays except such work as is necessary for the proper care and protection of work already performed, or except in cases of absolute necessity, and in any case only with the permission of the City. It is understood, however, that night work may be established as a regular procedure by the Contractor if he/she first obtains the written permission of the City, and that such permission may be revoked at any time by the City if the Contractor fails to maintain at night adequate force and equipment for reasonable prosecution and to justify inspection of the work. 9-09. Hours of Labor. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work, and the Contractor or any subcontractor shall not require or permit more than eight hours of labor in a day from any person employed by him in the performance of the work under this contract, unless paying compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day at not less than 1 1/2 times the basic rate of pay. The Contractor shall forfeit to the City, as a penalty, the sum of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for each workman employed in the execution of the contract by him or by any subcontractor, for each calendar day during which such laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight hours in violation of the provisions of Sections 1810 to 1816, inclusive, (Article 3, Chapter 1, Part 7, Division 2) of the Labor Code of the State of California and any acts amendatory thereof. 22 General ConditionsSection 9 SECTION 10. PAYMENT 10-01. Certification by the City. All payments under this contract shall be made upon the presentation that the work covered by the payments has been done and the payments thereof are due in accordance with this contract. 10-02. Acceptance. The Contractor shall notify the City, in writing, of the completion of the work, whereupon the City shall promptly, by personal inspection, satisfy themselves as to the actual completion of the work in accordance with the terms of the contract. 10-03. Final Estimate and Payment. The City shall, as soon as practicable after the final acceptance of the work done under this contract, make a final estimate of the amount of work done thereunder and the value thereof. Such final estimate shall be signed by the Architect or Project Manager, and after approval, the City shall pay or cause to be paid to the Contractor, in the manner provided by law, the entire sum so found to be due hereunder, after deducting therefrom all previous payments and such other lawful amounts as the terms of this contract prescribe. In no case will final payment be made in less than thirty-five (35) days after the acceptance of the work by the City. 10-04. Delay of Payments. Should any payment due the Contractor or any estimate be delayed, through fault of the City beyond the time stipulated, such delay shall not constitute a breach of contract or be the basis for a claim for damages, but the City shall pay the Contractor interest on the amount of the payment at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum for the period of such delay. The terms for which interest will be paid shall be reckoned, in the case of any monthly or progress payment, from the twentieth (20th) day of the month next succeeding the month in which the work was performed to the date of payment of the estimate; and in the case of the final estimate, from the forty-fifth (45th) day after acceptance to the date of payment of the final estimate. 10-05. Extra Work and Work Omitted. Whenever corrections, alterations, or 'modifications of the work under this contract ordered by the City increase the amount of work to be done, such added work shall be known as extra work, and when such corrections, alterations, or modifications decrease the amount of work to be done, such subtracted work shall be known as work omitted. When the Contractor considers that any changes ordered involve extra work, he/she shall immediately notify the City in writing and subsequently keep him informed as to when and where extra work is to be performed and shall make claim for compensation for each month not later than the first day of the month following that in which the work claimed to be extra work was performed and he/she shall submit a daily complete statement of materials used and expenses incurred on account of extra work performed, showing allocation of all materials and expenses. All such claims shall state the date of the City's written order and the date of approval by the City authorizing the work on account of which claim is made. Unless such notification is made in writing within the time specified and unless complete statements of materials used and expenses incurred on account of such extra work are furnished as above required, the Contractor shall not be entitled 23 General ConditionsSection 9 to payment on account of extra work and Contractor shall be deemed to have waived the right to make any future claims for compensation for such extra work. When changes decrease the amount of work to be done, they shall not constitute a claim for damages on account of anticipated profits on the work that may be omitted. 10-06. Compensation for Extra Work or Work Omitted. Whenever corrections, additions, or modifications in the work under this contract change the amount of work to be done or the amount of compensation due the Contractor and such changes have been ordered in writing by the City prior to the Contractor performing the extra work, then a price may be agreed upon, or failing such an agreement in price, an amount equal to the sum of the following five items shall be used as the full and proper compensation therefor; and such amount shall be added to or subtracted from, as the case may be, the price fixed by the terms of this contract for the part of the work affected. (1) The necessary reasonable cost to the Contractor of the material required for the work as furnished by the Contractor and delivered by him at the site of the work. (2) The necessary cost to the Contractor of the labor (including foremen devoting their exclusive attention to the work in question) required to incorporate all of said material into the work and to finish the work in accordance with directions. (3) The necessary reasonable cost to the Contractor of equipment used for the work. (4) The cost of workmen's compensation insurance premiums, State Unemployment and Federal Social Security payment on the labor included in item (2). (5) Fifteen (15%) percent of the sums of items (1), (2), (3) and (4) which shall be considered as covering all other expenses and profit. In order that a proper estimate may be made by the City of the net cost of labor and materials entering into extra work, in accordance with the procedure just stated, the Contractor shall furnish weekly an itemized statement of material and labor supplied together with the cost of such material and the wages paid, and shall furnish vouchers for quantities and prices of such labor, material, or work. In case the Contractor fails to comply with the above provisions, he/she shall have no claim for compensation against the City. This method of determining the price of work shall not apply to the performance of any work which is required or reasonably implied to be performed or furnished under this contract. 10-07. Compensation to the City for Extension of Time. In case the work called fOr under this contract is not completed within the time limit stipulated herein, the City shall have the right as provided hereinabove, to extend the time of completion thereof. If the time limit is so extended, the City shall have the right to charge to the Contractor and to deduct from the final payment for the actual cost of the work to City for engineering, inspection, superintendence, and other overhead expenses which are directly chargeable to the contract and which accrue during the period of such extension, except that the cost of final unavoidable delays shall not be included in such charges. 24 General ConditionsSection 9 10-08. Liquidated Damaqes for Delay. It is agreed by the parties to the contract that time is of the essence and that, in case all the work is not completed before or upon the expiration of the time limit as set forth, damage, other than those cost items identified in section 10-09, will be sustained by the City, and that it is and will be impracticable to determine the actual amount of damage by reason of such delay; and it is therefore agreed that the Contractor will pay to the City the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per day for each and every calendar day's delay beyond the time prescribed. General ConditionsSection 9 SECTION 11. MISCELLANEOUS 11-01. Notice. Whenever any provision of the contract documents requires the giving of written notice, it shall be deemed to have been validly given if delivered in person to the individual or to a member of the firm or to an officer of the corporation for whom it is intended, or if delivered at or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, to the last business address known to the giver of the notice. If mailed, the notice shall be deemed received on the date of delivery stated in the return receipt. 11-02. Computation of Time. When any period of time is referred to in the Contract Documents by days, it shall be computed to exclude the first and include the last day of such period. If the last day of any such period falls on a Saturday or Sunday or on a legal holiday, such day shall be omitted from the computation. 11-03. Litiqation and Forum Selection. Contractor and City stipulate and agree that any litigation relating to the enforcement or interpretation of this contract, arising out of Contractor's performance or relating in any way to the work, shall be brought in Mendocino County and that venue will lie in Mendocino County. The parties waive any objections they might otherwise have to the propriety of jurisdiction or venue in the state courts in Mendocino County and agree that California law shall govern any such litigation. The duties and obligations imposed by these General Conditions and the rights and remedies available hereunder to the parties hereto, and, in particular but without limitation, the warranties, guaranties and obligations imposed upon the Contractor and all of the rights and remedies available to the City thereunder, shall be in addition to, and shall not be construed in any way as a limitation of, any rights and remedies available to any or all of them which are otherwise imposed or available by law or contract, by special warranty or guaranty or by other provisions of the contract documents, and the provisions of this paragraph shall be as effective as if repeated specifically in the contract documents in connection with each particular duty, obligation, right, and remedy to which they apply. All warranties and guaranties made in the contract document shall survive final payment and termination or completion of this contract. 11-04. Waiver. The Contractor shall strictly comply with all notice and other contract requirements. Waiver by the City of any failure of the Contractor to comply with any term of the contract, including the notice provisions, shall not be deemed a waiver of a subsequent breach. 11-05. Contact Person All questions concerning interpretations of the Specifications must be referred to Sage Sangiacomo, Director of Community Services at (707) 463-6221. 26 General ConditionsSection 9 PROPOSAL The undersigned hereby submits a proposal for the General Contract for the construction of the Roof Overlay of the Ukiah Civic Center, all in accordance with Specifications prepared by the City. After having carefully examined the specifications and after having carefully read and examined the Instructions to Bidders, Form of Proposal, General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions, and after having visited the site and having examined all conditions affecting the proposed work, the undersigned agrees to furnish all labor, materials, transportation, services, equipment, tools, and appliances necessary for and reasonably incidental to the construction and proper completion of the job in strict conformity with the Contract Documents for the sum stipulated in the following proposal: 1. BASE BID The guaranteed price for the construction of this project, as shown on the drawings and described in the specifications is' Dollars ($, ). CONTRACT If the undersigned is notified of the acceptance of the proposal contained herein within thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the Bid Opening, he/she agrees to execute a Contract for the work for the compensation stated herein relative to such proposal. SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL The undersigned agrees to the City's right to reject any and all proposals without explanation. The undersigned declares that the preparation and submission of this proposal or any subsequent negotiations in connection therewith does not obligate the City in any way. LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS The undersigned acknowledges that he/she has reviewed Section 1-07 - Identification of Subcontractors, and has attached a completed cOpy of that section to this Proposal. PROJECT MANAGER A resident Project Manager may be retained by the City for the purpose of overseeing and coordinating project construction for compliance with the required schedule and budget. The Contractor shall be responsible to the Project Manager acting as a liaison between the City and the Contractor. 27 General ConditionsSection 9 TIME OF COMPLETION The undersigned further stipulates and agrees to substantially complete the work within 45 calendar days after the execution of the aforementioned contract. I, (we) certify that on ,20__, License No. was issued to me (us) by the Contractor's License Board, pursuant to the laws of California and that said License has not been revoked. The undersigned declares he/she is familiar with the items specified and has carefully read the requirements, checked all of the figures stated on the specifications, and accepts full responsibility for any error or omission in the preparation of this bid. Respectfully submitted, State whether an individual, a co-partnership or a corporation, and if a corporation, give names of individuals composing same. __ Individual Owner__ Partnership ~ Corporation __ Other Legal Name of Bidder: Address of Bidder: Phone #: Fax #: Tax I.D.#: By: (Signature) (Title) (Print or Type Name) The following items are attachments to this Proposal: (Date) R:SPECS/LD ROOFSPEC FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICATION TO: THE CITY OF UKIAH The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following work by Contract, hereby certifies that he has or will meet the standards of affirmative compliance with the Fair EmplOyment Practices requirements of the special provisions contained here in, Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center (Fill in description of Contract) (Signature of Bidder) Business Name and Address: Place of Residence: (The bidder shall execute the certification of this page at the time of submitting his/her proposal.) 29 WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract. Witness my hand this day of ~,2005. Signature of Bidder, with Business Address: Signature: Address: 30 CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT The bidder represents that he has/has not, participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to either the equal opportunity clause herein or the clause contained in Section 301 of Executive Order 10925; that he has/has not, filed all required compliance reports; and that representations indicating submission of required compliance prior to subcontract awards. Signature and address of Bidder: Signature: Date: Address: (This certification shall be executed by the bidder in accordance with Section 60-1.6 of the Regulations of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity for implementing Executive Orders 10925 and 11114.) 31 LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS In compliance with the provisions of Sections 4100-4108 of the State Government Code, and any amendments thereof, each bidder shall set forth: (a) the name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction site in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent (%) of the total bid; and (b) the portion of the work to be done by each subcontractor. STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude or character he has done, and to give references that will enable the City to judge his experience, skill and business standing, and his ability to conduct work as completely and rapidly as required under the terms of the contract. 32 CITY OF UKIAH Mendocino County, California BIDDER'S BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, , as PRINCIPAL and , as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Ukiah in the penal sum of 10 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE BID of the Principal above named, submitted by said Principal to the City of Ukiah, as the case may be, for the work described below, for the payment of which sum in lawful money of the United States, well and truly to be made, to the City Clerk to which said bid was submitted, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators and successors jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. In no case shall the liability of the surety hereunder exceed the sum of $ THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that whereas the Principal has submitted the above mentioned bid to the City of Ukiah, as aforesaid for certain construction specifically described as follows, for which bids are to be opened at the Office of the City Clerk, Ukiah Civic Center, Ukiah, California, on August 9, 2005 for ROOF OVERLAY OF UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER. NOW, THEREFORE, if the aforesaid Principal is awarded the contract and, within the time and manner required under the specifications, after the prescribed forms are presented to him or her for signatures, enters into a written contract, in the prescribed for, in accordance with the bid and files two bonds with the City of Ukiah, one to guarantee faithful performance and the other to guarantee payment for labor and materials, as required by law, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and virtue. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto se our hands and seals on this A.D. 20 __ day of (Seal) .(Seal) Principal (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) Surety (Seal) Address: 33 CITY OF UKIAH Mendocino County, California FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we thc undersigned, , as PRINCIPAL and , as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF UKIAH, hereinafter called the "City", in the penal sum of dollars ($ ) for the payment of which sum we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, and successors, jointly and severally. WHEREAS, the Principal has entered into a certain Contract with the City, dated which is hereto attached and made a part hereof, .,20 , a copy of NOW, THEREFORE, the condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal shall in all respects fully perform the Cotnract and all duly authorized modifications thereof, during its original term and any extensions thereof that may be granted and during any guaranty period for which the Contract provides, and if the Principal shall fully satisfy all claims, arising out of the prosecution of the work under the Contract and shall fully indemnify the City for all expenses which it may incur by reason of such claims, including its attorney's fees and court costs, and if the Principal shall make full payment to all persons supplying labor, services, materials, or equipment in the prosecution of the work under the Contract, in default of which such persons shall have a direct right of action hereupon; and if the Principal shall pay or cause to be paid all sales and use taxes payable as a result of the performance of the Contract as well as payment of gasoline and special motor fuels taxes in the performance of the Contract and all motor vehicle fees required for commercial motor vehicles used in connection with the performance of the Contract, then this obligation shall be void; otherwise, it shall remain in full force and effect. No modification of the Contract or extension of the term thereof, nor any forbearance on the part of the City shall in any way release the Principal or the Surety from liability hereunder. Notice to the Surety of any such modification, extension, or forbearance is hereby waived. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the aforesaid Principal and Surety have executed this instrument and affixed their seals hereto, this day of 20 In the presence of: WITNESS: (Individual Principal) (SEAL) (Business Address) (City/State/Zip Code) 34 WITNESS: (Corporate Principal) (SEAL) (Business Address) (City/State/Zip Code) ATTEST: (Corporate Principal) (Business Address) Affix Corporate Seal (City/State/Zip Code) ATTEST: (Individual Principal) (Business Address) Affix Corporate Seal (City/State/Zip Code) The rate of premium on this bond is $ per thousand. The total amount of premium charges is $ (The above is to be filled in by Surety Company). (Power of Attorney of person signing for Surety Company must be attached). (CERTIFICATE AS TO CORPORATE PRINCIPAL) I, , certify that I am the Secretary of the corporation named as Principal in the foregoing bond; that , who signed the said bond on behalf of the Principal, was then of said corporation; that I know his signature, and that his signature thereto is genuine; and that said bond was duly signed, sealed and attested to for and in behalf of said corporation by authority of its governing body. Affix Corporate Seal 35 CITY OF UKIAH Mendocino County, California MATERIAL AND LABOR BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we the undersigned, , as PRINCIPAL and , as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the CITY OF UKIAH, hereinafter called the "City", in the penal sum of dollars ($ .) for the payment of which sum we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, and successors, jointly and severally. WHEREAS, the Principal has entered into a certain Contract with the City, dated which is hereto attached and made a part hereof, ,20 . a copy of NOW, THEREFORE, the condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal shall in all respects fully perform the Cotnract and all duly authorized modifications thereof, during its original term and any extensions thereof that may be granted and during any guaranty period for which the Contract provides, and if the Principal shall fully satisfy all claims, arising out of the prosecution of the work under the Contract and shall fully indemnify the City for all expenses which it may incur by reason of such claims, including its attorney's fees and court costs, and if the Principal shall make full payment to all persons supplying labor, services, materials, or equipment in the prosecution of the work under the Contract, in default of which such persons shall have a direct right of action hereupon; and if the Principal shall pay or cause to be paid all sales and use taxes payable as a result of the performance of the Contract as well as payment of gasoline and special motor fuels taxes in the performance of the Contract and all motor vehicle fees required for commercial motor vehicles used in connection with the performance of the Contract, then this obligation shall be void; otherwise, it shall remain in full force and effect. No modification of thc Contract or extension of the term thereof, nor any forbearance on the part of the City shall in any way release the Principal or the Surety from liability hereunder. Notice to the Surety of any such modification, extension, or forbearance is hereby waived. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the aforesaid Principal and Surety have executed this instrument and affixed their seals hereto, this day of ,20 In the presence of: WITNESS: (SEAL) (Individual Principal) (Business Address) (City/State/Zip Code) 36 WITNESS: (Corporate Principal) (SEAL) (Business Address) (City/State/Zip Code) ATTEST: (Corporate Principal) (Business Address) Affix Corporate Seal (City/State/Zip Code) ATTEST: (Individual Principal) (Business Address) Affix Corporate Seal (City/State/Zip Code) The rate of premium on this bond is $ per thousand. The total amount of premium charges is $ (The above is to be filled in by Surety Company). (Power of Attorney of person signing for Surety Company must be attached). (CERTIFICATE AS TO CORPORATE PRINCIPAL) I, , certify that I am the Secretary of the corporation named as Principal in the foregoing bond; that , who signed the said bond on behalf of the Principal, was then of said corporation; that I know his signature, and that his signature thereto is genuine; and that said bond was duly signed, sealed and attested to for and in behalf of said corporation by authority of its governing body. Affix Corporate Seal 37 DIRECTIONS FOR PREPARATION OF PERFORMANCE AND MATERIAL AND LABOR BOND 1. Individual sureties, partnerships, or corporations not in the surety business will not be acceptable. 2. The name of the Principal shall be shown exactly as it appears in the Contract. 3. The penal sum shall not be less than required by the Specifications. 4. If the Principals are partners Or joint venturers, each member shall execute the bond as an individual and state his place of residence. o If the Principal is a corporation, the bond shall be executed under its corporate seal. If the corporation has no corporate seal, it shall so state and affix a scroll or adhesive seal following the corporate name. o The official character and authority of the person(s) executing the bond for the Principal, if a corporation, shall be certified by the Secretary or Assistant Secretary thereof under the corporate seal, or copies attached to such records of the corporation as will evidence the official character and authority of the officer signing, duly certified by the Secretary or Assistant Secretary, under the corporate seal, to be true copies. 7. The current power-of-attorney of the person signing for the surety company must be attached to the bond. 8. The date of the bond must not be prior to the date of the Contract. , The following information must be placed on the bond by the surety company: a. The rate of premium in dollars per thousand; and b. The total dollar amount of premium charged. 10. The signature of a witness shall appear in the appropriate place attending to the signature of each party of the bond. 11. Type or print the name underneath each signature appearing on the bond. 12. An executed copy of the bond must be attached to each copy of the Contract (original counterpart) intended for signing. 38 CITY OF UKIAH Mendocino County, California DEFECTIVE MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP (MAINTENANCE) BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, , as PRINCIPAL and , as SURETY, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Ukiah in the penal sum of (5 PERCENT OF THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT) ($ ), to which payment well and truly to be made, we do bind ourselves, our and each of our heirs, executors, administrators successors and assigns jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, the said Principal entered into a Contract with the City of Ukiah dated for WHEREAS, said Contract has been completed, and was approved on the day of NOW, THEREFORE, THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the Principal shall guarantee that the work will be free of any defective materials or workmanship which become apparent during the period of one (1) year following completion of the Contract, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect, provided however, any additional warranty or guarantee whether expressed or implied is extended by the Principal or Manufacturer only, and the surety assumes no liability for such a guarantee. Signed, sealed, and dated this day of BY: Principal BY: Surety Address: ,20 (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) (Seal) 39 CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE · CITY OF UKIAH ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY) PRODUCER NSURED THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE IS NOT AN INSURANCE POLICY AND DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. BEST'S COMPANY LETTER A COMPANY LETTER B COMPANY LETTER C COMPANY LETTER D COMPANY LETTER E COMPANIES RATING THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACTOR OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO J WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MIVl]DD/YY) ALL LIMITS IN THOUSANDS GENERAL AGGREGATE $ GENERAL LIABILITY [] COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY [] CLAIMS MADE [] OCCUR. [] OWNER'S & CONTRACTOR'S PROW. [] OTHER AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY [] ANY AUTO [] ALL OWNED AUTOS [] SCHEDULED AUTOS [] HIRED AUTOS [] NON-OWNED AUTOS [] GARAGE LIABILITY EXCESS LIABILITY [] UMBRELLA [] OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM [] WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY PROPERTY INSURANCE [] COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/RESTRICTIONS/SPECIAL ITEMS PRODUCTS-COMP/OPS AGGREGATE PERSONAL & ADVERTISING INJURY EACH OCCURRENCE FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) MEDICAL EXPENSE(Any one person) COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT BODILY INJURY (Per person) BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ PROPERTY DAMAGE $ EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE STATUTORY EACH ACCIDENT DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT DISEASE-EACH EMPLOYEE AMOUNT OF INSURANCE $ THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS APPLY: 1. None of the above described policies will be canceled until after 30 day's written notice has been given to the City at the address indicated below. 2. The City, its officials, officers, employees and volunteers are added as insureds on all Liability Insurance Policies listed above. 3. It is agreed that any insurance or sell-insurance maintained by the City will apply in excess of and not contribute with, the insurance described above. 4. The City is named a loss payee on the Property Insurance Policies described above, if any. 5. 'All rights of subrogation under the Property Insurance Policy listed above have been waived against the City. 6. The Worker's Compensation Insurer named above, if any, agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City for injuries to employees of the insured resulting from work for the City or use of the City's premises or facilities. CERTIFICATE HOLDER/ADDITIONAL INSURED City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 1/93 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE TITLE PHONE NO. WORKERS' COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY SUBMIT IN DUPLICATE SPECIAL ENDORSEMENT E,~DORSEMEN'~ NO. For: CITY OF UKIAH (THE "City") PRODUCER POLICY INFORMATION: Insurance Company Policy No.: Policy Period (from) (to) Telephone: OTHER PROVISIONS NAMED INSURED CLAIMS: Under-writer's representative for claims pursuant to this insurance. EMPLOYERS LIABILITY LIMITS Name: Address: $ (Each Accident) $ (Disease - Policy Limit) $ (Disease - Each Employer) lelephone: ENDORSEMENT HOLDER In consideration of the premium charged and notwithstanding any inconsistent statement in the policy to which this endorsement is attached or any endorsement now or hereafter attached thereto, it is agreed as follows: 1. CANCELLATION NOTICE. This insurance shall not be cancelled, except after thirty (30) day prior written notice by receipted delivery has been given to the City. 2. WAIVER OF SUBROGATION. This Insurance Company agrees to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses paid under the terms of this policy which arise from the work performed by the Named Insured for the City. Except as stated above nothing herein shall be held to waive, alter or extend any of the limits conditions, agreements or exclusions of the policy to which this endorsement is attached. ENDORSEMENT HOLDER CITY: iAU'I'HORIZED REPRESENTATIVE [1 Broker/Agent [] Underwriter [] City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue I (print/type name), Ukiah, CA 95482 warrant that I have authority to bind the above-mentioned insurance company and by my signature hereon do so bind this company to this endorsement. Signature: (Original Signature Required) Telephone: Date Signed: SPECIFICATIONS PART 1 - GENERAL SUMMARY OF WORK 1.1 NAME AND LOCATION OF PROJECTS Project Location: Ukiah Valley Conference Center 200 South School Street Ukiah, California 95482 1.2 SCOPE OF WORK A. This contract includes, but is not limited to: 1) 2) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 13) 14) 15) Remove and dispose of existing roof membrane where necessary. Cut and secure blisters on existing roof membrane as required. Remove walk pad material and dispose. Lose wall material needs to be secured. Mark and remove sheet metal cap for reuse. Damaged or asphalt latent cap metal to be replace with similar materials. Remove stucco as necessary to verify water tightness of sheet metal flashings at all corners. Replace crickets removed during tear off of roof, where necessary. Low A/C sheet metal pans to receive Duro-Flash base flashing. Termination bar detail on all other locations. Remove existing membrane roofing material 3 feet in each direction around drains on roof, where necessary. All drains and overflows shall be water tested and receive a leaf basket. New metal cap to be installed at parapet wall tie in at neighbors front wall. Community wall tie at neighbors block wall. Inspect and replace any damaged roof sheathing as directed by owners representative. Any repairs required due to wood decay will be compensated as additional work. Install Fire Protection Board on roof decks where necessary. Install new roof membrane and all associated components and flashings for a watertight installation. Use small fascia for vertical exterior membrane attachment. Use new blocking to support pipes and duct work. Provide 75 pieces of Walk pad for traffic areas. B. The intent of the contract is to provide a complete and serviceable project in every respect, the contractor shall provide all work required whether or not specifically indicated in the drawings and specifications. 44 1.3 PROJECT CONDITIONS A. Take necessary precautions to create minimum disturbance or disruption in occupied buildings. Comply with the restrictions or limitations imposed by the Owner to assure continued use of buildings during construction. g. Provide safety precautions to separate the work area(s) from pedestrian or vehicular traffic and to prevent damage to the building, its occupants and the surrounding areas. Observe applicable O.S.H.A. and California State O.S.H.A. requirements. C. Supply labor and equipment to accomplish the 'work. D. Temporary construction will not be allowed. Schedule, execute and coordinate work without exposing the buildings interior or its contents to inclement weather. Repair or replace items damaged caused by contractor negligence. E. Provide protection walkways for traffic on completed roof areas and for surface protection from others. F, Supply shoring to brace and support the structure and facilities affected by the work. This includes heating and air ducts, exterior lighting, roof top equipment, vent pipes, and items supported by the roof decks to be removed, or replaced, Supply all temporary walkways and ramps necessary to remove existing decking systems and install replacement deck material. G. Perform all work in accordance with applicable Federal, State and local code requirements. Ho Workmanship and materials shall be in accordance with manufactures instructions and code requirements. Specification requirements that exceed the minimum requirements of the manufacture take precedence. Coordinate the work in this section with other sections, including preparatory work, building protection, daily clean up and protection of building occupants and contents. J. Supply labor and equipment necessary to maintain a clean environment in the interior and exterior building and site areas around the construction. PART 2 - COORDINATION 2.1 SUMMARY A. Provide coordination, planning, scheduling and control perform Work and meet Requirements of Project. 45 2.2 SPECIAL REQUIRMENTS A. This facility is busy with activity and consistent traffic in and out. 1) Coordinate tear off and Other operations to minimize obstruction of vehicle and pedestrian traffic. 2) Each section inside the facility should be contacted and impact discussed. 2.3 COORDINATION WITH OTHER PARTIES A. Coordinate construction schedule with Project Manager as soon as possible after award of contract. B. Notify and coordinate with Project Manager 48 hours in advance if work requires disruption of Conference Center operations. C. Coordinate with Project Manager regarding access, security, interior items that may be disturbed, protective measures, clean up, and expected weather. PART 3 - REFERENCE STANDARDS 3.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. Quality Assurance B. Schedule of References 3.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. For products or workmanship specified by association, trade, or Federal Standards comply with requirements of the standard, except when more rigid requirements are specified or are required by applicable codes. B. Conform to reference standard by date of issue current on date of Contract Documents. C. Obtain copies of standards when required by Contract Documents. D. Maintain copy at job site during submittals, planning, and progress of the specific Work, until Substantial Completion. E. Should specified reference standards conflict with Contract Documents, request clarification from owner's representative before proceeding. 46 F. The contractual relationship of the parties to the contract shall not be altered from the Contract Documents. 3.3 SCHEDULE OF REFERENCES AIA ANSI ASCE ASTM CAC CARB CBC CBSC CCR CEC CENC CMC CPC CSI CT24 CRRC EPA ICBO NRCA OSHA SMACNA SPRI UL American Institute of Architects American National Standards Institute American Society of Civil Engineers American Society fbr Testing and Materials California Administrative Code California Air Resources Board California Building Code California Buildings Standards Code California Code of Regulations California Electrical Code California Energy Code California Mechanical Code California Plumbing Code Construction Specifications Institute California Title 24 Cool Roofing Rating Council Environmental Protection Agency International Conference of Building Officials National Roofing Contractors Association Office of Safety and Health Administration Sheet Metal & Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association Single Ply Roofing Institute Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc. PART 4 - SUBMITTALS 4.1 SUMMARY A. This section includes description for submission of shop drawing, product data and samples as required B. Refer to specific sections for special submittal items. 4.2 DEFINITIONS A. Submittals: Material submittals are complete lists and product information related to the project for the owner's review prior to project start. 47 4.3 B. Shop Drawings: Shop drawings are original sketches prepared by contractor, Subcontractor, supplier or distributor which illustrates some portion of the work, showing fabrication, layout, setting or erection details. C. Project Data: 1) Manufacturer's Drawings and applicable details. 2) Manufacturers catalog brochures, diagrams, performance charts and other descriptive information. D. Samples: Physical samples to illustrate materials, equipment or workmanship, and to establish standards by which complete work is judged. MANUFACTURERS RESPONSIBILITIES A. Have a technical representative available to visit the project and for clarifications. B. Manufacture required to review specifications, drawings, and confirm in writing that the minimum requirements are met to receive 15-year labor and material warranty. C. Technical Representative attends the pre-construction conference and observes the work during construction periodically. D. Notify the contractor and Owners representative of any deviations from the requirement observed during site visit. E. Perform a final inspection upon completion of the work. PART 5 - SCHEDULES 5.1 CONTRACT SCHEDULES A. Submit Proposed Schedule 1) Submit proposed schedule within two weeks of award of contract. 2) Schedule to include time frame required for each of phase including: a. Submittal Review b. Mobilization dates of both sites c. Schedule of roof areas. d. Clean up e. Inspection by Manufacture f. Completion of the work B. Schedule Format 1) Graphically show l~ar-chart or similar representation the order and interdependence of all activities necessary to complete the work, the 48 sequence in which each activity is to be accomplished and starting and ending dates of each activity. 5.2 COMPLETION OF THE WORK A. The roofing project must be complete no later than 45 days after contract award. PART 6 - SELECTIVE DEMOLITION 6.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. Demolition of and removal of designated materials from the site. B. Protection of building interiors from dirt, dusts and damage. 6.2 RELATED SECTIONS A. Part 1 - General Summary of Work B. Part 3 - Reference Standard C. Part 4 - Submittals 6.3 SPECIAL JOB CONDITIONS A. Refer to Part 1, Paragraph 1.3.F for water tightness requirements after demolition. B. Contractor will verify roof demolition scope with the Construction and Facility Managers prior to the start of work. 6.4 SUBMITTALS A. The Contractor shall submit a demolition plan to the Construction Manager, outlining the means and methods to be utilized in the removal, transportation and disposal of the existing roof system and related debris. The removal plan shall also include the Contractor's proposed methods for interior and exterior protection and cleanup during removal and re-roofing operations. Identify the proposed location(s) of dumpsters. 6.5 EQUIPMENT A. Conveyances: Buggies or wheelbarrows used on roofs shall be limited to 3/8 cubic yard capacity. 49 6.6 6.7 n. Chutes: Provide enclosed chutes for debris transfer from the roof vertically for a distance of 10 feet or more. Do not extend chutes in an unbroken line for more than 20 feet, without substantial breaks at intervals not greater than 20 feet. Debris shall not spill from the bottom of the chute directly onto the ground. Direct chutes into an approved construction debris container. Provide a hose with a nozzle connected to an adequate water supply, near chute outlet to wet debris as necessary for dust control. C, Hoists/Cranes: Provide hoists or cranes to remove debris and transport loose materials to and from the roof. All materials shall be properly secured to prevent loose materials or debris from breaking loose from hoisting apparatus. Debris to be transported from the roof shall be placed directly in approved construction debris containers. Provide protection of wall areas for their entire height shall be provided in the form of heavy duty tarps secured or affixed to exterior walls directly adjacent to or under the area of hoisting. D. The use of "bobcat" type removal equipment is prohibited. E. Mechanical cutting equipment: Roof cutting equipment shall have an operable blade depth setting mechanism, in order to control the cutting depth of the blade and alleviate the potential of damage to the structural deck. MATERIALS NOT USED EXECUTION A. Preparation 1) Provide, erect and maintain temporary barriers and security devices as required for the work. 2) Protect existing landscaping materials, appurtenances, structures and finish materials that are not to be demolished. 3) Mark location of utilities. 4) Protect existing structures and paving from damage or displacement. 5) Where nature of demolition requires their use, erect and maintain trash and dust chutes for disposal of materials, rubbish and debris. B. Demolition Requirements 1) Conduct demolition to minimize interference with adjacent occupancies. 2) Conduct operations with minimum interference to public or private accesses. Maintain egress and access at all times. C. Demolition 1) Disconnect, cap and identify designated utilities within demolition areas; protect those utilities to remain from damage. 50 2) Remove materials to be re-installed or retained. Store and protect in manner to prevent damage. 3) Remove demolished materials and debris from site. 4) Do not burn or bury materials on site. 5) Remove temporary work. D. Storage and Disposal 1) Debris disposal: a. All debris shall be transported to dumpsters at ground level by enclosed chute. Uncontrolled dropping of debris to ground level will not be permitted. Control visible emissions at the dumpster location by wetting the debris with a fine spray of water at the dumpster level and by providing a tarp cover over the dumpster. b. Dispose of all debris in accordance with all applicable local, State and Federal regulations for the proper transportation and disposal of roofing materials at an approved landfill. PART 7 - THERMOPLASTIC SINGLE-PLY MEMBRANE ROOFING 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 RELATED DOCUMENTS A. Drawings and general provisions of the Contract, including General and Supplementary Conditions and Division 1 Specification Sections, apply to this Section. SUMMARY A. This Section includes: 1) Mechanically fastened sheet roofing. 2) Fire protection board. B. Related Sections include the following: 1) Part 6 "Selective Demolition" for roof removal. DEFINITIONS A. Roofing Terminology: Refer to ASTM D 1079 for definition of terms related to roofing work not otherwise defined in this Section. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS A. General: Install sheet membrane roofing and base flashing that are watertight; will not permit the passage of liquid water; and will withstand wind loads, thermally induced movement, and exposure to weather without failure. 51 B. Material Compatibility: Provide roofing materials that are compatible with one another under conditions of service and application required, as demonstrated by roofing systein manufacturer based on testing and field experience. C. Roofing System Design: Provide a single-ply roofing system that complies with roofing system manufacturer's written design instructions and with the following: 1) SPRI's "Wind Design Guide for Mechanically Fastened Roofing Systems." a. Exposure Category: Exposure C b. System Design: System 2 7.5 SUBMITTALS A. Product Data: For each type of roofing product specified, include data substantiating that materials comply with requirements. Bo Submittals: Include plans, sections, and details of the following: 1) Base flashings and membrane terminations; 2) 8" x 11" inch of sheet roofing, of colored specified, including T-shaped side and end laps. 3) 4" x 5" sample of walkway pad. 4) 12" length of all edge detail materials. 5) Fire protection board fasteners of each type, length, and finish. 6) Fire protection board distribution plates. 7) Membrane fastener/distribution plates of each type, length, and finish. Co Installer Certificates: Signed by roofing system manufacturer certifying that installer is approved, authorized, or licensed by manufacturer to install specified roofing system. D. Maintenance Data: For roofing system to include in the maintenance manuals/pamphlets specified in Division 1. E. Warranty: Special warranties specified in this section. 7.6 QUALITY ASSURANCE Ao Installer Qualifications: The contractor shall have an experienced superintendent having experience installing the roof system specified, familiar with the requirements of this project. The contractor shall use adequate amounts of qualified workmen to install the specified roofing system. The contactor must be certified by the roofing system manufacturer. B. Fire-Test-Response Characteristics: Provide roofing materials with the fire-test- response characteristics indicated as determined by testing identical products per 52 7.7 test method indicated below by UL, FM, or other testing and inspecting agency acceptable to authorities having jurisdiction. Identify materials with appropriate markings of applicable testing and inspecting agency. (Select one) 1) Exterior Fire-Test Exposure: Class A, ASTM E 108 for application and slopes indicated. C. Preliminary Roofing Conference: Before starting roof deck construction, conduct conference at Project site. Meet with the same participants and review the same items listed for the pre-installation conference. In addition, review status of submittals and coordination of work related to roof construction. Notify participants at least 5 working days before conference. 1) Meet with Owner; Architect; Owner's insurer, if applicable; testing and inspecting agency representative; roofing Installer; roofing system manufacturer's representative; deck Installer; and installers whose work interfaces with or affects roofing, including installers of roof accessories and roof-mounted equipment. 2) Review methods and procedures related to roofing installation, including manufacturer's written instructions. 3) Examine deck substrate conditions and finishes for compliance with requirements, including flatness and fastening. 4) Review loading limitations of deck during and after roofing. 5) Review flashings, special roofing details, roofing drainage, roof penetrations, equipment curbs, and condition of other construction that will affect roofing. 6) Review governing regulations and requirements for insurance, certificates, and inspection and testing, if applicable. 7) Review temporary protection requirements for roofing system during and after installation. 8) Review roof observation and repair procedures after roofing installation. 9) Document proceedings, include corrective measures or actions required, and furnish copy of record to each participant. DELIVERY, STORAGE, AND HANDLING A. Deliver roofing materials to Project site in original containers with seals unbroken and labeled with manufacturer's name, product brand and type, date of manufacture, and directions for storing and mixing with other components. B. Store liquid materials in their original undamaged containers in a clean, dry, protected location and within the temperature range required by the roofing system manufacturer. Protect stored liquid materials from direct sunlight. 1) Discard and legally dispose of liquid material that cannot be applied within its stated shelf life. C. Protect roof fire protection board materials from physical damage and from deterioration by sunlight, moisture, soiling, and other sources. Store in a dry 53 location. Comply with manufacturer's written instructions for handling, storing, and protecting during installation. D. Handle and store roofing materials and place equipment in a manner to avoid permanent deflection of deck. 7.8 PROJECT CONDITIONS A. Weather Limitations: Proceed with roofing work only when existing and forecasted weather conditions permit roofing to be installed according to manufacturer's written instructions and warranty requirements. 7.9 WARRANTY A. Special Warranty: Manufacturer's standard form, without monetary limitation, in which manufacturer agrees to repair or replace components of membrane roofing system that fail in materials or workmanship within 15 year warranty period. Failure includes roof leaks. Submit Warranty coverage document in section 3.12 of this specification. 7.10 PRODUCTS A. Manufacturers 1) Available Manufacturers: Subject to compliance with requirements, manufacturer offering products that may be incorporated into Work includes, but is not limited to, the following: a. PVC Sheet: · Duro-Last Roofing, Inc. b. Thermal Recovery Board: · Georgia-Pacific Company B. PVC/CPA Sheet 1) PVC Sheet: Uniform flexible sheet formed from polyvinyl chloride with plasticizers and modifiers, complying with ASTM D4434, Type III and Type IV, Thickness 50 mils minimum, "Cool Zone" texture and color. 2) Membrane must have 28 mils above scrim. 3) PVC Sheet must meet "CRRC" requirements. ASTM E1980-01 SRI Rating of 109.75 4) Physical Properties: Provide thermoplastic sheets with the following minimum properties as determined by ASTM test method indicated: a. Type IV: Coated Reinforced Fabric · Breaking Strength: 390 lbs/in, ASTM D751, Procedure A. · Elongation at Break: 35 percent, ASTM D751. · Tearing Strength: 75 percent, minimum, of breaking strength of unseamed sample, ASTM D751, Procedure B. 54 · Resistance to Heat Aging: 90 percent retention of breaking strength and elongation at break after 56 days at 176 deg F or after 28 days at 185 deg F, ASTM D3045. · Low-Temperature Bend: Pass at minus 40 deg F, ASTM D2136. · Accelerated Weathering Test: No cracking or crazing after 5000 hours, ASTM D4434. · Linear Dimensional Change: 0.5 percent maximum after 6 hours at. 176 deg F, ASTM D 1204. · Water Absorption: Less than 3 percent mass change after 168 hours immersion at 158 deg F, ASTM D570. C. Auxiliary Materials 1) General: Furnish auxiliary materials recommended by roofing system manufacturer for intended use and compatible with membrane roofing material. a. Furnish liquid-type auxiliary materials that meet VOC limits of authorities having jurisdiction. 2) Sheet Flashing: Manufacturer's standard sheet flashing of the same material, type, thickness, and color as sheet membrane. 3) Bonding Adhesive: Manufacturer's standard bonding adhesive. 4) Slip Sheet: Manufacturer's recommended slip-sheet of type required for application. 5) Termination Bars: Manufacturer's standard bars, 1.5 inches wide, formed, and pre-punched. 6) Fasteners: Factory-coated steel fasteners and metal plates meeting corrosion-resistance provision of FM4470, designed for fastening sheet to substrate, and acceptable to roofing system manufacturer. 7) Miscellaneous Accessories: Provide pourable sealers, preformed pipe sheet flashings, preformed inside and outside corner sheet flashings, stainless steel bands, termination reglets, and other accessories recommended by roofing manufacturer for intended use. These accessories are to be covered by the roofing systems manufacturer's system warranty for the warranty period. D. Thermal Barrier 1) Thermal Barrier: Glass-mat, water-resistant gypsum board, ASTM C1177, of type and thickness indicated below: a. Type and Thickness: Regular, IA-inch. b. Product: Subject to compliance with requirements, provide "Dens-Deck" manufactured by Georgia-Pacific Corporation. E. Insulation Materials 1) Not Used F. Insulation Accessories 55 1) Not Used G. Walkways 1) Walkway Pads: Factory-formed, nonporous, heavy-duty, slip-resistant, surface-textured walkway pads, approximately 1/8-inch thick, minimum, of materials acceptable to roofing system manufacturer. PART 8 - EXECUTION 8.1 EXAMINATON A. Examine substrates, areas, and conditions under which roofing will be applied, with Installer present, for compliance with requirements. B. Verify that roof openings and penetrations are in place and set and braced and that roof drains are properly clamped into position. C. Verify that wood nailers are in place and secured and match thickness' of underlayment as required. D. Do not proceed with installation until unsatisfactory conditions have been corrected. 8.2 PREPARATION A. Clean substrate of dust, debris, and other substances detrimental to roofing installation according to roofing system manufacturer's written instructions. Remove sharp projections. Re-nail any backed out nails in wood deck and walls. Bo Prevent materials from entering and clogging roof drains and conductors and from spilling or migrating onto surfaces of other construction. Remove roof-drain plugs when no roof work is taking place or when rain is forecast. Co Complete terminations and base flashings and provide temporary seals to prevent water from entering completed sections of roofing system and the end of the workday or when rain is forecast. Remove and discard temporary seals before beginning work on adjoining roofing. 8.3 THERMAL BARRIER A. Install thermal barrier with long joints in continuous straight lines, perpendicular roof slopes with end joints staggered between rows. Tightly butt thermal barrier boards together. Stager joints a minimum of 6" from the plywood joints. 8.4 INSULATION INSTALLATION A. Not Used 56 8.5 8.6 8.7 MECHANICALLY FASTENED SHEET INSTALLATION A. Install thermoplastic sheet over area to receive roofing according to roofing system manufacturer's written instructions. Unroll sheet and allow to relax for a minimum 30 minutes. 1) Install sheet according manufactures instructions. B. Start installation in the presence of roofing system manufacturer's technical personnel. C. Accurately align sheets and maintain uniform side and ends laps of minimum dimensions required by manufacturer. Stagger end laps. D. Mechanically fasten sheet securely at terminations and perimeter of roofing. E. Apply roofing sheet with side laps shingled with slope of roof deck where possible. F. Spread sealant bed over deck drain flange at deck drains and securely seal roofing sheet in place with clamping ring. G. In-Seam Attachment: Secure one edge of the sheet using fastening plates centered within the membrane seam and mechanically fasten sheet to roof deck. Field-weld seam according to manufactures requirements. H. Install sheet and auxiliary materials to tie in to existing roofing. SEAM INSTALLATION A. Clean seam areas, overlap sheets, and weld side and end laps of sheets and flashings according to manufacturer's written instructions to ensure a watertight seam installation. Weld seam as follows: 1) Weld Method: Hot air, no chemical welds permitted. B. Test lap edges with probe to verify' seam weld continuity on daily basis. C. Repair tears, voids, and lapped seams in roofing that does not meet requirements. FLASHING INSTALLATION A. Install sheet flashings and preformed flashing accessories with mechanical fasteners, sealant and termination bar. B. Flash penetrations and pre-manufactured inside and outside corners with sheet flashing as recommended by manufacturer. 57 C. Clean seam areas, overlap sheets and hot air seal. Weld side and end laps to ensure a watertight seam installation. D. Test lap edges with probe to verify seam weld continuity. Test each weld at end of each day. E. Terminate and seal top of sheet flashings and mechanically anchor to substrate through termination bars. 8.8 WALKWAY INSTALLATION A. Walkways: Install walkway pads as directed by owners' representative. Heat weld or adhere walkway pads to substrate with compatible adhesive according to roofing system manufacturer's written instructions. 8.9 FIELD QUALITY CONTROL A. Verify field strength of seams a minimum of twice daily, according to manufacturer's written instructions, and repair seam sample areas. B. Final Roof Inspection: Arrange for roofing system manufacturer's technical personnel to inspect roofing installation on completion and submit report to architect. 1) Notify Architect or Owner 48 hours in advance of the date and time of inspection. 8.10 PROTECTION AND CLEANING A. Protect sheet membrane roofing from damage and wear during remainder of construction period. When remaining construction will not affect or endanger roofing, inspect roofing for deterioration and damage, describing its nature and extent in a written report with copies to Architect and Owner. B. Correct deficiencies in or remove roofing that does not comply with requirements, repair substrates, reinstall roofing, and repair sheet flashings to a condition free of damage and deterioration at the time of Substantial Completion and according to warranty requirements. 58 8.11 WARRANTY Low Slope Roofing Installation and Material Failure Liability & Responsibility Roofing contractor will provide one of the following prior to bid opening: 1. Copy of manufacturer's warranty that DOES NOT exclude consequential or incidental damages resulting from failure of factory and installation workmanship, roofing material, roofing components, or ponding water within 15 year warranty period and without dollar limit. 2. Notice of intent from proposed manufacturer's insurance provider to provide an insurance rider covering consequential or incidental damages resulting from; failure of factory and installation workmanship, roofing material, roofing components, or from ponding water within 15 year warranty period and without dollar limit for the specifically named project, properly identified by name, address, and installing contractor accompanied by manufacturer's notarized guarantee to pay all related premiums. 3. Roofing material manufacturers notarized waiver of exclusion of consequential or incidental damages resulting from failure of factory and installation workmanship, roofing material, roofing components, or ponding water within 15 year warranty period and without dollar limit for the specifically named project, properly identified by name, address, and installing contractor and signed by a current officer of the roofing material manufacturer exactly as follows: To: Attn: Reference: WAIVER OF EXCLUSION OF CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES FROM INSTALLATION AND PRODUCT FAILURE WITH AFFIDAVIT OF MANUFACTURER'S AUTHORITY. As (print title) of (print company) I (print name) hereby officially waive our standard exclusion for consequential or incidental damages resulting from failure of factory and installation workmanship, roofing material, roofing components, or ponding water, within 15 year warranty period without dollar limit for all roofs listed in your project manual entitled: dated installing our products listed: For our certified contractor: Contractor address: (please print clearly) Project(s) specified by name and location: Ukiah Valley Conference Center, Ukiah, California I hereby attest and certify under penalty of perjury that I mn qualified as an officer of (print) roofing manufacturing company to authorize this waiver of exclusion of consequential damages resulting from product and installation failure for the projects listed above for the Lake County. Signature of named officer date Signature of notary date Notary seal or stamp: Notary expiration date 59 ATTACHMENT "A": SAMPLE COPY OF AGREEMENT CITY OF UKIAH Mendocino County, California AGREEMENT FOR UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER ROOF OVERLAY Specification No. E25629 THIS AGREEMENT, made this day of the City of Ukiah, Mendocino County, California, hereinafter called the ..... ¢:~ 2005.~ by and between herinafter called the Contractor, WITNESSETH: ,'3' (,}~ ~,~'%, ~,,'~ WHEREAS, the Cny has caused to be prepared m ac¢ordance,:;'.wllh draw~n s and other contract documents for the work herein described hhd:',:~?Shown ah'd:~ has adopted these contract documents, specifications and drawings and hhs cau~:~:~to be{¢?published in manner and for the time ....... reqmred by law a nonce to Ndders ~nvmng,.¥S~'~ed proP0s:~s, for dmng the work in accordance with the terms of this contract' and "~?;?~:~:~{?,~{;?', WHEREAS, the Contractor, in response to the fi:~?d':~tQ',:;~jdders, g~ submitted to the City a sealed proposal accompanied by a proposal gu~i~ty..in amount of h'~'t'is';less~,than 10 percent of the bid price for the construcuon of the proposed work'i~ aoeordance with the terns of th~s contract; and, WHEREAS, the City, in the manner pr~'{cribed b'g'?i~, has pubhclv opened, examined and canxassed the proposals submmed a~fl~,~.as a result has determined and declared the Contractor to be the lowest and best regular responsible b~dd~[**:f~,:~e work and tot!he sums named ~n the proposal, NOW, THEREFORE, THis Ag~'~'~~:"WITttNESSETH Article,'::,[~ Work ib be Done ~hd Contract Days Allowed. That thei:~:::~C~aot~z::~5S.~all pt0~de all necessary macMnery tools apparatus and other means ot construcuon; shall furms~} all materials, superintendence, overhead, expenses, all labor and expenses ot whatever nature necessa[~}'for completion of the work in conformity with the Special Provisions and other contract docum~t~:<h~reto attached and according to such instructions as may be ~iven by the City The Contractor shall cS~plete the work w~thm tbrty-five (45) calendar days. Contract days shall be counted starting with the l0th day following receipt of notice that the contract hns been executed by the City. Contractor, at his or her option, may begin work prior to start of counting contract days, however, in no event shall the Contractor star work without giving notification to the City at least 72 hours prior to the start of work, without obtaining an encroachment permit from the City, or without having submitted certificates of insurance that have been accepted and approved by the City. Article II. Contract Prices. That the City shall pay the Contractor the prices stated in the proposal submitted by the Contractor, for complete performance of the contract by the Contractor. The Contractor hereby agrees to accept the prices as full compensation for all material and appliances necessary to the work, for all labor and use of tools and 60 ATTACHMENT "A": SAMPLE COPY OF AGREEMENT other implements necessary to execute the work contemplated in this contract; for all loss or damage arising out of the nature of the work or fi:om the action of the elements, or from any unforeseen obstructions or difficulties which may be encountered in the prosecution of the work; for all risks of every description connected therewith; for all expenses of the work, as herein specified; for all liability and other insurance, for all overhead and other expenses incident to the work; all according to the Contract Specifications, the Special Provisions, the Details, the instructions and the requirements of the City. Article III. Labor Discrimination. Attention is directed to Section 1735 of the Labor Code, which reads as follows: "No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon pul: race, color, national origin or ancestry, or religion of such persons and works violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed fo~ In connection with the performance of work under this contract, the Contr~'ct¢ works because of the for public of this chapter." The Contractor will not willfully discriminate against any emplo employment because of race, color, religion, ancestry, affirmative action to ensure that applicants are em employment without regard to their race, color reli shall include, but not be limited to, the recruitment or recruitment advertising; compensation; and selection for trainin: in conspicuous places, available to provided by the awarding authorit' ng section. i::ant for origin. Thc ,r will take that employees during r'y, or origin. Such action or transfer; or other forms of Contractor agrees to post fQr'employment, notices to be ~rovisions of this Fair Employment Practice b) The Contractor will send to each labor of workers with which he or she has a collective bargainin. .ent or ~'nderstanding, a notice, to be provided by the awarding union or worker's representative of the Contractor's commitments u ,ees and applicants for employment. c) The Contra~~'''' ~'~"~":' .... :.tOz.wdl permit access to h~s or her records of employment, emplovment advertisement ';¢'~""'"~'""~"" ...... ~"" ' ' %',3PP!i!~gB0n forms andi~other pemnent data and records by the Fmr Employment Practices Com]~ss~on;:::~tgs:,<,,og, URiah; or any other appropriate agency of the State of California de :nated by th~?:::;.aw~8~ngmgt~gr~ty, fl0r the purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance Fair Emp~'~ment Pract:fces section of this contract. d "~i~ a. tion of the >r'~:~{:'~*' Fair Employment Practices section of this Contract or of the ices Act shall be regarded by the awarding authority as a basis for to be not a "responsible bidder" as to future contracts for which such Contractor ma' bids, for revoking the Contractor's pre-qualification rating, if any, and for refm reestablish, or renew a pre-qualification rating for the Contractor. The City of Ukiah shall deem a finding of willful receipt of written notice form the Fair Employment Practices Act to have occurred upon that it has investigated and determined that the Contractor has violated the Fair Employment Practices Act and has issued an order under Labor Code Section 1426 or obtained an injunction under Labor Code Section 1429. Upon receipt of such written notice frmn the Fair Employment Practices Commission, the City shall notify the Contractor that unless he'. or she demonstrates to the satisfaction of the awarding authority within a stated period that the violation has been corrected, his or her pre-qualification rating will be revoked at the expiration of' such period. 61 ATTACHMENT "A": SAMPLE COPY OF AGREEMENT e) g) The Contractor agrees that should the City determine that the Contractor has not complied with the Fair Employment Practices section of this Contract, then pursuant to Labor Code Section 1735 and 1775 tile Contractor shall, as a penalty to the City, forfeit for each calendar day or portion thereof, for each person who ha~,; denied employment as a result of such non-compliance, the penalties provided in the Labor Code for violation of prevailing wage rates. Such monies may be recovered from the Contractor. The City may deduct any such damages from any monies due thc Contractor. Nothing contained in this Fair Employment Practices section shall be construed in any manner of fashion so as to prevent the City or the State of California from pursuing any other remedies that may be available at law. ..... .:i~': ~!ii~!l'.i~ Prior to awarding the Contract, the Contractor shall cemfy to the awarding authority that he or she has or will meet the following standards for affirmanve comphance,::.wh~ch shall be evaluated ~n each case b the award~n authont 1) The Contractor shall provide evidence, as required bv the City :h~ a or she ha~':}potified all supervisors, foremen and other personnel .cers in writing of ontent of"the anti- discrimination clause and their responsibilities, 2) The Contractor shall provide evidence, as all sources of employee advertisements, Department of El clause. 3) The Contractor shall file false statements made in compliance report shall als, responsibility for determi ni ng he City, th~':~?.he 0?'~he has notified · e~bloyment agencies, of~::::~he anti-discrimination report, as required by the City· Willfully punishable as provided by law. The the work force and who has the ~ether or not to hire. 4) Personally, negotiations with agreement which will! >resentatives, the Contractor shall, through 'homhe or she has agreements, attempt to develop an il'i"ties for nondiscrimination in hiring, referral, upgrading h) iplement an affirmative anti-discrimination program in terms of unions' specific areas of skill and geography to the end that qualified workers will be available and given an equal opportunity for oyment. 5) The C, shall notify the City of opposition to the anti-discrimination clause by firms or organizations during the period of its pre-qualification. The Contractor will include the provisions of the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 5 in every first tier subcontract so that such provisions will be binding upon each such subcontractor. The "Fair Employment Practices Certification" must be completed and signed prior to the time of submitting the bid. 62 ATTACHMENT "A": SAMPLE COPY OF AGREEMENT Article IV. Parts of the Contract. That the complete contract consists of the following documents, all of which shall be considered a part of this agreement: 1. Notice to Bidders 2. Wage Scales 3. General Conditions 4. Specifications 5. Proposal 6. Fair Employment Practices Certification 7. Agreement 8. Contract Bonds 9. Indemnification Agreement IN WITHNESS WHEREOF, this contract being executed in duplicate and the names to be signed by authority of their duly authorized office __ day of hawng cau.~ed their .~:.?i:;!'::: , 2005. CITY OF UKIAH, MENDOCINO COUNTY, By: MAYOR, CITY OF UKIAH Attest: DEPUTY CITY CLERK, '"~ By: Attest: Title: ;ENTATIVE The foregoing contract is approved as to form and legality this __ day of ,2005. DAVID RAPPORT, CITY ATTORNEY, CITY OF UKIAH 63 Oct 03 05 01:54p p. lO Gene~a! CondilionsSeclion g Attachment PROPOSAL The undersigned hereby submits a proposal for the General Contract for the construction of the Roof Overlay of the Ukiah Civic Center, ali in accordance with Specifications prepared by the City. After having carefully examined the specifications and after having carefully read and examined the Instructions to Bidders, Form of Proposal, General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions, and after having visited the site and having examined all conditions affecting the proposed work, the undersigned agrees to furnish all labor, materials, transportation, services, equipment, tools, and appliances necessary for and reasonably incidental to the construction and proper completion of the job in strict conformity with the Contract Documents for the sum stipulated in the following proposal: 1. BASE BID The guaranteed price for the construction of this project, as shown on the drawings and described in the specifications is: CONTRACT If the undersigned is notified of the acceptance of the proposal contained herein within thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the Bid Opening, he/she agrees to execute a Contract for the work for the compensation stated herein relative to such proposal. SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAl, The undersigned agrees to the City's right to reject any and all proposals without explanation. The undersigned decI~tres that the preparation and submission of this proposal or any subsequent negotiations in connection therewith does not obligate the City in any way. LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS The undersigned acknowledges that he/she has reviewed Section 1-07 - Identification of Subcontractors, and has attached a completed copy of that section to this Proposal. PROJECT MANAGER A resident Project Manager may be retained by the City for the purpose of overseeing and coordinating project construction for compliance with the required schedule and budget. The Contractor shall be responsible to the Project Manager acting as a liaison between the City and the Contractor, . 27 Oct 03 05 01:54p p.11 General CordilionsSection 9 TIME OF COMPLETION The undersigned further stipulates and agrees to substantially complete the work within 45 calendar days after the execution of the aforementioned contract. 1, (we)certifythat on '~ -' '~ I ,20~, License No. ¢ I ~ 7~'¢ '~1 was issued to me (us) by the Contractor's License Board, pursuant to the laws of California and that said License has not been revoked. The undersigned declares he/she is familiar with the items specified and has carefully read the requirements, checked all of the figures stated on the specifications, and accepts full responsibility for any error or omission in the preparation of this bid. Respectfully submitted, State whether an individual, a co-partnership or a corporation, and if a corporation, give names of individuals composing same. ~ Individual Owner ~ Partnership ~ Corporation Other Legal Name of Bidder: Address of Bidder: ~ Phone #: ' (Signatu~) (Print or Type,~me) Fax #: 70'7- .%'-3,,~--~/.~ '~7 Tax i.D.#: b~"~' (Title) lO,-II (Date) The following items are attachments to this' Proposal: R:SPECS/L D ROOFSPEC 28 Oct 03 OS 01:5~p p. 12 FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICATION TO: THE CITY OF UKIAH The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following work by Contract, hereby certifies that he has or will meet the standards of affirmative compliance with the Fair 'Employment Practices requirements of the special provisions contained here in, Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center (Fill in description of Contract) (Signature of Bidder) ~ Business Name and Address: Place of Residence: (The bidder shall execute the certification of this page at the time of submitting his/her proposal.) 29 Oct,03 05 Ol:5~p p.13 WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract. Witness my hand this day of 07'_.('0 [~t''~' 2005. Signature of Bidder, with Business Address: Signature: ~~.' ~~- Co._ 30 Oct, 03 05 O l:S4p p. 1~ CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT The bidder represents that he has/has not, participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to either the equal opportunity clause herein or the clause contained in Section 301 of Executive Order 10925; that he has/has not, filed all required compliance reports; and that representations indicating submission of required compliance prior to subcontract awards. Signature and address~:>f Bidder: Signa[ure: ~.~ ,~/ ... Address: Date' (This certification shall be executed by the bidder in accordance with Section 60-1.6 of the Regulations of the President's Committee on Equal EmPloyment Opportunity for implementing Executive Orders 10925 and 11114.) 31 Oct 03 05 01:55p p.15 LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS In compliance with the provisions of Sections 4100-4108 of the State Government Code, and any amendments thereof, each bidder shall set forth: (a) the name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction site in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent (%) of the total bid; and (b) the portion of the.work to be done by each subcontractor. STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude or character he has done, and to give references that will enable the City to judge his experience, skill and business standing, and his ability to conduct work as completely and rapidly as required under the terms of the contract. $c k 01 32 CJTY OF UKIAH MendoCi no County. Cati £ornia BIDDER'S BOND KNOW ^1.,1.. MEN BY THESE PRESENTS. Thatwe, Hemminfler Construction Company , ,'ts PRINC! PAl. Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company are held and firmly bound unto the City o1' Ukiah in the penal sum of 10 I>I3R¢iENT OP_ THE 'rC)q'Al. AMOUNT OT work descried belom, for the paym,nt of which sum in l~Wfiml money o) t~ U~ii¢d S~atcs, well ~nd tru}y to be rondo, to ~u City CI,~ .to which s~ld bid ~as zubmitted, we bind ourgelucs, our bci~. executors, admlnis~r~tors and the sm ors~~Ten percent of tile total amount bid) Tile CON'DITI~.JN 01' 'i'HI~ IDBI.IGATIOtq [51 SUCltL Lhat whm'ets Iht'. Principal ha.~ submitted the above mentioned bid to thc: Citer' of Ukiah, as aforesaid ~:~r ret:train construction specifically dascrtl~d as follow~, fi~r wbJcll bids are m be Opened ut Ibc Office of d~c City Clerk. Uklah Civic Coulter, ~ial~, California. on Ausust 9, 2~$ for ROOF OVERLAY OF UKIAH VALLEY CON~REN~ CENTER. NOW, THgRF~FORE, if the ,fom.~aid Prin¢¥tl is awarded th~ conlraet and, within thc time add man,er required under thc ~Jficat{ons. after the pr~cri}~d ~orms am Dre~nl(td tn him c,r liar ~r ~igm~ature~. enter~ I,~.) a ~itt~n =ontra=k in pcrBmance afld ~e Other to guarante~ payment for l~bor and matcriaN, as required b)' f,w, then this obligation sh~ll be null n~ void: ot~r~i~, it shall be ~nd refnaln in full ¢orc~ and vi~m. TN WITNESS WHEREOF, ~'e have hereunto so our htmds and seals on thi..q .7_.tbday or October ,,,,r), ~o 05 Hemmi Cons ction Company · ~ ................. Contractors BO.~,d,!.ng and In'~urance C.o. mpany Dennis Woodard, ^ttorney-in-Fact (Scat) Addrcss: 1200 Bayhill Drive San Bruno, CA 94066 '33 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT · · State of California County of CONTRA COSTA On 10-07-2005 Date personally appeared before me, SS. M.A~ ATWATER,. NOTARY PUBLIC DENNIS WOODARD Name and Title of Officer (e.g., 'Jane Doe, Notary Public') Name(s) of signer(s) [] personally known to me M. A. AIWAI'ER ~L Commission # 1552218 r' .o,o Contra Costa County ' ~'. lq. proved to me on the basis' of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/ars subscribed to the within instrument 'and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized Capacity(les), and that by his/her/their. signature(s)' on the instnJment the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature 0f No~ Public OPTIONAL ~ough the info~ation below is not required by la~ it may prove valu~le to pe~ons rel~ng on ~e document and could prevent f~udulent removal and rea~achment of this fo~ to ano~er document. Description of AEached Document · tle or Type of Document: Document Date: Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Number of Pages: Capacity(les) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer-- Title(s): [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General ~ Attorney in Fact [] Trustee [] Guardian or Conservator [] Other: signer Is Representing: Contracto :$ Bondin~ and Insurance .Company Top of thumb here Signer's Name: [] Individual [] Corporate Officer-- Title(s): · [] Partner-- [] Limited [] General [] Attorney in Fact [] Trustee ' [] Guardian or Conservator' [] Other: Signer Is Representing: Top of thumb here 2004 National Notary Association · 9350 De Soto Ave., P.O. Box 2402; Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 Item No. 5907 Reorder. Call Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 CONTRACTORS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY NOTICE - TERRORISM COVERAGE FOR CERTIFIED ACTS OF TERRORISM NOTICE- NO PREMIUM CHARGE This Notice is required pursuant to the federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002. For renewing policies of insurance, this Notice applies upon renewal too unless superseded by a written notice specifically so providing. There is no need to respond to this Notice. You are hereby notified that under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (the "Act"), effective November 26, 2002, you now have a right to purchase insurance coverage for losses arising out of acts of terrorism, as defined in Section 102(1) of the Act. Under the Act, the term "act of terrorism", means any act that is certified by the Secretary of the Treasury, in concurrence with the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General of the United States - to be an act of terrorism; to be a violent act or an act that is dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; to have resulted in damage within the United States, or outside the United States in the case of an air carder or vessel orthe premises ora United States mission; and to have been committed by an individual or individuals acting on behalf of any foreign person or foreign interest, as part of an effort to coerce the civilian population of the United States or to influence the policy or affect the conduct of the United States Government by coercion. No act of terrorism can be certified, however, if resulting property and casualty insurance losses in the aggregate do not exceed $5,000,000. In this Notice, we refer to an act of terrorism covered under the Act as a certified act of terrorism. We have decided to provide insurance coverage for certified acts of terrorism only at no charge, even though by federal law we are only required to notify you of your right to purchase the coverage. Our Policy contains an. exclusion of losses caused by terrorism, but the Act provides an exception from that exclusion for losses resulting from a certified act of terrorism. Non-certified acts of terrorism remain excluded in our Policy, and the PoliCy's other provisions still apply to any certified act of terrorism. This Notice may also serve as an endorsement when attached to our Policy if there is no other specific endorsement contained in our Policy dealing with coverage.for a certified act of terrorism. '. Additional Information for Policyholders with policies providing fire insurance in the States of: Arizona, California, Idaho, Oregon and Washington The existing terrorism exclusion makes an exception for (and thereby continues coverage for) f~re losses resulting from terrorism. Therefore, the coverage in Our Policy for such fire losses will continue. DISCLOSURE OF FEDERAL PARTICIPATION IN PAYMENT OF TERRORISM LOSSES Coverage provided by our Policy for losses caused by certified acts of terrorism is partially reimbursed by the United States under a formula established by the Act. Under this formula, the United States pays 90% of covered terrorism losses exceeding the statutorily established deductible paid by us as the insurance company providing the coverage. The premium charge by us for this coverage for certified acts of terrorism is zero. There may be a charge at some future point in time if the Federal Government pays a loss for the portion of loss covered by the Federal Government under the Act. Form 1 NotTERR.01-US 012203 ' ?/~' ':/::i? 2.5 :.,:.~: ' :,: 7AX 3..~??.5(i.~52~j?,$ Duro-Last ~ 001 RO,- AST® Roofing, Inc, 111 N. Valley Drive Grants Pass, OR 97526 (541) 476-9918 (800) 356-6646 FAX (541) 479-7071 FAX (800) 566-2698 www. duro-last.corn October 6, 2005 RE: Ukiah Conference Center Project To Whom it May Concern: Please be advised that Steve ~berts Roofing of Ukiah, California has been an authoriz'ed dealer/contractor for Duro-Last Roofing, Inc. since August of 1998. They have fulfilled all of our requirements and are in good standing to install all Duro-Last materials. They have received and maintained the necessary training and licensing for Duro- Last, Inc. They may purchase Duro-Last materials and are entitled to the services and privileges which accompany such authorization. Upon payment of all related invoices and satisfactory inspection by a Duro-Last Technical Representative, the standard Duro-Last 15-year commercial warranty will be issued. Please feel free to contact us, should you require further assistance. ViceH~rretsident Western Operations TH:dg Cc': Attn: Steve Steve Roberts Roofing 216 W. Perkins Street Suite 101 Ukiah, CA 95482 Fax: 707-467-1487 Other Locations: Saginaw, Michigan · Jackson, Mississippi - Sigourney, Iowa General ConditionsSection 9 Aftachment # --_ PROPOSAL The undersigned hereby submits a proposal for the General Contract for the construction of the Roof Overlay of the Ukiah Civic Center, all in accordance with Specifications prepared by the City. After having carefully examined the specifications and after having carefully read and examined the Instructions to Bidders, Form of Proposal, General Conditions, Supplementary Conditions, and after having visited the site and having examined all conditions affecting the proposed work, the undersigned agrees to furnish all labor, materials, transportation, services, equipment, tools, and · appliances necessary for and reasonably incidental to the construction and proper completion of the job in strict conformity with the Contract Documents for the sum stipulated in the following proposal: 1. BASE BID The guaranteed price for the construction of this project, as shown on the drawings and described in the specifications is: CONTRACT If the undersigned is notified of the acceptance of the proposal contained herein within thirty (30) calendar days after the date of the Bid Opening, he/she agrees to execute a Contract for the work for the compensation stated herein relative to such proposal. SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAl The undersigned agrees to the City's right to reject any and all proposals without explanation. The undersigned declares that the preparation and submission of this proposal or any subsequent negotiations in connection therewith does not obligate the City in any way. LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS The undersigned acknowledges that he/she has reviewed Section 1-07 - Identification of Subcontractors, and has attached a completed copy of that section to this Proposal. PROJECT MANAGER A resident Project Manager may be retained by the City for the purpose of overseeing and coordinating project construction for compliance with the required schedule and budget. The Contractor shall be responsible to the Project Manager acting as a liaison between the City and the Contractor. 27 General CondilionsSection 9 TIME OF COMPLETION The undersigned further stipulates and agrees to substantially complete the work within 45 calendar days after the execution of the aforementioned contract. I, (we) certify that on ,,J-'¢k/, 2- O ,202 License No. 7 ? 0 ~ ~/' ~ was issued to me (us) by the Contractor s License Board, pursuant to the laws of California and that said License has not been revoked. The undersigned declares he/she is familiar with the items specified and has carefully read the requirements, checked all of the figures stated on the specifications, and accepts full responsibility for any error or omission in the preparation of this bid. Respectfully submitted, State whether an individual, a co-partnership or a corporation, and if a corporation, give names of individuals composing same. __ Individual Owner~ Partnership.,./(' Corporation ~ Other Legal Name of Bidder: ~r/'~./ ~ ~oo ft '4 ~ ./'o //~ /! '~ /1 ~: -~ ¢. Address of Bidder: ~,. 72-..¢b ,,",_~.o~e_ ~". Z~ ~.~'oJ"c C,,,~ / Phone #: Z/,~ 0'"'~ 2.- ~,/ By: (Print or T~ype Name) (Title) (Date) The followin_q iter~s are attachments to this Proposal: ..., , / R:SPECS/LD ROOFSPEC 28 FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES CERTIFICATION TO: THE CITY OF UKIAH The undersigned, in submitting a bid for performing the following w,'ork by Contract, hereby certifies that he has or will meet the standards of affirmative compliance with the Fair Employment Practices requirements of the special provisions contained here in, Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center .. (~11 in description of Contract) (Signature of Bidder) Business Name and Address: ! q4-/z / Place of Residence: I,-//z ? (The bidder shall execute the certification of this page at the time of submitting his/her proposal.) 29 WORKER'S COMPENSATION CERTIFICATE I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or undertake self- insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this contract. Witness my hand this 1//'~ day of /~)~:'//~ ~,~r" .2005. Signature of Bidder, with Business Ad.cl~s: Signature: /~~., ~' '_~..~.~~ Address' 3O CERTIFICATION OF NON-DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT The bidder represents that he has/has not, participated in a previous contract or subcontract subject to either the equal opportunity clause herein or the clause contained in Section 301 of Executive Order 10925; that he has/has not, filed all required compliance reports; and that representations indicating submission of required compliance prior to subcontract awards. (This certification shall be executed by the bidder in accordance with Section 60-1.6 of the Regulations of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity for implementing Executive Orders 10925 and 11114.) 31 LIST OF PROPOSED SUBCONTRACTORS In compliance with the provisions of Sections 4100-4108 of the State Government Code, and any amendments thereof, each bidder shall set forth: (a) the name and location of the place of business of each subcontractor who will perform work or labor or render service to the Contractor in or about the construction site in an amount in excess of one-half of one percent (%) of the total bid; and (b) the portion of the work to be done by each subcontractor. STATEMENT OF EXPERIENCE OF BIDDER The bidder is required to state below what work of similar magnitude or character he has done, and to give references that will enable the City to judge his experience, skill and business standing, and his ability to conduct work as completely and rapidly as required under the terms of the contract. 32 BIDDER'S BOND KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT WE, Priority Roofing Solutions, Inc. , as principal, and Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Ukiah, state of california, hereinafter called the city, in the penal sum of ten percent (10%) of the total amount of the base bid of the principal above-named, submitted by said principal to the city, for' the work described below for the payment of which sum in lawful money of the united states, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators and successors jointly and severally, firmly by these presents, in no case shall the liability of the surety exceed the sum of Sixteen thousand and 00/100s dollars ($ $16,000.00 ) dollars. the condition of this obligation is such, that whereas the principal has submitted the above-mentioned bid to the city for certain construction specifically described as follows for which bids are to be opened at Ukiah, Ca., on October 12, 2005, for: Roof Overlay of Ukiah Valley Conference Center now, therefore, if the aforesaid principal is awarded the contract, and within the time and manner required under the specifications, after the prescribed forms are presented to him for signature, enters into a written contract in the prescribed form, in accordance with the bid, and files two bonds: one to guarantee faithful performance, and one to guarantee payment for labor and materials, as required by law; then this obligation shall be null and void; or should the aforementioned contract be awarded to other than the herein-named principal, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and virtue. as a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefore, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the city in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment rendered. 13 in witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands and seals on this 5 Principal: Surety: day of October 2005 . Priority Roofing Solutions Inc ,,~4NG · ' ~', ...... ~l. ,. ._ ", O~ " . Contractora Bonding and Znaurance Company (Seal ~""'""' (Seal) . , (Seal) Ann S. Ferrante, Attorney In Fact Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company 111 Pacifica, Suite 350 Irvine, California 92618 1-949-341-9110 Address Telephone Number Note: Signatures of those executing for the Surety must be, properly acknowledged. Important: Surety companies executing bonds must appear on the State of California Treasury Department's most current list (Circular 570 as amended) and be authorized to transact business in the State of California. 14 'CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of California County of Santa Cruz On October 5, 2005 before me, JOE A. FERRANTE, NOTARY PUBLIC DATE NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER personally appeared Ann S. Ferrante NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S) [X] Personally known to me - OR- [ ] Proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/arc subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that hc/she/~-h~ executed the same in his/ her/thcir authorized capacity(iRs), and that by his/her/thcir signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), of the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. SIGNATURE OF NOTARY OPTIONAL Though the data below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER DESCRIPTION OF ATTACHED DOCUMENT [ ] INDIVIDUAL [ ] CORPORATE TITLE (S) BID BOND TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT [ ] PARTNER(S) [ ] LIMITED [ ] GENERAL [X] ATTORNEY- IN-FACT [ ] TRUSTEE (S) [ ] GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR [ ] OTHER: NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) Contractors Bonding and Insurance Company Priority Roofing Solutions, Inc. SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE .LIMITED.POWER OF ATTORNEY ....-...- i.. .. ,u...... :....-. : .:.:' .: ..'- ::..-.:.. :'. :...,: .... - i Only an unaltered originai:i0ftliiS::'P0~e~fAtt0rn~Y dO~um~ i:s::~aliidi'A:~,ali:fi~6r~gimt/of thi~ifloeum~t'.is pr, i, nted 0fi'g[ia,.y security paper with:black:and!red :iitk an.d:bearSi:.the ~eal:'6i~:Co~tra¢!~r~'Bo/idingana:Insur~hee c6man? (~e Co~pany. ). The original'd°cumefit'eontalnsa, wate~ark With.the le~tei:~):,::cb~ embedded inthe paper mth~ than printed UPon it. Ti~e watermark appears in the!blank space beneath t!Xe words:."Li:mited:power of Att0mey~' at.'the top of.the document and is Visibie When tile d°cumen, ish~ld:~:~the .light. Thlsd°cUment is.i:Valid s°lei~:in conn~ctiOn.W~"¢he ex~uti0n.and delivery of the bond beating the number i:na~ca~ed beloW;and ~fovifle'd:'ai~o:::iti'attii~:.:~ad:ig: off,he :i~e indicated beloWl ThiS. document is valid onlYif~e b0ndii:ex~.Uted0n 0;.bef0re )i'.:.':I :: :.' i; : ' $10,000 ,O00 ~'; ..and': :provided, .! ~: further, :2hag:.' ~o J~t~Oa:ney.,iin~Fac~i.. Sh&ll haare.: 2he.. of .$10,0.0 O, O0 0.}: and:. .:.(2).' :C~se~ts:i~: re[:ease:S:~ and. ocher ::s~iar 8oc~enta r~ired under the au~r~ty 'of ':~he. 8o~rfl:',:~f'"D~rece°r's~:.'o~' .the 'cmpany; - . . : ______.__--,.------.------_-- ...... u. [: 7 Fi. . .: ' ' · u.. . . .. . _._.._..------.--..------.--.--------'--.------------------------------------ _________._ ------------.--------.--------------------------------------------' ................................ ~ ........... ~'a ~ ~a--~ ......... --. ....... ________.__...__...__._...'._'_______.-- .' :: . I, the'iUnde~signed:seCretary'of C6ntract°r~ B°nding and tnsuraneec°mpany, a WaShington''' reverse are nowin'fUll force and effecti .: Bond Number Signed and:sealed'this 5 . day of. '.' Oct.:obe:r . : CBtC · 121:3 Va!ley:Stree~,:-:: P~O~: BOX':9271::.., . seattle; WA. 98109~0271 622-7053 ,:: (800)7657CBIC:(Tolt Free)o (800).950,1558 (FAX)' .... -.......-... - .::.: u .:.. · ...... . ... . 10,"06,/2005 14'11 FAX 18005662698 Dur'o-Last ~001 RO- AST® Roofing, Inc. 111 lq. Valley Drive Grants Pass, OR 97526 (5,4.1) 476-9918 (800) 356-6646 FAX (541) 479-7071 FAX {800) 566-2698 www.duro-last.com Oclober 6, 2005 RE' Ukiah Conference Cente~ Project To Whom it May Concern' Please be advised that Priority Roofing Solutions of San Jose, California has been an authorized dealer/contractor for Duro-Last Roofing, Inc. since September of 2002. They have fulfilled all of our requirements and are in good standing to install all Duro-Last materials. They have received and maintained the necessary training and licensing for Duro-Last, Inc. They may purchase Duro-Last materials and are entitled to the services and privileges which accompany such authorization. Upon eayment of all related invoices and satisfactory inspection by a Duro-Last Technical Representative, the standard Dure-Last iS-year commercial warranty will be issued. Please feel free to contact us, should you require further assistance. /Tim Har~ k~'r Vice President Western Operations TH:dg Cc: A~tn: Jerry Priority Roofing Solutions 2928 Stanhope Drive San Jose, CA 95121 Fax: 408-532-8021 Other Locations' Saginaw, Michigan · Jackson, Mississippi · Sigourney, Iowa URO- ~mAS~® ~loofing, 52§ ~orley Drive Saginaw, MI ~8601 15 YEAR WARRANTY Warranty No. DURO-LAST, INC., (hereinafter "DURO-LAST"), sole owner of the Tradenmrk DURO-LAST, grants a limited warranty to the owner of a building (the "OWNER") containing a DURO-LAST ROOFING SYSTEM installed by an Authorized Dealer/Contractor, subject tothe conditions and hmitafions contained hereto. DURO-LAST, INC.'s, obligation during the 1~ through the 15t~ years shall be to repair any leak in the roof caused by any defect in the DURO-LAST, INC.'s membrane, materials or accessories or by the workmanship of the Authorized Dealer/Conu'actor, but only a~ it pertains to the installation of the DURO-LAST ROOFING SYSTEM and not for other work performed, ii' any. This obhgation includes the repair or replacement of me~nbrane material and accessories and the cost of/or furnishing of labor to repair said roof at the contractor list price, which is ia ef:tbct at the time or repair, provided the following conditions are met 1. DURO-LAST, INC. has authorized the repair, and, 2. An Authorized Dealer/Contractor makes the repair. LIMITATIONS 1 ) This limited warranty does not apply to a DURO-LAST Roofing System installed on a single-family residence. 2) DURO-LAST shall in no instance be held liable for any roof failure and/or subsequent damage arising from causes outside DURO-LAST's control, including, but not limited to: a) Damage caused by fire, lightning, hurricane, gale. hail, tornado, flood, earthquake or acts of God; or b) Damage caused by accident, vandalism, intentional act, negligence or ihilure to use reasonable care. whether on the part of the Owner or another: or c) Damage caused by any unauthorized modification to the DURO-LAST roof including, but not limited to, damage caused by unauthorized components used in installation or repair, or by additional equipment or structures added to or rmtde a part of the roof, or by traffic, or by chemicals not normally found in nature or the like: or d) Moisture entenng the roof system through walls, copings, structural defects, HVAC systems, or any part of the building structure, including from adjacent buildings. 3) This limited warranty specifically does not extend to color change of the DURO-LAST Roofing System 4) DURO-LAST is not liable under this fruited warranty unless: a) The Owner notifies DURO-LAST at the above address in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested, within thirty (30) days of the discovery of any leak or other alleged roof failure: and b) The Owner allows DURO-LAST's agent or its Authorized Dealer/Contractor access to the roof for inspection and examinanon' and c) DURO-LAST and its Authorized Dealer/Contractor have been paid in full by the Owner or its predecessor in title ibr all services rendered: and d) DURO-LAST authorizes the repair and the repair is done by an Authorized Dealer/Contractor. 5) This limited warranty passes to future Owners of the building for the full Fifteen (15) years hereof. 6) This limited warranty becomes effective only upon signature by both an authorized DURO-LAST representative and the original Owner. 7) This fruited warranty shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the State of Michigan, regardless of the State of purchase or installation. 8) DURO-LAST does not waive any'rights under this linnted warranty by refraining to exercise its rights in lull in due or more instances. THE REMEDIES STATED HEREIN ARE ]'HE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES OF THE OWNER FOR ALLEGED FAILURE OF THE DURO-LAST ROOFING SYSTEM~ WHETHER IN MEMBRANE. MATERIAL. ACCESSORIES OR DEALER/CONTRACTOR WORI~MANSHIP TI-IIS LIMITED WARRAi',iTY ALSO COVERS CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES DERIVED FROM I~AKS CAUSED BY DEFECTS WARRANTED AGAINST ABOVE. THERE ARE NO WARRANTLES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE (EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED) THAT EXTEND BEYOND THE FACE OF THIS LIMITED WARRANTY; DURO- LAST EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY SUCH FURTHER WARRANTIES. If DURO-LAST's Authorized'D~aler/Contractor made any statements about DURO-LAST's merchandise and services, those statements are not warranties, cannot be relied upon.by Owner and are not part of the contract for sale or installation DURO-LAST, ®INC. Date Signature of Authorized DL Representative Customer's Signature Address of Building City, State & Zip of Building Installed By DL-- 15COM 10-03 Name of Building Bldg. Designatiou: Serial Number: Sq. Foot: CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE CITY'OF UKLAH -PRODUCER 1NS(JR~O ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY) THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSUI~CE I$ NOT AN INSURANcE POL'iC~ ~kNDD(~E~'' NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POL|CIES BELOW. BESTS COMPANY LETTER A COMPANY LETTER B COMPANY LETTER C COMPANY LETTER D CO~P~NY ~LETTER E COMPANIES RATING THISiS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF IN~URA~ICE BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACTOR OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO ] WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONOITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAV; BEEN REDUCED BY PAI_D~CLAIMS. . . --_ - M3LICY EXI~qATtON I AUTOMOBILE LIABt[JT¥ il ANY ~UTO {] ACL OWNED ^LIFOS [} SCHEDULEO AUkS [J HI~D AUTOS ~N~wN~ GAUGE ~XCES~ i'l U~aRELL~ 01HEJI. TH~ UI4BRELL~ ~N O{~dT, l[5 COMFEN$&T1.ON AND EMrLOYER~ LIABILITY PROPERTY [NSURAKCE DESCRIPTION OF OPEILATIONS~LOCATIONSNEHICLES~R~STIUCTIOKS%TEC~AL rTEMS W ERTLSII~*G L~7 L*RY on~ ru~) ~HE FOLLOWING pROVISiONS APPLY: Hoot of lite abo~e ~ribed i~d~,ia wLII I~g r~tekd ami l a~r ~ ~}'s ~ ~l~c h~ ~ Zt~ ~ lO t~ City u t~ ~ i~ ~',: ,~ER~iFICATE HOLDE~ADDITIONAL INSURED Clly ~ U~h SI~ATURE 300 ~min~ Avenue TI~E Ukiah, CA 9~2-~ PHONE NO. 1~3 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE I ia I I I I I~ I I I IIIIII ITEM NO. 6f DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION REMOVING 226 LINEAL FEET OF ON- STREET PARKING ALONG CLAY STREET NEAR SUN HOUSE PARK SUMMARY: Captain Trent Taylor, Ukiah Police Department and Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director are requesting to extend the existing no parking zone along the south side of Clay Street near Sun House Park. Please refer to Attachment 2 for a location map. The proposed no parking zone will control parking adjacent to Sun House Park. Since there is no curb, gutter, nor sidewalk along the south side of Clay Street, east of Main Street, there have been some individuals which have apparently driven their vehicles onto the landscaping at the park. When this happens, the vehicle blocks the view of police patrolling a particular portion of the park which has actions which need to be monitored. During review of this request, the Traffic Engineering Committee (TEC) suggested extending the no parking zone east along a chainlink fence on the property adjacent to the park. On October 13, 2005 staff spoke to Hardy Schmidbauer, owner of the adjacent parcel, regarding this proposal. Mr. Schmidbauer has no objections to extending the no parking zone along the frontage of his parcel, however, he would reserve the right to request that the no parking zone be removed from his parcel frontage at a future date when the vacant parcel is developed. Mr. Schmidbauer added that he is in support of extending Clay Street east to tie in with Leslie Street. He believes that opening the area up to more traffic will have a positive effect on the park. The net result of the proposed action will be the loss of approximately ten on-street parking spaces. The Traffic Engineering Committee reviewed this request at its regular meeting of October 11, 2005 and recommended approval to the City Council with the provision that the adjacent property owner concurred with the proposed no parking zone. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution removing 226 lineal feet of on-street parking along Clay Street near Sun House Park. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not adopt resolution and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Hardy & Lillianne Schmidbauer (adjacent property owners) Requested by: Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engin. eer Prepared by: Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Resolution for Adoption 2. Location Map Candace Horsley, City ~anager RJS: AGnpClaySt nr SunHousePark. SUM RESOLUTION NO. 2006- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH REMOVING 226 LINEAL FEET OF ON-STREET PARKING ALONG CLAY STREET NEAR SUN HOUSE PARK WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate portions of streets upon which the standing, parking, or stopping of vehicles is prohibited or restricted pursuant to Article 11, Chapter 1, Division 8 of the Ukiah City Code; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineering Committee (Traffic Engineer) considered the request on October 11, 2005 to establish the no parking zone within the City of Ukiah; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineer recommends this request regarding the no parking zone. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Ukiah does establish a no parking zone on the south side of Clay Street near Sun House Park at a location determined by the City Engineer. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 2005 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Mark Ashiku, Mayor Resolution No. 2006- Page 1 of 1 Attachment LOCATION MAP Photo Date: March 2001 AGENDA ITEM NO: 6. g MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR PURCHASE OF TWO PATROL CAR VEHICLES IN THE AMOUNT OF $57,699.38 TO UKIAH FORD SUMMARY: Included in the fiscal year 2005/2006 budget is the purchase of two patrol vehicles for the Police Department at an estimated cost of $56,000 dollars. In September of this year, staff submitted bids to ten vehicle vendors, including all local Ford dealers for the purchase of two new patrol cars according to State of California Specifications for Police Vehicles with preferred additional optional items desired by the Ukiah Police Department. Bids were opened October 6th 2005, with 6 responses. During the bid evaluation, staff discovered that Ukiah Ford had bid twice, and that the lower of their two bids did not meet specifications. Ukiah Ford's second bid, (the second lowest quoted price) met the specifications provided for in the RFP, at $28,962.84 per vehicle, a total cost of $57,699.38, including sales tax. Staff checked this bid price against the State of California contract price for police vehicles and found that our quoted Iow bid was under the state contract price per vehicle. Staff recommends that Ukiah Ford be awarded the bid for two police vehicles in the amount of $57,699.38, from account 100.2001.800.000. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Staff recommends that Ukiah Ford be awarded the bid for two police vehicles in the amount of $57,699.38, from account 100.2001.800.000. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Chris Dewey, Captain Candace Horsley, City Manager and John Williams, Police Chief 1. Bid Spread Sheet, 2. Corrected Bid Tabulation Sheet Approved: Candace Horsley, O~ty Manager Chris Dewey From: Mary Horger [maryh@cityofukiah.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 7:14 AM To: dewey@cityofukiah.com; 'Marie Ulvila' Subject: Corrected Bid Tab for two Crown Vic's Importance: High Hey, guys: I went through the bids received for the Crown Vic's. As I suspected, some of the bids did not correctly calculate the tax increase that began this month (7.75% instead of 7.25%). The following is corrected bid tabulation: Ukiah Ford -* ~"~' Ford Harper Ford Downtown Ford Henry Curtis Ford Northlake Ford $28,962.84 each $2s,8:o.~e'~v:.,~. isle, ~ "~',r' V'e.,Jt:x:¢_. - 'E~z:, ~.4z¢,=¢~ $28,971.95 each $29,073.24 each $29,340.33 each $30,010.00 each Ukiah Ford seems to be Iow bid in both cases. I'm not sure why they submitted two bids - we'll have to check that out. Mary Horger Purchasing Agent City of Ukiah Phone: (707) 463-6233, Fax: (707) 463-6234 email: mary h('C,_,cityofu kiah. co m 10/12/2005 CITY OF UKIAH 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 (707) 463-6217 (City Clerk-s Office) BID OPENING FOR: Two (2) New 2006, 4-Door Ford Crown Victoria P71/730A Police Interceptor SPECIFICATION NO. E25927 DATE: October 6, 2005 TIME- 2'00 p.m. COMPANY UKIAH FORD '~,,,.~. i-,~,,.~,~. 7~'~..~ UKIAH, CA 95482 UKIAH FORD P. O. BOX 788 UKIAH, CA 95482 HARPER FORD COUNTRY 4200 HIGHWAY 101 NORTH EUREKA, CA 95501 AMOUNT ? DOWNTOWN FORD SALES 525 N 6TH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814-0592 HENRY CURTIS FORD MERCURY 1120 AUTO CENTER DRIVE PETALUMA, CA 94952-1100 NORTHLAKE FORD MERCURY 2575 S. MAIN STREET LAKEPORT, CA 95453 Gail Petersen-Latipow, Deputy City Clerk Bids: Police Car 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. DATE: October 19, 2005 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR STREET STRIPING 2005, SPECIFICATION NO. 05-06 SUMMARY: Funding for this project was approved in the fiscal year 2005/2006 budget in the amount of $20,000 in account number 100-3110-250-000. The City Council awarded the contract on August 17, 2005 to Traffic Limited of Lodi, California (contractor) in the amount of $19,926.55. The work of the contract was completed by the contractor in substantial conformance with the approved plans and specifications on September 16, 2005. The final contract cost based on actual street footage striped is $19,926.55. Final payment of the 10 percent retention will be made to the contractor after 35 days from the date the Notice of Completion is filed with the County Recorder. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Accept the work as complete; 2. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for Street Striping 2005, Specification No. 05-06. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engin. eer~~ Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Notice of Completion Candac~ Horsley, City Manaler AG-NOC-Spec-05-06.SU M Please return to: CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 (707) 463-6200 Attachment NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: o That the real property described is owned by the following whose address is: City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482-5400 . That the nature of the title to the Street Striping 2005, Specification No. 05-06 of all said owners is that of fee simple. . That on the 16th day of September 2005, the Contract work for this project was actually completed. . That the name and address of the Contractor is Traffic Limited, PO Box 1721, Lodi, California, 95241-1721. . That the real property herein referred to is situated in the County of Mendocino, State of California, and is described as follows: City-owned property identified as various streets within the City of Ukiah. City Council Approval CITY OF UKIAH, a Municipal Corporation By: DATE Marie Ulvila, City Clerk DATE STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF MENDOCINO) I, Marie Ulvila, being duly sworn says: That she is the City Clerk of the City of Ukiah City Council, that she has read the foregoing Notice of Completion and knows the content thereof and the same is true of her own knowledge. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me, Deborah Pollock, Notary Public, on this __ day of ., 2005, by , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. Notary Public in and for the County of Mendocino, State of California AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6i DATE: October 19, 2005 REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION REMOVING ON-STREET PARKING AND ESTABLISHING A BUS LOADING ZONE AT 548 FORD STREET SUMMARY: Mr. William Turner requested establishment of bus loading zone at 548 Ford Street (location map, Attachment 2). Mr. Turner is disabled and uses the MTA Dial-A-Ride service several times each day. Since there are no existing bus stops in the immediate vicinity, the proposed bus stop will provide a beneficial service for all residents in the area. The net result of the proposed action will be the loss of two on-street parking spaces. The Traffic Engineering Committee (TEC) reviewed this request at its regular meeting of October 11, 2005 and recommends approval to the City Council. Staff contacted Suzy Hiatt, apartment manager, who has no objections to the proposed bus stop. Ms. Hiatt added that residents have plenty of parking spaces available in the parking lots. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution removing on-street parking and establishing a bus loading zone at 548 Ford Street. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Do not adopt resolution and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Dan Baxter, MTA; Suzy Hiatt Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works ~d J[_--~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for Adoption 2. Location Map APPROVED! ~-~~.. Candace Horsley, City Man~er RJS: AGnpMTAbusZon~548 Ford St. SUM ~ RESOLUTION NO. 2006- Attachment # RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH REMOVING ON-STREET PARKING AND ESTABLISHING A NO PARKING ZONE / BUS LOADING ZONE NEAR 548 FORD STREET WHEREAS, the City Council may by resolution designate portions of streets upon which the standing, parking, or stopping of vehicles is prohibited or restricted pursuant to Article 11, Chapter 1, Division 8 of the Ukiah City Code; and WHEREAS, the provisions of Sections 21458 and 22500 of the California Vehicle Code permit the stopping of buses in a red zone marked or posted as a bus loading zone; and WHEREAS, on October 11, 2005 the Traffic Engineering Committee (Traffic Engineer) considered the request from Mr. William Turner to establish a "No Parking Zone / Bus Loading Zone" within the City of Ukiah; and WHEREAS, the Traffic Engineer recommends the request regarding this "No Parking Zone / Bus Loading Zone". NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council does establish a "No Parking Zone / Bus Loading Zone" on Ford Street, north side, near 548 Ford Street. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of October, 2005 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mark Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Resolution No. 2006- Page 1 of 1 N LOCATION MAP Attachment # 2 1 inch equals 100 feet Photo Date: March 2001 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO.: DATE: October 19, 2005 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION MAP WITH A SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION TO DRIVEWAY ACCESS REQUIREMENTS FOR A PROPERTY AT 432 McPEAK STREET SUMMARY: The approval of a Minor Subdivision Map to allow the division of a 13,361 square foot lot into two lots with net areas in excess of 6,000 square feet and a Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow the width of a private access driveway for the lot with no public street frontage to be reduced from the 20 feet required in the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance to a width of 10 feet. Background: Planning Department staff initially intended to process the proposed Minor Subdivision for action by the Ukiah City Engineer, but the addition of the Subdivision Requirement Exception component requires a review by the Ukiah Planning Commission and final action by the Ukiah City Council. Therefore, on August 24th of this year, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing (continued on PaRe 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Conduct a public hearing regarding Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19; 2. Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception, 3. Approve the Minor Subdivision with the Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow an access driveway width of 10 feet. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not approve the project and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Legal notice published in the Ukiah Daily Journal Requested by: Mr. Ron Meaux Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Tentative Parcel Map 3. Site Plan with Parking Exhibits (Full-Site and Detail) 4. Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration for MS-EX-VA 05-19, including Comments Received and Response to Comments 5. Minutes of Ukiah Planning Commission Meeting on August 24, 2005 6. Planning Commission Staff Report for Minor Subdivision-Subdivision Requirement Exception Components of Project, including Mitigated Negative Declaration 7. Planning Commission Staff Report for Variance Component of Project APPROVED: SUMMARY (Continued from Page 1): on these concurrent applications, with extensive comments from the project applicants and members of the public. As a result of this discourse, the Commission worked with the applicant to have an additional parking space added to proposed Lot 1 and indicated that it would require additional conditions of approval to address concerns with the line of sight for the proposed driveway and to ensure that the driveway would be widened to 20 feet in the event that it was ever used to serve second dwelling units on either parcel. Once these issues were addressed, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project. The Commission also voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception components of the project, based on the findings recommended in the Planning Commission staff report and subject to twelve conditions of approval, including the ten recommended by staff and two additional conditions recommended by the Commission. A copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report with the Mitigated Negative Declaration is included as Attachment 5 of this summary. In a subsequent action on October 12th of this year, the Planning Commission heard a Variance component that was added to the project to allow the development of the proposed access driveway with the proposed width of 10 feet. This action became necessary once staff determined that the Exception component of the project only applies to the access driveway standards outlined in the Subdivision Ordinance and that a Variance approved by the Planning Commission is required to allow any deviation from the driveway width requirements of Ukiah Municipal Code Sections 9251 and 9252. These Zoning Code sections require the same driveway width of 20 feet, but the approval of the Variance requires the making of findings that are similar, but not identical to, those required for an Exception. The Planning Commission again received testimony and written statements from the public, and then voted 4-0, with one member absent, to approve a Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Variance to allow the access driveway to be reduced to a width of 10 feet. The Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration is included as Attachment 4 and the staff report for the Variance component is included for reference as Attachment 6. Existing Conditions: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the west side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the western portion of the lot is undeveloped and covered with a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. The applicant is currently remodeling the existing single-family residence, with the intent of removing the existing carport/garage structure and replacing it with a single-wide garage and an outdoor parking space along the southern wall of the residence. Proposed Conditions: The project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide the 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R- 1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots and a Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow the width of the private access driveway required for ingress and egress to an interior lot to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Specifically, the two-lot subdivision would establish proposed Lot 1 on the eastern portion of the subject property, with approximately 72 feet of frontage located along the public right-of-way for McPeak Street. This lot would have a gross lot area of approximately 6,996 square feet, but the net area would total only 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in driveway width is permitted since this area is not included in the calculation of net lot area. As noted above, the applicant intends to remove the existing double-wide garage and replace it with a single-wide garage and an outdoor parking space on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off-street parking. The applicant has also proposed the establishment of a '20-foot wide utility easement and the development of a paved private access driveway over this easement to provide utility services and access to the landlocked parcel shown as Lot 2. This driveway would be 10 feet wide and would extend Agenda Summary for MS/EX 05-19 2 approximately 97 feet from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary line for proposed Lot 2. It would be paved with rock base and asphalt surfacing and marked in accordance with Ukiah Municipal Code standards for private accesses. Proposed Lot 2 would be located to the west of Lot 1, in the area now devoted to yards and gardens. This 6,356 square foot lot would have no public street access and would depend on the 10-foot wide driveway for ingress and egress to the common property line between the proposed lots and connection to parking facilities on Lot 2 should it be developed. At this point, the applicant has no specific plans for the development of this site, but he did indicate that that the primary goal of the subdivision is to establish another site for the construction of a single family residence. The proposed reduction in the width of the access driveway is proposed for several reasons, including the applicant's desire to reduce the amount of on-site paving and present a more aesthetically pleasing access. However, the primary reason for reducing the driveway width to 10 feet is that the proposed division of the site with the net lot areas proposed cannot be accomplished without a narrower driveway since the area used for access to the landlocked lot cannot be included in the net area calculation for the lot fronting McPeak Street. In fact, under all of the various scenarios looked at by staff, the inclusion of a 20-foot wide access driveway would reduce the net area of the 13,361 square foot property to substantially less than the 12,000 square feet required to subdivide it into two lots. Compliance with UMC Requirements for the Establishment of Lots Not Having Principal Frontage on Accepted Street Proposed Lot 1 would have almost 72 feet of frontage along McPeak Street, which is a publicly- maintained street. Therefore, this lot would comply fully with the street frontage requirements prescribed by the Minor Subdivision requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code (UMC). Proposed Lot 2 has no frontage along a public street and its establishment is only allowed if the specific requirements of UMC Sections 8305 and 9251 are met. These include the furnishing of a 20-foot wide utility easement and access driveway that connects the landlocked lot with a public street and conforms to the access requirements set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance and Section 9251 of the UMC. In this case, the applicants have established a 20-foot wide utility easement along the southern property line of proposed Lot 1, from its McPeak street frontage to the eastern boundary of proposed Lot 2. The applicants are also proposing to develop the required access to Lot 2, but have requested the Exception to allow the development of a 10-foot wide driveway instead of the required 20-foot wide roadway prescribed in the UMC sections discussed above. The most compelling reason for this request is the need to provide more net area for proposed Lot 1 by reducing the square footage of the access lane. However, the applicant also favors the use of a narrower driveway since it will allow for more open space and landscaping, which will be more attractive and more compatible with the single-family aesthetic characteristics of the lot and the surrounding neighborhood. Planning staff analyzed the potential impacts of reducing the proposed access to a 10-foot wide driveway and has concluded that the reduced width will provide a number of beneficial factors without compromising efficient ingress and egress from the landlocked lot and without creating hazards to persons occupying or passing by the access driveway. These conclusions are discussed below: The UMC requirements for a 20-foot wide access roadway to lots with no public street frontage are intended to provide two-way vehicle access to landlocked lots. In this case, the development of two- way access to proposed Lot 2 would be more convenient for its future occupants, but it is the opinion of staff that it is not particularly warranted since it would only serve one residential building site. In fact, staff notes that the proposed driveway width is fairly consistent with the 10-foot wide driveways found on other properties in this older neighborhood, including lots to the north, east, and south. In fact, staff notes that narrower driveways and tandem parking is common to this section of McPeak Street and persons driving this street will be familiar with the situation. Agenda Summary for MS/EX 05-19 3 Planning staff also reviewed aerial maps and determined that the proposed access driveway has little potential to serve any additional lots since the parcels to the north and south have direct access to McPeak Street and the lot to the west would be accessed via Eastlick Street if it were to be divided. In fact, if and when a single-family residence is constructed on proposed Lot 2 the ability to extend the proposed access driveway beyond its borders would be effectively precluded since there would not be sufficient area left on either of the proposed lots to meet the net lot area requirement of 6,000 square feet. Therefore, the division of this lot in the manner proposed would actually reduce the potential for future development on abutting lots. Planning staff also discussed the access issue with City Fire Department staff and confirmed that the 10-foot wide driveway would be wide enough for ambulance response to any residence eventually developed on proposed Lot 2, and that any fires fought on this lot would be conducted from fire vehicles based on McPeak Street. Police Department staff also indicated that the 10-foot wide driveway would provide adequate access to the landlocked lot. Staff also discussed the access roadway issue with City Utility Department staff who indicated that the 10-foot driveway width would actually provide better access for the maintenance of any utilities installed in the 20-foot wide utility easement on which the access driveway would be located. The development of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway would also allow the retention of vegetation in the area between the southern property line for proposed Lot 1 and the planting of grass or Iow-lying shrubs between the paved surface and the proposed single-wide driveway. This would be less obtrusive and more attractive than a 20-foot wide access roadway, which would encumber over 27 percent of the site's street frontage. For this reason, staff anticipates that a narrower driveway would be more consistent with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding single-family residential neighborhood. CONCLUSIONS Based on the reasons above it is the conclusion of Planning Department staff that in this particular case, the requirement for a 20-foot wide access roadway would be overly stringent and would serve no useful purpose. Staff also concludes that the proposed reduction in driveway width would provide a practical and reasonable alternative to interior site access and allow the subject property to be divided in a manner that is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan and with the applicable zoning and subdivision provisions that govern development activities in single-family residential neighborhoods. Staff further notes that the Planning Commission concurred with the staff conclusions and findings made in support of the Subdivision Requirement Exception and Minor Subdivision of the subject property. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION and FINDINGS for Proposed Subdivision Requirement Exception: The staff of the Planning Department and the Ukiah Planning Commission recommend that the Ukiah City Council APPROVE the proposed Subdivision Requirement Exception to the private access roadway width requirements of the Ukiah Subdivision, based on the on the findings listed below. o The 10-foot wide access driveway will not be used for additional right-of-way since the lots abutting the subject property are served by two public streets and the division of the site in the manner proposed will not provide sufficient net lot area for either of the lots proposed should the access be extended in any manner; . The granting of the Exception is warranted due to special conditions caused by the fact that the subject parcel was established at a time when lots in this area of the City were typically larger and longer and subsequent land divisions done prior to and after the imposition of zoning on the site left the oversize lot effectively landlocked by precluding the development of any additional street frontage on the eastern and western portions of the property; Agenda Summary for MS/EX 05-19 4 . The granting of the Exception is necessary to the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner since the development of an unwarranted access roadway will prohibit an effective and reasonable division of the site into two lots with net areas of at least 6,000 square feet, as provided for in the Ukiah General Plan Land Use Element and the Ukiah Municipal Code provisions for the development of lots in the R-1 Zoning District; , The potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway and the division of the subject property were analyzed in an Initial Study done in accordance with the provisions of the Californian Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in which it was determined that the reduced access width will not cause significant adverse environmental impacts if the mitigation measures/conditions of approval included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the project are adopted, and 5. The proposed access roadway of 10 feet is consistent with applicable General Plan standards since it will conform to LDR requirements for new development that require all access to be paved; . The granting of the Exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property owners in the surrounding neighborhood since the development of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway will provide ingress and egress to only one lot, is a reasonable and safe access alternative for persons occupying the site and for emergency personnel, and will provide a more attractive viewshed that is more consistent with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION and FINDINGS for Proposed Minor Subdivision: The staff of the Planning Department and the Ukiah Planning Commission recommend the Ukiah City Council APPROVE the proposed division of the site into two lots, based on the on the findings listed below. 1. The parcels established by the Minor Subdivision/Exception, as conditioned, are consistent with the requirements of the California Subdivision Map Act; . The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the Ukiah General Plan, including the applicable use and development standards for the LDR (Low Density Residential) land use designation outlined in the Land Use Element; 3. The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the applicable use and development standards for the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District; 4. The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance since both lots conform to the standards for Type I subdivisions, including those for lot areas, lot width, street improvements, water supply, fire protection, and other standards; and . The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the density, open space, and infill criteria for Compatibility Zone D of the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan and the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Plan; and . The potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway and the division of the property were analyzed in an Initial Study done in accordance with the provisions of the Californian Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in which it was determined that the reduced access width will not cause significant adverse environmental impacts if the mitigation measures/conditions of approval included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the project are adopted. Agenda Summary for MS/EX 05-19 5 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Minor Subdivision #05-19, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid: . A Parcel Map prepared pursuant to Local Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval with materials, fees, substantiating documents, and title report required by the City Engineer. . The Tentative Map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of its approval or conditional approval unless extended in accordance with the City of Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act. 3. All taxes now due, or past due, must be paid prior to the approval of the Parcel Map. 4. Each parcel shall be served individually upon the development of the parcel with appropriate public utilities required for the type of development within the parcel. , Easements will be required for the proposed 10-foot wide private access driveway and the 20-foot wide utility easement and for any drainage that affects abutting properties. These easements shall be included on the Parcel Map and recorded with the Mendocino County Clerk/Recorder prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map. . The access driveway shall be developed with a minimum width of 10 feet and in full accordance with all other Ukiah Municipal Code requirements for access roadways to interior lots with no public street frontage, . The Parcel Map, easements, title report and supporting documentation shall be submitted to the Public Works/City Engineer Department, with a fee of $320, for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map. Additional information required by the City Engineer during this review shall also be submitted by the applicant or agent for the applicant. . All improvements done within the City right-of-way shall be constructed in accordance with standard City drawings under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. The Encroachment Permit shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project with a fee equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the improvements. . All improvements shall be done by a licensed Contractor who has a current City of Ukiah Business License and copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability: $1,000,000; Property Damage: $1,000,000) and a copy of a current Workmen's Compensation Certificate. 10. If, during site preparation or construction activities, any historic or prehistoric cultural resources are unearthed and discovered, all work shall immediately be halted, and City Planning Department staff shall be notified immediately of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance and, if deemed necessary, to develop a precise mitigation program prior to the continuation of any site work. 11. The two-foot wide planter proposed along the southern property line of proposed Lot 1 shall contain no vegetation in the 20-foot long section located west of the sidewalk for McPeak Street. 12. The width of the access driveway between McPeak Street and the western boundary of proposed Lot 2 shall be increased to a minimum of 20 feet in the event that the driveway will provide access to or from for any Second Residential Dwelling Unit constructed on either lot in the subdivision. Agenda Summary for MS/EX 05-19 6 LOCATION MAP MS/EX/VA No. 05-19: MEAUX 432 McPeak Street (APN 001-251-06) CITY OF UKIAH CENTER 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet NORT~ ATTACHMENT 1 Attachment # --I~-cPEAK N13'58*53"W 71.66' Affachmenf ~ ~ I-~ ' # &ueLuqool~¥ Attachment __~-- ....... ,o/H----- .............. 0/t4 ' t / STREEJ' 'o McPEAK _8' / o (s=o.oos) · / .... ~ - -- - 6" SS~ / _~._ . ~ ~ _g'~ < , . ,~,~ ~ ~.,~_ .~,*~ -' ~ : '~'.1 I · 1 o ~. ~. I~ . '; ~ ~ o '~I ~'~.~' . · ;' ~~ :'.. I ~ ' ~i " · . . ~.~ .,.~, ~~1~ . "k ~o , '.. _ _ ~ ,.__~ -.i .... -¢:.~, ~,. ~ ~ ' c' ; -' ~ '."' ~,'' , ~ ~ . ~ . . ~ · '" ", .' .~ . ' ' , ,t ~ I ~ 0 ' ' ' . ~ ~ '_' -...'. ,~ ~ · .-.. t. .. . ~ --'~ ~ . A ~ '.-: ~ -. . ..... . ~ ~ ~Z . . Io~ . .~ ~ X X~ N13'58'53"W 71.66' ' Z · . -.%-I ( t 186.06, 95.87' ' .+100.7,3 25 101.1 OM ..LOT 1 6,985 SQ. 'FT. GROSS 6,000 SQ. FT. NET (~') HOUSE. I I --20' UTIL. ESdT _'.---.. .... I 186.58'. GARAGE ~.1 __LTO B'E reuovED);-_ x98.79" 2.00' 100.93 .% 45.00' Attachment 0 10 20 1"= 20' PARKING EXHIBIT DETAIL ¢,,= 2o') Attachment #. .~ ..... CITY OF UKIAH REVISED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE: APPLICANTS: PROJECT NOS.: LOCATION: September 20, 2005 Ronald Meaux Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 432 McPeak Street, City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino (Assessor Parcel Numbers 001-251-06) DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot Parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the west side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the western portion of the lot is undeveloped, with a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. This area is surrounded by wood and chain link fencing. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide a 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots, including one with no public street frontage. The application also includes a Subdivision Requirement Exception from the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance and a Variance from the Special Situations (Section 9251) requirements of the Municipal Code, since these approvals are required to allow the width of the private access driveway required for ingress and egress to an interior lot to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Specifically, proposed Lot 1 would be located on the eastern portion of the subject property, which has 72 feet of frontage located along McPeak Street, a public right;of-way. This lot would have a gross lot area of 6,816 square feet, but the net area would be approximately 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in driveway width is permitted. The applicant intends to remove the existing double-wide garage and construct a garage on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off-street parking. Other areas of the site would remain. undeveloped except for the proposed access driveway to proposed Lot 2. Proposed Lot 2 would be a 6,356 square foot lot located on the western portion of the subject property, with no public street access. This area is being divided to facilitate future single-family construction on the site, but no specific plans for any housing were submitted as' part of the project. The applicants have proposed the development of a 10-foot wide paved driveway to provide ingress and egress to Lot 2. This driveway would extend approximately 97 feet from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary line for the proposed lots, and would be located on the southern portion of Lot 1, approximately two feet from the lot's southern property lir~e. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: City of Ukiah staff conducted a careful and comprehensive review of the project that included the preparation of an Environmental Checklist in which potentially significant adverse impacts to cultural resources were identified. Based on this analysis, staff concluded the project will require the adoption of mitigation measures and a mitigation monitoring program to lessen these impacts to levels that are not significant. Staff further concluded that a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project is appropriate and specific Findings in support of this determination are listed below. Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19: Meaux FINDINGS SUPPORTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: 1. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions' contained in the Initial Study, ,the project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the local or regional environment; . Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in short-term impacts that will create a disadvantage to long-term environmental goals; o The potentially significant impacts resulting from this project would be mitigated to levels that. are not considered to be significant if the recommended mitigation measures are adopted; 4. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and . Based upon the analysis, findings, and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in environmental impacts that 'will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. STATEMENT OF DECLARATION: After appraisal of the possible impacts of this project, the City of Ukiah has determined that the project-will not have a significant effect .on the environment, and further, that this' Negative Declaration constitutes compliance with the requirements for environmental review and analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. This document may be reviewed at the City of. Ukiah Planning Department, Ukiah Civic Center, ~ September 20, 2005 :-'h"~ronment~al',~ rdinator/Director of Planning & .Community Development Date Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19: Meaux INITIAL STUDY OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ,CITY OF 'UKIAH I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Name of Project: Minor Subdivision/Subdivision ReqL~irement*Excepti0n/Variance # 05-19 2. Name of Project Proponent: Ronald Meaux 3. Address of Project Proponent: 206 Mason Street, Suite D, Ukiah, CA 95482 4. Project'Location: 432 McPeak Street, Ukiah, CA , 5. Assessors Parcel Number(s): 001-252-06 6. Date Of Initial Study Preparation:. Au.qust 2, 2005; Revised September 20, 2005 7. Name of Lead Agency: City of Ukiah 8. Address and Phone Number of Lead Agency: 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 / (707~ 463-6200 1 Environmental Setting / Project Description: (Please see the *Proiect Description on pa.qe ? of this Initial Study) 10. Plans, Exhibits, and other Submitted Application Materials: All the plans, exhibits, technical reports, and other submitted application materials are available for review at the City of Ukiah Plannin.q Department - 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah. 11.Initial Study Prepared by: Ukiah Planning Department Staff Mitigated Negative D'eclaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the w~st side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion.of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the western portion of the lot is undeveloped, with.a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. This area is surrounded by wood and chain link fencing. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The'project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide a 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots, including one with no public street frontage. The application also includes a Subdivision Requirement Exception from the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance and a Variance from the Special Situations (Section 9251) requirements of the Municipal Code, since these approvals are required to allow the width of the private access driveway required for ingress and egress to an interior lot to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Specifically, proposed Lot 1 would be located on the eastern portion of the subject property, which has 72 feet of frontage located along McPeak Street, a public right-of-way. This lot would have.a gross 10t area of 6,816 square feet, but the net area would be approximately 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in driveway width is permitted. The applicant intends to remove the existing doubl'e-wide' garage and construct a garage on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off- street parking. Other areas of the site would remain undeveloped except for the proposed access driveway to proposed Lot 2.. Proposed Lot '2 would be a 6,356 square foot lot located on the Western portion of the subject property, with no public street access.. This area is being divided to facilitate future single-family construction on the site, but no specific plans for any houSing were submitted as part of the project. The applicants have proposed the development of a'10-foot wide paved driveway to provide ingress and egress to Lot 2. This driveway would extend approximately 97 feet from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary line for the proposed lots, and would be located on the southern portion of Lot 1, approximately two feet from the lot's southern property line. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 DISCUSSION .AND ANALYSIS.OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. AESTHETICS A. Settin_~: The subject property is located in a single-family neighborhood located in a portion of the city's "Westside" area,, which is known for having relatively unique visual character features and a number of structures with distinct architectural and historical characteristics. However, the existing residence on the east side of the subject property is not recognized for any substantial architectural or historical characteristics and there are no substantial scenic views or vistas on the site or in the surrounding neighborhood. B. Si_qnificance Criteria: Aesthetic impacts would be significant if the project resulted in obstruction- of any scenic.view or vista open to the public, damage to significant scenic resources within a designated State scenic highwayl creation of an aesthetically offensive site open~ to the public, substantial degradation to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundingS, or generation of new sources of light or glare that adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area, including any direct illumination or reflection upon adjaCent property, or could be directly seen by motorists or persons resid!ng or otherwise situated within sight of the project. C. Impacts: The actual division of the subject property will not cause any direct aesthetic impacts, but it will permit the construction of additional residential and accessory buildings. HoWever, there is no . evidence that the development of such buildings will change the aesthetic values of the property, cause obstructions to any scenic view or vista, or damage to a significant scenic resource. Staff further notes that the development of any future residential building will be subject to development standards, such as building setbacks and maximum height restrictions that are designed to minimize the aesthetic impacts caused by the. development of typical single-family residence or appurtenant struCtures. The approval of the minor division will also necessitate the development of an access driveway to provide ingress and egress to proposed Lot 2, with a paved surface that will alter the appearance of Lot 1. However, it is not expected that this relatively small amount of pavement will cause significant adverse visual impacts since the proposed driveway would be developed in a manner that is similar to other driveways on abutting lots. In fact, it is anticipated that the'approval of the proposed exception to reduce the driveway width to 10 feet would actually be a beneficial impact to the site aesthetics since the paved area would be even less obtrusive and more compatible with the apPearance of single-wide driveways found on lots near the subject property. Based on 'the lack of significant adverse impacts to visual characteristics on the site and on abutting properties, no mitigation measures will be required. D. ,Mitigation Measures to Aesthetic Impacts: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/SubdiVision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 i II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES A. Settinq: The City of Ukiah is a small, but urbanized area, and the subject property is located in an established residential neighborhood with no agricultural lands and no close proximity to such lands. B. Si_qnificance Criteria: A significant impact to agricultural resources' would occur if implementation of the project caused a conversion of prime agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses or conflicted with lands zoned for agricultural uses or subject to the Williamson Act. C. Impacts: No impacts to agricultural resources will be caused by the project since it will not require the conversion of existing agricultural lands and is not directly adjacent to agricultural operations or lands zoned for agricultural operatiOns. D.' Miti_qation MeasUres: None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqati0n: N/A III. AIR QUALITY A. Sett. in_q - Air Basin Characteristics: The concentration of a given pollutant in the atmosphere is determined .by the amount' of pollutant released and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant. The major determinants of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain, and sunshine. In Ukiah, a relatively high potential for air pollution results from the combined effects of moderate winds, clear skies, frequent atmospheric inversions that restrict vertical dilution, and terrain · that restricts horizontal dilution. The City of Ukiah is situated in the flat and narrow Ukiah Valley and the presence of the mountains on both the west and east sides of the valley .tends to restrict the horizontal east-west movement of pollutants. The dominant wind direction in the Ukiah Valley is from the northwest to the southeast. Wind speeds in the center of the community are moderate, with winds of 4 mph or less occurring 60 percent of the time.. While the potential for air pollution is high in the Ukiah Valley, measurements provided by the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District show that actual pollutant levels are relatively low due to the lack of upwind sources and the relatively Iow'level of development in the local air basin. B. Siqnificance Criteria: Air quality Impacts would 'be significant if the project results in any conflicts with or obstructions to implementation of any applicable air quality plan; violation of any air quality standard or substantial contributions to an existing air quality violation, including a cumulatively considerable net increase of.any criteria for which the region is in nonattainment as defined by Federal or State regulations; exposure to sensitive recept~)rs' to substantial pollutant concentrations; or creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. C. Existin(~ Air Quality in Ukiah: . The Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD) Operates a monitoring site in Ukiah measuring concentrations of PM-10. Prior to August of 1988 the District also monitored several gaseous pollutants in Ukiah. In August of 1992, the District again established a multi-pollutant monitoring site in Ukiah for gaseous pollutants, which measures ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Air quality in Ukiah meets all Federal and State air quality, standards with the exception of the State Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for ,~ Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 24-hour PM-10 standard. This standard was exceeded on 3 days in 1990, 2 days in 1991, 0 days in 1992, 2 days in 1993, and I day in 1994. No exceedances have.occurred since 1994. Ozone is one of the most serious pollutants affecting the State, and 30 of the 58 counties are designated non-attainment. While Mendocino County.is attainment for ozone, the Ukiah (East Gobbi Street) sampling station has shown a steady increase in the annual hours of ozone levels exceeding the 40, 50, and 60 parts per billion thresholds since 1993. Additionally, the 80'ppb (State standard = 90 ppb) threshold has been exceeded twice over the past 4 years. However,. based upon 1993-1995 data, the ARB has assigned Ukiah an "Expected Peak Day Concentration".(EPDC) level of 74 ppb, which means that.any values above 70 ppb would be excluded from the designation process as extreme concentrations (Marcella Nystrom, ARB, personal communication, 4/24/97). Regardless of the attainment designation and the EPDC status, ozone remains as the pollutant of primary concern to the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District. The major sources of ozone precursors are combustion sources such as, factories, automobiles, and evaporation of solvents and fuels. D. Short-term Construction Related Air Quality Impact-~: Construction activities create a wide range of emissions, ranging from exhaust from heavy equipment to the air-.bound organic gases from solvents, insulating materials, caulking materials, and ,,wet,, pavement. However, while-these emissions may contribute to the accumulation of substances that undergo the photochemical reaction that creates urban ozone, they are not regarded as significant short-term impacts. Dust generated by equipment and vehicles used in ConstructiOn of the building pads, driveways, and the improved entry road and cul-de-sac terminus, would cause the most substantial short-term construction-related air quality impacts. Fugitive dust is emitted both during site preparation, grading, and construction-activity and as a result of wind erosion over exposed earth surfaces. Construction dust impacts are extremely variable, being dependent upon wind speed, soil type, soil moisture, the type of construction activity and acreage affected by the construction activity. The highest potential for construction dust impacts typically occur during the late spring and summer, and early fall months when soils are dry. These small particulates are respirable particulates that can increase the risk of chronic respiratory disease, and can alter lung function in children and the elderly when distributed in large enough concentrations. It can also rise into the lower troposphere and contribute to ozone production. The subdivision of the site will cause none of the air quality impacts described above, but the development of an additional residential building will require grading and site preparation activities that could contribute to the PM-10 impacts described above. However, staff does not anticipate any significant adverse impacts from this development since it will entail work on less than 5,000 square feet of surface area. Staff also anticipates that the 'development of another residence on the subject property would increase traffic and the potential for increased ozone levels caused by vehicle combustion. However, it is not considered likely that the 10 vehicle'trips per day projected from this site will cause any significant increase in this pollutant and no mitigation measures are required for this or other potential air quality impacts. E. Mitiqation Measures for Air Quality: None required. F. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation- N/A IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 A. Settinc~: The subject property is in an urbanized area of the city that has been developed'with a single family residence and a large, un-maintained tree canopy that includes a variety of small native oak trees, exotic landscape tree species, and fruit trees. The site also contains a large garden area, but this ,area has not been well-maintained as part of the overall landscaping for the site and is largely overgrown with a variety of garden plants. B. Si_qnificance Criteria: Project impacts upon biological resources would be significant if any of the following resulted: Substantial direct or indirect effect on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local/regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or any species protected under provisions of the Migratory Bird treaty Act (e.g.burrowing owls); · Substantial effect upon sensitive natural communities identified in local/regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the agencies listed above; · Substantial effect (e.g., fill, removal, hydrologic interruption) upon Federally protected Wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; Substantially interfere with movement of native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites; or Gl Conflict with any local policies/ordinances that protect biological resources (e.g., tree Preservation policy or ordinance).. ,Impacts: 1. Plant Life: The subject property contains a large number of trees, including several smaller oak trees along the southeastern, perimeter, a mature and apparently healthy palm tree in the northeast corner, and a variety of introduced 'shade trees and fruit trees located in the large rear yard area on the western portion of the property. The approval of this project will not directly affect any of these trees, but the construction of the proposed access driveway and an additional residential building would require the removal or pruning of the trees located along the southern property line and in the site's interior areas. HoWever, the removal of these trees is not considered a Significant adverse environmental impact since none of these trees is on any state or federal listing for endangered, threatened or sensitive plant species and there is no local 'ordinance designed tO'require their protection or preservation. Staff also notes that the proposed reduction in driveway width is intended, in part, to. provide at least two feet of planter area for the retention of trees located ..along the southern property line. Therefore, the subdivision of the site with a narrower access driveway is not expected to cause any potential significant adverse impacts to plant resources and no mitigation measures for the retention of existing trees or other vegetation are proposed as environmental mitigation measures. 2. Mammals: The subject property is located near the City's western hills, which are popUlated with deer, squirrels, and other mammals that may occasionally use the vegetation on the site's western half for shelter and food sources. However, the neighborhood containing the project site is almost .completely built out with single-family residential lots with few substantial habitat resources and the subdivision of the site and its development with a narrower access driveway will not significantly hinder the movement of mammals, nor significantly intrude on their habitat. Therefore, it is staff's conclusion that the proposed project would not have a significant impact on Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for 6 Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Vadance No. 05-19 E. any local mammals that utilize the subject property and no mitigation measur&s. 3. Birds: The site is also used. for shelter and food by a number of birds, but there is no evidence of any large nesting sites or rookeries., and the trees support no known substantial populations of any rare or threatened bird species. Therefore, the subdivision of the site is not expected to cause significant or adverse impacts to bird habitat in the .area, .particularly if some of the trees can be retained by the approval Of a narrower access driveway. Therefore, no mitigation measures for impacts to bird habitat will be required. · 4. Fish: Drainage from the site will be routed into City-maintained storm drains that carry surface waters through underground pipes and.into the Mendocino Creek drainage, which does contain salmon and other fish species. Staff of the City Engineer/Public Works Department and the Planning Department reviewed the potential subdivision of the site into two lots and determined that the actual land split would have no substantial or direct effects on this creek since it is minor land use adjustment that does nOt entail any actual development. ·. Additionally, staff does not anticipate any substantial impacts from the development of the proposed access driveway at a reduced width or the construction of .an additional residential unit' on the site due to its distance from the Mendocino Creek drainage and the relatively Small amounts of storm waters such development will cause. Essentially,' staff anticipates that storm waters from the site will be diluted with other storm waters well before it enters the Creek, which is over 'one-half mile to the southeast. Staff also anticiPates that th'e reduction of the driveway access will allow the development of a separate drainage sWale or other drainage device that will be effective as or more effective than the inclusion of a drainage device in a 20-foot wide driveway. Therefore, no direct effects from the reduction, of the paved access driveway are anticipated. Therefore, no mitigation measures specific to fish resources are required. Miti_~ation Measure: None required.. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation: N/A. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Settin_q: The City of Ukiah is rich in historical resources, which includes an eclectic assortment of historic homes and properties. Cultural. resources are similarly abundant, and the City has provided for the preservation and enhancement of its cultural heritage. .. B. Si_qnificance Criteria: A significant impact to historic and cultural resources would' occur if implementation of the project would' · Cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical or cultural resource; · Result in the removal or substantial exterior alteration of a building or structure or district that may be eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register; · Result in the removal or substantial exterior alteration of a building or structure so that it results in the loss of a designated county landmark in the City of Ukiah; Or · Result in the destruction of a unique paleontological resource, site, or unique geological feature, or disturb any human remains. Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major.Variance No. 05-19 C..Impacts: The subject, property is located in an area of the City that'~s known as the "Wests~de' ". This neighborhood is recognized in the General Plan for its historical and architectural values, with an emphasis on .the preservation and enhancement of the prevailing architectural and historical development patterns. In this' case, however, neither the existing residential on the east side of the site or any of the buildings surrounding it utilizes any unique design or building materials, and there is no prevailing architectural.standard for the immediate neighborhood. As .a result, none of the structures in this area are listed on any loCal, state, or federal registry for architectural, historical, or cultural resources, or any other policy document that requires special protection. E. Additionally, Figure V.3-DD of the General Plan's Historic and Archaeological Resources Element indicates that the subject property is situated in an area with the potential to be culturally sensitive. Staff has already noted that the existing structure and subject property have no known architectural or historical resources, and it is unlikely that a prehistoric site or Native American site is located on the subject property. However, in order to ensure that potential resources are not significantly impacted, it is recommended that the develOper of the property be required to halt all construction activities in the event of a discovery and hire a qualified archaeologist to evaluate' the resources and develop mitigation measures as appropriate. This requirement is outlined below in Mitigation Measure No. 1. F. Miff_clarion Measures , If, during site preparation or construction activities, any historic or prehistoric cultural resources are unearthed and discovered, all work shall immediately be halted, and City Planning Department Staff shall be notified immediately of the discovery. The applicant shall be required, to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance and, if deemed necessary, to develop a precise mitigation program prior to the continuation of any site work. G. Impact SiRnificance After Mitiqation: This mitigation ensures that cultural resources will not be adversely affected and that potential impacts 'are reduced to levels that are not significant. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: ' · A. Settinq: The Ukiah Valley is part of an active seismic region that contains the Maacama Fault, which traverses the valley to the east and north of the City. According .to resource materials maintained by the Ukiah Planning Department, the projected maximum credible earthquake along this fault Would be approximately 7.4 magnitude on the Richter scale. According to the Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity County Southwestern Part published by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, the subject property is underlain by an "urban mix" that includes native soils mixed with non-native fill materials. In fact, large areas on the West side of the site have been covered with i'aised planter beds that have contributed to a slight slope (less than 2 percent) that runs from the west to the east. B. Significance Criteria: A significant geologic impact would occur if a' project exposed people or structures to major geologic features that pose a substantial hazard to property and/or human life, or hazards such as earthquake damage (rupture, groundshaking, ground failure, or landslides), slope and/or foundation instability, soil erosion, soil instability, or other geologic problems that cannot be mitigated through the use of standard engineering design and seismic safety design techniques. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 C. Impacts: The subject property is not situated on or near an Alquist-Priolo fault zone and has no known slope .and/or foundation instability, soil instability, or other geologic hazards, in fact, it is staff's opinion that the primary impacts to soils on the site will result from grading, compaction, and other site preparation activities required to construct impervious building pads and an access driveway in the event that a residential structure is constructed on the property. Staff anticipates that between 80-90 percent of site soils in this area could be disturbed during site preparation work, with roughly 60 percent of the soils on the site eventually covered by impervious surfaces. It is possible that soil erosion and/or loss of topsoil could increase on the site if soils are left exposed to winds or storm waters for any substantial period of time.- However, such impacts would generally be short-term in nature and are not expected to be significant if normal grading and site preparation techniques are utilized during any subsequent development. Therefore, the adverse impacts are not considered to be significant in nature. D. Mitiqation Measures: None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After'Mitiqation:' N/A , Vii. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: A. Settinq: Ukiah is generally regarded as a healthy City with relatively clean air and water. While there are some known toxic ."spots" resulting from the past storage of hazardoUs materials underground, the City is not regarded as having a highly contaminated environment. Based on field review, and the review of contaminated site listings maintained by the City, it has been determined that the project site is in a clean and healthy state and not contaminated with toxic or hazardous materials that would present a significant health hazard for occupants'or other persons on the site. The project site'is located approximately 1.0 mile northwest of the-runway for the Ukiah Municipal Airport. This location 'places the property within an area designated in the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan as Compatibility Zone D (Other Airport Environs), where persons are subjectto negligible riSks and occasional noise intrusion from aircraft flying overl ' B. Significance Criteria: A significant impact to the environment and the public associated with hazards and hazardous materials would result from a project if any of the following occurred: · Creation of a significant hazard to the Public or environment by routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials or from foreseeable 'upset and accident conditions; · Emission and/or handling of hazardous, acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school;. · Location of a project on a listed hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; or : · Impairment/interference with adopied emergency.response plan or emergency evacuation plan. C. Impacts: The project does not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would not meet any of the hazardous materials criteria listed above. Staff is, therefore, able to conclude that the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact associated with hazardous materials exposure to the environment and the public. The subject property's relative proximity to the Ukiah Munici.pal Airport will subject persons on the site to Mitigated Negative Declaration /Initial Study for 9 Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major'Variance No. 05-19 ' effects from aircraft flying over the proposed apartment complex. Staff notes, however, that the site is situated to the northwest of the airport, and aircraft taking off from or landing on the north side of the runways do not regularly fly over the site. Furthermore, most of the air traffic that does fly over the site typically maneuvers at altitudes exceeding 1,000 feet above ground level. As a result of these factors, the Current Compatibility Criteria outlined in Table 7A of the airpOrt's master plan place the. subject property into Airport Compatibility Zone D, which includes single-family residential Uses as "normally acceptable uses". Therefore, it .is anticipated that the limited exposure of persons to aircraft overflights will not cause substantial hazards t© persons using the site. In the event of an emergency, ambulance, police, and fire personnel would se .rve tl~e site via McPeak Street, a maintained public street with fire hydrants located within 150 feet of the site. Planning Department staff discussed the project with the Ukiah Fire Marshal and he indicated that although this 28-foot wide street is slightly narrower than other streets in the area, this width has not been a deterrent to the provision of emergency services along this block. The Fire Marshal also indicated that,, in the event a residential building is constrUcted on the property's western portion, fire vehicles used to fight any fires would be stationed on the street to take advantage of nearby fire hydrants and to limit unnecessary exposure of personnel and equipment to situations where they might become-trapped by fire. Therefore, the potential reduction in driveway, width is not considered a significant deterrent to the Department's ability to prevent or suppress a fire on the site, nor would it adversely affect any emergency 'evacuation of the site or the surrounding neighborhood. D, Mitiqation Measures: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A. ) VIII.. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: A. Settinq: Three major creeks flow thrOugh the City on their way to the Russian River, with some of the adjacent areas identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as being potentially subject to flooding events. In this case, the subject property does not directly abut any of these creeks, but drainage from the site does run throuqh a series of. underground storm drains that eventually empty into the Mendocino Creek drainage t~at is located approximately one mile to the southeast. The western portion of the property is approximately, four feet higher than the eastern portions, resulting in a slight slope (less than 2 percent) that declines 'from west to east. However, there are no substantial watercourses or other major drainage features present on this relatively flat site. The Flood Boundary and Floodway Map and the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM Community Panel 060183-0811 B) prepared for the project area by the Federal Emergency Management Agency shows that none of the project site is subject to floodways or floodplains. ' Due to the relatively flat t°pography on the property, storm waters are now absorbed into the 'ground or flow east toward a storm drain inlet located on the eastern side of McPeak Street. This storm drain system extends for approximately One mile before flowing to Mendocino Creek and on to the Russian River. Domestic water quality, aS well as the quality of creek waters in the City of Ukiah is rated as very good, and the project site is served by existing water supply mains located beneath McPeak' Street. Water for fire protection is also available from existing hydrants along this street. Mitigated Negative Declaration/-Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 l0 · . B. Si_qnificance Criteria: Significant impacts associated with hydrology and water quality would result from a project if water quality standards or waste discharge requirements were violated; groundwater and surface water quality and quantity were substantially altered; drainage patterns were substantially altered that would increase erosion/siltation and increase surface runoff; increase runoff that would exceed capacity of existing or planned drainage systems or add a substantial source of pollution; located on a 100-year floodplain; or expose people to hydrological hazards such as flooding or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. C. Impacts: Floodway/Floodplain Issues: As noted above, the site is not designated with any FEMA-mandated floodway or floodplain, and there is no known source of localized ponding or flooding that adversely affects the site. In addition, the site is served-by a storm drainage system with sufficient capacity to ~erve the typical single-family residential structure in the event it is constructed and storm drainage increases. Therefore, no localized or general increases in flooding potential are expected as a result of the project. Storm Drainage: The subdivision of the property will not cause any direct significant adverse impacts to storm drainage on the.site, but it will establish an additional building site. In the event this area is developed, staff anticipates that between 80-90 percent of the lot's surface area will be graded or otherwise modified and that at least 60 percent of its surface area will be covered with impervious surfaces, including building pads, parking pads, and' access driveway paving, This development will increase the volume of storm drainage from the site, but Public Works Department staff does not anticipate that such volumes would cause significant adverse impacts to site drainage since the overall development area is .relatively small and grades are not substantial. In fact, the existing drainage for the site will allow any new storm waters to be collected and transported to the storm drain system in McPeak Street and on to the Mendocino Creek/RUssian Rivet'drainage to which it connects. The' eventual development of the western portion of the property could adversely affect on-site drainage or drainage onto neighboring lots. However, due to the quantities involved, these impacts are not expected to be significant in nature and it is anticipated that the imposition of standard drainage and erosion control measures typically required the building permit process for any buildings will .actually improve on-site and off-site drainage patterns.' In fact, the zoning and subdivision standards that apply to the proposed project require the inclusion of a drainage system in the utility easement and/or access driveway. In this case, it is anticipated that the proposed reduction in· access driveway width would allow the development of a swale or other drainage feature that Would be as effective as or more effective than one developed in a 20-foot Wide driveway. Therefore, staff anticipates no significant adverse drainage.impacts if a single-family residence is eventually constructed on the western portion of the property. Water Quality Standards: According to City Water Department staff, adequate quantities of Water for domestic use are available for the property through the water system that runs below .the McPeak Street right-of-way, although extensions may be required to fully serve' all of the proposed units. The subdivision of the site will cause no direct water qualitY impacts on the site, but staff noted that' the eventual development of the property with another single-family residence would not cause any significant adverse impacts to domestic water quality on the site or any a violation of any water quality standard. Groundwater Supply and Recharge: No direct groundwater impacts will result from the proposed subdivision of the site, but Planning staff anticipates that up to 60 percent of the site's surface area Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 will be covered with a variety of impervious surfaces if an additional single-family' residence is .eventually developed. However, it is not anticipated the development of such a structure would have a significant adverse impact on groundwater supplies or the 'ability for the underlying water table to recharge since large ,areas will probably be left open to groundwater percolation. Furthermore, the water table beneath the site is regularly recharged by groundwater systems that flow east from the western hills of Ukiah toward the Russian River. Wastewater and Sewer: The proposed subdivision.of the site will not cause any direct impacts to the City-maintained sewer main that runs beneath McPeak street,, but the development of an 'additional residential unit on the property would contribute to the capacity that this system can carry. However, while the City's overall sewer system is nearing capacity, Public Utilities staff anticipates that a sufficient number of hookups to the system will be available to serve any future residential units and that the development of the proposed lot will not require extensive modifications to existing sewer systems of the development of new sewer system resources. D. Mitigation Measures for Water Quality and Quantity ReSources: None required. E. !mpact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation: N/A IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: A. Settin(~: The City of Ukiah is a compact urban environment, and functions as the County seat for Mendocino County. Commercial, residential, and' industrial land uses are planned for specific areas, as set forth in the 1995 Ukiah General Plan, With allowed and permitted land uses'defined through distinct zoning districts that are outlined in the Ukiah Municipal Code. In this casel the 13,361 square foot property is zoned for R-1 (Low Density Residential) uses and residential development is limited to one unit for every 6,000 square feet of. net lot area.' . B. Si_qnificance Criteria: Significant land use impacts would occur if the project substantially conflicts with established uses, disrupt or divide an established' community, or result in a substantial alteration to present or planned land uses. Proposed project consistency with the Ukiah General Plan and zoning and any other applicable environmental plans and policies is also evaluated in making a determination about potential, land use impacts. C. Impacts:. As proposed,, the 13,361 square foot subject property would be divided into two lots with a 10-foot wide driveway access providing ingress and egress to one of the lots. Proposed Lot 1 would front McPeak Street, with approximately 72 feet of street frontage. This lot, which contains the existing single-family residence and garage, would have a gross lot area of 6,912 square feet and a net area of 6,003 square feet once the area of the proposed access driveway is excluded. Proposed Lot 2 consists of the 6,365 square foot area located on the western portion of the site. This lot would have no street frontage and ingress and egress to this land-locked lot would be provided by the ten-foot wide access driveway requested in the exception. This lot is not developed at this time, but it does contain the remnants of.a large garden and a large-number of trees. General Plan CompatibilitY: The Ukiah .General Plan designates the subject area for LDR (Low Density Residential) land uses and single-family residential development is included as an acceptable land use. The. proposed lots would also comply with the. density standards and siting Criteria 'for the LDR land use designation, as outlined in the Land Use Element of the Plan. Staff also notes that the proposed subdivision is also consistent with Housing Element goals and policies that encourage infill 'housing projects in all neighborhoods of the City, regardless of use type or density. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 Staff also determined that the proposed division of the lahd and its eventual development with an additional single-family reSidence is entirely consistent with the goals of the Community Design Element and the Historical and Archeological Resources Element. ' Goals and policies in both these elements stress the preservation and enhancemel~t of neighborhood character and encourage new construction to reflect the historical and architectural characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. In this case, the existing residential structure on the eastern portion of the site is being extensively remodeled with design features and building materials that are entirely consistent, and in some cases, more attractive than, .the existing structure or thOse four~d on surrounding residential structures. Furthermore, there is nothing to indicate that any additional buildings constructed on the site will deviate from the designs used. on abutting buildings. Based on these factors, and the fact that the project is not inconsistent with other General Plan elements and requirements, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposed apartment complex is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan. Consistency with Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance and Ukiah 'Municipal 'Code Standards: The proposed subdivision is consistent with the majority of development and 'subdivision standards that apply to this project. However; the proposed 10-foot access driveway is not consistent with the access standards outlined in Subdivision Ordinance Section 8305(A) and UMC Sections 9251 and 9252, which both require that private driveways or roadways not abutting a dedicated and accepted City street are constructed to particular standards that include a paved driveway with a minimum width of 20 feet. In this case, the applicant has requested the proposed exception and variance to reduce the required driveway width to a minimum of 10 feet. This lesser width is requested for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the development of a 20-foot wide access driveway would leave one or both of the proposed lots with too little net lot area to comply with Zoning and subdivision standards. However, in analyzing the 'proposed exception and variance, staff finds no major conflict with the zoning and subdivision standards that apply to this project since the Ukiah Municipal Code and the Ukiah Subdivision include allowances for exceptions and variances when warranted. "Furthermore, the approval or denial of any exception or variance will only occur after a subjective review by the Planning Commission and City Council and prior to any action on the proposed subdivision. Staff has als0 determined that the construction of the 10-foot wide access driveway proposed in the exception and variance would have only minor impacts on site acceSs, circulation, parking, and emergency access. Staff further concludes that the .reduced driveway width could actually allow for the development of more effective drainage systems and trenching for the provision and maintenance of utilities. Based on these factors, staff finds no significant adverse environmental impacts,associated with the proposed reduction in access roadway width and no need to require mitigation measures. Nei.qhborhood Compatibility: The approval of the proposed subdivision will allow the development of an additional single-family residence on the western portion of the site 13,365 square foot lot. Due to the lack of adequate street frontage, only one of the proposed lots can meet standards for frontage along McPeak Street and the second lot would be an interior lot with the proposed 10-foot wide driveway access on an easement across the first lot. This type of 10t configuration does not prevail in the surrounding' neighborhood, but it is not uncommon either. In fact staff reviewed aerial ~photographs of the surrounding neighborhood and conducted site visits to confirm that the surrounding neighborhood has numerous interior parcels with no pUblic street frontage, including a parcel that abuts the southwest corner of the subject property. Staff also noted that the use of driveways nar¢ower than the20-foo;[ standard is fairly common.to the area, including several lots located along the same block of McPeak Street and on some of the interior lots observed by staff. It is probable that most of these driveways were developed prior to the Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor SUbdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 13 imposition of zoning standards, but these nonconforming driveways have provided effective site access and parking through the life of the single-family structures they serve. Therefore, it is the opinion of staff that the proposed 10-foot wide driveway will be compatible with these driveways. D. Miti_qation Measure: None required. E. !mpact SiRnificance After Mitiqation: N/A X. MINERAL RESOURCES:. A. Settin_q: The soils on the subject property have been altered substantially by fills of non-native soils and inorganic materials, and are, not recognized for any substantial valuable natural resources. Materials derived from natural resources off the site will be used to develop this site in the event that additional residential buildings are constructed. B. Significance Criteria: Impacts to natural resources would be substantial if the proposed project resulted in the loss of significant or locally important materials such as minerals, gravel, sand or wood. C. Impacts: The subdivision of the site will cause no direct impaCts to the site, but the splitting of the parcel will establish a building site area where another single-family residence could be constructed. In this case, such development is expected to use sand, gravel, rock, wood, concrete, and other naturally occurring building materials that are readily available in the Ukiah Valley, with no extraction of such .materials from the project site. Furthermore, it is not anticipated the development of one additional residential building would demand excessive amounts of these materials or cause a direct increase in mining activities, nor woul'd it disrupt any substantial natural habitat or migration corridors. Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on natural resources. D. Miti_qation Measures:' None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation: N/A. Xl. NOISE: A. Settina: The subject properties are located in a developed area of the urban landscape that has the typical background ~noise sources expected in an urban environment, including automobile and truck traffic, collections of human voices, street working creWs and heavy equipment, etc. This site is also subject to aircraft noise from' aircraft flying over'the site, as discussed in Section VII (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) and Section IX (Land Use) of this study. Despite these noise sources, Planning Department staff noted no consistent or particularly obnoxious source of noise in the neighborhood. B.. Siqnificance Criteria: A project will typically have a significant noise impact if it exposes people to or generates noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or Noise Ordinance; causes, a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; or causes a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project. C..Impacts: The Ukiah General Plan identifies, the significant noise sources 'in the City as transportation noise coming from major roadways, railroad operations, industrial plants', and airports. The focus of the Noise Element in the General Plan is to Protect the noise-sensitive land uses from Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 :].4 transportation, industrial, railroad, and airport noise through the establishment of noise contours around these noise sources in the community, where typical noise can exceed the defined threshold of 60 dB (decibels). In addition, the City Noise Ordinance limits'the maximum level of noise that can emanate from residential units to 40 decibels during.the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.; 50 decibels from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; and 45 decibels from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. In this case, the subdivision of the site would cause no direct noise increases, but it would'establish a building site on the western portion of the property. However, in the event that this area is developed with an allowed single- family residence, there is no evidence that the construction or occupation of the structure will cause these noise levels to be exceeded regularly or significantly: Therefore, no specific mitigation measures will be required for noise reduction during any construction on the si.te or for the occupation of any allowed residential building. As noted earlier in this analysis, aircraft using Ukiah Municipal Airport fly over the subject property and ' create the potential for annoying occupants of the residences in this neighborhood. However, the exposure of persons to aircraft noiSe is usually on an occasional basis, with no regular or sustained flights occurring.over the area. As a result, the potential increase in noiSe levels is not considered to be hazardous to humans and is too short-lived to violate the equivalent decibel standards listed in the City's Noise Ordinance. Therefore, aircraft noise will not cause any significant adverse noise effeCts and no mitigation is required. D. Mitiqation Measure: N/A E. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation: N/A Vii. POPULATION AND HOUSING: A.' Setting: The 2000 census indicates that the population, of Ukiah is approximately 15,597 persons, with a slow and stable growth rate. The population has not changed much in the past several years, and it has only been very recently that it appears to be noticeably increasing. The 1995 · General Plan projected a population of 17,291 for the year 2000, which is 1694 more than the current population. · . El. Siqnificance Criteria: Population and housing impacts would be significant if the p~oject induced substantial direct or indirect population growth in an area and displaced substantial numbers of existing houses and/or substantial numbers of people, thus requiring replacement housing elsewhere. C. Impacts: The proposed subdivision of the site will 'cause no direct impacts'to local housing stocks, but it will establish a building site for another single-family residence in the area. However, the development of one additional housing unit will cause no substantial increases in Ukiah Valley housing or have any noticeable effects on housing stocks in the Ukiah Valley. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation' N/A Xlll.' PUBLIC SERVICES' A. Setting' The City of Ukiah is a small, but urbanized, area with a full complement of public services that include police and fire services, public schools, public works and utilities, and emergency services. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 ) ~ .B. Si_qnificance Criteria: Impacts to public services would be significant if the approval of the subdivision and exception to driveway width standards resulted in adverse physical impacts that would require the construction of new public facilities or substantial alteration to existing governmental facilities to maintain acceptable service levels or performance levels. C. Impacts: Staff discussed the proposed project with the City Police, Parks, Utilities, and Fire Departments, as well as with the Ukiah Unified School District. City Police Department: Discussions with the City Police Department reveal that the. proposed project will not result in the need for additional police officers, and will not have a substantial affect . on their ability to serve any future residents on the subject property. City police also indicated that the allowance of a 10-foot wide driveway and a building site on the interior portion of the existing parcel will not cause significant adverse impacts on their.ability to serve the proposed lots. City Community Services Department: Discussions with the City Community Services Department reveal that the proposed project will n°t result in the need for additional staff or park facilities, and will not have substantial affect the ability to maintain City-owned park facilities. This area of the City is within one mile of smaller pocket parks, the Todd Grove Park facilities, and the Ukiah MuniciPal Golf Course. City Utilities Department: Discussions with the City Utilities Department reveal 'that the proposed project will not result in the need for new or expanded electrical generation sourCes, nor will it caUse the need for adcJitional staff to maintain the current City-owned electric service facilities. In fact, staff indicated that the amount of electricity needed by any new single-family residential development that results from the subdivision of the site will not be substantial and is available from current generation capacity. The City's sewage treatment plant is reaching capacitY, but Utilities Department staff has indicated that it anticipates hookups will be available for any additional single-family residential deveiopment that could occur as a result of the proposed subdivision and exception. Therefore, the aPproval of the project will not cause significant adverse impacts to the sewer treatment system. Utilities staff also indicated that the reduction in the 'width of the paved' area proposed in the exception will have no adverse effects on their ability to serve the site through a utility easement since such serviceS will probably be privately maintained. In fact, they suggest that the reduction of the driveway to 10 feet might make such service easier over time since the paved area' would not have to be completely torn up or reconstructed when repairs or service is necessary. City Fire Department: The City Fire Marshal indicated that the subdivision of the property and the reduction in driveway access width would have no siqnificant adverse impacts on the. Fire Department's provision of emergency services to the existing residence or any future, residential use on the western portion of the site. D, Ukiah Unified School District: Previous discussions with the Ukiah Unified School District reveal that it has the basic capacity to'house and educate the minimal number of potential students generated by the development of any additional residential buildings on the site. The applicants will be required to pay the adopted school district developer mitigation fee that is intended to Offset the cumulative impact contribution to the district from all' development projects.. Mitigation Measures: None required. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 3.6 XlV. RECREATION A. Setting: The subject property does not directly border any City-maintained par. ks, but the City does operate the McGarvey mini-park on a site approximately one-quarter mile northeast of the site, which is also within a half-mile of the Todd Grove Park complex, Anton Stadium, and the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. Additionally, the City of Ukiah maintains a variety of recreational facilities throughout the City and runs programs for both youth and adults. B. Significance Criteria: A project will have a significant impact if it increases the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and other recreational facilities, includes significant recreational facilities or requires new facilities that will have an adverse effect on the physical environment. Impacts: The subdivision of the project site with a reduced driveway width will have no direct impacts to recreational .services in the City, but it will establish another building site that Could be developed with a single-family residential' building. 'However,' the effects of such development will have no significant adverse effects on local recreational services or facilities since its incremental contribution to the numbers of persons using these resources will be too 'small. ,. C. Miti_qation Measures: None required. D. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation: N/A XV.TRANSPORTATION/ TRAFFIC/ CIRCULATION: A. Setting: Ukiah is a rural city that is not experiencing significant population growth. However, as the government and commercial center for Mendocino County, the City has been growing in terms of commercial development. This has increased traffic and its corresponding delays at intersections, particularly during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. While traffic impacts are somewhat subjective in nature, recent traffic studies show that delays at some key intersections have substantially increased. The subdivision of the property with a reduced driveway width will cause no direct impacts to traffic in the project site area, but the development of an additional single-family residence on the building site established by this action will cause a minor increase in traffic levels. Public Works/City 'Engineer Department staff used standard traffic generation calculations prepared by the Institute of Transportatibn Engineers in the. 6th edition (1997) of its manual Trip Generation to determine that such development would generate approximately 10 additional trips per day. In the event that the proposed subdivision is approved, the applicant ifltends to demolish the existing two-car garage and replace it with on-site parking for'at least two vehicles on proposed Lot.. 1, including a single-wide garage on the south side of the residential building. Project exhibits show no off-street parking facilities for proposed Lot 2, but the 6,000-plus square foot lot will provide sufficient area for such parking. Planning staff will determine the exact number of requieed off-street parking stalls for the site once building permits for any residential structure is proposed and notes that no building can be legally occupied until parking is established on-site. B. Significance criteria: ACcording to the Ukiah General Plan Circulation Element, the minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) is LOS "D." Other criteria include whether the project would have substantial effects upon air traffic patterns; would increase traffic hazards due to design features; has inadequate emergency access or parking capacity; and would create conflicts with adopted policies, programs and plans for alternative transportation. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 ) ) C. Impacts: Traffic: No direct traffic impacts are exPected if ihe proposed subdivision is approved, but the splitting of the property as proposed will allow an additional residence to 'be constructed on the west side of the subject property. In the event that a residential structure is developed; staff projects that traffic to and from the site would increase by approximately 10 trip ends per day, which is not considered' to be a significant adverse impact to area traffic levels. · .Parkin.q and Access' The single-wide garage originally proposed for the existing residential structure will provide only one 'parking stall for proposed Lot .1 and an additional parking area has been included on the revised project exhibits to ensure full compliance with zoning requirements for front yard setbacks and the provision of two off-site parking, stalls. This off-street parking layout (Attachment 3) provides sufficient parking for this.lot and will have to be developed prior to the issuance of a permit to occupy the existing single-family residential structure. . . . In .the event the proposed lot split is approved and an additional residential building is developed on Lot 2, two off-street parking stalls will be required before' the building could be occupied. However, the 6,000-plus square foot lot will have sufficient capacity for such parking and no adverse impacts to area parking are expected if an additional residential structure is constructed. · The proposed exception and variance to allow a driveway width of 10 feet instead of the 20-foot width required will make ingress and egress between the lot pro. posed on the western, portion of the property and McPeak Street more difficult since two vehicles would be unable to pass' each other. However, staff notes that the proposed driveway Width will not cause significant adverse 'impacts to on-site circulation since it will serve only' one lot and the traffic from Lot 2 is not expected to exceed 10 trips per day. Furthermore, whi'le minor conflicts could occur when vehicles enter and exit the site at the same time, persons yie. lding the right-of-way would rarely have to back up more than .50 feet in either direction. In fact, none of the factors discussed above rePresent significant adverse traffic or circulation impacts, and no mitigatibn measures are recommended. ., D. Mitigation Measures: None required. . E. Impact SiRnificance After Mitigation: N/A XVI.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS A. _Settinq: Energy resources are readily available to the' citizens of Ukiah. These include electricity, natural gas, propane, and alternative sources.such as solar,·wind', and hydroelectric. B. Significance Criteria: A project will have a' significant .impact if it causes the use of fuel 'or energy in a wasteful manner, or encourages activities that'use large amounts of fuel or energy. C. Impacts: No direct impacts to utilities or service systems will be caused .by the subdivision 'of the property, but the development of any additional residential unit would require the consumption of fuels and energy during its construction and occupation. However, there is nothing to' indicate that future residential uses on the site would use significant levels of such resources. Therefore, the project will not cause significant adverse energy impacts or. require the development of new source§ of energy. · D.' Mitiqation Measure.~: None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitigation_: N/A Mitigated Negative Declaration /Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. ·05-19 18 XVll. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING: AB 3180 requires all public agencies to adopt a monitoring and 'reporting program whenever they adopt an EIR or "Mitigated Negative Declaration." The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this Mitigated Negative Declaration require the applicants to incorporate or comply with the important Mitigation Measures. listed in Table 1, below. Table 1- MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING PROGRAM MITIGATION MONITORING FUNDING MEASURES RESPONSIBILITY HOW AND WHEN VERIFICATION RESPONSIBILITY Historical and Applicants with Staff During all site Planning Applicants in the event Cultural oversight preparation and Department staff of a discovery Resources construction phases XVll. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: A. Potential to Degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reTduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop .belOw self sustaining levels, threaten.to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?' YES NO X B. Short Term:.. Does the project have' the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one that occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future). YES NO X C. Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the 'environment is significant). YES NO X D. Substantially Adverse: Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?' YES NO X Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 19 XVIlI. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this Initial Stud~. ! find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the ~nvironment,'and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the prOposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described within the Initial Study will be incorpo~'ated into the design of the project or required by the City of Ukiah. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. .,, erj,wr~nment, and an EN/.Y.~~NTAL s, - ~nmental Coordinator/DirectOr of Planninq & Community Development Title I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant adverse impact on the IMPACT REPORT shall be requi.red. Charley Stump Print Name August 2, 2005 Date Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision .Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 2O RESOURCES USED TO PREPARE THIS INITIAL STUDY . , . . . , o City of Ukiah General Plan, 1995 The Linkaqe Between Land Use, Transportation and Air Quality, State Air Resources Board, 1993. The Land Use - Air Quality Linkage: How Land Use and Transportation Affect Air Quality, State Air Resources Board, 1997. Transportation-Related Land Use Strateqies to Minimize' Mobile Source Emissions: An Indirect Source Research Proiect, State Air Resources Board, 1995. A Source of Air Quality Conditions Includinq Emissions Inventory, Ozone Formation,- PM10. Generation, and Mitigation Measures for Mendocino County, CA. Sonoma Technologies, Inc., November, 1998. Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity County, Southwestern Part, California, U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, January, 1991. U.SiG.S. Topographical Map, Ukiah Quadrangle, 1958 (photo inspected 1975), Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan Report, Shutt Moen Associates, July, 1996. Trip Generation Manual, 6th EditiOn, Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1997 10. Correspondence with Californian Department of Transportation staff, 'dated November 22, 2003, regarding potential impacts associated with Minor Subdivision Map Application No. 02-39 ) 11. Correspondence/discussions with the following City staff and Agency representatives: -' a. ChuckYates, Fire Marshal b. Thomas McArthur, Sewer/Water Eng. Tech. c. Cindy Sauers, Electrical Distribution Engineer d. Diana Steele, Public Works DirectodCity Engineer.. e. Tim Eriksen, Civil Engineer. f. RickSands, Engineering Associate g. John Williams, Police Chief h. Paul Richey, Airport Manager Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 21 .87' ' .+1oo. 73 /-"'--'-' GM _OT 1 985 SQ. FT. GROSS 000 SQ. FT. NET · (E) HOUSE EM PARKIN( I GARAGE L__~_TO B'E REMOVED.) )8.79' x 100.93 45.00'. 0 10 20 1". = 20' TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP ;TATEMENT A FIELD SURVEY BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION )' REPRESENTS THE VISUAL. SURFACE,CONDITIONS IE ~ 8/26/05 DATE LANDS OF MEA UX ACKSON · AND. ASSOCIATE'S LAND SURVEYORS 1055 'W. COI.LP..GE AVEN-UE. ~139 SANTA ROSA CALIFORNIA 95401 (707) 894-8494 DATE 5/51/05 JOB NO. 25-110 SHEET 1 OF 1 E.NVT'RON MENTAL CHECKLTST FOR MEAUX MTNOR SUBD1'V]'SON MAp/SUBD1.V~'sT~ON REQ'U~[REMENT EXCEpTTON/VAR[ANCE NO..0.5-[9 ENVIRONMENTAL cHECKLiST I.. AESTHETICS Would the ProjeCt: . 1) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 2). Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock, outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? . 3) SubstAntially degrade the existing visual 'character or quality of the site and its'surroundings? 4) Create anew source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or 'nighttime views in the area? II. -AGRICULTURE RESOURCES _ Would the Project: .. i) Convert Prime Farmland,'Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance . (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to' non-agricultural use? 2) 3) Conflict with .existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in Conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Potentially Significant Impact Significant with Mitigation ' Less Than Significant Impact No - Beneficial Impact. Impact ENVIRONMENTAL'CHECK_LiST FOR · · MEAUX MINOR SUBDIvIsON'MAP/SUBDIVISION. REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE 'NO'. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact. Incorporated III, AIR QUALITY Would the Project: 1) Conflict with or obstruct [] [] !~. [] [] implementation of the applicable air quality plan? /' 2) Violate any air quality standard or [] . []I~ [] [] contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 3) Result in a cumu atively [] [] li~ [] [] considerable net increase of any. · criteria pollutant for. which the project region is non-attainment· Under an applicable' federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? ~ 4) Expose sensitive receptors to [] [] [] [] substantial pollutant , concentrations? li~ 5) Create objectionable odors [] [] [] [] affecting a substantial number of. people?. · .. IV. ,BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the Project: /' 1) Have a substantial adverse effect, [] [] []I~ [] either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies-or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish & Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? . ~ 2) Have a substantial adverse effecl [] [] [] [] on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIS~ FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISONMAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO.. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated 3) Have a substantial adverse effect [] [] [] [] on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological. interruption, or other means? 4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory [] []I~ [] [] wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nurseries? 5) Conflict with any local policies or / ordinances protecting biological [] []I~/ [] [] resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 6) Conflict with provisions of an / adopted Habitat Conservation [] [] []I~ [] Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional,-or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project: /' d 1) Cause a substantial adverse [] [] [] [] change in the significance of a historical re§ource as defined in §15064.5? 2) Cause a substantial adverse [] [] [] [] change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? 3) Directly or indirectly destroy a [] [] [] [] unique paleontological resource or site or unique feature? /' 4) Disturb any human remains, [] [] []I~/' [] including those interred outside . of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the Project: 1) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated a) Rupture of a known [] [] [] [] earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. b) Strong seismic ground [] [] [] [] shaking? c) Seismic-related ground [] [] [] [] failure, including liquefaction? d) Landslides? [] [] D./ [] 2) Result in substantial soil erosion [] []li~ [] [] or the loss of topsoil? 3) Be located on a geologic unit or [] [] [] i~' [] soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? / 4) Be located on expansive soil, as [] [] [] ~ [] defined in Table 16-1 of the Uniform Building Code (2001), creating substantial risks to life or / property? 5) Have soils incapable of [] [] [] [] adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative. wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the Project: / 1) Create a significant hazard to the [] [] []I~ [] public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIkNCE NO. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated 2) Create a significant hazard to the [] [] [] [] public, or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? 3) Emit hazardous emissions or [] [] [] [] handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or / proposed school? 4) Be located on a site which is [] [] '[] [] included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? 5) For a project located within an [] []I~ [] [] airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 6) For a project within the vicinity of [] [] [] [] a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? / 7) Impair implementation of or [] []I~ [] [] physically interfere with adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? / 8) Expose people or structures to [] []I~ [] [] significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the Project: [] [] FI' [] 1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISOI~ MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIA/~CE NO. 05-19 . . Less Than -- Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigatibn Impact Impact Impact .., Incorporated 2) Substantially deplete groundwater [] [] [] []. supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 3) Substantially alter the existing [] []I~ [] [] drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial . erosion or siltation on or off site? 4) Substantially alter the existing [] []i~f [] [] drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a . stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site? 5) Create or contribute runoff water [] [] which would exceed the capacity of existing or planhed stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6) Otherwise substantially'degrade [] [] [] [] water quality?. 7) Place housing within a 100-year [] [] [] ~ · [] flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? '8) Place within a 100-year ~lood [] [] [] / [] hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? 9) Expose people or structures to a [] [] []I~ [] significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? 10) Be subject to inundation by [] [] [] [] seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX ~4INOR SUBDIVIS.ON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with .Significant No Beneficial ImPact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the ProjeCt , 1) Physically divide an established [] [] i~!/' [] [] community? 2) Conflict with any applicable land [] [] [] [] use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose, of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? 3) Conflict with any applicable [] [] [] [] habitat conservation plan or . natural community conservation .plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the Project: / 1) Result in the loss of availability of [] []lB/ [] [] a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? / 2) Result in the loss of availability of [] []I~ [] [] a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Xl. NOISE Would the Project result in: / 1) Exposure of per'sons to or [] [][~ [] [] generation of noise levels in excess of standards established · in the local general plan or noise · ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 2) Exposure of persons to, or [] [] []1~/ [] generation of, excessive ground- borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels? 3) Asubstantial permanent increase [] [] . [] [] in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 4) Asubstantial temporary or [] []li¢ [] [] periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing .without the project? ENVIRONMENTAL CHEC.KLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIP~ONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated 5) For a project located within an [] [] [] [] airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 6) For a project within the vicinity of [] [] [] [] a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Xll. POPULATION' AND HOUSING Would the Project: ./ 1) Induce substantial population [] []I~ [] [] growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses') or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 2) Displace substantial numbers of [] [] [] [] existing hOusing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? J 3) Displace substantial numbers of [] [] [] [] people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XlII..PUBLIC SERVICES Would the Project: 1) ' Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in .order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response timesl or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? [] [] Police protection? [] []I~,,~/ [] [] SChools? [] [] I~/ [] [] Parks? [] []I~ [] [] Other public facilities? [] [] [] [] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO. 05-19 ) ~ Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigation ' Impact Impact Impact Incorporated XlV. RECREATION Would the Project: I~ 1) Increase the use of existing [] [] [] [] neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? 2) Include recreational facilities or [] [] I~ [] [] require the construction of recreational facilities.which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? XV..TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the Project: I~ 1) Cause an increase in traffic, [] [] [] []. which is a substantial relation to the existing traffic Icad and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? J 2) Exceed, either individually or [] [] [] [] cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 3) Result in a change in air traffic [] [] [] I~ [] patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? ti~ 4) Substantially increase hazards [] [] [] [] due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? i~ 5) Result in inadequate emergency [] [] [] [] access? 6) Result in inadequate parking [] [] [] [] capacity? 7) Conflict with adopted policies, [] [] ~ [] [] plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ! ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 'FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREM1~NT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE 1~O. 05-19 Less Than -- Potentially Significant 'Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant .No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact -, Incorporated XVI.,U, TILITIES AND SERVICF - SYSTEMS Would the Project: 1) Exceed wastewater treatment [] [] [] ~ [] requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? .2) Require or result in construction .l-I [] I~ [] [] of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 3) Require or result in the. [] [] .j [] [] construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 4) Have sufficient water supplies [] [] ~ [] [] available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or . expanded entitlements needed? 5) Result in a determination by the [] [] .[] [] wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected-demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 6) Be served by a landfill with [] [] [] [] sufficient permitted capacity to · accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 7) Comply with federal, state, and [] [] [~//" [] [] local statues and regulations related to solid waste? .. · XVII.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1) Does the project have the [] [] [] [] potential to .degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? · ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX ~4INOR SUBDIVlSON F~AP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREI~ENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO. 05-19 10 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST' Significant with Significant ' No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated ~ 2) Does the project have impacts [] [] [] [] that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection, with the effects of past projects, the effects 'of current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? 3) Does the project have [] [] i~ [] [] environmental effects which' will cause substantial, adverse effects on human beings, either directlY or indirectly? _ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP/SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION/VARIANCE NO. 05-19 11 CITY OF UKIAH RESPONSE TO COMMENTS for REVISED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE: PROJECT NOS.: APPLICANTS: LOCATION: October 12, 2005 .. Minor SubdMsion/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19 Ronald Meaux 432 McPeak Street, City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino (Assessor Parcel Numbers 001-251-06) PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration for this project Was noticed for the period extending from September 21, 2005 through October 11, 2005 and no formal comments were received during this period. Staff did, however, receive written -comments pertaining to the Negative Declaration from Mr. Shawn.Harmon on October 12, 2005, and has prepared responses to these comments. These comments, Which are incorporated within a document that. includes comments pertaining directly to the Variance component of the project, are included as Attachment 1. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Mr. Harmon's comments are listed under three sections that are numbered as 1) Traffic;.2) Parking; and 3) Drainage, with subsections listed under alphabetical headings. Staff has responded to each of the comments using the subheadings as reference. 1) Traffic In its analysis of traffic impacts resulting from the proposed project, staff determined that the approval of a minor subdivision with an exception would not cause any direct impacts since it would not directly cause any additional development of the subject property. However, staff also notes that the McPeak Street corridor abutting the property is currently operating under very manageable levels of service and that'no decline in these levels of service were anticipated in the event that the site is developed with the levels of residential development permitted within the R-1 Zoning District. ao b, Mr. Harmon cites his opinion that the environmental review process used by the City of Ukiah does not address cumulative environmental impacts. In this case, staff noted in the Environmental Checklist prepared for the project that cumulative traffic impacts resulting from the subdivision of the site would not be significant. 'Staff indicates that no direct traffic increases will be caused by the Subdivision of the property, but that the development of an .additional residential unit on proposed Lot 2 would result in a traffic increase of approximately 10 vehicle trips per day. Mr. Harmon opines that up to 30 additional vehicle trips will result from the .subdivision of the subject property since second dwelling units could be developed. In this case, staff does not consider such intense development likelY, bUt does concur that it is a possibility. In this event, however, an increase of 30 trips per day is not expected to cause a significant decrease in any level of service for McPeak Street and other nearby roads, which currently operate with no major adverse traffic impacts. Response to Comments for Mitigated Negative Declaration/initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19: Meaux C, d, eo Mr. Harmon comments that the 28-foot wide area between curbs on McPeak Street is substandard and will reduce the traveled way to 12 feet if cars are parked on both sides of the street. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr. Harmon comments on the capacity of the McPeak Street corridor and its use by persons that do not reside on this street. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr, Harmon opine~ thata more competent traffic analysis of the cumulative impacts to traffic should be conducted given the width of McPeak Street and the current traffic demands on this transit corridor. As no.l~ed earlier,, the proposed 'subdivision of the subject property will not cause any direct traffic impacts and no traffic study is warranted for this project. Staff also notes that direci observations of traffic along McPeak Street were'done by 'staff of the City Planning Department and the City Engineer/Public Works Department during various times of the day, and no regular or significant volumes of traffic were noted. Based on 'these observations and the potential traffic that future development on the subject property Could cause, it was the consensus opinion of staff that no traffic study wOuld be warranted even if the project entailed specific development plans. 2) a, b, Parking Mr. Harmon cites that no analYsis of on-site parking was conducted along Mcpeak Street and indicates that additional parking caused by the future development of the lots proposed in this project will cause a number of unreasonable hardships to. adjacent properties. Staff notes that the subdivision of the subject property will not cause any direct parking impacts, but that the future development of the two lots proposed could indeed cause some on-street parking. However, staff further notes that any residential development on either, lot, whether it is for a primary or secondary residential building will require the development of one or more additional on-site parking spaces. In this case, the applicant has amended the project design to provide two on-site parking spaces on proposed Lot 1 and indicated that the development plans for future development on Lot 2 will include all required on-site parking. Mr. Harmon cites that coll'ection of refuse and recycling would be impaired by any additional on-street parking caused by the project. Staff refers the Commission to its discussion of Comment 2)a. above. 3) Drainage a, Mr. Harmon'notes that the subject property is located in a watershed area that does not have adequate downstream capacity and that the approval of previous projects has led to further degradation of this watershed. He also suggests that the cumulative impact of these projects is enough justification for a moratorium on all development within this watershed. Response to Comments for Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-19: Meaux b, Co d. e. g° Staff notes that the actual subdivision'of the subject property will cause no direct drainage impacts to. the surrounding watershed. However, staff from the City EngineedPublic Works Department reviewed potential drainage imPacts from the development of residential buildings and other structures that would cover water- absorbing soils and determined that, while the drainage capacity for this watershed is being studied as a result of staff concerns, any additional drainage from this site would not contribute directly or cumulatively to a significant adverse drainage impact. Therefore, City staff does not agree with Mr. Harmon that a moratorium on development in this watershed is warranted. Mr. Harmon notes that the majority of the drainage improvements cited in a 1958 drainage study for the City of Ukiah have not been implemented. This comment is not specific to the .Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr. Harmon further cites the report discussed above. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr. Harmon opines that the City of Ukiah ignored CEQA requirements during the approval of a subdivision at the eastern end of Cleveland Lane. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr. Harmon cites drainage work done on the DANCO-Summercreek Village, noting that the developer's engineer caused the development of an on-site detention facility to regulate storm water in an adjacent drainage basin to the s.ubject property. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr. Harmon cites ad'ditional development costs associated with the DANCO- Summercreek Village project. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. Mr. Harmon again 'cites City staff's awareness of drainage issues in the affected watershed. This comment is not specific to the Negative Declaration, but is noted for the record. The comments listed above were prepared by City of Ukiah staff, including the City Environmental Coordinator. Response to Comments for Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception/Major Variance No. 05-'19: Meaux October 11,2005 Mr. Dave Lohse, Associate Planner City of Ukiah Planning Department 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 RECEIVED OCT' ! 2 2005 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING DEPT RE: Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Exception/Zoning Vadance No. 05-19 (Meaux) Dear Dave: Please include the following comments with the record for the above referenced project. Comments have been divided between the project itself, and the Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. The Project: 1) Neither an exception nor a vadance can be justified for the project as proposed. The exception/variance is a first-time attempt at manipulating the mandatory requirements of the subdivision ordinance, and the mandatory requirements, of the zoning ordinance. There has never been a Subdivision approved under these conditions, and this subdivision should not be the first for the following reasons: a) Section 8305 of the Subdivision Ordinance sets forth the "MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR MINOR SUBDIVISIONS". The 20 foot minimum traveled way is a mandatory. requirement that, as a matter of law, should not be subject to the granting of an exception for the purpose of subdividing. b) This vadance woUld constitute the grant of a spedal privilege. The staff report sites no case where a subdivision was allowed by granting a vadance from mandatory driveway width requirements, where otherwise the size and width requirements for the parcels could not be met. The other 10 foot driveways found in the neighborhood and referenced in the staff report either serve the back of undivided lots, or were created pdor to the development of the current standards. There are no "spedal circumstances" within the meaning of the vadance ordinance that support a vadance to avoid this property from being depdved of uses that other similarly zoned properties have. This property is allowed residential use, including the ability to build a second house and build a 10 foot ddveway to that second house. No other similarly sized lot as this has ever been allowed to be divided in such a manner as to potentially create 4 houses, without meeting the 20 foot mandatory ddveway width requirement, so far as this record is concerned. There is no substantial dght to subdivide ones property. d) Section 9251 of the zoning ordinance requires the easement width for this development to conform to the street right-of-way width as set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance. While provisions for an exception to the width exists under certain circumstances, the required width under no circumstances shall be less than 20 feet (9251-A). Within and throughout that easement, a pdvate roadway shall be constructed (9251-B). There is no provision for reducing the easement width based on the reduction of pavement width as requested by this variance, in order to maintain minimum lot area. October 11, 2005 p. 2 e) A full 20 foot access and utility easement must be provided for the benefit of lot 2, and subtracted form the gross area of Lot 1. The derision for an exception/variance to pavement width should be derided at the time of development of proposed lot 2, not at the minor subdivision phase. Until the size, scope, and orientation of the future improvements on lot 2 have been determined, the requirements for pavement width, surfacing options, utility locations, drainage design, and any other improvements to be made within the 20 foot easement, can not be adequately determined. .... .. · Contrary to staff's proposed finding, granting this vadance with the undersized driveway/easement in order to avoid a substandard lot, will create detriments to the public welfare, by increasing traffic and on-street parking, and be injurious to property values because of the great potential increase in density in this compact neighborhood. With the ability of up to four housing units to be sited on this one property, the 37 feet of proposed on- street parking in front of this site is completely unacceptable, and will reduce available parking in front of other homes in the neighborhood. 2) The proposed building line setbacks for lot 1 do not comply with the intent of or the specific requirements of the zoning code. The required yard setbacks for the R-1 zoning distdct are to be "measured from the street right of way". The private 20 foot access and utility easement is equivalent to a street dght of way, and the side yard setback for lot 1 should be measured from the 20 foot easement. Required yard areas are to be independent of the 20 foot required easement. 3) The proposed single car garage for lot 1 does not comply with the required yard setbacks for garages. Garages require a 30 foot front yard setback from the street dght of way (9020-A). 4) The 2nd required parking space for lot 1, as shown on the revised Tentative Parcel Map, does not comply with the requirements for off-street parking. As defined, off-street parking is "required on- site parking beyond all setback lines of a lot." The proposed parking space is immediately adjacent to a substandard width ddveway serving lot 2 (required width 12 feet per Subdivision Ordinance 8t63) and 80% within the required 20 foot easement. 5) The calculation of net area for lot 1 has been misrepresented. According to staff interpretation, the location of the proposed 10 foot driveway/easement within the 20 foot utility easement has no beadng on the calculation of net area for lot 1. Staff has proposed to simply deduct the pavement width of 10 feet from the net area, leaving, in this case, a two foot stdp of net area on the south side of the proposed driveway. If the applicant were to have located the 10 foot ddveway in the middle of the 20 foot easement, a five foot stdp of net area would be located on the south side of the driveway, effectively leaving 500 square feet of the required 6000 square feet unusable to lot 1. Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration: Cumulative impact means the impact on the environment that results from incremental effects of the project in addition to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects regardless of what person undertakes the other projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a pedod of time. The Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration fails to take into account the effects of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in terms of traffic impacts, parking impacts, and drainage impacts, just to name a few. October 11, 2005 p. 3 1) Traffic a) Traffic impacts can not be addressed on a project by project basis for infill developments within residential zoning districts. Residential construction is categorically exempt from environmental review when the project is determined to be in compliance with local zoning requirements. This leads to a situation whereby cumulative.impacts would never be addressed by the current environmental review process implemented by the CitY of Ukiah. b) The current analysis for trip generation states that the proposed subdivision, if approved, would generate approximately 10 additional tdps per day. This assumes that only one additional residential unit will be built as a result of the project, when in fact, up to three additional units would be allowed if the variance is approved. This one variance, which will become the landmark precedent for substandard developments, will have the reasonable potential of generating an additional 30 tdps per day from this one site. c) McPeak Street is a substandard street in terms of width, with only 28 feet between the faces of curbs. With parking allowed on both sides of the street, the remaining traveled way is reduced to 12 feet (assuming the nominal allowance of eight feet for parking on each side). d) McPeak Street is considered a residential street by definition, but in reality is used as a minor collector as one of only a few north-south collectors on the west side of Ukiah. McPeak Street is located between Clay Street (east-west collector) and Mill Street (east- west collector). McPeak Street serves as the north-south collector for much of the west- side of Ukiah, including the Mendocino Gardens area, the Yokay6 Heights subdivision (Mill Court, Highland Ddve, etc.), Calvert Court, and areas beyond. The proximity of schools and medical complexes to the south (Yokayo, St. Mary's, Nokomis, County Health Department, etc), and schools and public facilities to the north (Pomolita, Todd Grove Park, Ukiah Municipal Golf Course, Ukiah Swimming Pool, Anton Stadium), make McPeak street a desirable alternative to the overly congested Dora Street dudng peak hours, as well as non-peak hours. e) Given the current demand placed on this residential street, and due to its substandard width, a more competent analysis of the cumulative impacts to traffic caused by the granting of the vadance and the subsequent subdivision need to be performed. 2) Parking a) The current analysis does not even attempt to look at what the existing parking situation is along McPeak Street. The majority, if not all of the homes along McPeak Street, between Clay Street 'and Mill Street, were built prior to the adoption of the zoning code. Therefore, the majodty of homes were built with only one off-street, independently accessible parking space, instead of the two that are required by today's standards. This means that McPeak Street is already burdened by the need for on-street parking in order to serve the existing dwelling density. Approval of this variance and project will create unreasonable hardships on adjacent property owners whose on-street parking space will likely be used by the overflow parking generated by the four dwelling units that could be constructed on this site. Furthermore, the cumulative effect of subsequent projects in this area will only further degrade the on-street parking situation. b) The City of Ukiah's current refuse and recycling collection program requires up to three curbside containers to be placed in the street dght of way on collection day. Reduction October 11, 2005 p. 4 of space along the street caused by additional on-street parking as a result of this project, and future projects, will make it more difficult, if not impossible for refuse collection to take place. 3) Drainage a) The project site is located in a watershed that has not had adequate downstream capacity for the past 57 years. Unfortunately, since 1958, the City of Ukiah and specifically the Department of Public Works, have neglected their responsibilities to remedy the situation. In fact, they have consistently approved projects within this watershed that have significantly contributed to the further degradation of the system and the surrounding properties which are impacted by the localized flooding that takes place on a nearly annual basis. With this said, the cumulative impact that has occurred is enough justification to require an immediate moratorium on all development within this watershed, while an environmental impact report can be prepared to finally address this long overdue problem. b) In 1958, a comprehensive and very useful drainage survey was performed by Brown and Caidweil of San Francisco. The report entitled "The Collection and Disposal of The Storm Drainage of The City of Ukiah California", incorporated herein by reference, presented detailed information concerning ".. the nature, magnitude, and estimated costs of both present and predicted future storm drainage requirements." The report identified over $2.5 million of drainage improvements that were then needed within the incorporated area of the city. To date, the majodty of those improvements have never been made. c) d) e) The project at hand is located in the drainage area identified in the report as the "north central area". One of the identified deficiencies located downstream of this area is the open ditch located at the end of Cleveland Lane, east of Main Street. The report goes on to say that "due to the inadequate capacity of the existing drainage facilities between Clay and Mill streets, it will be necessary to construct new drainage facilities on Clay Street and Gobbi Street. Initially, it is proposed to have the Clay Street drain discharge into Gibson Creek and to continue that operation until such time as the Vichy Springs Road drain is constructed to (the) Russian River." The described improvements were never built. In fact, upstream improvements were constructed without any consideration to the "inadequate capacity" of the downstream channel. In the mid 1990's the City ignored their CEQA obligations by approving an affordable housing subdivision at the end of Cleveland Lane. All drainage from that development dumps directly into the unmaintained drainage ditch that was inadequate in 1958, and is still inadequate today. In 2003, Danco Builders constructed the Summercreek Village - a controversial and Iow- income housing project - off of Gobbi Street. The natural drainage pattern of the site flowed to a point just downstream of the above mentioned channel. For fear of impacting inadequate downstream drainage facilities, the project engineer caused the developer to spend over $270,000 on a landmark onsite detention basin system that would regulate the minimal increase in storm water generated from the developed site. If it weren't for the substantial amount of government grant funding supporting the Danco project, the costs of such an elaborate drainage system would have precluded most conventional developments from being built. If the City of Ukiah, anytime between 1958 and 2003, had performed their responsibilities of analyzing cumulative impacts to the downstream drainage system, and identified upstream and/or downstream drainage October 11, 2005 p. 5 improvement projects and assessment districts, a portion of the $270,000 could have gone toward improving the inadequate facilities that have existed since 1958. g) The General Plan boasts of the fact that the City of Ukiah "has not taken full advantage of the full range of fees and exactions which have been made available to cities and counties." "For example, the City has not adopted a comprehensive traffic impact fee program, sales tax increase [sic], or utility fees for flood control or storm drainage." "As a result, Ukiah compares favorably against many other jurisdictions in the opportunity of affordable housing." I think Danco Builders could argue the point that had the City done' their job, the flood control/storm drainage impact fees would have been the preferred approach to getting their project completed in a more "affordable" manner. h) The City of Ukiah is well aware of the problems within this specific drainage basin, and until the exiting situation is resolved, and the impacts to downstream property owners are remedied, no further development should occur within this drainage area. I have spent a great deal of time opposing this project not to further any economic interest of my own, but to further the general interest of the taxpayers of the city in having a land development regime that follows the rule of law. In closing, I hope you will find these comments and observations to be helpful in making the appropriate recommendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. Respectfully submitted, Shawn P. Harmon Registered Civil Engineer ) Attachment # MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION August 24, 2005 MEMBERS PRESENT Ken Anderson Kevin Jennings James Mulheren, Chair Judy Pruden Mike Whetzel OTHERS PRESENT Listed below, Respectively STAFF PRESENT Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Sandra Liston, Associate Planner Diana Steele, City Engineer Tim Eriksen, Senior Civil Engineer Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary MEMBERS ABSENT None The regular meeting of the.City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by'Chair Mulheren at 6:34 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, Calil~ornia. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE John McCowen led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION Site visit for item 9A was verified. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 27, 2005 ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, seconded by Commissioner Whetzel, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to approve the July 27, 2005 minutes, as submitted. 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one from the audience came forward. 7. 'APPEAL PROCESS Chair Mulheren read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is September 6, 2005. 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE Minor Subdivision Map/Exception No. 05-19 and Woodbury Major Subdivision Final Map Review were legally noticed in accordance with the provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code. PUBLIC HEARING 9A. Minor Subdivision Map/Exception No. 05-19, as submitted by Mr. Ron Meaux, to allow the width of a private access roadway designed to serve a single lot with no public street frontage to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. The proposed exception is required to allow the subsequent'subdivision of the .2-acre project site into two lots MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 August24,2005 with net areas of 6,000 square feet or more. The subject property is located at 432 McPeak Street (APN.001-251-06); zoned R-t (Low Density Residential). Associate Planner Lohse addressed the proposed Minor Subdivision Map-Subdivision Requirement Exception as follows: The project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide a 13,361 square foot parcel into two Lots, Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectfully, and a Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow the width of the private access driveway required'for ingress and egress to the western interior lot to be reduced. The project site is designated for LDR land uses on the Ukiah General Plan Land Use Map. The two lots created would be in excess of 6,000 square feet. Lot 1 would have. a gross area of approximatelY 6.,816 square feet, but the net area would be approximately 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in the driveway width were permitted. Lot 2 would be an approximate 6,356 square foot lot located on the western portion of the subject property with no public street access. This area is being divided to facilitate a future single-family dwelling on the site. Lot 1 is currently developed with 1,040 square foot single-family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport attached to the' southern portion of the residence. The applicant intends to remove [he existing double-wide garage and construct a single- wide garage on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off- street parking. Other areas of the site would remain undeveloped except for the proposed access driveway to proposed Lot 2. Lot 2 proposed for the western portion of the subject property is currently devoted to yards and gardens. Access to.this proposed lot would depend on the 10-foot wide driveway to the common property line between the proposed lots and connection to parking facilities on Lot 2 should it be developed. The proposed lot split would be consistent with the Land Use Element of the Ukiah General Plan for Iow-density development. The proposed lots would comply with the R-1 Zoning Standards for interior lots, which require a minimum net lot area of 6,000 square feet. The existing residential dwelling on the subject property conforms to existing rear and side yard setback requirements, but the southeast portion of the residence and front portion of the garage structure is only 17 feet from the McPeak Street p.ublic right-of-way and does not conform to the 20-foot front yard setback for the R-1 Zoning District. However, since the structure was constructed prior to the imposition of the zoning standards in the 1950'si it is, therefore, a legal conforming building. By replacing the existing garage structure with a single-wide garage, the length of the non-conforming wall would be reduced by approximately. 15 feet. The reduced floor area of the residential dwelling and attached garage would conform to the applicable setback standards for the R-1 Zoning District. The current zoning standards for this. area. require two parking spaces for a single-family residence. The conversion from a two-vehicle garage to a one-vehicle 'facility would reduce on-site parking to one space. The two parking space requirement would not apply in this case because the building was developed prior to the imposition of the zoning standards. The parking space provided by the new' garage structure is not required. However, two off-street parking spaces would be required on proposed Lot 2 should this lot be developed with a residential unit. Proposed Lot 1 encompassing almost 72 feet of street frontage along McPeak Street fully complies with street frontage requirements prescribed by the .Subdivision requirements of the UMC. Since proposed Lot 2 has no frontage along a dedicated MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 August24,2005 publiclY maintained street, its approved establishment must comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and UMC Section 9251, to include; · A 20-foot wide utility easement that connects the landlocked proposed Lot 2 with a public street that conforms to the street right:of-way requirements. The Subdivision Ordinance and UMC provisions require a 20-foot wide paved access roadway.' · The applicants will furnish the required 20-foot wide utility easement. However, they have. requested an Exception to allow the development of a 10-foot wide driveway to access proposed Lot 2 instead of the required 20- foot wide roadway typically required for such lots to provide ingress and egress to proposed Lot 2. This driveway would extend approximately 97 feet from McPeak Street, 'a.public-right-way, to the eastern boundary line for the lots, and would be located on the Southern portion of Lot 1, approximately two feet from the lot's southern property line. Staff supports the concept of the proposed reduction in roadway width (Exception) based' upon the following information: · The net area for Lot 1 would be increased. · It would allow for more open space and landscaping to enhance the aesthetic characteristics of the lot and surrounding neighborhood as opposed to paving. · A 20-foot wide access driveway would serve no useful purpose other than allowing two-way vehicle traffic that would be unnecessary in this case. · A 20-foot wide driveway would be longer than most of the driveways in the neighborhood and likely be inconvenient when one vehicle.is entering and one is exiting. · A 10-foot wide driveway will exit the site at a point where a driveway apron already exists and it will not be blocked by any structures' or vegetation on the property. · The City Fire Department confirmed that a 10:foot wide driveway would be' wide enough for ambulance'response for Lots 1 and 2. Fires on the lots would be conducted from fire vehicles based on McPeak Street. · The City Utility Department also confirmed that a 10-foot wide driveway would be wide enough to allow for utility work. · The proposed 10-foot wide driveway has little potential to serve any additional lots, as the parcels to the north, south, and east have access to McPeak Street or Eastlick Street. · Further division of Lot 2 is unlikely because if a single-family residence were to be developed on this lot, the ability-to extend the driveway beyond Lot 2 would be precluded since there would not be sufficient area left to meet the required, minimum net lot area of 6,000 square feet. · The proposed 10-foot wide driveway would allow the retention of vegetation alOng the southern property line, which would be less obtrusive and more attractive than a 20-foot wide driveway. The line of sight is partially obscured by vegetation along the parcel's southern property line by a solid row of Oleander bushes that exist on the abutting property, and creates a safety hazard. These plants would have to be trimmed to a maximum MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 August 24, 2005 ) three-foot height to comply with UMC standards for hedges in the front yard setback areas. Although the vegetation problems on the abutting property affects the line-of- site for the project, it. is the City's and not the applicants' responsible to ensure Code comp!iance. The project is located in the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan's Compatibility Zone D in which a single-family residential development is a normally allowed land use. Staff supports approval of the proposed' Minor Subdivision/Excepti°n and recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the Ukiah City Council approve the project. Commissioner Pruden requested clarification as to how the gross square footage was calculated for the proposed two lot split including the driveway easement relevant to the Tentative Parcel Map exhibit information provided by Jackson and Associates and Meaux Architectural GroUp in the Memorandum from City Engineer Steele, dated August 24, 2005. There appears to be a discrepancy. City Engineer Steele stated the calculation'format involves ' subtracting approximately 990 square feet (99 feet by 10 feet from the gross area for a 10-foot wide access easement) . from the total square footage of 13,361 for the original parcel, which results in the net area of 6,003 square feet for Lot 1. She clarified that the exhibit map prepared by Meaux Architectural Group should have been labeled "net area" when referencing the 6,003 square feet. The approximate gross area on the Meaux exhibit is stated to be 6,365 square feet for Lot 2. The Meaux exhibit data will be amended to reflect the accurate contours/configurations of the property. Commissioner Pruden inquired whether the Jackson and Associates exhibit was incorrect and should amended. Mr. Lohse stated the exhibit map prepared by Meaux Architectural Group would be used for the project rather than the exhibit map prepared by Jackson and Associates. In order for the project to work, Lot 1 must have a net area of 6,003 square feet, after subtracting 990 square feet.for the proposed 10-foot access driveway for this lot. Reduction of the access width from 20 feet to 10 feet would eliminate having to extend the property line further west to increase the square .footage for Lot 1 to the point Where Lot 2 would not be developable, because it would not meet the 6,000 square foot minimum lot standard. Commissioner Pruden inquired regarding potential drainage issues associated with the project as provided for in a letter from Mr. Tom Herman, a certified land surveyor. · Senior Civil Engineer Eriksen is not aware of any potential drainage issues concerning the site. He cited known drainage issues at the corner Of Calvert Court and McPeak Street attributed to blockage inside the storm drain pipe that reduces the capacity. The property owner to the north of the project claimed drainage problems, However, appropriate drainage measures would be taken to ensure that routing of any water runoff from the project would flow into the appropriate City storm drain system. A general discussion followed regarding an abandoned storm drain on the site and that the drain has been re-routed to the appropriate City storm drain system. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING 'COMMISSION Page 4 .. August 24,' 2005 ) Commissioner prUden 'cited drainage issues on Eastlick Street generated from underground springs. Mr. Eriksen determined runoff from Eastlick Street would not affect development on McPeak Street. Commissio'ner Anderson inquired how the letters expressing concern regarding the obstruction of view from the overgrown Oleanders on the abutting property to the south on McPeak Street when exiting the proposed driveway would be addressed. Mr. Lohse confirmed that the property to the south of the project has overgrown vegetation and some of this same vegetation exists on the Meaux property. The UMC requires that such vegetation be appropriately maintained and it must comply with the three-foot or less maximum height standard for hedges/vegetation in the front yard setback area. No vegetation can obscure/block the line-of, sight from any driveway. All vegetation that exceeds the three-foot maximum height standard is a-Code enforcement issue for the City to address. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 7:02 p.m.- Ron Meaux, Applicant, indicated .the various City departments favor the 10-foot Exception, and added that the project would be an improvement to the neighborhood. The applicants polled the neighborhood, and noted the overall project response is favorable. The existing house is functioning Obsolete so the intent is to make improvements so that the subject property would be aesthetically pleasing and complementary to the neighborhood. The.most unattractive component of the project is the existing two-car garage. The Minor Subdivision would allow for a more affordable, way in which to remove the garage and make the development more attractive. The applicants' intent is complete the remodel on Lot 1 and' develop Lot 2 with a single-family residential dwelling. Lot 1 and accompanying remodeled residential unit is planned for re-sale. The applicants are asking the Planning Commission to consider the project objective, which is simply to provide for more affordable housing, a reasonable driveway that would be 10-feet wide leading to one home, and an improved subject property, Commissioner Pruden.referred to.the map exhibit, and requested confirmation regarding a 20-foot wide utility easement that runs north and south on the south portion of the property. Mr. Meaux confirmed that such an easement exists.' Commissioner Pruden further requested confirmation that the plans inclUde a 10-foot wide driveway, a two-foot vegetation strip, leaving a remaining balance of eight feet between the property line and the proposed single-wide garage, as the map indicates 20 'feet from the property line. Mr. Meaux stated the new garage would be 22 feet from the property line. Commissioner Pruden inqui'red whether the side yard would be 10 feet from the garage to the new proposed driveway. Mr. Meaux replied "yes." MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 August 24, 2005 ) ) Commissioner Pruden inquired whether the applicant would construct a fence between the driveway and the southern boundary of Lot 1. Mr. Meaux stated the single-wide garage would be two feet from the utility easement, which would act as sufficient barrier. However, a fence is proposed on the western side of the garage structure to separate the driveway from this structure. Commissioner Pruden addressed the issue of tandem parking, and commented it appears there is sufficient space to develop an additional parking space south of the new proposed garage. Mr. Meaux stated 10 feet exists between the garage and driveway and part of the utility easement that would be acceptable for parking. Commissioner'Pruden observed other driveway widths in the neighborhood, .and stated many of these driveways have a lO-foot width. She inquired if the applicant desires to construct another parking area and whether this space would have the same elevation as the driveway. Mr. Meaux stated the driveway is currently paved and there would be no reason to change the elevation in the event of an added parking space, A general.discussion followed regarding alternative surfacing material that could be used for the driveway. Bob Crab is not in favor of the proposed Minor Subdivision that would allow the construction of a new single-family residence. The project would increase the traffic on McPeak Street and add to safety issues. Specifically, traffic in the area is becoming increasingly congested and speeding is also a problem. He noted many residences in the area have overgrown vegetation that obstructs the line-of-sight when people are pulling out of their driveways and recommended the City enforce the three-foot maximum height standard for vegetation in the front yard setback area as a safety precaution. Also, headlights would impact him when vehicles exit the new driveway by shining into his bedroom window. John Prince is a property owner on McPeak Street. He does not object to the proposed Minor Subdivision or to the Exception. He referred to the .proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, and stated his objection relates to the process in which the project is being proposed. City staff should not have made a recommendation that the'project be approved without a close analysis of the ingress/egress problem at that location, as well as other locations on McPeak Street. The.overgrown vegetation in the area creates a safety, hazard for pedestrians and drivers. This problem should have been alleviated long before this project was considered, and emphasized the importance of ensuring code compliance prior to approval of a minor subdivision. First, he recommended Code enforcement measures be applied to address the vegetation and corresponding safety issues. Secondly, the proposed driveway could be reconfigured on the north side of the house or, develop the driveway closer to the house on the northerly side of the 20-foot setback against the south property line, leaving 10 feet open. These issues should be specifically addressed in the Mitigated Negative DeclaratiOn for the Minor Subdivision. He fully supports the project when the location of the driveway and the. vegetation issues to allow for safe ingress/egress are adequately addressed. Furthermore, staff should consider an ordinance regulating parking on McPeak Street, because the street is narrow and has traffic problems. He expressed MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 August 24, 2005 ) ') Associate Planner Lohse stated the Tentative Map for the Woodbury Majo¢ Subdivision Final Map was approved by the City Council in 2004. The Final Map has been reviewed and checked by City Engineer Diana Steele, and determined the document was prepared in accordance with the subdivision provisions of the Government Code and Ukiah City Code. The City Engineer recommends that the Planning Commission present the Final Map to the City Council at its next regular meeting for final approval. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, it was carried by.an all AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to recommend the Ukiah City Council approve the W oodbury Majoi' Subdivision Final Map. 10. ONGOING EDUCATION 10A. Smart Codes Smart Places, Jason Miller, 2004 The above-referenced publication is for the Commission's review. 11. PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT There was no discussion of this agenda item. 12. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORTS There was no discussion of this agenda item. 13. ADJOURNMENT ~~ting adjourned at 8:42 p.m. Jarhes Mu~e~~hair "' ' ~ C'~thy'~lawad~y, Record~g's~cretary MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 August 24, 2005 Attachment #_ ~ City of Ukiah STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ron Meaux Minor Subdivision Map-Subdivision Requirement Exception #05-19 ITEM # 9-A Meeting Date: August 24, 2005 PROJECT SUMMARY: Approval of the Minor Subdivision will allow the division of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots with net areas in excess of 6,000 square feet. One of these lots will front McPeak Street, a City-maintained street, while the other would rely on a private access driveway for ingress and egress. Approval of the Subdivision Requirement Exception will allow the proposed access driveway to be constructed with a width of ten (10) feet instead of the 20-foot wide driveway typically required for such lots. The discretionary actions associated with this project are quasi-judicial in nature; therefore each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove, or modify the projects. PROJECT LOCATION: The project site consists of a single parcel located at 432 McPeak Street (Assessor Parcel No. 001-251-06), on the west side of the street, approximately 150 feet north of its intersection with Calved Drive. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LDR (Low Density Residential) ZONING DESIGNATION' R-1 (Low Density Residential) ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Ukiah's Environmental Coordinator has determined that the proposed project is not exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and City of Ukiah staff conducted a careful and comprehensive review of the project that included the preparation of an Environmental Checklist in which potentially significant adverse impacts to cultural resources were identified. Based on this analysis, staff concluded the project will require the adoption of a mitigation measure and a mitigation monitoring program to lessen the potential adverse impacts to levels that are not significant. Staff further concluded that a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project is appropriate and specific Findings in support of this determination are included in the Negative Declaration attached to this project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existing Conditions: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the west side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the western portion of the lot is undeveloped, with a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. This area is surrounded by wood and chain link fencing. The applicant is currently remodeling the existing single-family residence, with the intent of removing the existing carport/garage structure and replacing it with a single-wide garage on the south wall of the residence. No other substantial modifications to this structure are planned at this time. Proposed Conditions: The project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide a 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots and a Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow the width of the private access driveway required for ingress and egress to an interior lot to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. ' Specifically, the two-lot subdivision would establish .proposed Lot 1 on the eastern portion of the subject property, with approximately 72 feet of frontage located along the McPeak Street a public right-of-way. This lot would have a gross lot area of approximately 6,996 square feet, but the net area would total only 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in driveway width is permitted since this area is not included in the calculation of net lot area. As noted above, the applicant intends to remove the existing double-wide garage and construct a garage on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off-street parking. The only other development on proposed Lot 1 would be a paved private access driveway that would be constructed approximately two feet north of the southern property line of the existing parcel. This driveway would be 10 feet wide and would extend approximately 97 feet from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary line for proposed Lot 2. It would be paved with rock base and asphalt surfacing and marked in accordance with Ukiah Municipal Code standards for private accesses. Proposed Lot 2 would be located to the west of Lot 1, in the area now devoted to yards and gardens. This 6,356 square foot lot would have no public street access and would depend on the 10-foot wide driveway for ingress and egress to the common property line between the proposed lots and connection to parking facilities on Lot 2 should it be developed. At this point, the applicant has no specific plans for the development of this site, but he did indicate that that the primary goal of the subdivision is to establish another site for the construction of a single family residence. PRELIMINARY STAFF ANALYSIS General Plan Compliance The project site is designated for LDR (Low Density Residential) land uses on the Ukiah General Plan Land Use Map, and staff has confirmed that the lot split, as proposed, would establish two lots that are consistent with the Land Use Element's criteria for Iow density development. These include locations within designated zoning districts, access from new structures to public streets, and maximum density. The proposed lots are also consistent with Community Design goals and policies for the preservation and enhancement of neighborhood character since the proposed lot sizes of at least 6,000 net square feet are consistent with the minimum lot size required for this single-family residential neighborhood. In fact, as the lot area exhibit (Attachment 4) submitted by the applicant shows, over a third of the lots in the immediate vicinity of the subject property are 6,000 square feet or less in area. In addition, it is expected that the construction of a 10-foot wide driveway would be more compatible than a 20-foot wide access roadway would with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. Compliance with Ukiah Municipal Code Standards for the R-1 Zoning District The project site is located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District, in which single-family residential structures are allowed. Planning staff has also determined that the proposed lots will be large enough to conform to applicable development standards for this zone, as outlined below. Lot Areas: Both of the proposed lots would also comply with the R-1 zoning standards for interior lots, which require a net lot area of 6,000 net square feet and a minimum lot width of 60 feet since both of the lots would be over 71 feet wide, with net areas of 6,003 square feet for Lot 1 and 6,356 square feet for Lot 2. Staff notes, however, that the division of the site with the net lot areas proposed depends entirely on the securing of the proposed exception to allow a narrower driveway. In fact, the division of the 13,361 square foot lot is not even possible if the full access driveway width is required since this paved access easement would take up at least 1,800 square feet of lot area that could not be included as part of the net lot area calculation for Lot 1. Yard Setback Areas: Proposed Lot 1 contains an existing residential structure with a carport and a two- car garage attached to its southern side. This structure conforms to existing rear and side yard setback requirements, but the southeast portion of the residence and the entire front portion of the carport/garage structure are located only 17 feet from the right-of-way for McPeak Street. This distance does not conform to the 20-foot front yard setback for the R-1 Zone, but staff has determined that these building walls were constructed prior to the imposition of zoning standards in 1950 and is, therefore, a legal nonconforming building. Furthermore, the removal of the existing two-car garage structure and the conversion of the carport into a single-wide garage will reduce the length of this nonconforming wall section by approximately 15 feet. Based on these factors, staff determined that the reduced floor area of the residential building and attached garage conforms to applicable setback standards and provides even more room for open space and landscaping. No development is proposed on Lot 2 at this time, but the proposed lot dimensions will be wide enough and long enough to allow the development of a single-family residence that would be consistent with required yard setbacks and requirements for the provision of off-street parking. In fact, staff estimates that Lot 2 would have a building area of at least 2,225 square feet if the current yard setbacks were applied to future development on the site. Parkinq: The existing residence on proposed Lot 1 currently contains a carport and a double-wide garage with room to park three vehicles. The applicant is proposing to demolish the garage structure and replace it with a single-wide garage, effectively reducing on-site parking to one space. The current zoning standards for the R-1 Zone require two parking spaces for a single family residence, but in this case, this requirement does not apply since the building was developed prior to the imposition of this standard. In fact, the parking space provided by the proposed garage is not even required in this case. However, two off-street parking spaces will be required on proposed Lot 2 if and when any residential development occurs. No specific development plans or designated parking areas are included as part of this project, but staff has determined that the proposed lot area will provide more than adequate area for a reasonably sized residential building and a parking pad and/or garage structure capable of supporting two parking spaces. Compliance with UMC Requirements for the Establishment of Lots Not Having Principal Frontage on Accepted Street Proposed Lot 1 would have almost 72 feet of frontage along McPeak Street, which is a publicly- maintained street. Therefore, this lot would comply fully with the street frontage requirements prescribed by the Subdivision requirements of the Ukiah Municipal Code (UMC). Proposed Lot 2 has no frontage along a public street and its establishment is only allowed if the specific requirements of UMC Section 9251 are met. These include the furnishing of a 20-foot wide utility easement that connects the landlocked lot with a public street and conforms to the street right-of-way requirements as set forth in the Subdivision Ordinance and Section 9251 of the UMC, which both require a 20-foot wide paved access roadway. In this case, the applicants are furnishing the full 20-foot wide utility easement prescribed in the UMC. This easement would extend along the entire southern property line of proposed Lot 1. The applicants are also proposing to develop the required access to Lot 2, but have requested the Exception to allow the development of a 10-foot wide driveway instead of the required 20-foot wide roadway presci'ibed in the UMC sections discussed above. The primary reason for the proposed reduction in roadway width is the need to reduce the required access easement areas and provide more net area for proposed Lot 1. However, the applicant also favors the use of a narrower driveway since it will allow for more open space and landscaping that should be more attractive and more compatible with the single-family aesthetic characteristics of the lot and the surrounding neighborhood. Staff concurs with this opinion and believes it will better fulfill the General Plan goal of preserving and enhancing neighborhood character. Planning staff analyzed the potential impacts of reducing the proposed access to a 10-foot wide driveway and has determined that the reduced width would provide a number of beneficial factors without compromising ingress and egress at the site and without creating hazards to persons occupying or passing by the access driveway. This determination is based on the reasons discussed below. The requirement for a 20-foot wide access roadway serves no useful purpose other than allowing two- way vehicle traffic, which staff feels is unwarranted in this case. The proposed access driveway would be longer than most of the driveways in the surrounding neighborhood, which could be inconvenient in cases where one vehicle is entering and one is exiting. However, this situation prevails along this section of McPeak since the majority of driveways require tandem parking and persons driving this street will be familiar with the situation. Staff also notes that the proposed access driveway will exit the site at a point where there is already an existing driveway apron and it will not be blocked by any structures or vegetation on the subject property. This access point is partially obscured by vegetation along the parcel's southern property line, but this situation is created by a solid row of Oleander bushes that are on the abutting property and these plants will have to be trimmed to a height of three feet or less to comply with UMC standards for hedges in front yard setback areas. Planning staff also discussed the access issue with City Fire Department staff and confirmed that the 10-foot wide driveway would be wide enough for ambulance response to any residence eventually developed on proposed Lot 2, and that any fires fought on this lot would be conducted from fire vehicles based on McPeak Street. Police Department staff also indicated that they would be satisfied with any direct access to the back of this lot, which is currently hard to access. Staff also discussed the access roadway issue with City Utility Department staff who indicated that the 10-foot width proposed would be wide enough to allow any utility work required. In fact, staff felt that the development of a lesser paved width could allow the placement of utility services that would be even more accessible if the trenches were not paved over. Planning staff also reviewed aerial maps and determined that the proposed access driveway has little potential to serve any additional lots since the parcels to the north, south, and east have access to McPeak Street or Eastlick Street. In fact, if a single-family residence is constructed on proposed Lot 2, the ability to extend this access driveway beyond Lot 2 would be effectively precluded since there would not be sufficient area left on either of the proposed lots to meet the net lot area requirement of 6,000 square feet. Therefore, the division of this lot in the manner proposed would actually reduce the potential for future development on abutting lots. The development of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway would allow the retention of vegetation located along the southern property line of the subject property and the planting of grass or Iow-lying shrubs between the paved surface and the proposed single-wide driveway. This would be less obtrusive and more attractive than a 20-foot wide access roadway, which would encumber over 27 percent of the site's street frontage. For this reason, staff anticipates that a narrower driveway would be more consistent with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding single-family residential neighborhood. Based on the reasons above it is the opinion of staff that, in this case, the requirement for a 20-foot wide access roadway would be overly stringent and would serve no useful purpose. Staff also notes that the proposed reduction in driveway width would provide a practical and reasonable alternative to interior site access and allow the subject property to be divided in a manner that is consistent with the intent and purposed of the General Plan, zoning, and subdivision provisions that govern development activities in single-family residential neighborhoods. Therefore, staff supports the proposed Exception and has included specific findings in support of this recommendation in the Findings section below. Airport Master Plan Consistency: According to the Land Use Compatibility Map of the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan, the subject property is in the area designated as Compatibility Zone D, where single-family residential development is a "normally allowed" land use. In this case, the development of an additional single-family residence will not conflict with the impact criteria for this compatibility zone and the proposed lots are consistent with all applicable compatibility criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Planning Department staff concludes that the proposed Exception to allow the development of a 10-foot wide driveway instead of the 20-foot wide private access roadway typically required by the Ukiah Municipal Code is consistent with the intent and purpose of the General Plan, zoning, and subdivision provisions that govern development activities in single-family residential neighborhoods. Staff further concludes that the reduced driveway width provides a more attractive and reasonable access to the single lot proposed on the rear portion of the site without compromising the safety of persons using the site or the surrounding neighborhood. Staff also concludes that the lot sizes and dimension proposed in the minor subdivision will be consistent with the lot sizes that prevail in this neighborhood, which includes a number of parcels with net areas less than 6,000 square feet. Planning staff further concludes that the lots proposed in the minor subdivision otherwise comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, the goals and policies of the Ukiah General Plan, the zoning and subdivision standards of the Ukiah Municipal Code, and the compatibility criteria of the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION and FINDINGS for Proposed Exception: The Planning Department recommends that the Ukiah Planning Commission recommends that the Ukiah City Council APPROVE the proposed Exception to private access roadway width requirements, based on the on the findings listed below. These include the findings required in UMC Sections 8320 and 9251. , The 10-foot wide access driveway will not be used for additional right-of-way since the lots abutting the subject property are served by two public streets and the division of the site in the manner proposed will not provide sufficient net lot area for either of the lots proposed should the access be extended in any manner; . The granting of the Exception is warranted due to special conditions caused by the fact that the subject parcel was established at a time when lots in this area of the City were typically larger and longer and subsequent land divisions done prior to and after the imposition of zoning on the site left the oversize lot effectively landlocked by precluding the development of any additional street frontage on the eastern and western portions of the property; . The granting of the Exception is necessary to the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner since the development of an unwarranted access roadway will prohibit an effective and reasonable division of the site into two lots with net areas of at least 6,000 square feet, as provided for in the Ukiah General Plan Land Use Element and the Ukiah Municipal Code provisions for the development of lots in the R-1 Zoning District; . The potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway and the division of the subject property were analyzed in an Initial Study done in accordance with the provisions of the Californian Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in which it was determined that the reduced access width will not cause significant adverse environmental impacts if the mitigation measures/conditions of approval included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the project are adopted, and , The proposed access roadway of 10 feet is consistent with applicable General Plan standards since it will conform to LDR requirements for access to new development that require all access to be paved; . The granting of the Exception will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property owners in the surrounding neighborhood since the development of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway will provide ingress and egress to only one lot, is a reasonable and safe access alternative for persons occupying the site and for emergency personnel, and will provide a more attractive viewshed that is more consistent with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION and FINDINGS for Proposed Minor Subdivision: The Planning Department recommends that the Ukiah Planning Commission recommends the Ukiah City Council APPROVE the proposed division of the site into two lots, based on the on the findings listed below. 1. The parcels established by the Minor Subdivision/Exception, as conditioned, are consistent with the requirements of the California Subdivision Map Act; . The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the Ukiah General Plan, including the applicable use and development standards for the LDR (Low Density Residential) land use designation outlined in the Land Use Element; o The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the applicable use and development standards for the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District; . , . The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance since both lots conform to the standards for Type I subdivisions, including those for lot areas, lot width, street improvements, water supply, fire protection, and other standards; and The parcels established by the division and exception are consistent with the density, open space, and infill criteria for Compatibility Zone D of the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan and the Mendocino County Airport Land Use Plan; and The potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway and the division of the property were analyzed in an Initial Study done in accordance with the provisions of the Californian Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in which it was determined that the reduced access width will not cause significant adverse environmental impacts if the mitigation measures/conditions of approval included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the project are adopted. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: No specific Conditions of Approval are recommended for the proposed Subdivision Requirement Exception since UMC requirements for the development of such access driveways/roadways are specifically spelled out in several Code sections. However, staff does include recommendations for the development of the access driveway in the conditions recommended for the approval of the Minor Subdivision (see Condition #6). The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Minor Subdivision #05-19, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid: A Parcel Map prepared pursuant to Local Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval with materials, fees, substantiating documents, and title report required by the City Engineer. , The Tentative Map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of its approval or conditional approval unless extended in accordance with the City of Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Map Act. 3. All taxes now due, or past due, must be paid prior to the approval of the Parcel Map. 4. Each parcel shall be served individually upon the development of the parcel with appropriate public utilities required for the type of development within the parcel. . Easements will be required for the proposed 10-foot wide private access driveway and the 20-foot wide utility easement and for any drainage that affects abutting properties. These easements shall be included on the Parcel Map and recorded with the Mendocino County Clerk/Recorder prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map. . The access driveway shall be developed with a minimum width of 10 feet and in full accordance with all other Ukiah Municipal Code requirements for access roadways to interior lots with no public street frontage. The Parcel Map, easements, title report and supporting documentation shall be submitted to the Public Works/City Engineer Department, with a fee of $320, for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of the Parcel Map. Additional information required by the City Engineer during this review shall also be submitted by the applicant or agent for the applicant. . . 10. All improvements done within the City right-of-way shall be constructed in accordance with standard City drawings under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. The Encroachment Permit shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project with a fee equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the improvements. All improvements shall be done by a licensed Contractor who has a current City of Ukiah Business License and copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability: $1,000,000; Property Damage: $1,000,000) and a copy of a current Workmen's Compensation Certificate. If, during site preparation or construction activities, any historic or prehistoric cultural resources are unearthed and discovered, all work shall immediately be halted, and City Planning Department staff shall be notified immediately of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance and, if deemed necessary, to develop a precise mitigation program prior to the continuation of any site work. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Subdivision/Exception Exhibit 3. Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Project 4. Lot Area Exhibit for Surrounding Neighborhood, as submitted by Applicant 5. Letter of Concern from Mr. Shawn Harmon (dated July 26, 2005) LOCATION MAP SubdMsion Requirement Exception No. 05-19: Meaux 432 McPeak Street (APN 001-251-06) ciTY 0t · CMC'{. 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet NOR~ ATTACHMENT 1 JOl~:l 0.~-0.25 CITY OF UKIAH MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE: APPLICANTS: PROJECT NOS.: LOCATION: August 2, 2005 Ronald Meaux Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 432 McPeak Street, City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino (Assessor Parcel-Numbers 001-251-06) DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the west side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the western portion of the lot is undeveloped, with a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. This area is surrounded by wood and chain link fencing. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide a 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots and a Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow the width of the private access driveway required for ingress and egress to an interior lot to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Specifically, proposed Lot 1 would be located on the eastern portion of the subject property, which has 72 feet of frontage located along McPeak Street, a public right-of-way. This lot would have a gross lot area of 6,816 square feet, but the net area would be approximately 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in driveway width is permitted. The applicant intends to remove the existing double-wide garage and construct a garage on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off-street parking. Other areas of the site would remain undeveloped except for the proposed access driveway to proposed Lot 2. Proposed Lot 2 would be a 6,356 square foot lot located on the western portion of the subject property, with no public street access. This area is being divided to facilitate future single-family construction on the site, but no specific plans for any housing were submitted as part of the project. The applicants have proposed the development of a 10-foot wide paved driveway to provide ingress and egress to Lot 2. This driveway would extend approximately 97 feet from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary line for the proposed lots, and would be located on the southern portion of Lot 1, approximately two feet from the lot's southern property line. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: City of Ukiah staff conducted a careful and comprehensive review of the project that included the preparation of an Environmental Checklist in which potentially significant adverse impacts to cultural resources were identified. Based on this analysis, staff concluded the project will require the adoption of mitigation measures and a mitigation monitoring program to lessen these impacts to levels that are not significant. Staff further concluded that a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project is appropriate and specific Findings in support of this determination are listed below. FINDINGS SUPPORTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION: 1. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the local or regional environment; Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19: Meaux Altochrr n! 1 I _I._I I I Iii L. . Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in short-term impacts that will create a disadvantage to long-term environmental goals; 3. The potentially significant impacts resulting from this project would be mitigated to levels that are not considered to be significant if the recommended mitigation measures are adopted; 4'. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and . Based upon the analysis, findings, and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in environmental impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. STATEMENT OF DECLARATION: After appraisal of the possible impacts of this project, the City of Ukiah has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and further, that this Negative Declaration constitutes compliance with the requirements for environmental review and analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. This document may be reviewed at the City of Ukiah Planning Department, Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. August 2, 2005 Date Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19: Meaux Attachment #_ ~?-2. CITY OF UKIAH I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1. Name of Project: Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 2. Name of Project Proponent: Ronald Meaux 3. Address of Project Proponent: 206 Mason Street, Suite D, Ukiah, CA 95482 4. Project Location: 432 McPeak Street, Ukiah, CA 5. Assessors Parcel Number(s): 001-252-06 6. Date of Initial Study Preparation: August 2, 2005 7. Name of Lead Agency: City of Ukiah 8. Address and Phone Number of Lead Agency: 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482 / (707) 463-6200 9. Environmental Setting / Project Description: (Please see the Project Description on pa.qe 2 of this Initial Study) 10. Plans, Exhibits, and other Submitted Application Materials: All the plans, exhibits, technical reports, and other submitted application materials are available for review at the City of Ukiah Planninq Department- 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah. 11. Initial Study Prepared by: Ukiah Planninq Department Staff Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Attachment DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the west side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the western portion of the lot is undeveloped, with a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. This area is surrounded by wood and chain link fencing. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a Minor Subdivision Map to divide a 13,361 square foot parcel located in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zoning District into two lots and a Subdivision Requirement Exception to allow the width of the private access driveway required for ingress and egress to an interior lot to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. Specifically, proposed Lot 1 would be located on the eastern portion of the subject property, which has 72 feet of frontage located along McPeak Street, a public right-of-way. This lot would have a gross lot area of 6,816 square feet, but the net area would be approximately 6,003 square feet if the proposed reduction in driveway width is permitted. The applicant intends to remove the existing double-wide garage and construct a garage on the southern side of the existing residential structure to provide off-street parking. Other areas of the site would remain undeveloped except for the proposed access driveway to proposed Lot 2. Proposed Lot 2 would be a 6,356 square foot lot located on the western portion of the subject property, with no public street access. This area is being divided to facilitate future single-family construction on the site, but no specific plans for any housing were submitted as part of the project. The applicants have proposed the development of a 10-foot wide paved driveway to provide ingress and egress to Lot 2. This driveway would extend approximately 97 feet from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary line for the proposed lots, and would be located on the southern portion of Lot 1, approximately two feet from the lot's southern property line. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Attachment # ~-~ DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I. AESTHETICS A. Settinq: The subject property is located in a single-family neighborhood located in a portion of the city's "Westside" area, which is known for having relatively unique visual character features and a number of structures with distinct architectural and historical characteristics. However, the existing residence on the east side of the subject property is not recognized for any substantial architectural or historical characteristics and there are no substantial scenic views or vistas on the site or in the surrounding neighborhood. B. Significance Criteria: Aesthetic impacts would be significant if the project resulted in obstruction of any scenic view or vista open to the public, damage to significant scenic resources within a designated State scenic highway, creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to the public, substantial degradation to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings, or generation of new sources of light or glare that adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area, including any direct illumination or reflection upon adjacent property, or could be directly seen by motorists or persons residing or otherwise situated within sight of the project. C. Impacts: The actual division of the subject property will not cause any direct aesthetic impacts, but it will permit the construction of additional residential and accessory buildings. However, there is no evidence that the development of such buildings will change the aesthetic values of the property, cause obstructions to any scenic view or vista, or damage to a significant scenic resource. Staff further notes that the development of any future residential building will be subject to development standards, such as building setbacks and maximum height restrictions that are designed to minimize the aesthetic impacts caused by the development of typical single-family residence or appurtenant structures. The approval of the minor division will also necessitate the development of an access driveway to provide ingress and egress to proposed Lot 2, with a paved surface that will alter the appearance of Lot 1. However, it is not expected that this relatively small amount of pavement will cause significant adverse visual impacts since the proposed driveway would be developed in a manner that is similar to other driveways on abutting lots. In fact, it is anticipated that the approval of the proposed exception to reduce the driveway width to 10 feet would actually be a beneficial impact to the site aesthetics since the paved area would be even less obtrusive and more compatible with the appearance of single-wide driveways found on lots near the subject property. Based on the lack of significant adverse impacts to visual characteristics on the site and on abutting properties, no mitigation measures will be required. D. Miti.qation Measures to Aesthetic Impacts: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Affachmen. t Cf ~-¢ II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES A. Settin_q: The City of Ukiah is a small, but urbanized area, and the subject property is located in an established residential neighborhood with no agricultural lands and no close proximity to such lands. B. SiRnificance Criteria: A significant impact to agricultural resources would occur if implementation of the project caused a conversion of prime agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses or conflicted with lands zoned for agricultural uses or subject to the Williamson Act. C. Impacts: No impacts to agricultural resources will be caused by the project since it will not require the conversion of existing agricultural lands and is not directly adjacent to agricultural operations or lands zoned for agricultural operations. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact SiRnificance After Miti_qation: N/A III. AIR QUALITY A. Settinq - Air Basin Characteristics: The concentration of a given pollutant in the atmosphere is determined by the amount of pollutant released and the atmosphere's ability to transport and dilute the pollutant. The major determinants of transport and dilution are wind, atmospheric stability, terrain, and sunshine. In Ukiah, a relatively high potential for air pollution results from the combined effects of moderate winds, clear skies, frequent atmospheric inversions that restrict vertical dilution, and terrain that restricts horizontal dilution. The City of Ukiah is situated in the flat and narrow Ukiah Valley and the presence of the mountains on both the west and east sides of the valley tends to restrict the horizontal east-west movement of pollutants. The dominant wind direction in the Ukiah Valley is from the northwest to the southeast. Wind speeds in the center of the community are moderate, with winds of 4 mph or less occurring 60 percent of the time. While the potential for air pollution is high in the Ukiah Valley, measurements provided by the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District show that actual pollutant levels are relatively Iow due to the lack of upwind sources and the relatively Iow level of development in the local air basin. B. Si.qnificance Criteria: Air quality Impacts would be significant if the project results in any conflicts with or obstructions to implementation of any applicable air quality plan; violation of any air quality standard or substantial contributions to an existing air quality violation, including a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria for which the region is in nonattainment as defined, by Federal or State regulations; exposure to sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. C. Existinq Air Quality in Ukiah: The Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD) operates a monitoring site in Ukiah measuring concentrations of PM-10. Prior to August of 1988 the District also monitored several gaseous pollutants in Ukiah. In August of 1992, the District again established a multi-pollutant monitoring site in Ukiah for gaseous pollutants, which measures ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Affachment # .3~, Air quality in Ukiah meets all Federal and State air quality standards with the exception of the State 24- hour PM-10 standard. This standard was exceeded on 3days in 1990, 2 days in 1991,0 days in 1992, 2 days in 1993, and 1 day in 1994. No exceedances have occurred since 1994. Ozone is one of the most serious pollutants affecting the State, and 30 of the 58 counties are designated non-attainment. While Mendocino County is attainment for ozone, the Ukiah (East Gobbi Street) sampling station has shown a steady increase in the annual hours of ozone levels exceeding the 40, 50, and 60 parts per billion thresholds since 1993. Additionally, the 80 ppb (State standard = 90 ppb) threshold has been exceeded twice over the past 4 years. However, based upon 1993-1995 data, the ARB has assigned Ukiah an "Expected Peak Day Concentration" (EPDC) level of 74 ppb, which means that any values above 70 ppb would be excluded from the designation process as extreme concentrations (Marcella Nystrom, ARB, personal communication, 4/24/97). Regardless of the attainment designation and the EPDC status, ozone remains as the pollutant of primary concern to the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District. The major sources of ozone precursors are combustion sources such as, factories, automobiles, and evaporation of solvents and fuels. D. Short-term Construction Related Air Quality Impacts: Construction activities create a wide range of emissions, ranging from exhaust from heavy equipment to the air-bound organic gases from solvents, insulating materials, caulking materials, and "wet" pavement. However, while these emissions may contribute to the accumulation of substances that undergo the photochemical reaction that creates urban ozone, they are not regarded as significant short-term impacts. Dust generated by equipment and vehicles used in construction of the building pads, driveways, and the improved entry road and cul-de-sac terminus would cause the most substantial short-term construction- related air quality impacts. Fugitive dust is emitted both during site preparation, grading, and construction activity and as a result of wind erosion over exposed earth surfaces. Construction dust impacts are extremely variable, being dependent upon wind speed, soil type, soil moisture, the type of construction activity and acreage affected by the construction activity. The highest potential for construction dust impacts typically occur during the late spring and summer, and early fall months when soils are dry. These small particulates are respirable particulates that can increase the risk of chronic respiratory disease, and can alter-lung function in children and the elderly when distributed in large enough concentrations. It can also rise into the lower troposphere and contribute to ozone production. The subdivision of the site will cause none of the air quality impacts described above, but the development of an additional residential building will require grading and site preparation activities that could contribute to the PM-10 impacts described above. However, staff does not anticipate any significant adverse impacts from this development since it will entail work on less than 5,000 square feet of surface area. Staff also anticipates that the development of another residence on the subject property would increase traffic and the potential for increased ozone levels caused by vehicle combustion. However, it is not considered likely that the 10 vehicle trips per day projected from this site will cause any significant increase in this pollutant and no mitigation measures are required for this or other potential air quality impacts. E. Miti.qation Measures for Air Quality: None required. F. Impact SiRnificance After Miti.qation: N/A Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Affr~chment Cf ~ - 7 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - PLANT AND ANIMAL LIFE A. Settinq: The subject property is in an urbanized area of the city that has been developed with a single family residence and a large, un-maintained tree canopy that includes a variety of small native oak trees, exotic landscape tree species, and fruit trees. The site also contains a large garden area, but this area has not been well-maintained as part of the overall landscaping for the site and is largely overgrown with a variety of garden plants. B. Significance Criteria: Project impacts upon biological resources would be significant if any of the following resulted: Substantial direct or indirect effect on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local/regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or any species protected under provisions of the Migratory Bird treaty Act (e.g.burrowing owls); · Substantial effect upon sensitive natural communities identified in local/regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the agencies listed above; · Substantial effect (e.g., fill, removal, hydrologic interruption) upon Federally protected wetlands under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; Substantially interfere with movement of native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites; or · Conflict with any local policies/ordinances that protect biological resources (e.g., tree preservation policy or ordinance). C. Impacts: 1. Plant Life: The subject property contains a large number of trees, including several smaller oak trees along the southeastern perimeter, a mature and apparently healthy palm tree in the northeast corner, and a variety of introduced shade trees and fruit trees located in the large rear yard area on the western portion of the property. The approval of this project will not directly affect any of these trees, but the construction of the proposed access driveway and an additional residential building in would require the removal or pruning of the trees located along the southern property line and in the site's interior areas. However, the removal of these trees is not considered a significant adverse environmental impact since none of these trees is on any state or federal listing for endangered, threatened or sensitive plant species and there is no local ordinance designed to require their protection or preservation. Staff also notes that the proposed reduction in driveway width is intended, in part, to provide at least two feet of planter area for the retention of trees along the southern perimeter. Therefore, the subdivision of the site with a narrower access driveway is not expected to cause any potential significant adverse impacts to plant resources and no mitigation measures for the retention of existing trees or other vegetation are proposed as environmental mitigation measures. 2. Mammals: The subject property is located near the City's western hills, which are populated with deer, squirrels, and other mammals that may occasionally use the vegetation on the site's western half for shelter and food sources. However, the neighborhood containing the project site is almost completely built out with single-family residential lots with few substantial habitat resources and the subdivision of the site and its development with a narrower access driveway will not significantly Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Affachment # ~ .... hinder the movement of mammals, nor significantly intrude on their habitat. Therefore, it is staff's conclusion that the proposed project would not have a significant impact on any local mammals that utilize the subject property and no mitigation measures. 3. Birds: The site is also used for shelter and food by a number of birds, but there is no evidence of any large nesting sites or rookeries, and the trees support no known substantial populations of any rare or threatened bird species. Therefore, the subdivision of the site is not expected to cause significant or adverse impacts to bird habitat in the area, particularly if some of the trees can be retained by the approval of a narrower access driveway. Therefore, no mitigation measures for impacts to bird habitat will be required. 4. Fish: Drainage from the site will be routed into City-maintained storm drains that carry the water through underground pipes and into the Mendocino Creek drainage, which does contain salmon and other fish species. Staff of the City Engineer/Public Works Department and the Planning Department reviewed the potential subdivision of the site into two lots and determined that the actual land split would have no substantial or direct effects on this creek since it is minor land use adjustment that does not entail any actual development. Additionally, staff does not anticipate any substantial impacts from the development of the proposed access driveway at a reduced width or the construction of an additional residential unit on the site due to its distance from the Mendocino Creek drainage and the relatively small amounts of storm waters such development will cause. Essentially, staff anticipates that storm waters from the site will be diluted with other storm waters well before it enters the creek, which is over one-half mile to the southeast. Staff also anticipates that the reduction of the driveway access will allow the development of a separate drainage swale or other drainage device that will be effective as or more effective than the inclusion of a drainage device in a 20-foot wide driveway. Therefore, no direct effects from the reduction of the paved access driveway are anticipated. Therefore, no mitigation measures specific to fish resources are required. D. Mitigation Measure: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES A. Settinq: The City of Ukiah is rich in historical resources, which includes an eclectic assortment of historic homes and properties. Cultural resources are similarly abundant, and the City has provided for the preservation and enhancement of its cultural heritage. B. Si_qnificance Criteria: A significant impact to historic and cultural resources would occur if implementation of the project would: · Cause a substantial change in the significance of a historical or cultural resource; · Result in the removal or substantial exterior alteration of a building or structure or district that may be eligible for listing in the National Register or California Register; Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 AHachment #_ · Result in the removal or substantial exterior alteration of a building or structure so that it results in the loss of a designated county landmark in the City of Ukiah; or · Result in the destruction of a unique paleontological resource, site, or unique geological feature, or disturb any human remains. C. Impacts: The subject property is located in an area of the City that is known as the "Westside". This neighborhood is recognized in the General Plan for its historical and architectural values, with an emphasis on the preservation and enhancement of the prevailing architectural and historical development patterns. In this case, however, neither the existing residential on the east side of the site or any of the buildings surrounding it utilizes any unique design or building materials, and there is no prevailing architectural standard for the immediate neighborhood. As a result, none of the structures in this area are listed on any local, state, or federal registry for architectural, historical, or cultural resources, or any other policy document that requires special protection. E. Additionally, Figure V.3-DD of the General Plan's Historic and Archaeological Resources Element indicates that the subject property is situated in an area with the potential to be culturally sensitive. Staff has already noted that the existing structure and subject property have no known architectural or historical resources, and it is unlikely that a prehistoric site or Native American site is located on the subject property. However, in order to ensure that potential resources are not significantly impacted, it is recommended that the developer of the property be required to halt all construction activities in the event of a discovery and hire a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the resources and develop mitigation measures as appropriate. This requirement is outlined below in Mitigation Measure No. 1. F. Miti.qation Measures 10. If, during site preparation or construction activities, any historic or prehistoric cultural resources are unearthed and discovered, all 'work shall immediately be halted, and City Planning Department staff shall be notified immediately of the discovery. The applicant shall be required to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance and, if deemed necessary, to develop a precise mitigation program prior to the continuation of any site work. E. Impact Significance After Mitic~ation: This mitigation ensures that cultural resources will not be adversely affected and that potential impacts are reduced to levels that are not significant. VI.' GEOLOGY AND SOILS: A. Setting: The Ukiah Valley is part of an active seismic region that contains the Maacama Fault, which traverses the valley to the east and north of the City. According to resource materials maintained by the Ukiah Planning Department, the projected maximum credible earthquake along this fault would be approximately 7.4 magnitude on the Richter scale. According to the Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity County Southwestern Part published by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, the subject property is underlain by an "urban mix" that includes native soils mixed with non-native fill materials. In fact, large areas on the west side of the site have been covered with raised planter beds that have contributed to a slight slope (less than 2 percent) that runs from the west to the east. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Aitachment #~ ,.,A-lo B. Siqnificance Criteria: A significant geologic impact would occur if a project exposed people or structures to major geologic features that pose a substantial hazard to property and/or human life, or hazards such as earthquake damage (rupture, groundshaking, ground failure, or landslides), slope and/or foundation instability, soil erosion, soil instability, or other geologic problems that cannot be mitigated through the use of standard engineering design and seismic safety design techniques. C. Impacts: The subject property is not situated on or near an Alquist-Priolo fault zone and has no known slope and/or foundation instability, soil instability, or other geologic hazards. In fact, it is staff's opinion that the primary impacts to soils on the site will result from grading, compaction, and other site preparation activities required to construct impervious building pads and an access driveway in the event that a residential structure is constructed on the property. Staff anticipates that between 80-90 percent of site soils in this area could be disturbed during site preparation work, with roughly 60 percent of the soils on the site eventually covered by impervious surfaces. It is possible that soil erosion and/or loss of topsoil could increase on the site if soils are left exposed to winds or storm waters for any substantial period of time. However, such impacts would generally be short-term in nature and are not expected to be significant if normal grading and site preparation techniques are utilized during any subsequent development. Therefore, the adverse impacts are not considered to be significant in nature. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: A. Setting: Ukiah is generally regarded as a healthy City with relatively clean air and water. While there are some known toxic "spots" resulting from the past storage of hazardous materials underground, the City is not regarded as having a highly contaminated environment. Based on field review, and the review of contaminated site listings maintained by the City, it has been determined that the project site is in a clean and healthy state and not contaminated with toxic or hazardous materials that would present a significant health hazard for occupants or other persons on the site. The project site is located approximately 1.0 mile northwest of the runway for the Ukiah Municipal Airport. This location places the property within an area designated in the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan as Compatibility Zone D (Other Airport Environs), where persons are subject to negligible risks and occasional noise intrusion from aircraft flying over. B. Significance Criteria: A significant impact to the environment and the public associated with hazards and hazardous materials would result from a project if any of the following occurred: Creation of a significant hazard to the public or environment by routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials or from foreseeable upset and accident conditions; · Emission and/or handling of hazardous, acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within ¼ mile of an existing or proposed school; · Location of a project on a listed hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; or · Impairment/interference with adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 AHachment # ,,'3- II C. Impacts: The project does not involve the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, and would not meet any of the hazardous materials criteria listed above. Staff is, therefore, able to conclude that the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact associated with hazardous materials exposure to the environment and the public. The subject property's relative proximity to the Ukiah Municipal Airport will subject persons on the site to the effects caused by aircraft flying over the proposed apartment complex. Staff notes, however, that the site is situated to the northwest of the airport, and aircraft taking off from or landing on the north side of the runways do not regularly fly over the site and most air traffic will typically maneuver at altitudes exceeding 1,000 feet above ground level. As a result of these factors, the Current Compatibility Criteria outlined in Table 7A of the airport's master plan place the subject property into Airport Compatibility Zone D, which includes single- family residential uses as "normally acceptable uses". Therefore, it is anticipated that the limited exposure of persons to aircraft overflights will not cause substantial hazards to persons using the site. In the event of an emergency, ambulance, police, and fire personnel would serve the site via McPeak Street, a maintained public street with fire hydrants located ~; the site. Planning Department staff discussed the project with the Ukiah Fire Marshal and he indicated that although this 28-foot wide street is slightly narrower than other streets in the area, this width has not been a deterrent to the provision of emergency services along this block. The Fire Marshal also indicated that, in the event a residential building is constructed on the property's western portion, fire vehicles used to fight any fires would be based on the street to take advantage of nearby fire hydrants and to limit unnecessary exposure of personnel and equipment to situations where they might become trapped by fire. Therefore, the potential reduction in driveway width is not considered a significant deterrent to the Department's ability to prevent or suppress a fire on the site, nor would it adversely affect any emergency evacuation of the site or the surrounding neighborhood. D. Miti.qation Measures: None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After Miti_qation: N/A. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: A. Settinq: Three major creeks flow through the City on theirway to the Russian River, with some of the adjacent areas identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as being potentially subject to flooding events. In this case, the subject property does not directly abut any of these creeks, but drainage from the site does run through a series of underground storm drains that eventually empty into the Mendocino Creek drainage that is located approximately one mile to the southeast. The western portion of the property is approximately four feet higher than the eastern portions, resulting in a slight slope (less than 2 percent) that declines from west to east. However, there are no substantial watercourses or other major drainage features present on this relatively flat site. The Flood Boundary and Floodway Map and the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM Community Panel 060183-0811 B) prepared for the project area by the Federal Emergency Management Agency shows that none of the project site is subject to floodways or floodplains. Due to the relatively flat topography on the property, storm waters are now absorbed into the ground or flow east toward a storm drain inlet located on the eastern side of McPeak Street. This storm drain system extends for approximately one mile before flowing into the Mendocino Creek drainage system and on to the Russian River. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 l0 AHachment # ~- I~ Domestic water quality, as well as the quality of creek waters in the City is rated as very good, and the project site is served by existing water supply mains located beneath McPeak Street. Water for fire protection is also available from existing hydrants along this street. B. Significance Criteria: Significant impacts associated with hydrology and water quality would result from a project if water quality standards or waste discharge requirements were violated; groundwater and surface water quality and quantity were substantially altered; drainage patterns were substantially altered that would increase erosion/siltation and increase surface runoff; increase runoff that would exceed capacity of existing or planned drainage systems or add a substantial source of pollution; located on a 100-year floodplain; or expose people to hydrological hazards such as flooding or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. C. Impacts: Floodway/Floodplain Issues: As noted above, the site is not designated with any FEMA-mandated floodway or floodplain, and there is no known source of localized ponding or flooding that adversely affects the site. In addition, the site is served by a storm drainage system with sufficient capacity to serve the typical single-family residential structure in the event it is constructed and storm drainage increases. Therefore, no localized or general increases in flooding potential are expected as a result of the project. Storm Drainaqe: The subdivision of the property will not cause any direct significant adverse impacts to storm drainage on the site, but it will establish an additional building site. In the event this area is developed, staff anticipates that between 80-90 percent of the lot's surface area will be graded or otherwise modified and that at least 60 percent of it will be covered with impervious surfaces, including building pads, parking pads, and access driveway surfaces. This development will increase the volume of storm drainage from the site, but Public Works Department staff does not anticipate that such volumes would cause significant adverse impacts to site drainage since the overall development area is relatively small and grades are not substantial. In fact, the existing drainage for the site will allow any new storm waters to be collected and transported to the storm drain system in McPeak Street and on to the Mendocino Creek/Russian River drainage to which it connects. The eventual development of the western portion of the property could adversely affect on-site drainage or drainage onto neighboring lots. However, due to the quantities involved, these impacts are not expected to be significant in nature and it is anticipated that the imposition of standard drainage and erosion control measures typically required the building permit process for any buildings will actually improve on-site and off-site drainage patterns. In fact, the zoning and subdivision standards that apply to the proposed project require the inclusion of a drainage system in the utility easement and/or access driveway. In this case, it is anticipated that the proposed reduction in access driveway width would allow the development of a swale or other drainage feature that would be as effective as or more effective than one developed in a 20-foot wide driveway. Therefore, staff anticipates no significant adverse drainage impacts if a single-family residence is eventually constructed on the western portion of the property. Water Quality Standards: According to City Water Department staff, adequate quantities of water for domestic use are available for the property through the water system that runs below the McPeak Street right-of-way, although extensions may be required to fully serve all of the proposed units. The subdivision of the site will cause no direct water quality .impacts on the site, but staff noted that the eventual development of the property with another single-family residence would not cause any significant adverse impacts to domestic water quality on the site or any a violation of any water quality standard. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Aflachment # .~_'_1.~____ Groundwater Supply and Recharge: No direct groundwater impacts will result from the proposed subdivision of the site, but Planning staff anticipates that up to 60 percent of the site will be covered with a variety of impervious surfaces if an additional single-family residence is eventually developed. However, it is not anticipated the development of such a structure would have a significant adverse impact on groundwater supplies or the ability for the underlying water table to recharge since large areas will probably be left open to groundwater percolation. Furthermore, the water table beneath the site is regularly recharged by groundwater systems that flow east from the western hills of Ukiah toward the Russian River. Wastewater and Sewer: The proposed subdivision of the site will not cause any direct impacts to the City-maintained sewer main that runs beneath McPeak Street, but the development of an additional residential unit on the property would contribute to the capacity that this system can carry. However, while the City's overall sewer system is nearing capacity, Public Utilities staff anticipates that a sufficient number of hookups to the system will be available to serve any future residential units and that the development of the proposed lot will not require extensive modifications to existing sewer systems of the development of new sewer system resources. D. Mitigation Measures for Water Quality and Quantity Resources: None required. E. Impact Si.qnificance After Mitiqation: N/A IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: A. Settinq: The City of Ukiah is a compact urban environment, and functions as the County seat for Mendocino County. Commercial, residential, and industrial land uses are planned for specific areas, as set forth in the 1995 Ukiah General Plan, with allowed and permitted land uses defined through distinct zoning districts that are outlined in the Ukiah Municipal Code. In this case, the 13,361 square foot property is zoned for R-1 (Low Density Residential) uses and residential development is limited to one unit for every 6,000 square feet of net lot area. B. Significance Criteria: Significant land use impacts would occur if the project substantially conflicts with established uses, disrupt or divide an established community, or result in a substantial alteration to present or planned land uses. Proposed project consistency with the Ukiah General Plan and zoning and any other applicable environmental plans and policies is also evaluated in making a determination about potential land use impacts. C. Impacts: As proposed, the 13,361 square foot subject property would be divided into two lots with a 10-foot wide driveway access providing ingress and egress to one of the lots. Proposed Lot 1 would front McPeak Street, with approximately 72 feet of street frontage. This lot, which contains the existing single- family residence and garage, would have a gross lot area of 6,912 square feet and a net area of 6,003 square feet once the area of the proposed access driveway is excluded. Proposed Lot 2 consists of the 6,365 square foot area located on the western portion of the site. This lot would have no street frontage and ingress and egress to this land-locked lot would be provided by the ten-foot wide access driveway requested in the exception. This lot is not developed at this time, but it does contain the remnants of a large garden and a large number of trees. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 12 Affochment # .... 32/_~ ...... General Plan Compatibility: The Ukiah General Plan designates the subject area for LDR (Low Density Residential) land uses and single-family residential development is included as an acceptable land use. The proposed lots would also comply with the density standards and siting criteria for the LDR land use designation, as outlined in the Land Use Element of the Plan. Staff also notes that the proposed subdivision is also consistent with Housing Element goals and policies that encourage infill housing projects in all neighborhoods of the City, regardless of use type or density. Staff also determined that the proposed division of the land and its eventual development with an additional single-family residence is entirely consistent with the goals of the Community Design Element and the Historical and Archeological Resources Element. Goals and policies in both these elements stress the preservation and enhancement of neighborhood character and encourage new construction to reflect the historical and architectural characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood. In this case, the existing residential structure on the eastern portion of the site is being extensively remodeled with design features and building materials that are entirely consistent, and in some cases, more attractive than, the existing structure or those found on surrounding residential structures. Furthermore, there is nothing to indicate that any additional buildings constructed on the site will deviate from the designs used on abutting buildings. Based on these factors, and the fact that the project is not inconsistent with other General Plan elements and requirements, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the proposed apartment complex is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan. Consistency with Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance and Ukiah Municipal Code Standards: The proposed subdivision is consistent with the majority of development and subdivision standards that apply to this project. However, the proposed 10-foot access driveway is not consistent with the access standards outlined in Subdivision Ordinance Section 8305(A) and UMC Sections 9251 and 9252. These ordinances require that private driveways or roadways not abutting a dedicated and accepted City street are constructed to particular standards that include a paved driveway with a minimum width of 20 feet. In this case, the applicant has requested the proposed exception to reduce the required driveway width to a minimum often feet. This width is requested for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the development of a 20-foot wide access driveway would leave one or both of the proposed lots with too little net lot area to comply with zoning and subdivision standards. However, in analyzing the proposed exception, staff finds no major conflict with the zoning and subdivision standards that apply to this project since the Ukiah Municipal Code and the Ukiah Subdivision include allowances for exceptions when warranted. Furthermore, the approval or denial of any exception will only occur after a subjective review by the Planning Commission and City Council, and prior to any City Engineer action on a proposed subdivision. Staff has also determined that the construction of the lO-foot wide access driveway proposed in the exception would have only minor impacts on site access, circulation, parking, and emergency access, and that it could actually allow for the development of more effective drainage systems and trenching for the provision and maintenance of utilities. Based on these factors, staff finds no significant adverse environmental impacts associated with the proposed reduction in access roadway width and no need to require mitigation measures. Neighborhood Compatibility: The approval of the proposed subdivision will allow the development of an additional single-family residence on the western portion of the site 13,365 square foot lot. Due to the lack of adequate street frontage, only one of the proposed lots can meet standards for frontage along McPeak Street and the second lot would be an interior lot with the proposed 10-foot wide driveway access on an easement across the first lot. This type of lot configuration does not prevail in the surrounding Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 13 Affachment # ~-t~- neighborhood, but it is not uncommon either. In fact staff reviewed aerial photographs of the surrounding neighborhood and conducted site visits to confirm that the surrounding neighborhood has numerous interior parcels with no public street frontage, including a parcel that abuts the southwest corner of the subject property. Staff also noted that the use of driveways narrower than the20-foot standard is fairly common to the area, including several lots located along the same block of McPeak Street and on some of the interior lots observed by staff. It is probable that most of these driveways were developed prior to the imposition of zoning standards, but these nonconforming driveways have provided effective site access and parking through the life of the single-family structures they serve. Therefore, it is the opinion of staff that the proposed 10-foot wide driveway will be compatible with these driveways. D. Miti_clation Measure: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A X. MINERAL RESOURCES: A. Settincl: The soils on the subject property have been altered substantially by fills of non-native soils and inorganic materials, and are not recognized for any substantial valuable natural resources. Materials derived from natural resources off the site will be used to develop this site in the event that additional residential buildings are constructed. B. Significance Criteria: Impacts to natural resources would be substantial if the proposed project resulted in the loss of significant or locally important materials such as minerals, gravel, sand or wood. C. Impacts: The subdivision of the site will cause no direct impacts to the site, but the splitting of the parcel will establish a building site area where another single-family residence could be constructed. In this case, such development is expected to use sand, gravel, rock, wood, concrete, and other naturally occurring building materials that are readily available in the Ukiah Valley, with no extraction of such materials from the project site. Furthermore, it is not anticipated the development of one residential building would demand excessive amounts of these materials or cause a direct increase in mining activities, nor would it disrupt any substantial natural habitat or migration corridors. Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposed project would not have a significant adverse impact on natural resources. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A. Xl. NOISE: A. Setting: The subject properties are located in a developed area of the urban landscape that has the typical background noise sources expected in an urban environment, including automobile and truck traffic, collections of human voices, street working crews and heavy equipment, etc. This site is also subject to aircraft noise from aircraft flying over the site, as discussed in Section VII (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) and Section IX (Land Use) of this study. Despite these noise sources, Planning Department staff noted no consistent or particularly obnoxious source of noise in the neighborhood. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 A~achment # B. Significance Criteria: A project will typically have a significant noise impact if it exposes people to or generates noise levels in excess of standards established in the local General Plan or Noise Ordinance; causes a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existi'ng without the project; or causes a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels without the project. C. Impacts: The Ukiah General Plan identifies the significant noise sources in the City as transportation noise coming from major roadways, railroad operations, industrial plants, and airports. The focus of the Noise Element in the General Plan is to protect the noise-sensitive land uses from transportation, industrial, railroad, and airport noise through the establishment of noise contours around these noise sources in the community, where typical noise can exceed the defined threshold of 60 dB (decibels). In addition, the City Noise Ordinance limits the maximum level of noise that can emanate from residential units to 40 decibels during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.; 50 decibels from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; and 45 decibels from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. In this case, the subdivision of the site would cause no direct noise increases, but it would establish a building site on the western portion of the property. However, in the event that this area is developed with an allowed single-family residence, there is no evidence that the construction or occupation of the structure will cause these noise levels to be exceeded regularly or significantly. Therefore, no specific mitigation measures will be required for noise reduction during any construction on the site or for the occupation of any allowed residential building. As noted earlier in this analysis, aircraft using Ukiah Municipal Airport fly over the subject property and create the potential for annoying occupants of the residences in this neighborhood. However, the exposure of persons to aircraft noise is usually on an occasional basis, with no regular or sustained flights occurring over the area. As a result, the potential increase in noise levels is not considered to be hazardous to humans and is too short-lived to violate the equivalent decibel standards listed in the City's Noise Ordinance. Therefore, aircraft noise will not cause any significant adverse noise effects and no mitigation is required. D. Mitigation Measure: N/A E. Impact Significance After Miti_qation: N/A VII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: A. Setting: The 2000 census indicates that the population of Ukiah is 15,597 persons, with a slow and stable growth rate. The population has not changed much in the past several years, and it has only been very recently that it appears to be noticeably increasing. The 1995 General Plan projected a population of 17,291 for the year 2000, which is 1694 more than the current population. B. Significance Criteria: Population and housing impacts would be significant if the project induced substantial direct or indirect population growth in an area and displaced substantial numbers of existing houses and/or substantial numbers of people, thus requiring replacement housing elsewhere. C. Impacts: The proposed subdivision of the site will cause no direct impacts to local housing stocks, but it will establish a building site for another single-family residence in the area. However, the development of one additional housing unit will cause no substantial increases in Ukiah Valley housing or have any noticeable effects on housing stocks in the Ukiah Valley. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 Xlll. PUBLIC SERVICES: A. Setting: The City of Ukiah is a small, but urbanized, area with a full complement of public services that include police and fire services, public schools, public works and utilities, and emergency services. B. Significance Criteria: Impacts to public services would be significant if the approval of the subdivision and exception to driveway width standards resulted in adverse physical impacts that would require the construction of new public facilities or substantial alteration to existing governmental facilities to maintain acceptable service levels or performance levels. C. Impacts: Staff discussed the proposed project with the City Police, Parks, Utilities, and Fire Departments, as well as with the Ukiah Unified School District. City Police Department: Discussions with the City Police Department reveal that the proposed project will not result in the need for additional police officers, and will not have a substantial affect on their ability to serve any future residents on the subject property. City police also indicated that the allowance of a 10-foot wide driveway and a building site on the interior portion of the existing parcel will not cause significant adverse impacts on their ability to serve the proposed lots. City Community Services Department: Discussions with the City Community Services Department reveal that the proposed project will not result in the need for additional staff or park facilities, and will not have substantial affect the ability to maintain City-owned park facilities. This area of the City is within one mile of smaller pocket parks, the Todd Grove Park facilities, and the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. City Utilities Department: Discussions with the City Utilities Department reveal that the proposed project will not result in the need for new or expanded electrical generation sources, nor will it cause the need for additional staff to maintain the current City-owned electric service facilities. In fact, staff indicated that the amount of electricity needed by any new single-family residential development that results from the subdivision of the site will not be substantial and is available from current generation capacity. The City's sewage treatment plant is reaching capacity, but Utilities Department staff has indicated that it anticipates hookups will be available for any additional single-family residential development that could occur as a result of the proposed subdivision and exception. Therefore, the approval of the project will not cause significant adverse impacts to the sewer treatment system. Utilities staff also indicated that the reduction in the width of the paved area proposed in the exception will have no adverse effects on their ability to serve the site through a utility easement since such services will probably be privately maintained. In fact, they suggested that the reduction in covered areas might make such service easier over time since the paved area would not have to be completely torn up or reconstructed when repairs or service is necessary. City Fire Department: The City Fire Marshal indicated that the subdivision of the property and the reduction in driveway access width would have no significant adverse impacts on the Fire Department's provision of emergency services to the existing residence or any future residential use on the western portion of the site. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 16 AHachment ~ .... ~,'_1~___ Ukiah Unified School District: Previous discussions with the Ukiah Unified School District reveal that it has the basic capacity to house and educate the minimal number of potential students generated by the development of any additional residential buildings on the site. The applicants will be required to pay the adopted school district developer mitigation fee that is intended to offset the cumulative impact contribution to the district from all development projects. D. Mitiqation Measures: None required. E. Impact Significance After Miti~qation: N/A XlV. RECREATION A. Setting: The subject property does not directly border any City-maintained parks, but the City does operate the McGarvey mini-park on a site approximately one-quarter mile northeast of the site. The property is also within a half-mile of the Todd Grove Park complex, Anton Stadium, and the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. Additionally, the City of Ukiah maintains a variety of recreational facilities throughout the City and runs programs for both youth and adults. B. Significance Criteria: A project will have a significant impact if it increases the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and other recreational facilities or includes recreational facilities or requires the construction of facilities that will have an adverse effect on the physical environment. Impacts: The subdivision of the project site with a reduced driveway width will have no direct impacts to recreational services in the City, but it will establish another building site that could be developed with a single-family residential building. However, the effects of such development will have no significant adverse effects on local recreational services or facilities since its incremental contribution to the numbers of persons using these resources will be too small. C. Mitigation Measures: None required. D. Impact Significance After Miticlation: N/A XV.TRANSPORTATION/ TRAFFIC/ CIRCULATION: A. Setting: Ukiah is a rural city that is not experiencing significant population growth. However, as the government and commercial center for Mendocino County, the City has been growing in terms of commercial development. This has increased traffic and its corresponding delays at intersections, particularly during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. While traffic impacts are somewhat subjective in nature, recent traffic studies show that the delays at some key intersections have substantially increased recently. The subdivision of the property with a reduced driveway width Will cause no direct impacts to traffic in the project site area, but the development of an additional single-family residence on the building site established by this action will cause a minor increase in traffic levels. Public Works/City Engineer Department staff used standard traffic generation calculations prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the 6th edition (1997) of its manual Trip Generation to determine that such development would generate approximately 10 additional trips per day. Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 In the event that the proposed subdivision is approved, the applicant intends to demolish the existing two- car garage and replace it with a single-wide garage on the south side of the residential building that is currently located on the northeast corner of the property. The subdivision map/exceptions exhibit shows no off-street parking facilities for proposed Lot 2, but the 6,000 square feet of area proposed for the site will provide sufficient area to provide such parking. Planning staff Will determine the exact number of required off-street parking stalls for the site once a specific house or other residential design is proposed and these buildings could only be occupied once the parking has been physically established on the site. B. Significance Criteria: According to the Ukiah General Plan Circulation Element, the minimum acceptable level of service (LOS) is LOS "D." Other criteria include whether the project would have substantial effects upon air traffic patterns; whether the project would increase traffic hazards due to design features; whether the project has inadequate emergency access; whether the project has inadequate parking capacity; and whether the project would create conflicts with adopted policies, programs and plans for alternative transportation. C. Impacts: Traffic: No direct traffic impacts are expected if the proposed subdivision is approved, but the splitting of the property as proposed will allow an additional residence to be constructed on the west side of the subject property. In the event that a residential structure is developed, staff projects that traffic to and from the site would increase by approximately'10 trip ends per day, which is not considered to be a significant adverse impact to area traffic levels. Parkinq and Access: The single-wide garage proposed for the existing residential structure may have to be shifted to the west to assure full compliance with zoning requirements for front yard setbacks and the provision of two off-site parking stalls. However, the proposed lot on which the building is located contains adequate area for the development of such facilities and they will have to be developed prior to the issuance of a permit to occupy the existing single-family residential structure. In the event the proposed lot split is approved and an additional residential building is developed, two parking stalls will also have to be constructed on proposed Lot 2 to comply with zoning standards for off- street parking before the building could be occupied. However, the 6,000 square foot lot will have sufficient capacity for such parking and no adverse impacts to area parking are expected if the building is constructed. The proposed exception to allow a driveway width of 10 feet instead of the 20-foot width required will make ingress and egress between the lot proposed on the western portion of the property and McPeak Street more difficult since this width will not allow two vehicles to pass each other. However, it is the opinion of staff that proposed driveway width will not cause significant adverse impacts to on-site circulation since this driveway access will serve only one lot and the average traffic to and from this lot is not expected to exceed 10 trips per day. Furthermore, while minor conflicts could occur when vehicles enter and exit the site at the same time, in most cases persons yielding the right-of-way would rarely have to back up more than 50 feet in either direction. None of the factors discussed above represent significant adverse traffic or circulation impacts to the project site or the surrounding roads and intersections, so no mitigation measures are recommended. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact Significance After Mitiqation: N/A Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 18 XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS A. Settin_q: Energy resources are readily available to the citizens of Ukiah. These include electricity, natural gas, propane, and alternative sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric. B. Significance Criteria: A project will have a significant impact if it causes the use of fuel or energy in a wasteful manner, or encourages activities that use large amounts of fuel or energy. C. Impacts: No direct impacts to utilities or service systems will be caused by the subdivision of the property, but the development of any additional residential unit would require the consumption of fuels and energy during its construction and .occupation. However, there is nothing to indicate that future residential uses on the site would use significant levels of such resources. Therefore, the project will not cause significant adverse energy impacts or require the development of new sources of energy. D. Mitigation Measures: None required. E. Impact SiRnificance After Mitiqation: N/A XVll. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING: AB 3180 requires all public agencies to adopt a monitoring and reporting program whenever they adopt an EIR or "Mitigated Negative Declaration." The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this Mitigated Negative Declaration require the applicants to incorporate or comply with the important Mitigation Measures listed in Table 1, below. Table 1: MITIGATION MEASURE MONITORING PROGRAM MITIGATION MONITORING FUNDING MEASURES RESPONSIBILITY HOW AND WHEN VERIFICATION RESPONSIBILITY Historical and Applicants with Staff During all site Planning Applicants in the event Cultural oversight preparation and Department staff of a discovery Resources construction phases XVll. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: A. Potential to Degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? YES NO X Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 19 Attachment # __~-__2-_L B. Short Term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one that occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future). YES NO X C. Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is significant). YES NO X D. Substantially Adverse: Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? YES NO X XVlII. DETERMINATION: On the basis of this Initial Study: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described within the Initial Study will be incorporated into the design of the project or required by the City of Ukiah. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant adverse impact on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT shall be required. Signat ~d Actinq Environmental Coordinator Title Dave Lohse Print Name August 2, 2005 Date Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 2O RESOURCES USED TO PREPARE THIS INITIAL STUDY , . , 10. 11. City of Ukiah General Plan, 1995 The Linkaqe Between Land Use, Transportation and Air Quality, State Air Resources Board, 1993. The Land Use - Air Quality Linka.qe: How Land Use and Transportation Affect Air Quality, State Air Resources Board, 1997. Transportation-Related Land Use Strateqies to Minimize Mobile Source Emissions: An Indirect Source Research Project, State Air Resources Board, 1995. A Source of Air Quality Conditions Includinq Emissions Inventory, Ozone Formation, PM10 Generation, and Mitigation Measures for Mendocino County, CA. Sonoma Technologies, Inc., November, 1998. Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part, and Trinity County, Southwestern Part, California, U.S. Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service, January, 1991. U.S.G.S. Topographical Map, Ukiah Quadrangle, 1958 (photo inspected 1975). Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan Report, Shutt Moen Associates, July, 1996. Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition, Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1997 Correspondence with Californian Department of Transportation Staff, dated November 22, 2003, regarding potential impacts associated with Minor Subdivision Map Application No. 02-39 Correspondence/discussions with the following City staff and Agency representatives: a. Chuck Yates, Fire Marshal b. Thomas McArthur, Sewer/Water Eng. Tech. c. Cindy Sauers, Electrical Distribution Engineer d. Diana Steele, Public Works Director/City Engineer e. Tim Eriksen, Civil Engineer f. Rick Sands, Engineering Associate g. John Williams, Police Chief h. Paul Richey, Airport Manager Mitigated Negative Declaration / Initial Study for Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception No. 05-19 2:]_ LOCATION MAP Minor Subdivision Map No. 05-19: Meaux 432 McPeak Street (Assessor Parcel No. 001-251-06) crrY Ol · CNlC { 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet NORTH Attachment PRC Referral for Minor Subdivision 05-19: Meaux AHachment # JOB:lO3-025 ENVI'RONMENTAL CHECKLI'ST FOR MEAUX MI'NOR SUBDI'VI'SON MAP & SUBDI'V'I'SI'ON REQUI'REMENT EXCEPTI'ON NO. 05-19 Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS Would the Project: 1) Have a substantial adverse effect [] []~ [] [] on a scenic vista? 2) Substantially damage scenic [] [] []I~ [] resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock, outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? 3) Substantially degrade the existing [] [] [] [] visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? / 4) Create a new source of [] []I~ [] [] substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES Would the Project: / 1) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique [] [] []li~ F1 Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? 2) Conflict with existing zoning for []' [] [] ~ [] agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 3) Involve other changes in the [] [] [] [] existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment # 3- I AH'achment # 3-~ __ Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated III. AIR QUALITY Would the Project: / 1) Conflict with or obstruct [] []I~' [] [] implementation of the applicable , air quality plan? 2) Violate any air quality standard or [] []I~ [] [] contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality I violation? 3) Result in a cumulatively [] [] [] [] considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? 4) Expose sensitive receptors to [] [] [] [] substantial pollutant concentrations? 5) Create objectionable odors [] [] [] [] affecting a substantial number of people? ! I IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES I Would the Project: / 1) Have a substantial adverse effect, [] [] []I~ [] either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status , species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish & Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services? 2) Have a substantial adverse effect [] [] [] [] on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment # 3- 2. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporatedi~ -- 3) Have a substantial adverse effect [] [] [] [] on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 4) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established ,( native resident or migratory [] [] [] [] wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nurseries? 5) Conflict with any local policies or / ordinances protecting biological [] []I~ [] [] resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? 6) Conflict with provisions of an /' adopted Habitat Conservation [] [] []li~ [] Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the Project: / 1) Cause a substantial adverse [] []I~ [] [] change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? / 2) Cause a substantial adverse [] []I~ [] [] change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? / 3) Directly or indirectly destroy a [][t~ [] [] [] unique paleontological resource or site or unique feature? 4) Disturb any human remains, [] []~ [] [] including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the Project: 1) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment Attachment Less Than I Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated a) Rupture of a known rq [] [] [] earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. b) Strong seismic ground [] [] [] [] shaking? c) Seismic-related ground [] [] [] [] failure, including liquefaction? d) Landslides? [] [] [] /' [] 2) Result in substantial soil erosion [] [] I~' [] [] or the loss of topsoil? 3) Be located on a geologic unit or [] [] [] I~ [] soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 4) Be located on expansive soil, as [] [] [] li~ [] defined in Table 16-1 of the Uniform Building Code (2001), creating substantial risks to life or property? 5) Have soils incapable of [] [] [] [] adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the Project: 1) Create a significant hazard to the [] [] [] I~ [] public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation imPact Impact Impact Incorporated 2) Create a significant hazard to the [] [] [] [] public, or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? / 3) Emit hazardous emissions or [] [] [] [] handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 4) Be located on a site which is [] [] [] [] included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? / 5) For a project located within an [] []~ [] [] airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 6) For a project within the vicinity of [] [] [] [] a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 7) Impair implementation of or [] []I~ [] [] physically interfere with adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? 8) Expose people or structures to [] []I~ [] [] significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the Project: [] [] [] [] 1) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment Less Than Less Potentially Significant Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impacj, Impact Impact Incorporated 2) Substantially deplete groundwater [] [] [] [] supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would .drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or , planned uses for which permits have been granted)? / 3) Substantially alter the existing [] [] [] [] drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site? / 4) Substantially alter the existing [] []~ [] [] drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on or off site? 5) Create or contribute runoff water [] [] [] [] which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? 6) Otherwise substantially degrade [] [] [] [] water quality? 7) Place housing within a lO0-year [] [] [] F'I flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 8) Place within a lO0-year flood [] [] [] [] hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? 9) Expose people or structures to a [] [] []li~ [] significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Z 10) Be subject to inundation by [] [] [] [] seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 AHachment # ;~- (~ I Less Than -- Potentially Significant Less Than No !, Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the Project: / 1) Physically divide an established [] []I~ [] [] community? 2) Conflict with any applicable land [] [] [] [] use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an / environmental effect? 3) Conflict with any applicable [] [] [] [] habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the Project: 1) Result in the loss of availability of [] []I~ [] [] a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 2) Result in the loss of availability of [] []I~ [] [] a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? i , Xl. NOISE Would the Project result in: / 1) Exposure of persons to or [] []~ [] [] generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? / 2) Exposure of persons to, or [] [] []I~ [] generation of, excessive ground- borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels? 3) A substantial permanent increase [] [] [] [] in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 4) A substantial temporary or [] [] [] [] periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment # ~-7 Affachmenl' -//-' __ "_.~1 ......... Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant No Beneficial Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated 5) For a project located within an [] [] [] [] airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 6) For a project within the vicinity of [] [] [] [] a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XlI. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the Project: / 1) Induce substantial population [] []~ [] [] growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) qr indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? 2) Displace substantial numbers of [] [] [] r'"l existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 3) Displace substantial numbers of [] [] [] [] people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Xlll. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the Project: 1) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? [] []~ [] [] Police protection? [] [],-,! [] [] Schools? [] [].,,;1~ [] [] Parks? [] [] 4 [] [] Other public facilities? [] []I~ [] [] ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Aflachrnent # ~? I~ Affachment ¢¢-' .... ~.-._~_,.%_.. .............. Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XIV. RECREATION Would the Project: I 1) Increase the use of existing [] [] [] [] neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? / 2) Include recreational facilities or [] []~ [] [] require the construction of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect I on the environment? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the Project: / 1) Cause an increase in traffic, [] []~ [] [] which is a substantial relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? 2) Exceed, either individually or [] [] []~ [] cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? 3) Result in a change in air traffic [] [] [] [] patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? / 4) Substantially increase hazards [] []I~ [] [] due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? / 5) Result in inadequate emergency [] []I~ [] [] access? 6) Result in inadequate parking [] [] [] [] capacity? 7) Conflict with adopted policies, [] [] [] [] plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 Attachment # 3-~' ,, Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated XVI.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the Project: 1) Exceed wastewater treatment [] [] []l~/ [] requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 2) Require or result in construction [] [] ~ [] [] of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 3) Require or result in the [] [] [] [] construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? 4) Have sufficient water supplies [] [] [] [] available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? / 5) Result in a determination by the [] [] []d [] wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? 6) Be served by a landfill with [] [] [] [] sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid / waste disposal needs? 7) Comply with federal, state, and [] [] [] [] local statues and regulations related to solid waste? XVII.MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1) Does the project have the [] [] [] [] potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 10 AHachment # -S-lO ___ Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Beneficial ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Significant with Significant Impact Mitigation Impact Impact Impact Incorporated 2) Does the project have impacts [] [] [] i [] that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? 3) Does the project have [] [] ~ [] [] environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOR MEAUX MINOR SUBDIVISON MAP & SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT EXCEPTION NO. 05-19 11 A~achment # ~-11 ~ti~chrnenl # .~'3g Aitc~chmenl # ........ ~ Shawn P. Harmon 602 W. Mill St. Ukiah, CA 95482 July 26, 2005 Mr. Dave Lohse, Associate Planner City of Ukiah Planning Department 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 RE: Minor Subdivision Map/Exception No. 05-19 Dear Dave: After several conversations with you regarding the details of the above referenced subdivision, I feel compelled to provide you with my written comments and concerns over the approval of this project as proposed. These comments apply to the proposed exception, as well as the pending subdivision, and should be included with the record for the entire project. The project as proposed consists of a Minor Subdivision with an application for an exception. The exception does not stand alone as a project and your finding that "the project" is exempt from CEQA is a fallacy. While 15305 may apply to an exception that has no other project tied to it, it certainly does not apply to the project as proposed. Due to the need for the exception, the Minor Subdivision no longer qualifies for a categorical exemption under section 15315 of the CEQA Guidelines. Until an initial study has been performed, and the appropriate environmental documentation has been prepared and properly noticed for public review, it is my opinion that the noticed public meetings should be cancelled, unless denial of the project is eminent. , Subdivision Ordinance 8320 requires that an application for exception be made by a certified petition by the subdivider, "stating fully the grounds of the application and the facts relied upon by the petitioner." If such document exists, the "grounds" and "facts" should be included in your staff report and a determination made as to their relevance for making the findings required by said section. The required findings are not in your staff report. , The proposed exception is disingenuous. An attempt is being made to circumvent several sections of the City Code and its intent as to how to propedy provide for the development of potentially useable areas of parcels that do not front on a public street or approved private road. The proposed project is creating a situation commonly known as a flag lot. Unfortunately the City of Ukiah's Code does not specifically address the requirements for creating a flag lot. It does however provide several provisions (two of which are considered "Special Circumstances") as to ways of developing parcels such as this. In every case the minimum width for an access/utility easement (which should be considered one in the same for this type of development) is 20 feet. The exception proposes to deceivingly identify these as two separate instruments in an attempt to comply with minimum net.areas required in R-1 districts. By definition, the net lot area shall eXclude the "...portion of a flag lot providing access to a street, and excluding any public or private easement or right of way providing access to another lot. Attachment # .~ ~__-j · Page 2 July 26, 2005 Every municipality within our region, who has a flag lot ordinance in their code, requires a minimum width of 20 feet for the narrow strip portion of the flag lot. In every case, the portion of the flag lot which is subtracted from the gross area is the entire width of the narrow strip leading to the main portion of the lot; not just the portion of the strip that is physically paved. In this case, to claim that only 10 feet of paving should be subtracted from the gross area, instead of the entire 20 feet which provides access and utilities to one specific parcel is preposterous. The net impact to Lot 1 is the same, regardless of the location of the 10' paved driveway within the 20 foot easement; 20 feet of Lot 1 has been encumbered for the benefit of Lot 2. Therefore, the full 20 foot strip should be subtracted from the gross area, just as the following example indicates. o While this site may have sufficient area for two building sites, it does not have adequate area to be subdivided. In 1982 the City Council recognized this type of situation and declared it a "Special Situation', whereby lots in excess of 12,000 square feet and 70' of street frontage could be approvable as two building sites (see sec. 9252). While similar to the permitted use of constructing a second dwelling unit, this special situation does not restrict the occupancy, or the square footage of either dwelling unit, so long as each site has a net area of 5000 square feet (emphasis added). The conditions placed on this type of situation are noteworthy. The Council maintained the strict requirement that "... the private street or easement to such rear lot shall be not less than twenty (20) feet in width (emphasis added); and ". ..... that such private street shall not be considered as a part of any required yard area, for the purpose of determining area." While the ordinance does not specifically state the required paved width within the easement, it still requires that the full 20 feet be excluded when calculating net area and yard area. Though clearly deviating from the R-1 zoning requirement of 6000 net square feet for a building lot, the Council held steadfast to the requirement of maintaining a 20 foot wide access and utility strip to serve the rear building site. , Section 9251, found in the same "Special Situations" category as 9252, further describes how lots that do not have their principal frontage on an accepted street should be handled. The required utility easement to serve such a lot is to be the same width as the right of way requirements of the subdivision code. The right of way, as defined in the subdivision ordinance, is for "street and utility purposes and on a portion of which a street is built" (emphasis added). Additionally, section 9251 (A) states that the "..minimum width to be accepted as a utility easement under any conditions shall be twenty feet (20'). It further goes on to require in section D that" within and throughout the length of said public utility easement, the owner shall construct a private roadway." It further states that "the traveled way shall be a minimum of twenty feet (20') in width." This is just another example of the consistency in the code as to what the minimum width for joint access/utility easements should be. 7. Site plan observations: Provisions for off-street parking on Lot 1 have not been adequately identified. The two independently accessible parking stalls that are proposed for removal (garage demolition), must be reconstructed on proposed Lot 1 in order to comply with R-1 development standards. For your reference, off-street parking is defined in the city code as "...required on-site parking beyond all setback lines of a lot." It is essential that detailed drawings be provided showing how Lot 1 will comply with this requirement. The southern building setback line for Lot 1 should be measured from the 20 foot easement, just as section 9251 requires yard area to be independent of the 20 foot easement. Page 3 July 26, 2005 As proposed, there would be a 2 foot setback from ti;e south property line for construction of the 10 foot road surface. The unofficial prcperty line as shown on the tentative map is at least 1 foot to the south of the existing fence line (same situation on the North line). In addition to this possible boundary ccnflict, which could require reconfiguration of parcels to maintain required net areas, there is a distinct grade difference along the fence line near the southwest corn ar of the existing garage. There is approximately a 2 foot drop in grade at this lc. cation, which would likely require the construction of a retaining wall along a portion cf the south property line, in order to contain the proposed roadway. There are also mature trees (pine and oak) along the south property line that are not shown on the tentative map; trees which could conflict with the construction of the driveway, and/or ~.: retaining wall. There is an undisclosed drainage feature located near the south-west corner of the existing garage which flows onto the neighboring proper:y a short distance before entering a 5" to 6" corrugated metal pipe. This is likely the reason for the grade differential noted above (i.e., a historical drainage course e:dsted prior to development of this parcel). This property, as well as most of the prope:ties in this general vicinity, slope and drain to the east. Given this observation, it is my opinion that a detailed drainage investigation/analysis should be performed to ensure that the additional storm water runoff caused by the development of these ~ ~ parcels can be collected and transported to a satisfactory point of disposal. Withoat the analysis, impacts to neighboring properties and downstream drainage faciliti(:s can not be adequately ascertained to ensure that no significant impact will be caused by this project. As a local observation, the drainage inlet on the corner cf McPeak and Calvert Dr. routinely floods the street during most nominal storm ever [s. Whether this is due to lack of maintenance, or lack of capacity, the City shoulc take the responsibility,of ensuring that this problem is remedied, and is not exacerbs,:ed by this project. These c{ mments represent several of my concerns, but not all. As I indicated to you early on, it is my opinion t ~at this parcel should not be subdivided. It is too small, too narro.,¢, and in a location where larger p~.;cels are of great value in preserving, enhancing, and protecting Ihe open space that is so coveted ...Ch the historical West Side of Ukiah. The R-1 district should not be targeted for impacted infill, especiall/within the West Side neighborhoods where larger lots are very cammon. The justifications you prov.de in your staff report are not at all unique to this project. The sarne findings could be made for any i-arcel that can't comply with the current city code. I find this to 3e a misapplication of the "exceptic,¥' provision in the code, and pledge to continue to oppose this pr3ject, and any others, until such tim,. that the City updates its code so that exceptions are no longer the -ule. Sincerely,. Shawn F Harmon AHachment Vt_ ~'3 LOCATION MAP MS/EX/VA No. 05-19: MEAUX 432 McPeak Street (APN 001-251-06) CITY OF UKL~ CENTER 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet NOR~ ATTACHMENT 1 Attachment # ,7 City of Ukiah STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ron Meaux Variance No. 05-19 ITEM NO. 9-A Meeting Date: October 12, 2005 PROJECT SUMMARY: The project consists of a Variance to allow the width of a private access driveway for a proposed lot with no public street frontage to be reduced from 20 feet to 10 feet. The proposed driveway would extend from the McPeak Street frontage to the eastern boundary of a new lot proposed as part of the Minor Subdivision Map/Subdivision Requirement Exception applications that make up the other components of this project. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Minor Subdivision/Subdivision Requirement Exception applications in August of this year, voting 5-0 to recommend that the Ukiah City Council approve both and allow the division of the site. However, staff later determined that the Exception component only applies to access driveway standards in the Subdivision Ordinance and that a Variance must also be approved to allow the narrower driveway width since the 20-foot standard is also included in the Ukiah Municipal Code Sections 9251 and 9252, which are part of the Ukiah Zoning Code. Therefore, in order to ensure that the reduced roadway width is thoroughly reviewed and acted on properly, the Planning Commission is required to hear and act on the proposed Variance. The discretionary actions associated with this project are quasi-judicial in nature; therefore each decisibn-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove, or modify the project. PROJECT LOCATION: The project site consists of a single parcel located at 432 McPeak Street (Assessor Parcel No. 001-251-06), on the west side of the street, approximately 150 feet north of its intersection with Calvert Drive. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City of Ukiah's Environmental Coordinator has determined that the proposed project is not exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality ACt (CEQA), and City of Ukiah staff conducted a careful and comprehensive review of the project that included the preparation of an Environmental Checklist in which potentially significant adverse impacts to cultural resources were identified. Based on this analysis, staff concluded the project will require the adoption of a mitigation measure and a mitigation monitoring program to lessen the potential adverse impacts to levels that are not significant Staff further concluded that a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project is appropriate and specific Findings in support of this determination were included in the Negative Declaration prepared for the project. Once staff determined that the Variance was required, it reassessed the environmental impacts of the amended project and determined that the addition of the Variance application would not cause any adverse impacts that were not already identified in the previous analysis. Based on this determination, staff prepared a Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration for the entire project and re-circulated it in accordance with CEQA requirements. VARIANCE NO. 05-19: MEAUX 1 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LDR (Low Density Residential) ZONING DISTRICT: R-I (Low Density Residential) PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existin.q Conditions: The project site consists of a 13,361 square foot parcel located in a Iow density residential neighborhood on the west side of Ukiah. This lot contains a 1,040 square foot single family residence with a 700 square foot garage/carport structure attached to the southern portion of the residence. These structures are surrounded by concrete walkways and porches, but the-western portion of the lot is undeveloped, with a dense planting of trees and other vegetation. This area is surrounded by wood and chain link fencing, Proposed Conditions: Proposed Lot 1 would be located along the McPeak Street frontage. This lot will be just less than 72 feet wide, with a gross lot area of 6,985 square feet and a net lot area of 6,000 square feet. The existing single-family residence located on the. northeast corner of the site is being remodeled and will be retained, but the existing garage structure will be replaced with smaller carport constructed along the southern wall of the residence. An additional outdoor parking stall will be constructed along the southern side of the garage, with access to both parking spaces via the existing driveway entrances. The south side of Lot 1 would be developed with the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway, which will be developed on top of a 20-foot wide utility easement that will extend along the southern property line for Lot 1. As proposed, this asphalt-paved access lane will be located approximately two feet from the lot's southern property line and will extend approximately 99 feet to the eastern property line of proposed Lot 2. Proposed Lot 2 would be located to the west of Lot 1, with no public street frontage. It will-also be slightly less than 72 feet wide, with a net lot area 6,377 square feet. As noted earlier, this portion of the site is undeveloped and no specific plans to cOnstruct any residential, accessory, or access structures in this area have been submitted. STAFF ANALYSIS General Plan Consistency: The project site is designated for LDR (Low Density Residential) land uses on the Ukiah General Plan Land Use Map, and staff has confirmed that the lot split, as proposed, would establish two lots that are consistent with the Land Use Element's criteria for Iow density development. These include locations within designated zoning districts, access from new structures to public streets, and maXimum density. Staff has also determined that the proposed 10-foot wide access roadway will be consistent with LDR requirements for access to new development so long as it is paved. Should the reduced access driveway width be approved, the proposed lots will also be consistent with Community Design goals and policies for the' preServation and enhancement of neighborhood character since the proposed lot sizes of at least 6,000 net square feet are consistent with the minimum lot size required for this single-family residential neighborhood. In fact, as a neighborhood lot area exhibit .(Attachment 5) submitted by the applicant shows, over a third of the lots in the immediate vicinity of the subject, property are 6,000 square feet or less in area. In addition, it is concluded that the construction of a 10-foot wide driveway would be more compatible than a 20-foot wide access 'roadway would with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood, which contains a number of residential sites with similarly sized driveways. VARIANCE NO. 05-19: MEAUX 2 ) Consistency with Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance and Ukiah Municipal Code Standards: The proposed access roadway width of 10 feet is not consistent with the access roadway standards outlined in Subdivision Ordinance Section 8305(A) and UMC Sections 9251 and 9252. These ordinance standards require that private roadways not abutting a dedicated and accepted City street are constructed to particular standards that include a minimum paved width of 20 feet. In this case, the applicant has requested the proposed Variance to reduce the paved width to a minimum of ten feet. The approval of this request would allow the applicant to continue with the processing of the proposed Minor Subdivision map to divide the site .into two lots, with each of the proposed lots established with a net lot area in excess of 6,000 square feet. These lot areas would be consistent with General Plan and R-1 Zoning District standards for lot area, including standards for the maintenance of a 20-foot wide utility easement to the back lot. Variances to the access driveway width requirements of the UMC are permissible, but only in cases where specific findings can be made, as described in UMC Section 9232. These findings are similar to the findings made in support of the Subdivision Requirement Exception heard by the Planning Commission earlier this year, but there are also distinct differences and staff prepared specific discussions on each required finding. These are found below. Finding A: That any variance granted shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is .situated. In this case, the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway would be only half the width of the access width required in the UMC, but this driveway would provide access to only one additional lot, with no real opportunity to extend access 'to any additional lots that may be developed in the future. Furthermore, the 10-foot width proposed in this' project is consistent with the 10-foot wide driveways used for off-street access and parking on many of the lots in the surrounding neighborhood and it is staff's opinion that it will blend in better than a wider driveway. Based on these factors, it is the opinion of staff that the 10-foot width proposed in this project would not be a grant of special' privilege. Findinq B: That because of special circumstances appficable to the subject property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this Chapter is found to deprive subject under identical zone classifications. The subject property is over 186 feet long, but it was created with a width and street frontage of less than 72 feet. In fact, the subject parcel was established at a time when lot dimension in this area of the City were typically larger and longer, and subsequent land divisions left this oversize lot effectively landlocked with little opportunity for the development of additional' street frontage on any property line. As a result, the property now has a total lot area of approximately 13,361 square feet, but it does not have'sufficient width along the McPeak Street frontage to allow its subdivision with the required street frontage of 60 feet per lot. Therefore, any division of the property will require the development of an access driveway to the lot proposed for the western portion of the property. In this case, the development of the typical 20-foot wide access driveway over proposed Lot 1 would reduce the overall net area of the existing property by almost 2,000 square feet, which effectively precludes any division of this otherwise developable property. Staff also notes that the subject property is situated in an area where surrounding development effectively limits' opportunities for shared access across abutting lots and makes the use of the proposed access driveway for ingress and egress to any surrounding lots highly unfeasible. Based on these factors, it is the opinion of staff that the unique shape of this property and its semi- landlocked location in the surrounding neighborhood would deprive the applicant of the ability to subdivide the property into lots that would be consistent in area and development patterns 'with those found on most of the lots in the surrounding neighborhood. VARIANCE NO. 05-19: MEAUX 3 Findinq C: That the granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially or adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the particular case, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other propert, y owners in the surrounding neighborhood since the development of the proposed lO-foot wide access driveway will provide ingress and egress to only proposed Lot 2, and will establish lots that are otherwise entirely consistent with the development requirements for Iow density residential lands. Staff also notes that the development of the narrower driveway access will have no direct impacts on surrounding lots and is, in fact, expected to cause fewer aesthetic impacts than a 20-foot wide access driveway would. This opinion is based on the fact that the proposed driveway would require less paving surface and would.allow the retention of a two-foot wide strip for landscaping along the southern property line of proposed Lot 1. These features are much more consistent with the aesthetic characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood than a wider paved driveway with no landscaping. Finally, it is staff's opinion that the. development of a 10-foot wide access driveway will provide reasonable and safe access for persons occupying the site and for personnel responding to emergencies on proposed Lot 2, and that the reduced paving width will allow a more usable area for the development and maintenance of utilities. This opinion is based on discussions' with City fire, police, and utility crews, who indicated that the narrower driveway width Would be acceptable for the following reasons: The 10-foot wide access driveway will not cause conflicts With on-site traffic patterns or require dual traffic lanes since it will serve only one lot and cannot be feasi.bly extended to serve additional lots; The 10-foot wide access driveway will be situated in an area that is visible enough to allow persons in vehicles on Mc.Peak Street to see vehicles entering or exiting the roadway entrance; The Ukiah Fire Marshal has verified that the 10-foot wide access driveway will not hinder fire protection or fire-fighting services since it is unlikely that fire trucks or other large equipment would be pulled onto the site and that crews would operate from trucks parked on the McPeak Street frontage; The 10-foot wide access driveway is wide enough to provide access for ambulance crews and other emergency services; and The 10-foot width will make it easier to install and maintain in-ground utilities on the site, including electrical, cable, and telephone lines and water and sewer mains. CONCLUSIONS: While it is obvious that the proposed access roadWay width of 10 feet does not fully comply with Ukiah Municipal Code and Subdivision Ordinance standards for access to lots with no public street frontage, staff concludes that in this case the required findings' apply and a reduction in width is warranted for a number of reasons. These include the fact that the proposed access driveway is designed to access only a single additional lot and the feasibility of using it for access to other lots is limited by the locations of the proposed lots and abutting lots. It also includes staff's determination that the development of the proposed 10-foot wide access roadway will not cause any substantial impacts to on-site or area traffic circulation patterns or the provision of emergency services on either of the proposed lots, and will be more attractive and consistent with neighborhood characteristics than' a wider access roadway. Staff also examined the proposed lots for compliance with the development requirements for Iow density residential neighborhoods and found both of the proposed lots to' be consistent with every applicable standard other than the access driveway width. Based on this determination, and the opinion that the narrower access driveway width is warranted by a variety of factors, staff also concludes that strict adherence to the 20-foot width would unnecessarily preclude the division and eventual development of residential uses on this larger than normal property. VARIANCE NO. 05~19: MEAUX 4 RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for APPROVAL of Variance No. 05-19 is based, in part, on the following findings: o The issuance of the variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicin, ity and subject to identiCal zoning regulations since the 10-foot wide driveway proposed by the applicants would effectively serve only one additional parcel and is consistent with the driveway widths found on a large number of conforming and'legal, nonconforming lots in the surrounding neighborhood, .including similar residential parcels located along the same McPeak Street corridor as the subject property; . The strict application of the 20-foot wide access driveway width to this project deprives the Subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and subject to identical zoning regulations .since the dimensions of the existing property and the location of surrounding lots prohibit the subdivision of the property with two lots that have street frontages of 60 feet, and'the development of the lots with a 20-foot driveway width that is not considered essential for safe and effective access would effectively preclude the subdivision of the 13, 361 square foot property by reducing the net area of the existing parcel to less than 12,000 square feet; , The issuance of the variance would not be detrimental to surrounding property owners since it will provide reasonable and safe access for persons occupying the Site and for personnel responding to emergencies on proposed Lot 2, will provide sufficient areas for the development and maintenance of on-site utilities, and will be more consistent with the aesthetic characteristics of this older residential neighborhood; and , The potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposed 10-foot wide access driveway and the division of the subject property were analyzed in a revised Initial Study done in accordance with the provisions of the Californian Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in which it was determined that the reduced access width will not cause significant adverse environmental impacts if the mitigation measures/conditions of approval included in the Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the project are adopted. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Tentative Parcel Map Exhibit (showing Access Driveway and Utility Easement) 3. Parking Exhibits: Full Site and Det. ail 4. Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for MS-EX-VA 05-19 5. Neighborhood Lot Area Exhibit (prepared by Applicant) VARIANCE NO. 05-19: MEAUX i LOCATION MAP Minor Subdivision Map No.. 05-19: Meaux 432 McPeak Street' (Assessor Parcel No. 001.251.06) · CMC · 5O0 1000 1500 2000 2500 "300' APPRO~TE SCALE: 1 inch =. 500 feet. NORTH Affochrr~nt # ~.. o~ ~cPEAK A A A' A Attachment 1-~' # iueuJqoo~v McPEAK ___._~=o.oo~) ~~ ~6~ SS= . b. x. N13'58'53"W 71.66' STREET Z { 186.06' 95.87' ' .+.1oo. 73 · 101.12 1.25 GM ..LOT 1 6,985 SQ.'FT. GROSS 6,000 SQ. FT. NET (E) HOUSE I ---!--- I .-.--20' UTIL. ESOT GARAGE L__£TO ~3'E REMOVED) x98.79'- x .~86.58' 2.00' 100.93 4-5./[. ' '~ 10 20 = 20' PARKING EXHIBIT DETAIL (1"= 20') Attachment # ~- 2., ST.. ~. I I · ** "AttaChment # IT= ~o dd ~ .j ~ X' ..--.-~--- X N13'58'53"W 71,66' H/'O. -- -: C) J~ o AGENDA ITEM NO: 9.a MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: 'INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADDING A NEW ARTICLE 7, ENTITLED "TOBACCO RETAILERS" TO THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council, at their September 21, 2005 meeting, directed staff to prepare an Ordinance for adoption regarding the licensure of tobacco retailers in the City limits. The agenda summary report and a draft ordinance submitted by the American Cancer citizens group are attached for Council's review (Attachment 2). Staff has revised the draft Ordinance to meet the City of Ukiah requirements which is presented to the Council for review, discussion and introduction (Attachment 1). The main changes include the definition of the Grievance Committee on page 3, as a committee of two persons, one City Councilmember selected by the City Council and one operational City employee, selected by the City Manager. This format is recommended in order to provide a balanced level of perspective in the hearing process. The City Attorney has also redefined the Grievance Committee Appeals process to include a listing of required deadlines and a requirement for written legal findings so that the hearing decision will be in a format appropriate for court proceedings if the appellant decides to appeal the matter to Superior court. OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Ordinance requires that every retail outlet that sells tobacco products be licensed through the City of Ukiah. Staff will be coordinating this procedure through our current RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and Introduce the Ordinance ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Determine not to introduce Ordinance; 2) Direct staff to make revisions to the Ordinance Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: American Cancer Society American Cancer Society Candace Horsley, City Manager City Attorney, Finance Director, Police Chief 1. Tobacco Ordinance 2. Sept. 21,2005 ASR rCandace Horsley, City Finance personnel that handles the business licenses. Licenses will be effective January through December of each year. The Public Health Department will be conducting two investigations every year to determine if the retailers are selling tobacco to minors. If it is determined that sales have occurred, they will report this information to the City. The last survey performed in 2004, showed that 41% of City retailers unlawfully sold tobacco products to minors. There are twenty-nine current retailers within the City limits that sell tobacco products, therefore approximately eleven retailers at 41%, would be found to violate the tobacco ordinance. The Ordinance requires that upon the first violation, within a 36 month period, the license would be suspended for fourteen days. However, prior to imposing this suspension, the City would send an Advice Letter to the retailer advising that if they trained all sales employees at the location of the sale to the laws pertaining to the sale of tobacco products to minors, the suspension would not go into effect. An affidavit must then be filed with the City by the retailer, confirming that the training had been completed. If there is a second violation, a twenty-one day of suspension is imposed; a third violation requires a thirty-day suspension; with a fourth violation the license would be suspended for a period of three years. It would be the duties of the Finance Department staff to keep track of the violations and the appropriate suspension notices. The Police Department staff would be responsible for checking that any retailer that was under a suspension did not sell tobacco products during their suspension time period. This would be the extent of the Police Department's involvement with this Ordinance. If it is determined that an unlicensed retailer, including ones that had a revoked or suspended license, was engaging in tobacco sales, the City would fine the retailer from $100 to $500 depending on the number of violations. The retailer may request an appeal at any time when a letter has been received from the City in regards to a suspension or fine. If an appeal is received by the City, it must provide written notice to the applicant as to the date, time and place of the hearing. The City will prepare and submit evidence at the hearing, have witnesses when relevant and provide this information to the appellant not less than ten days prior to the scheduled hearing. Once a hearing is completed, the City will notify the appellant in writing, as to the decision and also their right to seek review of the decision to the Superior Court. Based on the 2004 survey, it is estimated that there may be 4 to 6 appeals requested in the first year. This number should lessen in proceeding years with enforcement of the ordinance. The City Manager's office will handle the responsibility for the Grievance Committee and hearing processes, including all legal notifications and records retention. Based on the operational process described above, the annual estimated staff time required upon adoption of this ordinance is as follows: Finance Department: 32 hours, Police Department: 5 hours, and City Manager's Office: 16 to 28 hours. The City Attorney's time would be dependent on the number of appeals to the Grievance Committee's decisions. Upon introduction of the Ordinance, staff will return with a resolution establishing the fee for the license and will begin preparing the various forms and sample letters in anticipation of the first Public Health survey of the tobacco retailers. Attachment # ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADDING A NEW ARTICLE 7, ENTITLED "TOBACCO RETAILERS" TO DIVISION 1, ARTICLE 2 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Ukiah ordains as follows: SECTION ONE. FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF INTENT: The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby finds and declares as follows: 1. Penal Code Section 308 prohibits the sale or furnishing of cigarettes, tobacco products and smoking paraphernalia to minors, as well as the purchase, receipt, or possession of tobacco products by minors. 2. Business & Professions Code Sections 22952 and 22956 require that tobacco retailers check the identification of tobacco purchasers who reasonably appear to be under 18 years of age and provide procedures for using persons under 18 years of age to conduct onsite compliance checks of tobacco retailers. 3. Business & Professions Code Section 22952 and Penal Code Section 308 require that tobacco retailers post a conspicuous notice at each point of sale stating that selling tobacco products to anyone under 18 years of age is illegal. 4. Business & Professions Code Section 22962 prohibits the sale or display of cigarettes through a self-service display and prohibits public access to cigarettes without the assistance of a clerk. 5. Penal Code Section 308.1 prohibits the sale of "bidis" (hand-rolled filterless cigarettes imported primarily from India and Southeast Asian countries) except in adult- only establishments. 6. Penal Code Section 308.3 prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of cigarettes in packages of less than 20 and prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of "roll-your-own" tobacco in packages containing less than 0.60 ounces of tobacco. 7. Education Code Section 48901(a) prohibits public school students from smoking or using tobacco products while on campus, while attending school-sponsored activities, or while under the supervision or control of school district employees. 8. Despite these restrictions, minors continue to obtain cigarettes and other tobacco products at alarming rates. ORDINANCE NO. 1 9. A survey in 2004 of the ability of minors to buy tobacco products in the City of Ukiah showed that 41% of City retailers unlawfully sold tobacco products to minors. 10. 88% of adults who have ever smoked tried their first cigarette by the age of 18 and the average age at which smokers try their first cigarette is 141~. 11. The City of Ukiah has a substantial interest in promoting compliance with federal, state, and local laws intended to regulate tobacco sales and use; in discouraging the illegal purchase of tobacco products by minors; in promoting compliance with laws prohibiting sales of cigarettes and tobacco products to minors; and in protecting children from being lured into illegal activity through the misconduct of adults. 12. The California courts in such cases as Cohen v. Board of Supervisors, 40 Cal. 3d 277 (1985), and Bravo Vending v. City of Rancho Mirage, 16 Cal. App. 4th 383 (1993), have affirmed the power of the cities and counties to regulate business activity in order to discourage violations of law. 13. A requirement for a tobacco retailer license will not unduly burden legitimate business activities of retailers who sell or distribute cigarettes or other tobacco products to adults. It will, however, allow the City of Ukiah to regulate the operation of lawful businesses to discourage violations of federal, state, and local tobacco-related laws. 14. It is the intent of the City Council of the City of Ukiah, in enacting this ordinance, to monitor progress in preventing minors from purchasing tobacco products, to encourage responsible tobacco retailing and to discourage violations of tobacco-related laws, especially those which prohibit or discourage the sale or distribution of tobacco products to minors, but not to expand or reduce the degree to which the acts regulated by federal or state law are criminally proscribed or to alter the penalties imposed for the violation of such laws. SECTION TWO. A new Article 7, entitled 'q'obacco Retailers" is hereby added to Article 2, Division 1 of the Ukiah City Code to read as follows. ARTICLE 2 SPECIAL BUSINESS REGUALTIONS ARTICLE 7. TOBACCO RETAILERS §2350: §2351: §2352: §2353: §2354: §2355: Definitions License Requirements Application Procedure Issuance of License Display of License License Fee ORDINANCE NO. 2 §2356: §2357: §2358: §2359: §2360: §2361: License Not Transferable License Violation Suspension, Termination or Revocation Administrative Fine Grievance Committee hearing Enforcement §2350: DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, whenever used in this Article, shall have the meaning provided in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: (a) "Appellant" means a Person who appeals a Department decision to the Grievance Committee. (b) "Department" means the City Manager and/or the duly authorized designee of the City Manager. (c) "Grievance Committee" means a Committee of two (2) persons, one City Council member, selected by the City Council, and one City employee selected by the City Manager. No member of the Committee shall have participated in a decision appealed to the Committee. (d) "Person" shall mean any natural person, firm, partnership, trust, estate, association, corporation, or organization of any kind. Where a principal acts through an agent, the word "person" shall include both such principal and agent. (e) "Tobacco Product" means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco. (f) ''Tobacco Retailer" means any Person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to exchange for any form of consideration, tobacco or Tobacco Products. ''Tobacco Retailing" shall mean the doing of any of these things. This definition is without regard to the quantity of tobacco or Tobacco Products sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. §2351: REQUIREMENT FOR TOBACCO RETAILER LICENSE: (a) It shall be unlawful for any Person to act as a Tobacco Retailer withOut first obtaining and maintaining a valid Tobacco Retailer's license pursuant to this Article for each location at which that activity is to occur. No license may issue to authorize Tobacco Retailing at other than a fixed location. For example, Tobacco Retailing by Persons on foot and Tobacco Retailing from vehicles are prohibited. (b) The term of a license is one year from January Ist through December 31st unless earlier suspended, terminated or revoked pursuant to Section 2358. Each ORDINANCE NO. 3 Tobacco Retailer shall apply for the renewal of his or her Tobacco Retailer's license no later than thirty (30) days prior to its expiration. (c) Nothing in this Article shall be construed to grant any Person obtaining and maintaining a Tobacco Retailer's license any status or right other than the right to act as a Tobacco Retailer at the location in the City of Ukiah identified on the face of the license. For example, nothing in this Article shall be construed to render inapplicable, supercede, or apply in lieu of any other provision of applicable law, including, without limitation, any condition or limitation on smoking in enclosed places of employment made applicable to business establishments by Labor Code §6404.5. §2353: APPLICATION PROCEDURE: Application for a Tobacco Retailer's license shall be submitted in the name of each Person proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be signed by each Person or an authorized agent thereof. It is the responsibility of each Person to be informed of the laws affecting the issuance of a Tobacco Retailer's license. A license that is issued in error or on the basis of false or misleading information supplied by a Person may be revoked pursuant to Section 2358. All applications shall be submitted on a form supplied by the Department and shall contain the following information: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of each Person. 2. The business name, address, and telephone number of each location for which a Tobacco Retailer's License is sought. 3. The name and mailing address authorized by each Person to receive all license-related communications and notices (the "Authorized Address"). If an Authorized Address is not supplied, each Person shall be understood to consent to the provision of notice at the business address specified pursuant to subparagraph 2 above. 4. Whether or not any Person has previously been issued a license pursuant to this Article that is, or was at any time, suspended or revoked and, if so, the dates of the suspension period or the date of revocation. 5. Such other information as the Department deems necessary for the administration or enforcement of this Article. §2353: ISSUANCE OF LICENSE: Upon the receipt of an application for a Tobacco Retailer's license and the license fee, the Department shall issue a license, unless: (a) the application is incomplete or inaccurate; or ORDINANCE NO. 4 (b) the application seeks authorization for Tobacco Retailing by a Person for which or whom a suspension is in effect pursuant to Section 2358, or by a Person which or who has had a license reVOked pursuant to Section 2358. §2354: DISPLAY OF LICENSE: Each license shall be prominently displayed in a publicly visible location at the licensed premises. {}2355: LICENSE FEE-' The fee to issue or to renew a Tobacco Retailer's license shall be established by resolution of City Council. {}2356: LICENSES NOT TRANSFERABLE: A Tobacco Retailer's license is not transferable. If the information required in the license application pursuant to 2353, items 1,2, or 3 changes, the Tobacco Retailer must notify the Department within 14 days, and update all information on the license application form in order to continue to act as a Tobacco Retailer. For example, if a Tobacco Retailer to whom a license has been issued changes business location, that Tobacco Retailer must supply updated license information within 14 days of acting as a Tobacco Retailer at the new location. If a business is sold, the new owner must apply for a license for that location before acting as a Tobacco Retailer. The current licensee shall notify the Department of the sale of the Tobacco Retailing business. §2357: LICENSE VIOLATION: (a) VIOLATION OF TOBACCO-RELATED LAWS. It shall be a violation of a Tobacco Retailer's license for a Person or his or her agent or employee to violate any local, state, or federal tobacco-related law. (b) LICENSE COMPLIANCE MONITORING. The City of Ukiah anticipates that compliance checks of each Tobacco Retailer will be conducted at least two times during each twelve-month period by the Mendocino County Public Health Department. The City shall not enforce any tobacco-related minimum-age law against a person who otherwise would be in violation of such law because of the person's age (hereinafter "youth decoy") if the violation occurs when: 1. the youth decoy is participating in a compliance check supervised by a law enforcement official, a code enforcement official, or any peace officer; or 2. the youth decoy is participating in a compliance check funded or supervised in part by the County of Mendocino or, funded or supervised in any part by the California Department of Health Services. §2358: SUSPENSION, TERMINATION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE: (a) SUSPENSION, TERMINATION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE FOR VIOLATION. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, a Tobacco Retailer's license may be suspended or revoked, if the Department determines that the ORDINANCE NO. Person or his or her agents or employees have violated the requirements of this Article or other conditions of the license imposed pursuant to Section 2357. A Person who loses his license for one location does not lose it for all locations, if those locations are in compliance with this Article, and may renew licenses for other conforming locations. A Person cannot obtain a new license for a new location so long as there is a suspension in effect for any location. (1) NOTICE REQUIRED. The licensee shall be served with written notice of all determinations or decisions under this Section affecting his or her license. Notice shall be served by personal service, overnight courier, certified mail return receipt requested, or U.S. Mail with First Class postage affixed. The notice shall be sent to the Authorized Address. All notices shall be deemed served, when received, except for notices sent by first class mail which shall be deemed served two days after deposit in the U.S. Mail if addressed to a location within Mendocino County and five days if addressed to a location outside Mendocino County. The notice shall describe the legal and factual basis for the decision. A decision imposing a fine shall specify the amount of the fine. A decision to suspend or revoke a license shall specify the beginning and ending dates of the suspension or the effective date of the revocation. No decision shall become effective in less than 10 days from the date of service. (2) DURATION OF SUSPENSIONS. i. Upon a finding by the Department of a first license violation within any thirty-six (36) month period, the license shall be suspended for fourteen (14) days. However, prior to imposing the suspension, the Department shall by letter (an "Advice Letter") advise the Person that if Person trains all sales employees at the location of the sale in the laws pertaining to the sale of tobacco products to minors and techniques to ensure future compliance with said laws, the suspension will not go into effect. Within 30 days of the issuance of the AdVice Letter, the Person must file with the Department an affidavit signed by the Person and the sales employees that said training has been completed. If the Person fails to timely submit the affidavit, the Department shall notify the Person that the permit is suspended for 14 days. ii. Upon a finding by the Department of a second license violation within any thirty-six (36) month period, the license shall be suspended for twenty-one (21) days. iii. Upon a finding by the Department of a third license violation within any thirty-six month (36) period, the license shall be suspended for thirty (30) days. ORDINANCE NO. iv. Upon a finding by the Department of a fourth license violation within any thirty-six (36) month period, the license shall be revoked and the Person or Persons who had been issued the license shall not be issued a Tobacco Retailer's license pursuant to this Article for a period of three (3) years from the date of revocation. (b) FAILURE TO PAY RENEWAL FEES. A Tobacco Retailer's license which is not timely renewed pursuant to Section 2352(b) is an expired license. The Tobacco Retailer shall not engage in Tobacco Retailing at the licensed location until a new license has been issued for that location. (c) REVOCATION OF LICENSE ISSUED IN ERROR. A Tobacco Retailer's license shall be revoked if the Department determines that one or more of the bases for denial of a license under Section 2353 existed at the time application was made or at anytime before the license issued. The revocation shall be without prejudice to the filing of a new application for a license. (d) LICENSE SUSPENSION REQUIRES THE REMOVAL OF ALL TOBACCO PRODUCTS FROM PUBLIC VIEW. A Tobacco Retailer whose license is suspended must remove from public view all Tobacco Products and tobacco advertising for the duration of the suspension. Failure to remove such items from view will be regarded as a violation of this ordinance equivalent to that of selling to minors. (e) REVOCATION OF LICENSE OBTAINED UNDER FALSE PRETENSES. Tobacco Retailers whose license is obtained under false pretenses shall have that license revoked. A licensee whose license is revoked pursuant to this subsection may not apply for a new license for a period of one year from the date the license is revoked. {}2359: ADMINISTRATIVE FINE. (a) GROUNDS FOR FINE. If the Department determines that any unlicensed person, including a person named on a revoked or suspended license, has engaged in Tobacco Retailing in violation of this Article, the Department shall fine that Person as follows: 1. a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation in any thirty-six (36) month period; or 2. a fine not exceeding two hundred dollars ($200) for a second violation in any thirty-six (36) month period; or 3. a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500) for a third or subsequent violation in any thirty-six (36) month period. EaCh day that such a Person engages in Tobacco Retailing shall constitute a ORDINANCE NO. 7 separate violation. (b) IMPOSITION OF FINE. If no request for a hearing is timely received in accordance with Section 2360, the Department's determination on the violation and the imposition of a fine shall be final and payment shall be made within thirty (30) days after notice of the fine was served in accordance with Subsection 2358(a)(1). If the fine is not paid within that time, the fine may be collected, along with interest at the legal rate, in any manner provided by law. In the event that a judicial action is necessary to compel payment of the fine and accumulated interest, the Person or Persons subject to the fine shall also be liable for the costs of the suit and attorney's fees incurred by the City in collecting the fine. §2360: GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE APPEALS: (a) APPEAL OF FINE, SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. A decision of the Department to impose a fine or to revoke or suspend a license may be appealed to the Grievance Committee. The Appellant must file a written notice of appeal with the Department within ten (10) days after service of the notice of the decision. Failure to file a timely notice of appeal waives any right to further challenge the Department's decision. "File" means delivered to the City Manager's office in the Ukiah Civic Center at 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, CA. The filing of a notice of appeal automatically stays the Department's decision, until the Grievance Committee has served its final decision on the appeal. The Committee may reverse, modify or uphold the Department's decision. (b) NOTICE OF HEARING. If a notice of appeal is timely filed, the Department shall provide written notice to the Appellant of the date, time, and place of the hearing in the manner specified in Subsection 2358(a)(1). A hearing may not be conducted less than twenty (20) days after notice is given to the Appellant. (c) HEARING. The Grievance Committee may adopt rules governing the conduct of its hearings. Those rules shall include, at least, the following: 1. The Department shall submit evidence at the hearing substantiating its decision. Such evidence may include testimony, police or other reports of the incident, witness statements and other documents. Not less than 10 days prior to the scheduled hearing, the Department must notify the Appellant of the name, address and phone number of any witness to the violation, and furnish Appellant with a copy of any document it intends to submit at the hearing. Not less than seven (7) days prior to the hearing, the Appellant may request the Department to produce at the hearing any witness the Department intends to rely upon to substantiate the violation. The written request must name the witness or witnesses who are requested to attend the hearing. The Department may not rely on the testimony of any witness (including such testimony contained in reports or written witness statements) whose appearance at the hearing is required by this subsection, if that witness fails to appear. ORDINANCE NO. 8 2. Not less than 10 days prior to the hearing, the Appellant must notify the Department in writing of the name, address and phone number of any witness the Appellant intends to call as a witness at the hearing, provide a brief description of the proposed testimony, and furnish the Department with a copy of any document the Appellant intends to offer as evidence at the hearing. The Appellant may not call any witness to testify at the hearing who was not identified as required by this subsection or offer any document as evidence at the hearing that was not provided to the Department as required by this subsection. 3. At the hearing, the Appellant may be represented by an attorney, at Appellant's expense. Both the Department and the Appellant shall have the right to examine and cross-examine any witness produced at the hearing. The rules of evidence that normally apply in court shall not apply in a hearing before the Committee, but the Grievance Committee shall only consider evidence which would be relied upon by reasonable people making an important decision, and shall disregard evidence which by its nature is unreliable or not credible. 4. The entire hearing shall be electronically or stenographically recorded. The Grievance Committee shall base its decision exclusively on the evidence presented at the hearing and shall issue a written decision, which includes a statement of the relevant facts which the Committee finds to be true and explains how the facts support its decision. For example, if the Department finds that the Appellant sold cigarettes to a minor, but this was the first violation committed by the Appellant within 36 months, the decision would explain that Section 2358(a)(2)i requires a 14 day suspension of the Appellant's license to sell Tobacco Products at the licensed location, and on that basis the facts support a 14 day suspension of the license for that location. The record of the hearing shall be preserved for not less than six months after the decision is served on the Appellant. (d) HEARING DECISION. The chairperson of the Grievance Committee shall issue the written decision required by subsection 4, above. Copies of the decision shall be served in accordance with Subsection 2358(a)(1). The hearing decision shall include notice of the Appellant's right to seek review of the decision pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 and 1094.6, including the statute of limitations for seeking review pursuant to Section 1094.6. (e) FINALITY OF THE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE'S DECISION. The decision of the Grievance Committee shall be the final decision for the City of Ukiah. (g) APPEAL TO SUPERIOR COURT. Judicial review of the Grievance Committee's decision shall be governed by the Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6. (h) ENFORCEMENT OF DECISION. Unless stayed by a court, any final decision of the Grievance Committee is effective immediately and may be implemented and enforced by the Department. ORDINANCE NO. 9 2361: ENFORCEMENT. The remedies provided by this Article are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. (a) Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this ordinance shall constitute a violation. (b) Violations of this Article are hereby declared to be public nuisances. (c) Violations of this Article are hereby declared to be unfair business Practices and are presumed to at least nominally damage each and every resident of the community in which the business operates. (d) A violation of this Article constitutes a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $1,000 or by imprisonment in the County jail for six months, or both. (e) In addition to other remedies provided by this Article or by other law, any violation of this Article may be remedied by a civil action brought by the City Attorney or the District Attorney, including, for example, administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings, other legally authorized enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief. SECTION THREE. 1. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable. 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 ,2005, by the following roll call vote: ORDINANCE NO. 10 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ,2005 by the following roll call vote: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 11 AGENDA ITEM NO: MEETING DATE: September 21,2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE LICENSURE OF TOBACCO RETAILERS IN THE CITY LIMITS The City was approached by.a concerned group of citizens involved with the American Cancer Society (ACS) regarding a process for licensure of tobacco retailers within the City limits. The group is interested in dissuading tobacco use by minors and is recommending this process as an enforcement mechanism against retailers .who are selling tobacco to minors. The City of Willits adopted an Ordinance enaCting this process two years ago and, the County of Mendocino adopted their Ordinance eight months ago. In speaking with., the City Manager of Willits, the procedure has worked well for them. The grievance committee process has been a little more onerous then they first projected, and feel they will need to make changes to the make up of the committee to be more appropriate for the circumstances. · The-ACS has provided packets of information for the Council' that' includes a draft ordinance, associated duties and an ~pdated surVey of local youth .buying history. The various duties required of the City and staff under the proposed ordinance include issuance of a license.on an annual basis to all retailers that sell tobacco within the City limits and that have filled out the City application for same, enforcement follow through if a violation occurs which includes suspensions of the license issued by the City, monitoring that the suspension is followed and p°ssible fines if sales continue and RECOMMENDED ACTION: licenSing· Discuss and provide direction regarding tobacco ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: American Cancer Society Candace Horsley, City Manager Mike McCann, Finance Director' 1. Packet of information from the ACS 2. Letters of support Approved:~ · C~ndace 'H0rsley, Cit .~Manager handling appeals upon request of retailers that have received notification of violations. The Mendocino County Public Health Department would, upon approval of a written agreement with the City, conduct compliance checks of each tobacco retailer at least two times a year and report it's findings to the City. The City Manager has met with the Directors of the Finance and Police-Departments to discuss this procedure. The Police Department will have very little involvement in the enforcement procedure, as Public Health, through a written agreement, would provide the Compliance checkS of each retailer .located in the City twice a year. The City Manager and Finance offices would have the bulk of the responsibilities and duties. The actual licensing would be performed by the current employee that issues business licenses within the City limits. However, keeping track of the number of violations per retailer, the associated suspension timelines, When to renew the license and provide documentation of such including follow through on whether the retailer has actually stopped selling tobacco'for'the specified period is going to 'be a major time constraint for staff. Staff would attempt to handle most of these responsibilities by incorporating them into current staffing, processes consistent with the City's business license and Finance Department procedures.. However, the responsibility of checking on the retailer for compliance during a suspension period has not been identified to a particular department at this time. If the Council would like to investigate this process further, staff will review' and revise the ordinance and forms to meet the City's requirements and prepare an estimate of the additional staff time required under the ordinance for Council's review and provide any other information the Council determines is necessary to analyze this action. Proposed Ordinance "Required Licensure of Tobacco Retailers" (the "Ordinance") Goal of the Ordinance: To dissuade tobacco retailers within the Ukiah city limits from selling tobacco products to minors and creating an enforcement mechanism against those retailers that are selling and continue to sell to our youth. Licensure: The Ordinance would require tobacco retailers to obtain a license annually. (Article 2(a) and (b)) Such license will be required to be displayed at place of business. (Article 5) Amount of Annual Licensure: The annual license fee to be paid by each tobacco retailer would be set by the City Council. (Article 6) In Willits, the Willits City Council set the fee at $15 per year and the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors set the fee at $25 per year for tobacco retailers in the unincorporated areas. License Applications: Upon enactment of the Ordinance the Mendocino County Public Health Department ("Public Health") will send out an educational packet to each retailer along including notification with regard to the Ordinance. Public Health would also be willing to include the City's Tobacco License Application in the packet. There is a model of a Tobacco License Application at Tab ~ that can be made specific to the City. An executed application form will be returned to the City for issuance of the license. Compliance Checks: Public Health will conduct compliance checks at least twice annually using youth decoys. (Article 8(b)). Enforcement: If a tobacco retailer sells to a youth decoy during a compliance check there are the following penalties (Article 9 (a) and (e) - suspension and revocation and Article 10- administrative fines): 1st violation (in 36 month period): License suspended for 14 days (which would require the removal of all tobacco products and tobacco advertising during the suspension). In lieu of suspension retailer can train all sales employees in the laws pertaining to the sale of tobacco products to minors and file an affidavit to that effect. Plus a fine not to exceed $100. 2nd violation (in 36 month period ): License suspended for 21 days (which would require the removal of all tobacco products and tobacco advertising during the suspension). Plus a fine not to exceed $200. 3nd violation (in 36 month period ): License suspended for 30 days (which would require the removal of all tobacco products and tobacco advertising during the suspension). Plus a fine not to exceed $500. 4th violation (in 36 month period ): License shall be revoked (which would preclude further sales of any tobacco products). Retailer shall not be issued a license for a period of 3 years from date of revocation. Plus a fine not to exceed $500. Grievance Committee: Retailers will have the right to appeal any suspension or revocation decision to the Grievance Committee (made up of the City Manager (or her appointee) and an appointee of the City Council). Responsibilities of the City of Ukiah under the Ordinance: o Issuance of licenses and informing Public Health about new licenses being issued and any new merchants in their jurisdiction selling tobacco - In Willits the issuance of licenses is coordinated through the business license person. o Enforcement of suspension, termination or revocation and collection of fines - The bulk of these tasks fall to the City Attorney, the City manager and those the sit on the Grievance Committee. o Establishment of Grievance Committee DRAFT 05/23/05 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADDING NEW CHAPTER ENTITLED "REQUIRED LICENSURE OF TOBACCO RETAILERS" The City Council of the City of Ukiah ordains as follows: "SECTION I. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS: The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby finds and declares as follows: WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale or furnishing of cigarettes, tobacco products and smoking paraphernalia to minors, as well as the purchase, receipt, or possession of tobacco products by minors (Penal Code §308); and WHEREAS, state law requires that tobacco retailers check the identification of tobacco purchasers who reasonably appear to be under 18 years of age (Business & Professions Code §22956) and provides procedures for using persons under 18 years of age to conduct onsite compliance checks of tobacco retailers (Business & Professions Code §22952); and WHEREAS, state law requires that tobacco retailers post a conspicuous notice at each point of sale stating that selling tobacco products to anyone under 18 years of age is illegal (Business & Professions Code §22952, Penal Code §308); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale or display of cigarettes through a self- service display and prohibits public access to cigarettes without the assistance of a clerk (Business & Professions Code §22962); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale of "bidis" (hand-rolled filterless cigarettes imported primarily from India and Southeast Asian countries) except in adult-only establishments (Penal Code §308.1); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of cigarettes in packages of less than 20 and prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of "roll- your-own" tobacco in packages containing less than. 0.60 ounces of tobacco (Penal Code §308.3); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits public school students from smoking or using tobacco products while on campus, while attending school-sponsored activities, or while under the supervision or control of school district employees (Education Code §48901 (a)); and WHEREAS, despite these restrictions, minors continue to obtain cigarettes and other tobacco products at alarming rates. Each year, an estimated 924 million packs of cigarettes are consumed by minors 12 to 17 years of age, yielding the tobacco industry $480 million in profits from underage smokers; and -1- DRAFT 05/23/O5 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ADDING NEW CHAPTER ENTITLED "REQUIRED LICENSURE OF TOBACCO RETAILERS" The City Council of the City of Ukiah ordains as follows: "SECTION I. FINDINGS AND DECLARATIONS: The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby finds and declares as follows: WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale or furnishing of cigarettes, tobacco products and smoking paraphernalia to minors, as well as the purchase, receipt, or possession of tobacco products by minors (Penal Code {}308); and WHEREAS, state law requires that tobacco retailers check the identification of tobacco purchasers who reasonably appear to be under 18 years of age (Business & Professions Code {}22956) and provides procedures for using persons under 18 years of age to conduct onsite compliance checks of tobacco retailers (Business & Professions Code {}22952); and WHEREAS, state law requires that tobacco retailers post a conspicuous notice at each point of sale stating that selling tobacco products to anyone under 18 years of age is illegal (Business & Professions Code §22952, Penal Code {}308); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale or display of cigarettes through a self- service display and prohibits public access to cigarettes without the assistance of a clerk (Business & Professions Code §22962); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits the sale of "bidis" (hand-rolled filterless cigarettes imported primarily from India and Southeast Asian countries) except in adult-only establishments (Penal Code {}308.1); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of cigarettes in packages of less than 20 and prohibits the manufacture, distribution, or sale of "roll- your-own" tobacco in packages containing less than-0.60 ounces of tobacco (Penal Code {}308.3); and WHEREAS, state law prohibits public school students from smoking or using tobacco products while on campus, while attending school-sponsored activities, or while under the supervision or control of school district employees (Education Code §48901 (a)); and WHEREAS, despite these restrictions, minors continue to obtain cigarettes and other tobacco products at alarming rates. Each year, an estimated 924 million packs of cigarettes are consumed by minors 12 to 17 years of age, yielding the tobacco industry $480 million in profits from underage smokers; and -1- DRAFT 05/23/05 WHEREAS, in a 2004 California youth-buying survey, 14% of retailers surveyed unlawfully sold tobacco product to minors; and WHEREAS, within the City of Ukiah, a youth-buying survey in 2004 showed that 41% of retailers unlawfully sold tobacco products to minors within the City; and WHEREAS, 88% of adults who have ever smoked tried their first cigarette by the age of 18 and the average age at which smokers try their first cigarette is 141/2; and WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah has a substantial interest in promoting compliance with federal, state, and local laws intended to regulate tobacco sales and use; in discouraging the illegal purchase of tobacco products by minors; in promoting compliance with laws prohibiting sales of cigarettes and tobacco products to minors; and in protecting children from being lured into illegal activity through the misconduct of adults; and WHEREAS, the California courts in such cases as Cohen v. Board of Supervisors, 40 Cal. 3d 277 (1985), and Bravo Vending v. City of Rancho Mirage, 16 Cal. App. 4th 383 (1993), have affirmed the power of the cities and counties to regulate business activity in order to discourage violations of law; and WHEREAS, a requirement for a tobacco retailer license will not unduly burden legitimate business activities of retailers who sell or distribute cigarettes or other tobacco products to adults. It will, however, allow the City of Ukiah to regulate the operation of lawful businesses to discourage violations of federal, state, and local tobacco-related laws. NOW THEREFORE, it is the intent of the City Council of the City of Ukiah, in enacting this ordinance, to monitor progress in restricting your access, to encourage responsible tobacco retailing and to discourage violations of tobacco-related laws, especially those which prohibit or discourage the sale or distribution of tobacco products to minors, but not to expand or reduce the degree to which the acts regulated by federal or state law are criminally proscribed or to alter the penalty provided therefore. -2- DRAFT 05/23/05 SECTION II. A new Chapter entitled "Licensure of Tobacco Retailers" is hereby added to the Ukiah City Code and shall provide as follows: CHAPTER LICENSURE OF TOBACCO RETAILERS Article I DEFINITIONS. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this Chapter, shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise: (a) "Department" means the City Manager and/or the duly authorized designee of the City Manager. (b) "Grievance Committee" means a Committee of two persons. One member shall be the City Manager for the City of Ukiah or someone appointed by the City Manager and one member shall be a member as ~ appointed by the City Council of the City of Ukiah. ~, (c) "Person" shall mean any person, firm, partnership, trust, estate, association, corporation, or organization of any kind. Where a principal acts through an agent, the word "person" shall include both such principal and agent. (d) "Tobacco Product" means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco. (e) "Tobacco Retailer" means any Person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to exchange for any form of consideration, tobacco or Tobacco Products. "Tobacco Retailing" shall mean the doing of any of these things. This definition is without regard to the quantity of tobacco or Tobacco Products sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. Article 2 REQUIREMENT FOR TOBACCO RETAILER LICENSE. (a) It shall be unlawful for any Person to act as a Tobacco Retailer without first obtaining and maintaining a valid Tobacco Retailer's license pursuant to this Chapter for each location at which that activity is to occur. No license may issue to authorize Tobacco Retailing at other than a fixed location. For example, Tobacco Retailing by Persons on foot and Tobacco Retailing from vehicles are prohibited. (b) The payment of the license fee designated in [Section Article 6] confers paid status upon a license for a term of one year. Each Tobacco Retailer shall apply for the renewal of his or her Tobacco Retailer's license no later than thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the payment term. -3- DRAFT 05/23/05 (c) Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to grant any Person obtaining and maintaining a Tobacco Retailer's license any status or right other than the right to act as a Tobacco Retailer at the location in the City of Ukiah identified on the face of the permit. For example, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed to render inapplicable, supercede, or apply in lieu of any other provision of applicable law, including, without limitation, any condition or limitation on smoking in enclosed places of employment made applicable to business establishments by Labor Code {}6404.5. Article 3 APPLICATION PROCEDURE. Application for a Tobacco Retailer's license shall be submitted in the name of each Person proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be signed by each Person or an authorized agent thereof. It is the responsibility of each Person to be informed of the laws affecting the issuance of a Tobacco Retailer's license. A license that is issued in error or on the basis of false or misleading information supplied by a Person may be revoked pursuant to [Section Article 9(c)] of this Chapter. All applications shall be submitted on a form supplied by the Department and shall contain the following information: 1. The name, address, and telephone number of each Person. 2. The business name, address, and telephone number of each location for which a Tobacco Retailer's License is sought. 3. The name and mailing address authorized by each Person to receive all license-related communications and notices (the "Authorized Address"). If an Authorized Address is not supplied, each Person shall be understood to consent to the provision of notice at the business address specified pursuant to subparagraph 2 above. 4. Whether or not any Person has previously been issued a license pursuant to this Chapter that is, or was at any time, suspended or revoked and, if so, the dates of the suspension period or the date of revocation. 5. Such other information as the Department deems necessary for the administration or enforcement of this ordinance. Article 4 ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. Upon the receipt of an application for a TobaCco Retailer's license and the license fee, the Department shall issue a license unless substantial record evidence demonstrates one of the following bases for denial: (a) the application is incomplete or inaccurate; or (b) the application seeks authorization for Tobacco Retailing by a Person for which or whom a suspension is in effect pursuant to [Section Article 9] of this -4- DRAFT 05/23/05 Chapter; or by a Person which or who has had a license revoked pursuant to [Section Article 9] of this Chapter. Article 5 DISPLAY OF LICENSE. Each license shall be prominently displayed in a publicly visible location at the licensed premises. Article 6 FEES FOR LICENSE. The fee to issue or to renew a Tobacco Retailer's license shall be established by resolution of City Council of the City of Ukiah. Article 7 LICENSES NONTRANSFERABLE. A Tobacco Retailer's license is nontransferable. If the information required in the license application pursuant to [Section Article 3, items 1,2, or 3], changes, Tobacco Retailer must notify the Department within 14 days, and update all information on the license application form in order to continue to act as a Tobacco Retailer. For example, if a Tobacco Retailer to whom a license has been issued changes business location, that Tobacco Retailer must supply updated license information within 14 days of acting as a Tobacco Retailer at the new location. If a business is sold, the new owner must apply for a license for that location before acting as a Tobacco Retailer. The current licensee shall notify the Department of the sale of the Tobacco Retailing business. Article 8 LICENSE VIOLATION. (a) VIOLATION OF TOBACCO-RELATED LAWS. It shall be a violation of a Tobacco Retailer's license for a Person or his or her agent or employee to violate any local, state, or federal tobacco-related law. (b) LICENSE COMPLIANCE MONITORING. The City of Ukiah anticipates that compliance checks of each Tobacco Retailer will be conducted at least two times during each twelve-month period by the Mendocino County Public Health Department, City of Ukiah shall not enforce any tobacco-related minimum-age law against a person who otherwise would be in violation of such law because of the person's age (hereinafter "youth decoy") if the violation occurs when: 1. the youth decoy is participating in a compliance check supervised by a law enforcement official, a code enforcement official, or any peace officer; or 2. the youth decoy is participating in a compliance check funded or supervised in part by the County of Mendocino or, funded or supervised in any part by the California Department of Health Services. Article 9 SUSPENSION, TERMINATION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE. (a) SUSPENSION, TERMINATION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE FOR VIOLATION. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, a Tobacco Retailer's license shall be suspended or revoked if the Department -5- DRAFT 05/23/05 finds, after notice to the Person_and opportunity to be heard, that the Person or his or her agents or employees has or have violated the requirements of this Ordinance or other conditions of the license imposed pursuant to [Section Article 8] above. A person who loses his license for one location does not lose it for all locations if those locations are in compliance with this Chapter, and may renew licenses for other conforming locations. A person cannot obtain a new license for a new location so long as there is a suspension in effect for any location. (1) Upon a finding by the Department of a first license violation within any thirty-six (36) month period, the license shall be suspended for fourteen (14) days. However, prior to imposing the suspension, the Department shall by letter advise the Person that if Person trains all sales employees at the location of the sale in the laws pertaining to the sale of tobacco products to minors and techniques to ensure future compliance with said laws the suspension will not go into effect. Person must file with the Department, within 30 days of the issuance of the letter advising Person of this, an affidavit signed by Person and the sales employees that said training has been completed. If Person fails to timely submit the affidavit, the Department shall notify Person that the permit is suspended for 14 days. (2) Upon a finding by the Department of a second license violation within any thirty-six (36) month period, the license shall be suspended for twenty- one (21) days. (3) Upon a finding by the Department of a third license violation within any thirty-six month (36) period, the license shall be suspended for thirty (30) days. (4) Upon a finding by the Department of a fourth license violation within any thirty-six (36) month period, the license shall be revoked and the Person or Persons who had been issued the license shall not be issued a Tobacco Retailer's license pursuant to this Chapter for a period of three (3) years from the date of revocation. (b) TERMINATION OF LICENSE FOR FAILURE TO PAY RENEWAL FEES. A Tobacco Retailer's license which is not timely renewed pursuant to [Section Article 2(b)] shall automatically be deemed terminated by operation of law. - (c) REVOCATION OF LICENSE ISSUED IN ERROR. A Tobacco Retailer's license shall be revoked if the Department finds, after notice and opportunity to be heard, that one or more of the bases for denial of a license under [Section Article 4] existed at the time application was made or at anytime before the license issued. The revocation shall be without prejudice to the filing of a new application for a license. -6- DRAFT 05/23/05 (d) APPEAL OF SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. A decision of the Department to revoke or suspend a license is appealable to the Grievance Committee of the City of Ukiah and must be filed with the Department within ten (10) calendar days of personal service of the notice of the decision on the Person or Persons subject to the decision or within fifteen (15) calendar days if the Person or Persons subject to the decision are served by mail. An appeal shall stay all proceedings in furtherance of the appealed action. A suspension or revocation pursuant to [Section Article 9 (b)] is not subject to appeal. (e) LICENSE SUSPENSION REQUIRES THE REMOVAL OF ALL TOBACCO PRODUCTS FROM PUBLIC VIEW. Tobacco retailers whose license is suspended must remove from public view all tobacco products and tobacco advertising for the duration of their suspension. Failure to remove such items from view will be regarded as a violation of this ordinance equivalent to that of selling to minors. (f) REVOCATION OF LICENSE OBTAINED UNDER FALSE PRETENSES. Tobacco Retailers whose license is obtained under false pretenses shall have that license revoked. This revocation shall be with prejudice to one calendar year must elapse between any revocation pursuant to this subsection and any subsequent application. Article 10 ADMINISTRATIVE FINE, (a) GROUNDS FOR FINE. If the Department finds, based on substantial record evidence, that any unlicensed person, including a person named on a revoked or suspended license, has engaged in Tobacco Retailing in violation of this Chapter, the Department shall fine that Person as follows: 1. a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation in any thirty-six (36) month period; or 2. a fine not exceeding two hundred dollars ($200) for a second violation in any thirty-six (36) month period; or 3. a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500) for a third or subsequent violation in any thirty-six (36) month period. Each day that such a Person engages in Tobacco Retailing shall constitute a separate violation. (b) NOTICE OF VIOLATION. A notice of violation and of intent to impose a fine shall be personally served on, or sent by certified mail to, the Person or Persons subject to the fine. The notice shall state the basis of the Department's determinations and include an advisement of the right to request a hearing to contest the fine. Any request for a hearing must be in writing and must be received by the Department within ten (10) calendar days -7- DRAF'F 05/23/05 of personal service of the notice on the Person or Persons subject to a fine or within fifteen (15) calendar days if the Person or Persons subject to a fine are served by mail. (c) IMPOSITION OF FINE. If no request for a hearing is timely received, the Department's determination on the violation and the imposition of a fine shall be final and payment shall be made within thirty (30) calendar days of written demand made in the manner specified above for a notice of violation. If the fine is not paid within that time, the fine may be collected, along with interest at the legal rate, in any manner provided by law. In the event that a judicial action is necessary to compel payment of the fine and accumulated interest, the Person or Persons subject to the fine shall also be liable for the costs of the suit and attorney's fees incurred by the City of Ukiah in collecting the fine. (d) NOTICE OF HEARING. If a hearing is requested pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, the Department shall provide written notice, within forty-five (45) calendar days of its receipt of the hearing request, to the Person or Persons subject to a fine of the date, time, and place of the hearing in the manner specified above for a notice of violation. (e) HEARING DECISION. The chairperson of the Grievance Committee shall render a written decision and findings within twenty (20) working days of the hearing. Copies of the decision and findings shall be provided to the Person or Persons subject to a fine in the manner specified above for a notice of violation. (f) FINALITY OF THE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE'S DECISION. The decision of the Grievance Committee shall be the final decision of the City of Ukiah. (g) APPEAL TO SUPERIOR COURT OF LIMITED JURISDICTION. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 1094.5 or § 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, within twenty (20) days after personal service of the Grievance Committee's decision and findings, or within twenty-five (25) days if served by mail, any Person subject to a fine may seek review of the hearing officer's decision and findings by the Superior Court of limited jurisdiction. A copy of the notice of appeal to the Superior Court shall be timely served in person or by first-class mail upon the Department by the contestant. The appeal shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the Department's file in the case shall be received in evidence. A copy of the records of the Department of the notices of the violation and of the Grievance Committee's decision and findings shall be admitted into evidence as prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein. (h) FAILURE TO PAY FINE. If no timely notice of appeal to the Superior Court is filed, or the Department is not timely served with a copy of a notice of appeal, the Grievance Committee's decision and findings shall be deemed -8- DRAFT 05/23/05 confirmed and the fine shall be collected pursuant to subsection (c) of this Section. Article 11 ENFORCEMENT. The remedies provided by this Chapter are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. (a) Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this ordinance shall constitute a violation. (b) In addition to the administrative enforcement procedures provided by [Section Article 9] of this Chapter violations of this ordinance may, at the discretion of the District Attorney, be prosecuted as misdemeanors. (c) Violations of this ordinance are hereby declared to be public nuisances. (d) Violations of this ordinance are hereby declared to be unfair business practices and are presumed to at least nominally damage each and every resident of the community in which the business operates. (e) In addition to other remedies provided by this Chapter or by other law, any violation of this ordinance may be remedied by a civil action brought by the City Attorney or the District Attorney, including, for example, administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings, civil or criminal code enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief. (f) Any Person acting for the interests of itself, its members, or the general public may bring an action for injunctive relief to prevent future such violations or to recover such actual damages as he or she may prove. Article 12 SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance, or its application to any person or circumstance, is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases of this Ordinance, or its application to any other person or circumstance. The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more other sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases hereof be declared invalid or unenforceable. SECTION III. EFFECTIVE DATE, PUBLICATION. The Clerk of the City Council shall publish this Ordinance as required by law. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage." -9- DRAFT 05/23/05 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Ukiah, State of California, on this ~ day of ,2005, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: WHEREUPON, the Mayor declared the Ordinance passed and adopted and SO ORDERED. MAYOR, MARK ASHIKU ATTEST: MARIE ULVILA Clerk of Said City Council By: [Deputy] APPROVED AS TO FORM: DAVID J. RAPPORT, City Attorney By: -10- Ukiah Buys History # Stores Sale Date Surveyed = Yes Aug. 2000 21 5 Nov-Jan 2001 21 12 May-July 2002 25 8 May, 2003 23 4 Feb. 2004 21 9 Aug.-Nov. 2004 21 2 Sale % Sales ID Checked % ID = No Rate = Yes Checked 16 24% 18 86% 9 57% 14 67% 17 32% 21 84% 19 17% 22 96% 12 43% 19 90% 19 10% 21 100% Store Name Address Date Aibertsons 504 E. Perkins Beacon USA Petroleum Beacon Station USA Station 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 7/11/2002 5/27/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 1105 S. State Street 8/30/2000 11/30/2000 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 1105 S. State Street 2/17/2004 8/26/2004 585 E. Perkins 585 E. Perkins 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 7/11/2002 5/27/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 ID requested? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Did sale occur? No No No No No No Yes No Yes No Yes No No Yes No No Yes No Page 1 of 5 Store Name Chevron Mini Mart Dave's 76 Diamond Jim's EXXON Food 4 Less Food Maxx Golden Gate Shell Address Date 605 E. Perkins 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 7/11/2002 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 734 S. State Street 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 8/26/2004 1294 N. State Street 8/30/2000 12/7/2000 7/11/2002 5/27/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 998 S. State Street 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 1235 Airport Park Blvd. 7/11/2002 1235 Airport Park Blvd. 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 8/26/2004 1105 Airport Park Blvd 5/28/2002 8/30/2000 11/30/2000 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 8/26/2004 ID requested? Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Did sale occur? No Yes Yes Yes No No No No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No Yes No No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Page 2 of 5 Store Na~ne Handy Market KMART Kwik Pik Address Date 517 S. State Street 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 350 Orchard Ave. 8/30/2000 12/7/2000 7/11/2002 795 E. Perkins 1 / 19/2001 8/30/2000 7/11/2002 5/27/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 Ukiah Liquor & Food 135 Washington Ave 2/17/2004 8/30/2000 11/30/2000 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 8/26/2004 Liquor & Food Express 390 E. Gobbi 390 E. Gobbi 295 W. Mill Liquor & Food 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 5/28/2002 5/27/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 5/28/2002 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 Page 3 of 5 ID requested? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Did sale occur? No No No No No Yes Yes No Yes No No No No Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Yes No No Store Name Longs Drugs Quest Mart Redwood Tree 76 Rite Aid Safeway Shop N Wash Address Date ID requested? 155 S. Orchard Ave 2/17/2004 Yes 8/30/2000 Yes 1/19/2001 No 7/11/2002 Yes 5/27/2003 Yes 11/1/2004 Yes 915 N. State Street 8/30/2000 Yes 12/7/2000 Yes 5/28/2002 Yes 5/29/2003 Yes 2/17/2004 Yes 11/1/2004 Yes 859 N. State Street 7/17/2002 Yes 5/29/2003 Yes 680 S. State Street 8/30/2000 Yes 1/19/2001 Yes 7/11/2002 Yes 5/27/2003 Yes 2/17/2004 Yes 11/1/2004 Yes 653 S. State Street 8/30/2000 Yes 1/19/2001 Yes 7/11/2002 Yes 5/27/2003 Yes 2/17/2004 No 8/26/2004 Yes 581 N. State Street 8/30/2000 Yes 12/7/2000 Yes 5/28/2002 Yes 5/27/2003 Yes 2/17/2004 Yes 11/1/2004 Yes Page 4 of 5 Did sale occur? Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No Yes No Yes Yes No No Yes No Store Name South Ukiah Chevron The Bottle Shop WalMart Store Westside Market Address Date 1099 S. State Street 8/30/2000 11/30/2000 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 8/26/2004 152 Talmage Rd. 8/30/2000 11/30/2000 7/11/2002 5/29/2003 1155 Airport Park Blvd. 8/30/2000 11/30/2000 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 8/26/2004 1003 W. Clay 8/30/2000 1/19/2001 5/28/2002 5/29/2003 2/17/2004 11/1/2004 ID requested? Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Did sale occur? No Yes No No No No No Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No Page 5 of 5 Mendocino County Unit The need for Tobacco Licensing in Ukiah The Problem: Tobacco is the leading cause of death in the U.S., with 19 % of all deaths attributed to its effects. ACTUAL CAUSES OF DEATH, UNITED STATES, 1990 JALPA 1993;~70 ~07.. ;~212 Age adjusted rates for lung cancer deaths in Mendocino County are 124% of those in Califomia as a whole, with local rates at 58.5 deaths per 100,000 and Califomia at 46.9 deaths per 100,000. In Califomia in 1999 and 2000, approximately 14% of 16-17 year olds reported smoking during the last 30 days. (Califomia Cancer Facts & Figures 2002). In Mendocino County, the California Healthy Kids Survey performed in 1999 found that 27% of 16-17 year olds reported smoking during the last 30 days (Mendocino County Community Health Status Report 2002). The Califomia Tobacco Survey found smoking rates far lower throughout the state's teen population than those found in Mendocino County by the Healthy Kids Survey. A comparison of rates of teens who said they had smoked a cigarette in the past 30 days found California vs. Mendocino showing: 12- 13 year olds CA 1.7%, Mendocino 13%; 14- 15 Smoked a cigarette in past 30 days 30.00%- 20.00% 10.00% 'l California m Mendocino 0.00% Mendocino 12-13 year California olds 14-15 16-17 115 E. Smith Street, Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 462-7642 x 3 year olds CA 5.6%, Mendocino 20%; 16 - 17 year olds CA 16.3%, Mendocino 27%. At least 75% of all cigarettes smoked by youth are purchased by youth, either through direct purchase, having others buy for them, or borrowing from other youth who buy directly. In California, 49% of youth that smoke buy their own cigarettes. (MMWR 7/9/00 & 8/14/98) SOlX(~ Nalll)~ll Hout;llltetd ~ o1~ Dflqi Nm~e More than half of all smokers begin smoking before age 14; 90% begin by age 19. (USDHS 1991) Can children buy tobacco even with laws on the books? Youth Buy Rates: Mendocino County vs. Nation 60- 5O 40 % sales 30- 20 10 0. dendocino County Nation Nation · Mendocino County · In Ukiah, buying surveys conducted by underage teens who were instructed not to lie, and to offer valid ID when asked, showed an average of 30% retailers sold tobacco to these minors between 2000 - 2004 (Mendocino County Tobacco Control Program survey 2005). · A current estimate of the national sales rate to minors through vendor non-compliance is approximately 41% (SAMHSA). The Solution: Institute tobacco licensing to help us more actively enforce the anti-tobacco laws already on the books. Effective tobacco retailer licensing can help tobacco retailers clearly communicate that illegal tobacco sales to minors are unacceptable, and would level the business playing field. (Surgeon General's Report, 2000) Makes enforcing current laws far easier - in a County with no civil arm to the District Attorney's office, our enforcement options are limited. Licensing can be enforced by an administrative hearing officer (i.e. a city attorney, county counsel, the city manager, a public health official) designated in the ordinance. Surveillance of underage tobacco sales is already done by the Public Health Department. 115 E. Smith Street, Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 462-7642 x 3 ITEM NO. 9b DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED REVISION TO MARIJUANA CULTIVATION ORDINANCE AND POSSIBLE REFERRAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION SUMMARY: Ukiah's marijuana cultivation ordinance became effective on September 2, 2005, as Ukiah City Code Section 9254. Attached is a draft of an ordinance amending UCC Section 9254. The draft ordinance is proposed after four months of administering first the interim moratorium ordinance on marijuana cultivation and then the permanent ordinance. The Planning Department has been acting on more than 15 complaints received during this time period. The proposed changes to the current ordinance are suggested based on that experience and other concerns as stated below. The proposed amendment to the ordinance deletes the permitting provisions in the original ordinance. In addition, it would delete the six plant per parcel limit and the prohibition on cultivating marijuana within a stated distance of schools, parks, etc. The proposed revised ordinance incorporates some of the features of the recently adopted Willits ordinance, but adds a provision requiring an inspection of indoor growing activity by the City's Fire Marshal. As revised, although no permits would be issued, the indoor growing of marijuana would violate the ordinance unless the grower has requested and received an inspection and is following any instructions from the Fire Marshal to comply with the Fire Code or avoid an undue risk of fire. The Fire Marshal Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Refer proposed amendments to the Ukiah City Code Section 9254, regulating marijuana cultivation, to the Planning Commission for public hearing and a recommendation. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Make no changes to Section 9254. 2) Request further changes to the proposed draft ordinance. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: None David Rapport, City Attorney David Rapport, City Attorney Candace Horsley, City Manager John Williams, Police Chief Charley Stump, Planning Director 1 Draft ordinance amending Section 9254. APPROVED: Candace i--Iorsley, Cit~Manager Marijuana Ordinance October 14, 2005 Page 2 of 3 would maintain a record of the inspections, but the records would be declared confidential and only be used in the enforcement of the ordinance. This proposed revision to the ordinance avoids several problems posed by the existing ordinance: 1. Although no one has yet to filed for a permit, it eliminates the need for a permit which is problematic for the following reasons: a. The public notice requirements of the ordinance publicizes where marijuana is being grown, which is contrary to one of the purposes of the ordinance; to avoid marijuana from being an attractive nuisance. b. The public notice, public hearing and public record features of the permit process have been argued to violate the privacy rights of a marijuana patient. c. By issuing a permit, the City may, in fact, be authorizing an activity which is a violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. do e, Requiring an application for a permit has been argued to violate a marijuana grower's 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination by requiring him or her to admit in the application to a violation of federal law. The elimination of the permitting requirements will reduce administrative burdens on the City's planning department. Conversely, it will eliminate an argument that the permit is a de facto prohibition, because it is so burdensome. 2. Eliminating the six plant per parcel limitation in residential zoning districts avoids the potential conflict with regulations or guidelines enacted in Senate Bill 420 (Article 2.5 to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and Safety Code related to medical marijuana). Adding language that allows for the abatement of a public nuisance caused by indoor or outdoor growing addresses the problem of someone growing so much marijuana on the property, even indoors, as to create public nuisance. If that should happen at a particular address, a civil action could be filed to abate the specific nuisance impacts involved. 3. If all marijuana is required to be grown within a secure structure, there is less demonstrable need for banning cultivation within a stated distance of public facilities such as schools or parks. Moreover, eliminating this prohibition: a. Eliminates another argument that the ordinance violates Senate Bill 420; and b. Allows a patient who is using marijuana to grow small quantities indoors within 200 or 300 feet of a school, as long as that activity does not create a public nuisance. An enforcement action filed by the City is being defended by the group "Citizens for Safe Access" which has raised all of these issues in opposing an injunction to the enforcement of the existing ordinance. Since the hearing on September 21, the judge has yet to rule on the City's application for a preliminary injunction. Even if the judge Marijuana Ordinance October 14, 2005 Page 3 of 3 grants the injunction, Citizens for Save Access has vowed to file an appeal. They have also indicated that they intend to raise these same issues in a demurrer to the complaint. The City Attorney would much prefer to defend the attached proposed ordinance than the permitting and plant limitation requirements in the existing ordinance. The proposed draft ordinance would simplify and reduce the burden of enforcement and make the ordinance more defensible against the inevitable legal challenges. The City Attorney also believes that a simple ban on outdoor cultivation will alleviate many of the complaints the City Council has received. The draft ordinance would authorize a civil injunctive action if specific public nuisance impacts of indoor cultivation exist in individual cases. If the City Council is willing to consider these amendments to Section 9254, it should refer them to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and a recommendation. Given the time this process takes, the referral should occur as soon as possible. ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED: "MARIJUANA CULTIVATION," 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 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 up to 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 (August- October) 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 as well as its visibility from adjacent parcels or from areas accessible to the general public 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 ORDINANCE NO. 1 Mendocino County Air Quality Management District ("MCAQMD") reports an accelerating increase in formal air quality complaints associated with the growing of marijuana in 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 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 medical marijuana patients may grow in residential neighborhoods and requiring that that they be grown indoors within a secure structure should alleviate a number of the above-described problems. These requirements 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. 12. It is the City Council's intention that nothing in this Ordinance shall conflict with federal law as contained in the federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. Section 801 et seq., nor to otherwise permit any activity that is prohibited under that Act. It is further the City Council's intention that nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to (1) allow ORDINANCE NO. 2 persons to engage in conduct that endangers others or causes a public nuisance, (2) allow the use of marijuana for non-medical purposes, or (3) allow any activity relating to the cultivation, distribution, or consumption of marijuana that is otherwise illegal. 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: Section 1. Definitions. As used herein the following definitions shall apply: 1. "Cultivation" means the planting, growing, harvesting, drying; or processing of marijuana plants or any part thereof. 2. "Outdoor" means any location within the City of Ukiah that is not within a "fully enclosed and secure structure. 3. "Fully enclosed and secure structure" means a space within a building, greenhouse or other structure which has a complete roof enclosure supported by connecting walls extending from the ground to the roof, which is secure against unauthorized entry, and which is accessible only through one or more Iockable doors. 4. "Primary caregiver" means a "primary caregiver" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(d). 5. "Qualified patient" means a "qualified patient" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7 (f). 6. "Parcel" means property assigned a separate parcel number by the Mendocino County Assessor. Section 2. Cultivation of Marijuana. A. Outdoor cultivation: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any premises within any zoning district in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such premises to be used for the outdoor cultivation of marijuana plants as described herein. B. Indoor cultivation without a Fire Marshall inspection: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any premises within any zoning district in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such premises to be used for the indoor cultivation of marijuana ORDINANCE NO. 3 plants without have first obtained an inspection of the indoor cultivation activity by the Fire Marshall or to continue such activity after such inspection, except in compliance with any instructions by the Fire Marshall which require compliance with the Uniform Fire Code or other measures to avoid an undue risk of fire. C. Fire Marshall Inspection: Upon request of any person owning, leasing, occupying or having charge or possession of any premises within the City, the Fire Marshall shall conduct an inspection of an indoor marijuana growing activity to determine whether it is in compliance with the Uniform Fire Code or poses an undue risk of fire. The Fire Marshall shall maintain a record of each such inspection and his or her recommendations. Such records shall be maintained as confidential records, exempt from public disclosure to the maximum extent permitted law, and shall only be made available to City officials for the exclusive purpose of enforcing the provisions of this Section 9254. By resolution, the City Council may adopt a fee for the inspection authorized by this subsection. Nothing in this Section 9254 shall be construed as a limitation on the City's authority to abate any nuisance which may exist from the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, processing or storage of marijuana plants or any part thereof from any location, indoor or outdoor, including from within a fully enclosed and secure building, greenhouse or other structure. Section 4. Enforcement. The violation of this ordinance is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and may be abated by the City Attorney by the prosecution of a civil action for injunctive relief. Cultivation of marijuana on parcels within the City that does not comply with this Section 9254 constitutes a violation of the zoning ordinance and is subject to the penalties and enforcement as provided in. Article 22, commencing with § 9350. SECTION THREE 1. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment), 15061(b)(3) (there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment). In addition to the foregoing general exemptions the following categorical exemptions apply, Sections 15308 (actions taken as authorized by local ordinance to assure protection of the environment), and 15321 (action by agency for enforcement of a law, general rule, standard, or objective administered or adopted by the agency, including by direct referral to the City Attorney as appropriate for judicial enforcement). 2. 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 ORDINANCE NO, 4 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. 3. 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 ,2005, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on ,2005 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 5 ITEM NO. 9c DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF STAFF COMMENT LE'rrER CONCERNING THE MENDOCINO COUNTY UKIAH VALLEY AREA PLAN DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SUMMARY: On October 5, 2005, the City Council conducted a public workshop and discussed the Ukiah Valley Area Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). At the conclusion of the discussion, the Council directed Staff to prepare comments on the adequacy of the EIR. Staff has reviewed the document and prepared a draft comment letter to the County for the Council's review and approval. Many of Staff's comments provide updated information, while others recommend changes to make the EIR legally adequate. The letter is attached for the Council's consideration. The City Public Utilities Director is reviewing the Water and Wastewater Sections of the Draft EIR, and comments will be provided for Council consideration under separate cover prior to the October 19 City Council meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the draft Environmental Impact Report comment letter, make any modifications, and direct Staff to send it to the County Board of Supervisors. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not discuss the EIR comment letter and provide direction to Staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Comment Letter on the draft E]~R APPROVED: Candace Horsley, ~:it~ Manager October 19, 2005 Honorable Board of Supervisors Mendocino County 501 Low Gap Road Ukiah, CA 95482 RE: City of Ukiah Comments Concerning the Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board: The City of Ukiah thanks Mendocino County for transmitting the Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for our review and comment. The Ukiah Valley Area Plan is an extremely important planning document that will establish the framework for growth, development, and conservation of the Ukiah Valley. Obviously, the strategy for managing this growth and development is of great interest to the City because of the potential impacts it could have on the City itself. The City accepts and acknowledges the notion that growth and development within the City could similarly have impacts on the unincorporated valley. To this end, the City supports and encourages the implementation measures (mitigation measures) that call for increased teamwork between the City and County to successfully manage growth to benefit the quality of life throughout the Valley. The City believes that this is particularly important given the current and expected growth pressures as noted in the EIR. Simply put, the City and the County must forge a strong working relationship to develop a sound and balanced strategy for growth management. Based on the implementation measures contained in the City's General Plan Housing Element, the City is currently revising many of its regulatory tools to inject sustainable development and smart growth principals. We strongly encourage the County to explore these planning paradigms as suggested in the DEIR so that a more consistent approach to managing growth and development in the Valley can be achieved. The City found the EIR to be informative and generally adequate. However, we do have a number of comments for the Board to consider. Some of the comments are simple commentary, some provide updated information, while others recommend changes to make the EIR legally adequate. 1. MITIGATION MEASURES IN GENERAL The City believes that to genuinely and legally mitigate impacts, the policy level mitigation measures calling for the adoption of new ordinances and regulations must be completed rapidly to be meaningful and truly mitigate impacts. This is particularly true given the current growth pressures in the Valley. Based on the City's experience with implementing its 1995 General Plan, it recognizes and acknowledges that these types of work products can take considerable time to complete because of staff shortages and a lack of funding. It is our recommendation that any Implementation measure calling for the adoption of new ordinances and regulations should be carefully evaluated for its feasibility in terms of available funding and staff resources. If the County cannot conclude that a required new ordinance or regulation will be prepared and adopted in a rapid timeframe it should be deemed infeasible and discarded, and a new approach to mitigation should be pursued- or the impact should be labeled unavoidable. This exercise is particularly important given the current and expected growth pressures in the Ukiah Valley. The City also believes that the mitigation measures suggesting that the County consider adopting new regulations to mitigate impacts must be changed to require the adoption of the new regulations. The EIR acknowledges this in many instances. For example, it alters UVAP implementation measures (mitigation measures) CT-6.1.3, CT-6.1.4, and CT-6.3.5 to strike the terms "consider," "should," and "may", and add the terms "Adopt," "shall," and "shall." However, it other cases, the term "should" is retained in the mitigation measure/implementation measure. For example, the recommended mitigation measure for Impact 3.7-D (Noise) states "The County should adopt a Noise Ordinance ....... "The "should" must be changed to "shall" to effectively mitigated the impact. 2. Page 7 - C. PROJECT GROW'rH IN THE PLAN AREA The first sentence should be modified to read: "Table 1_ describes the projected 2025 population for the plan area, the City of Ukiah, and the County as a while whole. 3. Page 8 -Table 1' POPULATION PROJECTIONS Table 1 indicates that the population projected for the City of Ukiah in 2025 is 17,990. Appendix B references the City General Plan as the source of this figure. The 2004 City of Ukiah Housing Element indicates that the total number of probable units to be developed before buildout is reached is 733. Using the standard 2.51 people per unit formula reveals the buildout (current City limits) to be 17,330. 1 Page 86 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE (MITIGATION MEASURE) OC- '12.2.5 It is unclear where the five-acre threshold in this mitigation measure comes from, and therefore seems arbitrary. The City requires erosion control plans for all discretionary projects involving site preparation and grading activities. Acknowledging the rural nature of most of the planning area, the City does not recommend that all discretionary projects be required to prepare and submit an erosion control plan. However, as stated on page 90 of the DEIR, one of the two most critical water quality problems within the planning area is sedimentation. Therefore, the City recommends that a smaller acreage threshold be considered to provide more meaningful mitigation. 5. Page 98 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE SF-2.3.3 This implementation measure requires the County and City to develop a stormwater management program to minimize damage to agricultural areas from conveyance of floodwaters from urban areas of the valley. The County and the City cannot require each other to implement policy of mitigation measures. While the City does not oppose the concept of the implementation/mitigation measure, the "City" should be deleted from the language. 6. Page102 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE OC-12.2.3 The term "appropriate technology" is vague and meaningless to the public. The City recommends that language be added to provide examples of appropriate technology that delay storm surges from water running off parking areas and potentially overburdening drainage systems. An example may be the installation of storm water detention infrastructure. 7. Page 143- IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE HA-2.1.1 If this mitigation measure is truly needed in conjunction with the others listed on pages 142 and 143 to successfully mitigate potentially significant adverse impacts to archaeological and historical resources resulting from future development, then the language must be modified to read "The County budget shcu!d shall include capital improvement funds for maintenance and enhancement of historic buildings." 8. Page 157 - LAST SENTENCE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE The information received from the City's traffic engineering consultants is deemed premature. The City is still evaluating a number of alternatives, so that not all impacts on streets such as Perkins and State Streets have been identified. It is unknown to the City what all the cumulative impacts may be that would result from City and UVAP buildout, and whether or not they can be successfully mitigated. The language and analysis should be modified accordingly. 9. Page 163 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE CT-2.2.2 (e) The language in (e) must be revised to read "Projects impacting State or City transportation systems or rights-of-way should shall be consistent with adopted Caltrans or City transportation planning documents as applicable." 10. Page 164 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE CT-4.1.3 While the City agrees that the County and City should work cooperatively to plan roadway improvements in the City and immediate unincorporated area, the Implementation Measure should be revised to read "The County..,~n~,.. City a-~, ..., o* .... ..,,~,j]" ar~ shall make every effort to work with the City to coordinate and plan an appropriate route and roadway improvements for the extension of Orchard 11. Page 168 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE CT-2.2.2 (b) To ensure true mitigation, the City recommends that the word "should" in the first sentence be replaced with the word "shall," and that the word "will" in the second sentence be replaced with the word "shall." 12. Page 168 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE CT-2.2.2 (e) To ensure true mitigation, the City recommends that the word "should" in this Implementation Measure be replaced with the word "shall." 13. Page 169 - SECOND PARAGRAPH See comment above for page 157. '14. Page 210- TRAFFIC-GENERATED NOISE The discussion regarding traffic-generated noise fails to include the increasingly loud noise resulting from some modified vehicle exhaust systems, as well as excessively loud car stereos. The noise generators have become an increasing nuisance problem in the City, and may or may not be regarded as a significant adverse impact. 15. Page 2'13 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE AE-'1.'1.'1 Since adoption of the City General Plan, the City and the County have worked cooperatively to interpret and implement the provisions of the Ukiah Airport Master Plan. Accordingly, the following language is a more practical approach to mitigating potential noise impacts originating at the Ukiah Municipal Airport: "The County and r-;,,,..,., ..,°~'~",..,, ....~' ........... .., ,~..., ..=.....'~ shall continue to work cooperatively with the City to interpret and implement the City Airport Master Plan and to maintain consistent land use classifications and uses in the immediate unincorporated vicinity nd the Ukiah Municipal Airport arou ...... III~.~ ~.~ ,vi I i ~ l l, I~=~ i l ~=~ ~.v ~,~l ~,~ v ~ I, ~=~111 I I1~=~1 iii i ~lVl i i,~.~1 i I. ii l~ I a 11-~4 ~d ~.~ I v l v [1~.~ l I, v i il. ~..41 i ~d ~--v I Ill l~ '16. Page 2'15- THIRD PARAGRAPH If needed to truly mitigate noise impacts, the language should be revised to read "The County should shall adopt a Noise Ordinance ...... " The County may wish to review and consider the City of Ukiah Noise Ordinance to create continuity in the City-County transition areas. '17. Page 226 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE CD-2.2.2 Similar to previous comments, this Implementation Measure inappropriately provides a directive to the City. While the City is supportive of the concept of working cooperatively with the County on selecting and planting trees within street rights-of-way, the language should be revised to read: "The r.;. .... '~ County er.,...],~ shall c~H~mte work with the City to plan and plant VII,] l,.dl I~lld ~1 IVHI~ p~rmit *~,.. ~,~,~[~-*;"~,,...= ~, canopy trees within rights-of-way to improve or enhance the streetscape." '18. Page 23'1 - LAST PARAGRAPH While not a specific comment regarding the adequacy of the EIR, the City supports the suggestion that the County consider the design guidelines set forth in the Smart Growth Network's Getting to Smart Growth: 100 More Policies for Implementation, and Getting to Smart Growth II. The City is reviewing these documents, and is considering revising its design guidelines and other regulatory tools to incorporate certain smart growth principals. '19. Page 243 - UKIAH POLICE DEPARTMENT Some of the information contained in this paragraph needs updating. It is understood that the population for the City of Ukiah, as of 2002 is 15,497. Additionally, last June a ballot measure that would provide tax revenues to fund new police officers was successful. The City recommends that the consultant contact Captain Dewey of the City Police Department to update the information in his formal Response To Comments and preparation of the Final EIR. 20. Page 244 - LAST PARAGRAPH Similarly, the last paragraph should be revised to reflect the current status of the Ukiah Police Department. 2'1. Page 245- SECOND PARAGRAPH There should be an explanation as to why the demand for additional City police officers resulting from buildout under the UVAP is not regarded as a significant adverse impact to City police protection services. 22. Page 25'1 - CITY OF UKIAH FIRE DEPARTMENT Some of the information contained in this paragraph needs updating. It is understood that the population for the City of Ukiah, as of 2002 is 15,497. According to Fire Marshal Yates, the current staff consists of 15 full-time career firefights/paramedics and 30 volunteer positions with 15 firefighters on the active roster. In terms of calls for assistance, there were 2300 in 2004. 23. Page 285- SERVICE REVIEW The last sentence should be updated to read "Once the Service Review is completed, the City of Ukiah expects to reduce its sphere of influence." ~1~ II VVl IVl ~1 I I~ I I. 24. Page 288 - POLICY CF-4.2 See previous correspondence on this issue/language, dated September 14, 2005 (copy enclosed). 25. Page 298 - CITY OF UKIAH REREATION FACILITIES The description of the City's recreation facilities needs to be updated to reflect the new Perkins Street Park and the emerging Observatory Park. 26. Page 302 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES PR-2.1 AND PR-2.1.2 These Implementation measures inappropriately provide directives to the City. While the City supports cooperative efforts with the County regarding park and recreation planning, providing directives to the City in the UVAP is inappropriate. 27. PAGE 305 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE PR-1.2.2 The City believes that future development in the planning area will have a significant adverse impact on City parks and recreation facilities. Even with the UVAP policies calling for County-City coOperation to investigate methods for financing parks and recreation facilities and services, we recommend that a second sentence be added to Implementation Measure PR-1.2.2 to ensure that this mitigation measure is effective: "All residential development projects of 15 or more units shall include on-site outdoor recreation facilities such as tot-lots, basketball courts, and/or other similar improvements." The City has been using this approach successfully to reduce impacts on park and recreation facilities and services. 28. Page 3'16 - IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE AE-'1 .'1 .'1 Since adoption of the City General Plan, the City and the County have worked cooperatively to interpret and implement the provisions of the Ukiah Airport Master Plan. Accordingly, the following language is a more practical approach to mitigating potential impacts noise impacts originating at the Ukiah Municipal Airport: "The County..,~-'~,.. ~';~"..,.~ ~,o~",..., ~...~"< .., .......... ,..w, ..u~..'~ shall continue to work cooperatively with the Cit~ to interpret and implement the City Airport Master Plan and to maintain consistent land use classifications and uses in the immediate unincorporated vicinity ~ ;rr~r~ around the Ukiah Municipal Airport. r'~r,~r--k---~;,,-- ,~-~ ,,o~ D,a~ ~--.~ .... ~"'. ..~ .... ~ ........... ~ ........ ~,,,~ ........... ~,,,~,,~ ..... ~ ..... iil~gl ~1 II I I ~l~lgl I~ II I ~1 I~ ~ ~ ~1~1 I~ gl I ~1 I~ I III ~gl ~ ~1 I~ g~ g~l I i~tl~lll~] ii1~, 29. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Based on its review of the Draft EIR, the conclusions regarding unavoidable and significant irreversible impacts, the City believes that the County should seriously consider the environmentally superior Growth Management project alternative. This recommendation will be discussed in a separate correspondence. 30. MITIGATION MONITORING While we acknowledge that Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines allows the Mitigation Monitoring Plan for a General Plan level document to consist of policies included in the Plan, the City believes that it is crucial for the EIR to provide a mitigation monitoring table indicating who is responsible for implementing each mitigation measure/policy, when and how it will be implemented, the projected cost, and who will be responsible for the cost. This would provide meaningful public disclosure and a sensible and practical link between the EIR and UVAP, as well as a statement regarding the true viability of the Plan. The "Timeframe" and "Responsibility" statements after some of the implementation/mitigation measures are useful, but a formal Mitigation Monitoring Table would present all the mitigation monitoring information in one place in the document. Thank you again for providing an opportunity to comment of the Ukiah Valley Area Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. Sincerely Mark Ashiku, Mayor City of Ukiah September 14, 2005 Ms. Pam Townsend, Senior Planner Mendocino County Planning & Building Services 501 Low Gap Road, Room 1440 Ukiah, CA 95482 RE: UVAP Draft EIR Dear Pam: The City of Ukiah is currently reviewing the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Ukiah Valley Area Plan (UVAP). We understand that the formal public review and comment period is August 26, 2005 through ©ctober 26, 2005. The Ukiah City Council will be discussing the document at its October 5, 2005 meeting and will be providing formal comments shortly thereafter. The following are preliminary staff observations. The City is about to commence Phase I of its Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade and Expansion Project. That phase will upgrade the existing sewer plant and provide some additional capacity for new sewer connections. It is not enough capacity to serve build-out under the Land Use Element of the proposed UVAP. The mitigated negative declaration for this project also evaluated the environmental impacts from a proposed Phase 2 which would add additional capacity to the treatment plant to serve ali of the development authorized by the UVAP. Phase 2 would require the acquisition of the following properties to the north of the existing treatment plant property: APN's 184-100-04 (Norgard), 184-090-01 (Norgard), 184-090-06 (Mattern), and 184-090-07 (Norgard). The UVAP designates these parcels "AG" (Agricultural Lands), but states that if the City acquires the Norgard parcels, the County will, at County expense, rezone the Mattern parcel to an industrial zoning classification. The City has never contemplated acquiring the Norgard parcel but not acquiring the Mattern parcel. Phase 2, if it were pursued, would require the acquisition of both the Norgard and Mattern parcels. The proposed UVAP provisions relating to re-zoning the Mattern parcel could be used by the Matterns to justify appraising that property as industrial rather than as agricultural property. This could raise the acquisition costs to the point where Phase 2 would no longer be financially feasible. The EIR should consider the environmental impact of this provision of the UVAP. It could restrict the City's ability to increase the capacity of the wastewater treatment plant to serve all of the development authorized by the UVAP. If that level of development is authorized without the capacity to serve it with adequate wastewater treatment services, it could have significant, adverse environmental impacts not considered by the draft EIR. 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 Thank you for sending the draft EIR to the City for our review and comment. We will forward the C, jty Council comments to you promptly after its October 5, 2005 meeting. / '. ~ ~//~ /,~ P,,Canning and Community Development AGENDA ITEM NO: 10.a MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION ON MENDOCINO COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FUNDING COMMITMENT FOR THE WlLLITS AND HOPLAND BYPASS PROJECTS Councilmember McCowen has asked to agendize a discussion of the Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) funding commitment for the Willits and Hopland bypass projects. At the last MCOG Board meeting, the Board members reviewed the draft 2005 Regional Transportation Plan and the MCOG funding projections for the two bypass projects. It was agreed by consensus that each member of the Board would agendize the item for discussion at their respective jurisdictions. MCOG policy from 2003 and 2004 designated the Willits bypass as a top priority and the Hopland bypass as a secondary priority. Up to $5,000,000 has been allocated for these local programs per funding cycle for the 2006, 2008, 2010 and 2012 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). This commitment would encumber 100% of available STIP funding for the next decade, which is the major source of funding for local transportation projects. MCOG Executive Director, Phil Dow, will be in attendance and has included a summary overview of the issues for Council review. Also attached for Council review, is the Agenda Summary Report from a 2004 City Council meeting regarding the Hopland Bypass funding, which was requested by Vice-Mayor Baldwin. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss MCOG Funding for the Willits and Hopland Bypass Projects provide direction if appropriate ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Councilmember McCowen Candace Horsley, City Manager Phil Dow #1 - Overview by Phil Dow #2- 2004 ASR regarding the Hopland Bypass #3 - Minutes of July 7, 2004 City Council Motion Approved:~~~.~ Candace Horsley, O~ty Manager MENDO'CINO COUNCIL OF GOVERNM ENTS 367 North State Street--Suite 20'6-~Ukiah-~Callfornia.-95482 ! Aflachment # _ _ ~ , , .PHILLIP j, Dov~ EXECU'nVE OIREcTOR Telephone 707;463-1859 Fax 707-463-2212 www;mendocinocog.org mcog@m endocinocog.org October 13, 2004 Ukiah City 'CounCil 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Mayor Ashiku and City Council: At our August Board meeting, Director Gjerde (Fort Bragg) asked to place discussion of the Hopland Bypass commitment on our next agenda. We did not meet in September, therefore this issue appeared on the agenda for our October 3, 2005 MCOG meeting. Discussion among the MCOG Board focused on Resolution No. M2004-02 (adopted April 5, 2004). Essentially, this ResolutiOn commits Regional Improvement Program shares in future funding cycles, as needed, to provide local funding shares for the Willits Bypass. It also, as a second priority, commits shares up to $5 million per 2-year cycle through 2012 to ensure that the local share of the Hopland Bypass project is fully funded through the design and right-of-way phases. Near the end of the meeting, a motion was offered to reconsider this commitment to the Hopland Bypass. The motion failed on a 4-4 vote. In Board discussion that followed, it was suggested that Board members take this issue back to their individual councils (or Board) for discussion. At the end of the meeting, Director McCowen asked if I would be available to attend the Ukiah City Council while this issue is discussed. I have been in contact with City Manager Horsley and understand that this will appear on the October 19 agenda, i will be in attendance to provide background on this issue and answer any questions the Council may have. Sincerely, Phillip J. Dow, P.E. Executive Director AGENDA Attachment ITEM NO: 9b MEETING DATE: June 2, 2004 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING HOPLAND BYPASS FUNDING--VICE-MAYOR BALDWIN Vice-Mayor Baldwin has requested a discussion and possible action regarding the recent Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) decision for funding of the Hopland bypass. The MCOG Board approved the funding of $5 million per STIP cycle (every two years) through 2012 for the Hopland bypass. The 2002 STIP cycle allocated $18 million for the Mendocino County regional area. CalTrans has accepted this proposal and thus kept the Hopland bypass on their list of projects. They eliminated 20 out of 40 possible projects due to the lack of staff, time and money that it takes to do the environmental review and right-of-way acquisition. Mr. Dow has indicated that STIP funding is not only for local streets, but also for regional projects whereby local agencies share project costs with the State. A question and answer sheet from MCOG is attached. The first phase of the project, which will include design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction, is estimated at $120 million. The State has allocated $7.2 million for environmental review, which is expected to begin three-and-a-half years from now. MCOG has allocated $20 million up to 2012. Additional phases, once the bypass is completed, will construct a continuous four-lane highway to the south of Ukiah. Attached for Council's information is a letter from Vice-Mayor Baldwin, as well as two letters to the Ukiah Daily Journal that he has submitted for Council's review and discussion. Vice-Mayor Baldwin is asking for action from the City Council to formally oppose the funding by MCOG for the Hopland bypass. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss funding of Hopland bypass and provide direction to staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: NIA Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Approved: NIA Phil Baldwin, Vice-Mayor Candace Horsley, City Manager Phil Baldwin, Vice-Mayor 1. Letter from Vice-Mayor Baldwin 2. Letters to the Editor regarding the Hopland bypass 3. MCOG question and answer sheet Candace Horsley, City l~nager Attachment # May 27, Fellow Councilmembers, I ask this Council to formally oppose any City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, or Mendocino Council of Governments funding for the Hopland Bypass. Not only are there far more critical transportation projects in Mendocino County and not only is this a project inspired by State masterminds rather than local need, but it is a project that will induce auto dependent, sprawling subdivisions here and in Lake County by cutting commute time to Santa Rosa and San Francisco. Attached find two letters from local citizens making the case for this position better than I. Thank you for considering this issue. Phil Baldwin 4- THURSDAY, APRIL.29, 2004 Letters from' our readers. Again,St'bYpassing Hol land · To the Editor:' Let m,c see. if I get this 'sffaight. Caltrans , is going' ahead .with "plans to bypass the wonderfully small community of Hopland even 'though California is"in one of the Worse fiscal crisis's, in its. history. Vital .: mental-and PUbiC health'programs and'. ~----~:.- .. being clor~ed, putting: thousands of peoPles,'. livc~-at risk, and Callz~ans wants to millions On something that is justp!ain sm,' · pid, · .' . " The damage, to the environment alone ShoUld be enough to ·tell .Cal~ans to back off. The traffic in Hopland is not aproblcm.~. A person can..even cross, the street without putting their life in danger most. of the time. What is Caltrans thinking?. ' . " This 'is just another'example of jUst how out of touch.people 'in Sacramento are. Projects like' this shOtild b~ 'put before th~, ' voters of MendOCino CoUntY.so that we can. :set priorities' when it'comes to the What is , done here, . · All' the money being spent on:this lame- brained idea could be 'put 'into' the much needed bypaSs ofWilli'ts; and maybe, some of the money' could be. used to nlake ~sure that people with me, ntal illness are.'not forced into, long-term locked,facilities simz ply because the state refuses to-set priori- ties...They, obviously do not 'care what .we want or what ,we need aiad are willing to · spend tons of money .on projects that offer no h.elp .to .us at all. The only people that would want Sdch a .terrible project to hap- pen are those who Would end up selling,. their land. · If Caltrans would only'co'me up he~ a~d ask us What. we want and what we .need, they would see jUSt how 'wrong they have been over the years,"Ideas would include a straight 'road to the coast,'.'the, redesign of the off ramps at Perkins,. and .getting the Willits". byPass, done. as soon as poss.ibl.e · (Caltrans. is' the' .only. grbup that..', is .really .keeping-it from getting, started). All they need to do. is ask what we Want, iinstead of. telling 'us What they ..want;. We, live here and are impacted by what they do.. We ar~ the ones ,who' suffer from' their stu-" 'pidity; ' · ' " I.urge everYone t° write to CalWafis and demand that .they PUt an immediate .halt to any plans that:wohld spenff millions of dol' lars no one has On a project no One in their i.;. . .right.mind wants. William French' .. - .' . .. 'Uklah 41 'T. MONDAY, APRIL 19, 2004 . . · . Letters;'..fr0m:-' r--:. readers concerned .iabo~t~ :'.H...~and - ,.' · · . · ,L ~' ". ,:, -? ':o', ' ' ?.- ' 'bypass·' '": · . To the!Ed!, tor: ""' "" ': ' '~'"/' ' ' ue, s, .this avernge- may, nevcr~'.met '-but This'te~..Was;Sub~...int0 .the.'.. '.' .~. .' .... ' .... ~ ...... ~,'~-'~-," :' ":" '.. · · · bei~'~nd, its.~p~abl6"abih.'ty to pay.'. '. ,.." ~'~ .tl~.: :MCOG.' n~.~.~.~.~. '.~ i~.Ap .tit' 5 rneetinl~ is'a'~ii'dS/'.~.~'.to.'.' .co~ . ap,'~:.'tha., t 'MC..OG has'.eVen, tried .to so_h'c- mit to' funding a. P0'rtio~ of.~ -Cal..~.,~pro~ ,l~0'l~l~...oplal~ti.B-'~,ass; I ~e..rev. ieW..~ed; ~. ' beii~ve the BYpass would be anotherfnc"' i ·-.,qu,,t and .'s~. :~~~,~itsl .~o~ fUndS ·C~'be'.~~·; o~;tbe, next. te.U years Or i'So tO 'pa~.Iot':the N~ass.. '-.."...~ '...'.'~ ·andI b~li~8.:~,Co~ty.'i~ ofi'~i ~ new 'section of.~Wg¥' th~ '.~ugh.: the.-~Sl,: '... Valley..would.~'~'~:}~u~e'' tni~.... ~'~..'~;;' .. · ?o'be~. with; the.amoai~t'or~:rno~y~. Caltrans is'.requeS~ingfrom the: County is ' · ~t0t. ';~bntributing ~ gr0wth:i/t ,Mend0cino - · '= CoU'~ity;.'as it."W~ld ;fiiake the.commUte far too mUCh..For the Willits . MC00 fUnd~l only: !-5 should Mend~ii~6':ftind 25 'per~..e.n.t..-'.~:~{; c0~nty has:.to0 ~y.: °th'et'l.ocal' - the.County shi)'. Uld.nothe~,lp fUtld..~j~.~:" died'by the State.'After:al!; 'the re~onal: peOp!e-'-and trucks.trav.~'si~gthe' .' Staie. it '.s, li.'pu)d be SOlely a state. ~ feder- al; res~ibili'ty' W'fund int~m~,:hi$..h:,"' I~ICOG s fiexibility'to.meet'future'~.l,ocal. needs. Our-County roads and'other lo~al "" roads in some areas.are in vc-ry" ..po% .- · shape,-and dang~rous'c°ndilions on-10cal roads.'sh~uld be MCO(3's'ft/st priority.' In. th~end, tbe.Count~ simply ca~, 't afford fimdithe,Hopland:.BypaSs. ' . ..- -.. '", ',." "Your ~rt- to MCOG also doesn, t tel! the 'fu~t Sto~.' ..Th~.'. proposal is-r.or MCOG commt~rnel{t.~ fu~d Ihe environmental..: ' study= .p'.h, aSe and.right-of-wayplS, nning and acq~siti..0n, .the pmp. osal 1.eaves.a !..'fundLrtg §ap'.b.f.Sl t:s~;.~ni!lia. '~ .after '~ 2.'.This.' c0uld~e Mend°Cino C~nty' a~/:that P0.int~With a HobsOn's. choice: someho~ · ~.~-mdi~l~ia .g~at......deal',more.mon. ey (su.c.h as . by..c~g a.loc,.a! transportation.tax),. al~,.'.~_ .~.fl~..' .i~P~s pr~je~l~ ( ,t~ereb.y from' l~.laces lilt.~, santa Rosi~ e. aSii~r. YoUr... re. port,"howgver,~'simply, dism)sses the i.i ~al..growtli'ittducing effect of the BYPaSs:':MCOG laoliS a. mandate'to tate,sUck:~,ro~th. Before MCOG taEesany. ~.acti0n 1i1~'-.this; it should make sure it has' t.~: support=of.the residents,of.the County. - .F.'..ma!..!y, I d0n~t.think, tlia. t £ounty fu.' nd~ .i.~g'iS.~ really.neces. ~. If,.tllis project iS .. .~y ne~ed, rail .sate.or.federal funding should be ma.de, a.v, ailable,,.Even 'if Cialtrans. mak~, .so~ .o~' i~:~ ~.t, to;'~'~:pr°~rani''. the I~IOpland iB~ if.:MCOG doesn, t ;.: ~Ommit. tO'. fundih'g 2.5, ~ment; that .doesn't meanlthe B, ,~.aS'S ~:'b~ forever fore-. cI°S~L tn ~'..~'.'fu,ttite,' if.ther~ is more pub~ li~";d~d, f6r thig costly, project, the . · · Po~..iticat.. will '~'arid 'the. state funding - ~'0r ir~' ~.ypass will be' muste/red.. ,'" I urge you;tO i~,onSidek Your'.repon in light ~f these isibeS., arid I. urge MCOG ask'Caltrans tO: lOOk elsewhere for Hopland Bypass funding.. -,.', . .. : ..'.. · ... · ... : · -. "Julie Mattern Golden ~ident, Golden-Vineynrds Hopland .. Attachment #..~ ,, HOPLAND BYPASS PROJECT INFREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS March 16, 2004 Winat is the purpose of this project? The project purpose is to provide an interregional transportation facility that will relieve congestion, reduce operational conflicts by separating local traffic from inter-regional traffic, accommodate future traf~c volumes and improve safety. What is the need for this project? The need for this project is centered on the following concerns: Congestion, Operational Conflicts and Delay - Within project limits the existing roadway is a conventional highway with numerous at- grade public and private mad connections. Existing peak hour level of service is "E". US 101, functioning as "Main Street" carries 70% inter-regional travelers. Truck passing lanes in North Hopland segment are the only passing opportunities. · Safety - While the overall corridor has collision rates below the statewide average, the fatality rote is 1.7 times the statewide average for similar facilities. As volumes increase over time and capacity is exceeded more frequently, collision rotes will increase. · Regional Improvement Priorities- The Hopland Bypass has been the top rated improvement priority of the North Coast Counties Supervisor's Association since the Willits Bypass project was removed. The Hopland Bypass and North Hopland continue to be short-range priorities in the Regional Transportation Plan. · Concept Facilities - The existing roadway is not consistent with the Caltrans "Interregional Transportation Strategic Plan" and the District 1 Route Concept Report for Route 101. Both reports call for a four-lane facility in the Hopland area. Route 101 throughout the state is one of ten "Focus Routes" identified by the California Transportation Commission for improvement. What are the benefits of this project? This project would provide a safe, modem facility to accommodate both existing and future peak hour volumes. It would also provide guaranteed passing opportunities, and would meet the facility concept established through State and Regional planning efforts. The project would reduce travel time through the corridor. The construction of a freeway bypass would significantly reduce collisions and operational conflicts on the existing Route 101 segment. Statewide -1- collision rates on four-lane facilities are three times lower than for two-lane conventional highways. Specifically, the project would: · Reduce congestion by providing guaranteed passing opportunities · Increase the level of service and reduce delay time · Accommodate future growth (expected 70% increase in volumes over 20 years) · Enhance safety of corridor (four-lane facilities are safer than two- lanes) · Enhance safety within Hopland by removing inter-regional traffic and reducing operational conflicts · Close the last two-lane gap between the Bay Area and Willits · Enhance air quality and noise levels in the Hopland community · Reduce energy consumption by eliminating stops/acceleration Won't construction of this project induce growth in Mendocino County? Market forces such as housing costs, salary levels, and the comparative differences between where housing is located and where jobs are located are the key factors affecting growth. Access improvement alone seldom provides the impetus for land use development change or change in intensity. Since we know that construction is still many years away, the need to resolve traffic issues in Hopland will already exist prior to construction. Any additional growth that a bypass might induce would be incidental to growth that is already projected. Since this facility would be a four-lane freeway/expressway, access to the bypass would only occur at interchanges. No opportunity to provide direct (therefore improved) land access will occur. In contrast (although not being proposed), a new conventional (two-lane) highway route could open up new access to land, thereby inducing growth. How long has this project been around? The Hopland Bypass project and the North Hopland project (also known as Crawford Ranch) have been identified as needed projects in Caltrans documents and the Regional Transportation Plan for over 25 years. How long does it take to complete a major project like the Hopland Bypass? Like many things, the controlling factor is finding the funding to commit to the project. If funding were secured though, it would still take many years until the facility is ready for traffic. Projects in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) are generally fimded by four separate activities: Environmental (PA & ED), Design (PS&E), Right-of-Way (ROW), and Construction. -2- Environmental- This phase considers all the environmental impacts of several alternatives (including the No Build alternative). For normal projects this phase takes 5-6 years. If there are significant impacts to species, archaeological sites, wetlands, etc., this phase could take longer to complete. Design - Preparation of plans, specifications, and estimates could take as little as two years, but typically takes three years on larger projects. · Right of Way - This phase could take 2-3 years depending on the complexity of the final alignment. Some of this work could take place concurrent with the design phase. · Construction - Large projects such as this, especially in areas like the North Coast that experience winter work suspensions, will take about 3 years. To sum this up, if we had funding commitments in place today, it would probably take at least 12-13 years to complete this project. More realistically, we would be very close to Year 2020. Where are we now in this long process? With their share of the State Highway Account funds in the 1998 State Transportation Improvement Program, Caltrans programmed $5 million for the Environmental Phase of the Hopland Bypass. Just a few months later, in conjunction with the 2000 State Transportation Improvement Program, Caltrans programmed $2.2 million for the Environmental Phase of the North Hopland project. The environmental phases of the two projects were eventually merged for the purposes of efficiency and environmental consistency. Work began on the project in 2001, and in 2003 a Community Advisory Committee was created. Current projection for completion of Project Approval and the Environmental Document is December, 2007 for the entire corridor being studied (Russian River bridge to Burke Hill). So now why is the Hopland Bypass project being considered for elimination by Caltrans? Over the past two years, we have become very familiar with the financial situation of the State in general and the financial situation of the State Transportation Improvement Program in particular. This year Caltrans is facing staff reductions that will impact their ability to work on all the projects that they had planned. There are currently about 40 projects statewide that are only in the first phase (environmental) of development. About 20 of these have to be cut to match the available personnel. Projects that are further along than Hopland (proceeding into -3- the right-of-way acquisition and construction phases) are much harder to cut due to the amount of resources previously committed. Why don't we just drop Hopland until we have funding and there is a greater need? It takes a great deal of effort and resources to. get a project rolling. To date there have been Value Analysis studies, open houses, environmental studies, field surveys are 90% complete and the Community Advisory Committee has been in place for over 14 months. By all accounts, the project is progressing smoothly. We know from past recoveries that trained personnel may not be available to work on projects when the money again becomes available. There is always a lag period that is measured in years. We know that environmental work has a certain life expectancy. It will have to be repeated if there is a significant interruption in the environmental work. We also know that the need for the project will not diminish over time. Costs for right-of-way acquisition are likely to increase substantially. Our work with the Wine Country IRP indicates that the jobs/housing imbalance between Mendocino and Sonoma counties is expected to increase. What is Caltrans asking of MCOG? Cheryl Willis presented a report on the Hopland Bypass status at the March 1, 2004 MCOG meeting. The crux of the issue is that the State has to reduce its work load. It Wants some reassurance that the projects that it continues to work on will be eventually supported (financially) by their partners in the inter-regional system (regional agencies). If there is no reassurance that, the design, right-of-way, and construction phases will be funded, the Hopland Bypass will become a good candidate for the axe. We need to recall that all the funding to date for the Hopland Bypass has been provided through the Inter-regional Improvement Program. There have been no Regional Improvement Program funds programmed for this project to date. Cheryl Willis presented the following options for clarifying MCOG's financial support for the Hopland Bypass: · MCOG may declare its intent to seek GARVEE bonding for funding ROW and capital needs of the Hopland Bypass · MCOG may designate, by Resolution of the Board, all of its RIP funds in future STIP cycles until funds sufficient to meet 25% of project costs are reserved · MCOG may take no action, in which case Caltrans will likely recommend de-programming the Hopland Bypass project. -4- Didn't we just deal with this issue last year? At the March 3, 2003 meeting the MCOG board passed Resolution M2003-3 that committed $2 million of its un-programmed funding toward future needs of the Hopland Bypass. This same Resolution recognized th_at participation in cost sharing of the Hopland Bypass project will be greater than 15% and may be as much as 25%. This action was enough to avoid cutting the Hopland Bypass last year. As we all know, the situation has worsened over the past year and another round of project cuts is imminent. How much are other regional agencies participating in these Caitrans/regional partnerships around the state? Information on partnerships from the 2002 STIP cycle apparently was not published, but information from the 1998 and 2000 STIP cycles indicates that partnership projects show that the average financial sharing for these projects is close to 50/50. Then why is it that MCOG has previously asked to come up with less than 50% of the costs for the Hopland Bypass? MCOG and other small regional agencies have argued that we are disadvantaged when it comes to delivering very large projects. The statewide 50/50 average is heavily influenced by the 17 counties that have active transportation sales taxes in place. A 50/50 cost sharing for very large projects like Willits and Hopland push them out of the range of affordability. District 1 has been supportive of a lower participation rate and has been at least partially successful with Caltrans Headquarters in establishing a 25% local target for these large projects. Other than MCOG's commitment to the Hopland Bypass, does Caltrans Headquarters have other concerns with this project? Yes. Construction of the entire corridor under environmental review will cost well over $250 million. This is a lot of money in any part of the state. It is unrealistic to assume we can construct all components Of the project at one time. In order to produce a fundable project, the Caltrans design team continues to work on staging options that include: · Decreasing the project limits to only include about 4 miles around the community of Hopland (postmiles 8.8 to 13.0) · Including only one interchange, at State Route 175 These staging options would produce a project in the $130 million range, leaving the other components for future years. -5- How much funding capacity can MCOG expect to receive in the 2006 and subsequent STIP cycles? Attached to this report is a bar graph entitled "Post SB 45 STIP Funding" that clearly indicates that the STIP cycles have varied substantially since the first Post SB 45 cycle in 1998. In 1998 it was over $17 million: this year it is $0. Variables that go into the fund estimate include Federal as well as State revenue projections, commitments to the State SHOPP (State Highway Operations Protection Plan), commitments to mandated programs (seismic retrofit), loan repayments, debt service, etc. There is no "average" STIP cycle. In some cycles (as this year) we have $0 new capacity, but we nearly hit $18 million in 2002. Somewhere in between zero and $18 million would be a responsible guess of future revenues. Disregarding the 2000 STIP but adding in the 2000 STIP Augmentation, the average over 5 STIP cycles is over $10 million. Recognizing that some STIP years could be $20 million and others $5 million or zero, $10 million per cycle is a ball park estimate. What other obligations does MCOG have for its Regional Improvement Program share? The Willits Bypass Project is not fully funded. Although not exactly known until the preferred route is selected and approved, we remain about $40 million short of completing this project. MCOG has committed to a 15% Share of this project. At a $40 million cost, our share would be $6 million. We have applied for federal funding through the federal re-authorization process for the Willits Bypass. MCO(3 has requested $23.5 million. Prospects for receiving this funding are currently unknown, but receiving federal funding would reduce the funding gap to about $16.5 million; our share then being about $2.5 million. The Regional Transportation Plan mentions other major long term projects such as Leggett to Red Mountain Creek and a bypass of Laytonville. Caltrans recently received federal emergency funding to re-route the Confusion Hill portion of the Leggett to Red Mountain Creek segment. Needs for substantial improvement of other portions of that segment may be re-assessed in the future. A bypass of Laytonville certainly remains in the long term and may be re-assessed in the future. There are other projects of regional importance that may emerge as well: · Route 20 passing lanes (Fort Bragg-Willits) · Redemeyer Road extension to Lake Mendocino · Ramp improvements in Ukiah Valley on US 101 · North State Street widening · Brooktrails second (and third?) access -6- Caitrans identified GARV~E bonds or commitment of all future STIP funding as options to save this project. What are GARVEF~ bonds? GARVEE bonds are grant_anticipation_revenue vehicles. They can be used to fund projects with the debt service to be repaid as revenues accrue to the state and to our local share. A sheet describing GARVEE bonds is attached to this report. A number of Self-Help (transportation sales tax) counties are now using GARVEE bonds to continue with STIP projects that would otherwise have been delayed due to the current revenue shortfall. Can staff identify other options than those identified by Caltrans that may save the Hopland Bypass Project? Yes. Staff believes that it is important to preserve this project to meet existing safety needs and future capacity needs. Letting this project lapse will result in dealing with Hopland in a reactive mode 20 years too late. Meanwhile, options which may be now available could become precluded by development, environmental regulations, costs, or a number of other things. Reviewing draft financing plans for the Hopland Bypass, staff concludes that approximately $5 million each over the next two (2006 & 2008) STIP cycles will be enough for MCOG's share of project design and fight-of-way for this project. Construction amounting to $90 million (MCOG share $22 million) would await future funding cycles. MCOG may wish to consider a counter-proposal to Caltrans that commits $5 million per cycle for the 2006 and 2008 STIP periods to ensure that the environmental phase is complete, design is funded, and right-of way is locked up. MCOG may wish to consider continuing the $5 million commitment through the construction phase as a minimum guarantee. It is expected that by 2008 or 2010 there will be at least one "good cycle" with programming capacity well over the $10 million average. PJD 3/16/04 -7- Attachment Police Chief Williams explained that the procedures than an officer must follow when responding to a call. He advised that he is unaware of any immigration sweeps in the Ukiah area, other than what Ms. Araiza told him. Richard Johnson discussed recent immigration sweeps that occurred in Ukiah. Two other people spoke concerning the immigration sweeps. An unidentified man expressed his concern with the immigration sweeps and wanted them to stop. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7a. Adoption of Resolution Calling' an Election and Authorizin.q Execution o! AQreement with [he County of Mendocino for the Provision of Election Services at the City Election to Be Consolidated with the Regular Statewid= General Election Deputy City Clerk Ulvila advised that historically the City has consolidated its elections with Mendocino County. A proposed Resolution calling an election on November 2, 2004, consolidating the election with the Statewide General. Election and contracting with the County of Mendocino for election services was presented to Council for consideration. The election is necessary to fill the vacancies created by the expiration of two Council terms, the term of Mayor, and the term of the City Treasurer, as well as any ballot measures. M/S Andersen/Smith adopting Resolution 2005-02, Requesting the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors to request the County Clerk to conduct the Municipal Election of the City of Ukiah on Tuesday, November 2, 2004, and to consolidate said election with the General Election held on that same day, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Andersen, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 7b. Discussion and Adoption of Revised Public Safety Sales Tax Ordinance fo, the Nove~iber 2004 Election City Manager Horsley advised that at the June 16, 2004 Council meeting, the City Council reviewed a public safety sales tax draft ordinance and made revisions to the ordinance verbiage. The revised version is presented to the Council for review and approval. It was the consensus of Council that they are satisfied with the redline version of the Ordinance and directed Finance Director Elton to make other revisions, as discussed by Council and staff, and return later in the meeting with those revisions. 7, UNFINISHED BUSINESS Discussion and Possible Action Re.qardinQ Hopland Bw3ass Funding Vice-Mayor Baldwin Regular City Council Meeting July 7, 2004 Page 3 of 9 Councilmember Baldwin requested Council formally oppose any City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino, or Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) funding for the Hopland bypass. He felt there are far more critical transportation projects in Mendocino County and that it is a project that will induce auto dependent, sprawling subdivisions in Ukiah and in Lake County by cutting commute time to Santa Rosa and San Francisco. Phil Dow, Executive Director of MCOG, discussed the way in which funding works for state highway projects in California, the State Management Capital Improvement Program, the Regional Transportation Planning Agency, and how MCOG allocates funds to Mendocino County jurisdictions. He went on to discuss the Willits and Hopland bypasses and noted that these two projects have always been in MCOG's plan as very important major highway projects. The Hopland bypass is now Caltrans' #1 project; making the Willits bypass #2 on the list of importance. Tape lb Mr. Dow discussion the importance of the Hopland bypass with regard to relieving congestion during peak hours and safety aspects that a four-lane highway would have in this area. He stated that 60% more traffic along that route is expected in next 20 years. He noted that the state is looking to partnership for these projects. Michael Deckard spoke in support of funding for the Hopland bypass. Members of the audience speaking against funding for the Hopland bypass were: William French and Bruni Kobbe. Discussion followed with regard to the cost of the project and funding for rural communities. The area of Highway 20 east to Lake County was noted as being very congested during peak hours. Motion Baldwin to direct the City's MCOG delegate to oppose funding for the Hopland bypass. Motion failed due to no second on the motion. Councilmember Andersen expressed concern that once Highway 101 is widened, it will induce growth along Highway 20 toward Lake County and Fort Bragg. Councilmember Smith expressed his support of the project and did not agree to direct the City's delegate to not vote on funding for the Hopland project. Councilmember Rodin expressed concern with safety and response times for medical personnel to respond to accidents on a two-lane road. Councilmember Baldwin reiterated his views, as contained in his letter to Council. By a consensus of four to one, Council directed its MCOG representative to take no action with regard to the issue of funding the Hopland bypass. Recessed: 8:36 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting July 7, 2004 Page 4 of 9 AGENDA ITEM NO: 10b MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD' OF BID FOR MOBILE DIGITAL VIDEO UNITS TO GLOBAL E POINT IN THE AMOUNT OF $123,165 SUMMARY: The Ukiah Police Department has been using video cameras in patrol cars since the summer of 2000. Originally, seven cameras were purchased in the amount of $32,676 using a federal block grant. These cameras used VHS tape recorders in the patrol car's trunk to record video and audio recordings of an officer's activity. During the last five years, the department has found these in-field recording systems to be extremely valuable, resulting in an overall reduction of city liability, in a number of critical areas: · Providing a visual and audio recording of officer activity. · Assisting officers in documenting and preparing accurate police reports. · Highly effective tool in providing evidence in the courtroom setting. · Recording and documenting high profile use-of-force incidents. · To investigate allegations of officer misconduct. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Staff recommends that Sequent- Global E Point, be awarded the bid to provide Mobile Digital Video. units to the City of Ukiah Police Department in the amount of $123,165, plus applicable sales taxes, funding of $109,211 from Asset Forfeiture Account 200.2001.800.000 and $13,954 from Federal grant Account 207.2001.800.000. 2. Staff further recommends that Council authorize a budget amendment to Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Account 207.0600.488.006 in the amount of $13,954, for the revenue received from the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Request additional information from Staff or provide alternative direction. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Chris Dewey, Captain Candace Horsley, City Manager and John Williams, Police Chief 1. Bid Spread Sheet, Police Mobile Digital Video Units 2. Evaluation Committee Findings Approved: ~~:~~~(~ Canda~e HorsleY~~,xManager After 5 years of continuous use, the department began to experience excessive mechanical failures with the VHS tape recorders of these units and staff began to search for alternatives to replace our aging system, along with funding for the replacement system being proposed. Funding for this project is not included within the City of Ukiah's Police Department General Fund Budget. Funding for this project will come primarily from the department's Asset Forfeiture Account. Asset Forfeiture funding rules call for these funds to supplement existing services, and not supplant any existing funding for law enforcement services provided by that entity. Our existing camera system was purchased utilizing a federal grant, and is not included within the City of Ukiah budget. This new purchase qualifies under the Asset Forfeiture expenditure rules. In addition to the Asset Forfeiture funds, the City of Ukiah recently applied for and was awarded $13,954 in funding from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program, specifically for this video project. The Bureau of Justice Assistance approved this grant because: "Use of the in-car camera systems have shown to reduce attacks on officers, increase the number of court convictions, and reduce the number of citizen complaints and officer misconduct incidents." USDOJ Grant Award, 08/09/2005 In December of 2004, staff issued an RFP to nine Mobile Digital Video Manufacturers. Based upon staff's experience with our existing video system, our RFP requested a solution which encompassed each phase of the video / digital process, including: · Ease of installing the system. · Maintenance of the equipment within the vehicle. · Ability to record multiple views. · Both external wireless audio recording and within the vehicle audio recording. · Ease of transfer of images from the vehicle to storage devices. · Storage and server capability. · Ability to view incidents through the department's internal computer network. · Management of the stored video images. · Ease of reproduction for evidence and court purposes. Staff additionally advised each potential vendor, that although price was an important factor, system suitability and quality of the complete system were also critical in our determination of the best overall solution for the department. In January of 2005, the City of Ukiah received 4 responses to the RFP, and one additional "no response". The quoted prices provided by each vendor (as requested in the RFP) was for the installation of 4 mobile digital video units, plus the storage and server capabilities for 3 additional units to be phased into service as patrol vehicles were replaced. After receiving the responses, an evaluation committee was formed to evaluate each of the proposals provided. The committee consisted of the City of Ukiah's MIS Coordinator and the department's Administrative and Operations Captains. Each proposal was evaluated based on quoted price, capabilities of the system, durability, ability of the system to expand in the future, future costs of expanding the system, and the workload associated with managing a digital video system. In addition, a product demonstration of each system was conducted by staff either prior to or after the RFP was issued to observe the various systems in operation to determine ease of use, durability, and serviceability of each vendor's system. As the evaluation of the various responses was conducted, staff found that digital video systems in general were quite different from our existing video tape system. Although the cameras in the vehicles are similar to our existing system, the server configurations and the reproduction and storage of digital video information varied between the vendor's solutions. These differences in server and storage solutions provided by the various vendors also provided for a wider range of cost for the proposed systems. This range in cost was not from each vendor's equipment which would be installed in each vehicle, but was from the costs associated with the computer server, storage, and reproduction capabilities associated with each system. After reviewing each of the four proposals, the evaluation committee felt that the Sequent / Global E Point proposal best meets the current and future needs of the department. (See attached committee findings of each of the 4 proposals.) Based on the findings of the evaluation committee, staff began to work with Sequent to explore an implementation plan for delivery of their system. During the development of this implementation plan, staff learned that Sequent offers other products which would enhance our overall digital video plans at the department. Besides the mobile video products designed for in-car use, Sequent provides video surveillance products for locations, such as the police department day and night lobbies, booking room and interview rooms. Sequent also can provide surveillance products for outdoor locations to enhance security and prevent vandalism and other types of loss. These types of surveillance cameras can later be added to the system designed by Sequent for other City of Ukiah facilities, parks or other locations. Also, during this time period a number of changes occurred that have had an impact on the implementation plan for this project and staff requested Sequent update their bid to account for a number of factors: Council has approved additional officers on patrol. To account for the increased staffing, the department is recommending an increase in the total number of mobile video units from 4 initial units (3 future units) to 10 initial units. This adjustment results in an increase cost from $24,332 for the original 4 camera bid to $58,990 for the revised 10 camera bid. As a result of obtaining additional Federal grant funding, staff requested Sequent to revise their original bid to provide costs for surveillance cameras for the department's day and night lobbies and its booking and interview facilities resulting in an increase of $5,118. Staff worked with Sequent on their server solution to provide a more scalable server solution for the future. This change resulted in a savings of $20,336 dollars. As need for expansion with the system occurs, the department will have the capability to add hard drive storage capacity as needed. This adjustment resulted in a reduction from the original bid of $44,943 to $24,607. The sum total of these changes resulted in a total increase in the cost of the system from the original bid price of $73,975 to $96,165. In addition to the standard one year warranty on parts and labor being proposed, Sequent offers on-site maintenance service for their product. These on-site maintenance contracts are extremely important to staff. When critical breakdowns occur with highly technical equipment, they provide on-site experts to help diagnose and solve problems. Video evidence is of high importance to the department, and dealing with digital storage and retrieval of that evidence during a critical breakdown is an area that city staff is unfamiliar with. Staff recommends that we purchase a 3 year "on-site" maintenance contract with this product to ensure reliability of the system and the evidence collected. This contract would cost an additional $27,000 and includes replacement and service of parts, labor and associated costs to support this project. Recommendations: Staff recommends that Sequent- Global E Point, be awarded the bid to provide Mobile Digital Video units as proposed above in the amount of $123,165, plus applicable sales taxes. The funding sources are: $109,211 from the Asset Forfeiture Account 200.2001.800.000 and $13,954 from the Federal Grant Account 207.2001.800.000. Staff additionally recommends that Council authorize a budget amendment to Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Account 207.0600.488.006 in the amount of $13,954, for the revenue received from the Edward Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program. CITY OF UKIAH 300 SEMINARY AVENUE UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 (707) 463-6217 (City Clerk's Office) ATTACHMENT 1 BID OPENING FOR: MOBILE DIGITAL VIDEO UNIT SPECIFICATION NO. E-24248 DATE: January 13, 2005 TIME: 2:00 p.m. . o o . . . COMPANY KUSTOM SIGNALS, INC. 9325 PFLUMM LENEXA, KANSAS 66215-3347 KUSTOM'~NA~'~. 9325 PFLUM.,~ kEN E~NSA'~ 66215-3347 AMOUNT ICOP DIGITAL 11011 KING STREET, SUITE 260 OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS 66210 MOBILE-VISION, INC. 90 FANNY ROAD BOONTON, NJ 07005 BEST LOGIC 339 S. CHERYL ~~ ~ ~,-. CI~ OF INDUSTRY, CA 91789 INTERNATIONAL POLICE TECHNOLOGIES 4150 S. 87TH EAST AVENUE TULSA, OK 74145 Marie Uivila, City Clerk Bids: Mobile Digital Video Unit - PD ATTACHMENT 2 Evaluation Committee Findings: ICOP Diqital- System $24,830.87 / Vehicle $4,500 / Server $5,024.53 ICOP Digital's proposal calls for a single small capability sever which would serve as the collection point for all of the department's video evidence. This solution calls for video evidence to be transferred to DVD's on a frequent basis. As the department adds additional cameras, this transfer of information would require constant staff management to complete. The proposal offers no back-Up solution, in case of server failure, and the potential for lost evidence exists. In addition, the solution requires an additional $750 dollar license, (not included in quoted price), for each concurrent user who wishes to view video evidence on the department's existing computer network. Proposal calls for hard drives within each car to be carried into the station and then manually downloaded into the server. Additional hard dives ($350 each) would need to be purchased so that one hard drive was always available for each vehicle. The evaluation committee felt that this proposal did not meet the needs of the department. Mobile-Vision - System $43,252.86 / Vehicle $5,520 / Server $16,999 Mobile Vision proposal calls for a larger capability server, with back-up capabilities. Storage and archiving of evidence would be transferred to a 50 capacity DVD writer. This solution also provides a wireless solution which allows data from a vehicle to be automatically downloaded back to the server, each time a vehicle is at the station. This system server's operating system is specified to be a "Redhat Linux" operating system. Staff has no training in the maintenance or use of this operating system. This solution would preclude staff from analyzing and fixing problems in-house. The evaluation committee felt that based on the server operating system, this proposal did not meet the needs of the department. IPT- System $62,337.50 / Vehicle $6,025 / Server $31,650 IPT's proposal calls for the largest of the servers from the 4 proposal received. Rather than archiving evidence to DVD's, the IPT solution calls for a large server with 36 redundant hard drives storing the video information. This approach allows for back-up of critical video evidence, but only stores the videos until the hard drives are full. A separate computer would be used to view and make DVD's for court and other purposes. This solution does not allow the department to retain video information on a long-term basis, and relies completely on the server. In the event of a server failure, much of the department's information may not be available for evidence use. In addition, this proposal calls again for removable hard drives located within the patrol cars. The hard drives are swapped when full and downloaded manually to the server. As our system grows this type of downloading will become staff intensive. The evaluation committee felt that based on the server and swappable hard drives, this proposal did not meet the needs of the department. Sequent - Global E Point - System $73,975 / Vehicle $6,083 / Server $44,119 Sequent's proposal per vehicle cost is highest, yet within range of the other proposals. This cost includes all accessories the department will need to purchase when deploying the units into the vehicles, while the lower bids have optional items which will be needed for the deployment of the equipment. Sequent also employs wireless technology to automatically download information to the server each time a patrol vehicle is at the station. This technology will save staff time, and help reduce evidence being lost or damaged in the transfer process. Sequent proposes a larger redundant type server capable of automatically backing-up evidence, and will automatically archive video information to DVD's as a permanent record of the video evidence. Sequent also allows for any user on the police network, access and viewing of video evidence using a simple Internet Browser system. Sequent's proposed server cost is $36,483. Where Sequent differs from the other vendors is adding $8,460 dollars of associated equipment, (routers, switches and equipment) to install and support their system within our City-Wide network. ITEM NO. lOc DATE: October 19, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF TIMER SYSTEM FOR THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS During the installation of the new audio/recording system, it was noted by the contractor that a number of public forums use automated timekeeper systems that control remote signal lights alerting speakers to the end of their allotted time. The Mayor requested that this item be brought to Council for discussion. The Limitimer system is an alternative to the non-visual stopwatch method currently being used during Ukiah City Council Meetings. A product overview of the Limitimer system is provided in the attachment to this report. The manufacturer lists the following benefits of the timekeeping system: · Keeps time of speakers/presentations. · Maintains pace of meetings. · Builds confidence that no one's time is unfairly curtailed. · Spares moderators the need to interrupt. · Helps speakers end smoothly. Continue on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction to staff on possible use and purchase of automated timekeeper system to monitor time allotments for public comment during Council meetings. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Mayor Ashiku Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Limitimer Specifications and Options APPROVED~) Candace Horsl Manager To achieve the full benefits of a timekeeper system, signals must be visible to the governing members, the speaker, and the audience. If the Council wishes to proceed with the purchase of a Limitimer system, there are a number of variations of signal displays that can be considered and are identified in the attachment. A basic system for the Council Chambers, as recommended by the contractor, might include the following: o o A timekeeper control panel stationed with a staff person. One flush mounted signal light/display (Model # PSL-20VF) at the podium for the speaker Two audience signal lights/displays which would include one 4" display (Model # ASL4WD3) facing the audience and one 2" display (Model # ASL2ND3) mounted towards the Council. Each of these display units could be placed near the City Clerk's station and would provide both audience members and Councilmembers with a visual of the allotted time. Estimated cost of the system identified by the contractor is approxima, tely $3,000 and includes wiring and installation of all components. Since the display units utilize LED technology, the manufacturer has indicated that the system is virtually maintenance free and should easily exceed 10 years of use. Attachment #1 limitimer lhe Traffic Light for Speakers Limitimer is an automated timekeeper that controls a remote signal light alerting speakers to the end of allotted time Limitimer...Keeps time at lectures, forums and legal proceedings. Maintains pace of programs. Builds confidence that no one's time is unfairly curtailed. Spares moderators the need to interrupt and helps speakers end smoothly. Download a Brochure (pdf) or visit the User PaRes for answers to frequently-asked questions. Click for Dimensioned drawin.qs of the Timer and Signal Lights The AV-2000 The PRO-2000 Features: Easy-to-use: Set Total Time. Set Sum-Up Time. Start. Digital clock displays Time Remaining; Green-Yellow-Red lights cue phase: Talk, Sum-Up, Stop. Pre-set up to 4 timing programs. Run a session timer in background to other programs. Select from 3-different beep sounds (or no sound). Connect two or more timers to a single signal light for multi-point start/stop control.. Connect tow or more signal lights to a single timer for multi-speaker prompting. Select count-up or count-down modes. Ti~E START O oo limitimer- signal lights Note: All signal lights contain both input and output jacks so that they may be interconnected in a daisy chain fashion to create a custom di.~;play configuration. PSL-20V Podium Signal Light Dimensions: 3"D x 4"W x 3"H On board beeper; signal lights front and back Additional signal lights may be plugged into on- board jack audience signal lights PSL-20VF Flush-mount Signal Light Dimensions: 4"W x 2.5" H ASL4 Audience Signal Lights All audience signal lights may be powered directly from Limitimer or plugged into AC outlet when more than 200' away. They may be set to receive any or all Limitimer programs. All feature multiple in-out R J45 or XLR jack for a variety of interconnections. Model ASL4 "Traffic Light." Circular array of LEDS visible for 200+ feet. Case: 21" W x 5.75" H x 3" deep Model ASL4ND3 - 4"-high solid LED digits with green-yellow-red warning lights. Can be used as digital clock when timer is "off." Case: 21" W x 5.75" H x 3" deep Model ASL2ND3 - 2"-high solid LED digits with green-yellow-red warning lights. Can be used as digital clock when timer is "off." Case: 11" W x 4.5" H 1.5" x deep limJtJmer ~ lhe T~aflic Lighr fo; Speakers Attachment #1 Limitimer is an automated timekeeper that controls a remote signal light alerting speakers to the end of allotted time Limitimer...Keeps time at lectures, forums and legal proceedings. Maintains pace of programs. Builds confidence that no one's time is unfairly curtailed. Spares moderators the need to interrupt and helps speakers end smoothly. ,. Download a Brochure (pdf) or visit the User Pages for answers to frequently-asked questions. Click for Dimensioned drawin.qs of the Timer and Signal Lights Tile A\/-2c qr",, _, _.._ Ttie PRO-='"-)CICI0 Features; Easy-to-use: Set Total Time. Set Sum-Up Time. Start. Digital clock displays Time Remaining; Green-Yellow-Red lights cue phase: Talk, Sum-Up, Stop. Pre-set up to 4 timing programs. Run a session timer in background to other programs. Select from 3-different beep sounds (or no sound). Connect two or more timers to a single signal light for multi-point start/stop control.. Connect tow or more signal lights to a single timer for multi-speaker prompting. Select count-up or count-down modes. f IOIAL lIME limitimer- signal lights Note: All signal lights contain both input and output jacks so that they may be interconnected in a daisy chain fashion to create a custom display configuration. PSL-20V Podium Signal Light Dimensions: 3"D x 4"W x 3"H On board beeper; signal lights front and back Additional signal lights may be plugged into on- board jack audience signal lights PSL-20VF Flush-mount Signal Light Dimensions: 4"W x 2.5" H ASL4 Audience Signal Lights All audience signal lights may be powered directly from Limitimer or plugged into AC outlet when more than 200' away. They may be set to receive any or all Limitimer programs. All feature multiple in-out R J45 or XLR jack for a variety of interconnections. Model ASL4 "Traffic Light." Circular array of LEDS visible for 200+ feet. Case: 21" W x 5.75" H x 3" deep Model ASL4ND3 - 4"-high solid LED digits with green-yellow-red warning lights. Can be used as digital clock when timer is "off." Case: 21" W x 5.75" H x 3" deep Model ASL2ND3 - 2"-high solid LED digits with green-yellow-red warning lights. Can be used as digital clock when timer is "off." Case: 11" W x 4.5" H 1.5" x deep UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 SEMINARY AVENUE October 19, 2005 8:00 P.M.* . ROLL CALL AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The Ukiah Redevelopment Agency welcomes input from the audience. 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. . APPEAL PROCESS Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the Redevelopment Agency may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The Agency has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety (90) days the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2005 . NEW BUSINESS a. Approval of Agreement for Purchase, Sale and Development of Real Property 6. COMMISSIONERS REPORTS 7. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORTS 8. CLOSED SESSION a. Government Code §54956.8- Conference with Real Property Ne.qotiator Property: Assessor's Parcel Nos. 180-110-02 and 06 Owner: Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Negotiator: Candace Horsley Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment 9. ADJOURNMENT *Or as soon as the meeting may be held in conjunction with the City Council meeting. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 1.4th day of October, 2005. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 SEMINARY AVENUE August 17, 2005 1. ROLL CALL: Convened: 9:16 p.m. Present: Commissioners Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. Absent: Commissioner Rodin. 2. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one came forward to address the Agency. 3. APPEAL PROCESS Chairman Ashiku read the appeal process. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of Jul~ M/S Crane/Baldwin approving the Minutes of July following roll call vote: AYES: Crane, McCowen, ABSENT: Commissioner Rodin. AB,~ None. ; tried by the Ashiku ~ES: None 5. NEW BUSINESS a. Ado of Resolution City Clerk Ulvila voiced her appreciation regarding the various o on City com the D, Board nal for publishing an article M/S Baldwin the following roll None ABSENT: Tom LidE McCt ABSTAIN the Design Review Board; and carried by Baldwin, and Chairman Ashiku NOES: IRe. M/S the foll~ ABSl roll ca Commission~ ~r to the Design Review Board; and carried by McCowen, Baldwin, Chairman Ashiku NOES' None None. Commi~ Crane ~portunity to make a nomination. M/S McCowm the following roll ABSENT: Coun( iku Donna Berry to the Design Review Board; and carried by Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, Chairman Ashiku NOES' None Rodin. ABSTAIN' None. M/S Baldwin/McCowen nominating Estok Menton to the Design Review Board; and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Chairman Ashiku NOES: None ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin. ABSTAIN' None. Mayor Ashiku and Councilmember Crane stated they wished to pass the opportunity to make a nomination. M/S Ashiku/McCowen nominating Jody Cole to the Design Review Board; and carried by Regular Meeting of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency August 17, 2005 Page 1 of 2 the following roll call vote: AYES: Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, Chairman Ashiku NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. M/S McCowen/Ashiku adopting Resolution 2006-03 appointing Tom Liden, Richard Moser, Donna Berry, Estok Menton and Jody Cole to the Design Review Board; and carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, Chairman Ashiku NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Rodin. ABSTAIN: None. 7. COMMISSIONERS REPORTS No Reports 8. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR REPORTS No Reports Adjourned to Closed Session: 9:25 p.m. . No action taken. Reconvened: 10:26 p.m. 10. ADJOURNMENT There being no fu CLOSED SESSION a. Government Code §54956.8- Conference Property: Assessor's Parcel Nos. 180-110-02 Owner: Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Negotiator: Candace Horsley Under Negotiation: Price and Ter meeting at 10:26 p.m. Marie Ulvi[ Regular Meeting of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency August 17, 2005 Page 2 of 2 AGENDA ITEM NO: 5.a MEETING DATE: October 19, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: APPROVAL OF AGREEIVlENT FOR PURCHASE, SALE AND DEVELOPIVlENT OF REAL PROPERTY . . This item regarding the sale of Redevelopment Agency's Parcels APN 180-110-02 and APN 180-110-06 will be discussed in Closed Session. If acceptable to the Agency, a motion for approval will be taken in Open Session. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction to staff and / or approve ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved: L ~ ~"'"),~ Candace Horsley, City M~ager