The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-05-17 Packet CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 May 17, 2006 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS a. Presentation: Public Safety and Emergency Communication Needs Assessment b. Introduction of New Employee - Ben Kageyama, Senior Civil Engineer 4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Workshop with Low and Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee of April 19, 2006 b. Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission of March 29, 2006 c. Regular City Council Meeting of March 1, 2006 Sm RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. 1 CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Report of Disbursements for Month of April 2006 b. Amendment of Total Purchase Price of Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board to Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. Authorized by Council 4/19/06 from $32,247.25 to $35,217.25 c. Adoption of an Ordinance Rezoning Assessor Parcel Numbers 003-050-29, 66, 85 and 86 (ZC No. 05-34) d. Award of Bid for the Purchase of Concession Equipment Damaged During the New Year's Flood at the Ukiah Sports Complex from Superior Outlet Center (dba As The Next Day Gourmet)in the Amount of $18,582.03 e. Adoption of Resolution Approving Housing Corporation Major Subdivision Map No. 05-17 f. Receive and File Report of Investment Oversight Committee Approval and Subsequent Execution of Bond Proceeds Investment g. Authorize Mayor To Sign Form And Letter of Support For AB 2840 Related to Californians Against Higher Auto Insurance Rates - Council Member Mccowen h. Award of Bid to Wesco for the Purchase of an ABB 1500kva 277/480v Three Phase Transformer for the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvement Project in the Amount Of $21,368.98 8. 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. 1 PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM) a. Minor Subdivision Exception 05-49: Gadea; 733 South Oak Street- continued to June 7, 2006 b. Approval of Application to Demolish Two Structures Over 50-Years Old Located at 528 North State Street c. Adoption of Resolutions Approving a Precise Development Plan for a Townhouse Planned Development Project and a Tentative subdivision Map to Divide the Subject Properties into 27 Lots 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Continued Discussion and Consideration of an Ordinance Regarding Campaign Reform - Baldwin, Rodin (Continued from 5/3/06) b. Receive Status Report Concerning Sign Ordinance Enforcement Activities c. Review of Proposals and Creation of Panel to Interview Consulting Firms for the Downtown/Perkins Street Community Visioning and Form Based Zoning Project d. Introduction of the Ordinance Amending Section 2000 of the Ukiah City Code, Pertaining to Temporary Rules in City Parks, and Adding a New Section 2000.2, Pertaining to Rules for City Sponsored Concerts in the Park e. Goals: Community Services (continued), Airport, Water/Sewer f. Status of the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Emergency 11. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Tentative Approval of Memorandum of Understanding Among City of Ukiah, Northcoast Railroad Authority (NCRA) and Mendocino County Transit Authority (MTA) b. Discussion and Direction Regarding Agreement Among Parties Contributing Funds Toward Local Sponsor Share of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coyote Dam Feasibility Study c. Review and Prioritization of Planning Projects d. Discussion of Possible Options In Response to Sewer Rates on Low Income Residents, Senior Citizens and Non-Profit Organizations e. Discussion and Direction Regarding Proposed Public Works and Engineering Department Fees f. Set Dates for Fiscal Year 2006-07 Budget Hearings g. Authorize City Manager to Negotiate and Sign a Three-Year Audit Services Contract with Davis Hammon & Co, CPA's for Total First Year Cost of No More than $29,505 12. COUNCIL REPORTS 13. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 14. CLOSED SESSION 15. 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 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 12 day of May, 2006. ~ Marie Ulvila, City Clerk AGENDA ITEM NO: 3.a MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: PRESENTATION- PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS NEEDS ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: Recently, the Mendocino Emergency Service Authority's (MESA) Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Committee, set aside $30,000 in Homeland Security grant funding to study public safety and emergency 9-1-1 communication capabilities. Recommendations will be provided for future improvements including the development of appropriate service alternatives for Police, Fire and EMD agencies within Mendocino County. The first step in this process is to identify the needs of the various communication users within Mendocino County through a comprehensive needs assessment, and make recommendations for future regional public safety improvements to our communications systems. To assist in this effort, MESA has hired a nationally recognized consulting firm specializing in public safety communications projects. During the week of May 15th to May 19th, a consulting team will be conducting site visits at each of the Police, Fire and Emergency Medical communications centers within the County, and conducting interviews with key communication Directors, Police and Fire Chief's, City Managers, and the County's CEO's office. This initial step will assist our county in documenting the current local and regional communications issues, including funding, technology and infrastructure, and develop appropriate alternatives for the various Public Safety Agencies to consider when looking towards the future. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. No Action Required ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Chris Dewey, Captain John Williams, Police Chief, Candace Horsley, City Manager None Approved: Candace Hor~ley, City er MENDOCINO COUNTY, COMMUNICATIONS NEEDS ASSESSMENT Following the intensive site visit week, a Needs Assessment Report will be completed for MESA and each of the participating agencies. This report will document current technology, existing challenges, customer service levels, redundancy issues, managerial and labor issues, existing communication trends, future growth projections, existing facilities and security and vulnerability concerns of our communication networks within the county. In addition, the findings provided within the report, will help Mendocino County Communications Providers: · Identify political objectives and obstacles, and address transitional issues in improving interoperability in public safety operations and communications. Identify potential future options to consider in communication centers, developing a co-location regionalization, or other potential solutions to consider. maintaining our current communication center, · Identify current and future funding options to improve communication systems within the county, while using "best-practices" cost saving approaches. This initial needs assessment study will provide the various communication providers within the county with potential communications solutions for the future. It will provide the basis for developing a master communications plan to improve and enhance our communication capabilities, within Mendocino County. Staff will provide Council with further updates as they occur. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 3.b DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE - BEN KAGEYAMA, SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER The City of Ukiah Public Works and Engineering Departments is proud to announce the addition of Ben Kageyama as the new Senior Civil Engineer. Ben was selected for the position based on his impressive r6sum6, his credentials as Professional Engineer and Land Surveyor and his local reputation as a fair and detail oriented civil engineer. Ben was born in San Francisco and raised in San Jose. He has lived in Santa Cruz County and Sacramento County prior to moving to Ukiah in 1994. He has worked at the County of Mendocino in the Department of Transportation since 1994. Ben went to High School in San Jose and started his engineering career at San Jose State University where he graduated with a Bachelors degree in Civil Engineering in 1983. Ben has worked in the private sector as a civil engineer. In 1983 he was offered a job from MacKay & Somps where he worked both in the San Jose and Sacramento offices until 1994. Ben was then offered a job from the County of Mendocino in the Department of Transportation where he worked for twelve years. As the Chairman and the public member of the Traffic Engineering Committee, Ben has always shown his interest in the City of Ukiah. One of the concerns of Ben's employment with the City is that he could no longer be the public member of this committee. However, since Ben has been such a valuable member of the committee for the last 6 years, we have appointed him to the committee as the representative of the City Manager. Ben has already made significant contributions to the Engineering Department. He has taken on all of the development review. This is a position of high visibility for the City and Ben has managed this assignment with critical, accurate and timely review. One of the characteristics that interested Ben in the City was the opportunity to have a more direct impact on projects based on the proximity to the planners. Ben is now completely integrated with the planning staff. Ben and his wife, Rebecca, live in the City and have raised their children here in Ukiah. His son, Robin, is currently a junior attending Marlboro College in Vermont. His daughter, Maya, is a junior attending Ukiah High School and is currently an exchange student spending a year in Argentina. Ben enjoys bike riding and gardening and spending time with his family. Ben was a daily bicycle commuter to his former job at the County Department of Transportation out on Lake Mendocino Drive; now he enjoys his daily commute on foot. Please join me in welcoming Ben Kageyama as our new Senior Civil Engineer. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Welcome Ben Kageyama as the new Senior Civil Engineer. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A REQUESTED BY: Tim Eriksen PREPARED BY: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works/City Engineer COORDINATED WITH: Candace Horsley, City Manager Horsley, City anagerCandace DRAFT MINUTES JOINT MEETING UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW & MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 19, 2006 UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT Doug Crane John McCowen Mari Rodin Phil Baldwin Chairman Ashiku OTHERS PRESENT Listed below, Respectively UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COMMISSIONERS ABSENT None LOW & MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONFIRMED MEMBERS PRESENT Gary Mirata, Chair Tom Kesey Mark Rohloff LOW & MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE CONFIRMED MEMBERS ABSENT Robert Clark LOW & MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE UNCONFIRMED MEMBERS PRESENT Kari Hackett Patti Bruder Duane Hill Lisa Hillegas LOW & MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE UNCONFIRMED MEMBERS ABSENT Todd Crabtree Steve Berekman STAFF PRESENT Candace Horsley, Executive Director Charley Stump, Planning Director Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary The joint meeting of the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency and Low & Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee was called to order by URA Vice-Chair Baldwin at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page ! April 19, 2006 Roll was taken for the City Council and the Planning Commission with the results listed above. DISCUSSION WITH LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE REGARDING ITS MEMBERSHIP AND THE 20 PERCENT HOUSING SET-A-SIDE FUND ALLOCATION PROGRAM Commissioner Baldwin requested clarification regarding "confirmed and unconfirmed" membership. Planning Director Stump referred to Attachment No. 1 that lists confirmed/unconfirmed/interested/membership and URA Resolution Nos. 90-13 and 96-5 that establish and re-establish the Low and Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee, and stated in 1996, the RDA adopted a Resolution naming specific individuals from various community groups and organizations as Committee members. Committee members have since been unofficially replaced by other representatives of groups and organizations. Attachment No. 1 lists the current "confirmed" and "unconfirmed" Committee members. Staff recommends the RDA review the Committee membership. Planning Director Stump stated the intent of the joint meeting is to discuss the 20 percent housing setaside fund allocation program and consider establishing a 50 percent saving/50 percent allocation approach that would provide for growing housing fund for potentially large projects, as well as allocations to local affordable housing projects, and discuss the membership of the Committee and provide direction to staff. The 20 percent Setaside · URA Resolution No. 92-2 (Attachment 4) is the resolution approving the Low and Moderate Income Housing Setaside Allocation Program and URA Resolution No. 97-4 ( Attachment 5) is the resolution approving the revised Low and Moderate Income Housing Setaside Allocation Program. · The Program has historically been a semiannual (spring and fall) allocation process based upon competitive applications for specific housing projects in which allocation of funds is made by the RDA with recommendations from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee. A history of the housing projects and the amount allocated for each project is available. · According to State law, the City Redevelopment Agency (RDA) is required to set aside 20 percent of the property tax increment from the redevelopment area into a Iow and moderate income housing fund to be allocated for Iow and moderate income housing projects where distribution specifically includes 20 percent setaside for Iow and moderate income housing projects and 80 percent for all other redevelopment projects. · Distribution based upon existing agreements between the RDA and other agencies include 65 percent being available for discretionary disbursement by the RDA, 25 percent is assigned to specific funds for the County of Mendocino and 10 percent for the Mendocino/Lake Community College District. · Eligible activities concerning the semiannual competition were divided into two categories Housing and Predevelopment on an 80/20 percentage split where total allocations within the Predevelopment category cannot exceed $50,000. Up to 10 percent can be allocated to the Emergency category from Housing or Predevelopment based upon request/need. The requests for funding during the MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 2 April 19, 2006 semiannual competition were examined and judged by the Committee based upon evaluation criteria and internal priorities and defined by points relevant to Type of Occupancy, Type of Program, Income Level, Project Retention in the Affordability Pool, Fund Leveraging, Repayment, and Length of ©ccupancy. A matrix was made available at each semiannual competition advising the total amount of funding available per category. · The RDA with assistance from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee have made spring and fall allocations over the past fifteen years since its inception for local Iow and moderate income housing projects. The RDA cannot save its share of the housing fund indefinitely. It can save it up to an amount equal to the total amount deposited in the Housing Fund during the preceding four years. The RDA is required to either spend or encumber the excess surplus funds or transfer the funds to the local housing authority (Community Development Commission) within one year from the date the funds become excess surplus or spend or encumber the excess surplus funds within two additional years. The total amount the RDA can reserve in its special housing project fund is $2,486,844. The current fund balance relative to the Ukiah RDA Special Projects Housing Fund after allocations, administrative costs, and the required allocations to Mendocino County and Mendocino College is $949,614.77. · Recently the RDA desires to accumulate funds for a potential large project in the Downtown area. The Committee desires to discuss this modification concerning the allocation process with the RDA to define a way to reserve funds for a large downtown project and continue with the allocation program. Proposed Allocation Alternatives · Establish a 50 percent saving/50 percent allocation approach that would save funds for a large downtown project and provide allocations to local affordable housing projects. · Adjust the percentages to provide more or less funds into the Special Housing Projects reserve fund. · Reserve all the funds until the balance reaches the maximum excess surplus limits. Commissioner McCowen commented that all members regardless of whether they are confirmed or unconfirmed should be able to participate in the discussions. Lisa Hillegas supported the concept of increasing the allocation for the RDA from 20 to 25 percent, as there is a need for Iow and moderate income housing. Mr. Stump addressed the new Housing Element completed for the Ukiah General Plan in 2004, and stated the document indicated that the RDA may desire to have a discussion about increasing the setaside percentage. Lisa Hillegas commented that the Committee members expressed concern as to the type of project the RDA had in mind when they were first advised that the Agency desires to hold onto funding as opposed to continuing with the current allocation program process. Mr. Stump stated the RDA will make the final decision whether the formal allocation process established by resolution using specific rating criteria to evaluate proposed funding requests will continue. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 3 April 19, 2006 Commissioner McCowen stated the City staff person responsible for managing the 20 percent setaside allocation process left, creating a breakdown in communication, so it may be an opportune time to review the role and responsibility of the Committee and the allocation process. Duane Hill stated management of the allocation process did not get passed to the appropriate source when the City staff member left, and noted this situation sometimes occurs in organizations with reassignment of responsibilities. While the RDA has allocated funding for many significant affordable housing projects over the years, the need for public/private commitment of funding to meet the fair share allocations appropriated to the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency (URDA) and the other agencies remains very important to this community. Being able to adequately support the affordable housing needs of all applicants is an issue because not every funding request can be realistically met. The RDA has helped RCHDC with funding for affordable housing projects. He commented on the proposal to reserve a certain percentage of funds for a large project, and stated it may be necessary to look at feasibility compared to how the allocation of funding for projects has been appropriated in the past. He supports the concept of continuing with the "Adhoc" method as the best approach for the allocation of funds the way it has been done in the past. Funding requests may vary according to the project needs where alternative approaches may be necessary to get the project done. He cited, for example, an RCHCD project where redevelopment money could be utilized to purchase property for a future housing project provided effort is made and/or a plan is formulated toward development of the property. In the event RCHDC defaults on the agreement, the property goes to the redevelopment agency at a certain amount of interest. Mark Rohloff understands while construction of affordable housing projects in the community is important, the time for developments of these projects is difficult with the rise in construction, City sewer hook-up fees, and other relevant development costs making funding requests for local assistance with the Ford Street projects more crucial than ever. Establishing a 50 percent savings mode may not be a feasible approach with the significant rise in development costs. He added that finding funding sources for predevelopment- related costs that include engineering studies, appraisals, administrative costs and other costs for Ford Street projects is difficult where local funding assistance from the RDA is important. He noted that Ford Street projects typically have multiple funding sources where RDA funding supplements these other funding sources. Housing projects and corresponding funding sources relative to State and federal grants and loan types for Ford Street differ from those of RCHDC because of the type of services Ford Street provides. Duane Hill commented that construction costs at the current prevailing wage for one, two or three bedroom apartment units is approximately $250,000. For example, it is costing $10 million to construct 40 apartment units that are approximately 1,000 square feet in Kelseyville. Committee Chair Mirata commented that obtaining money for projects from the State and federal government is difficult. He added that many projects were reviewed by the Low and Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee. Commissioner Rodin acknowledged that it is important for agencies such as Ford Street and RCHDC to own properties where many of the associated projects are subsidized housing through HUD. The rental income from housing subsidies is essentially a long term MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 4 April 19, 2006 investment where additional property can eventually be purchased rather than having to later go through the tedious process of applying for grant funding for such purchases. Mark Rohloff agreed that more can be done when an agency owns the property in terms of decision-making concerning projects and allocation of resources to fund for housing projects. Ford Street housing projects have typically been subsidized through HUD in which they no longer want to support maintenance and property management for these projects. Property ownership is more advantageous because agencies have more authority when it comes to decision making and management. Tom Kesey has served on the Committee since its inception. He advised of a College housing project that was funded in part by the Community Development Commission (CDC), the College 10 percent portion of the 20 percent Iow income housing money together with a loan from Mendocino Savings Bank. He looks forward to other housing development opportunities in the future. The College needs housing for students that qualify for Iow and moderate income housing. Mary Lou Leonard, Mendocino County Department of Social Services, oversees the homeless services program for the County. She advised that Kathleen Stone of Mendocino County Department of Social Services desires to serve on the Committee as did her predecessor, Ramona Ansolabehere and move from the "interested party" to a confirmed/unconfirmed member status. She concurred with the other persons that have participated in the above discussions and noted there a tremendous need for Iow and moderate income housing in this community. It is only fair for agencies to understand the process by which they can apply for setaside money so that everyone has an equal opportunity. Commissioner McCowen inquired whether there were any organizations not currently listed on the Low and Moderate Income Housing Advisory Committee that should likely be members. Mr. Stump stated the list names persons who have regularly been attending Committee meetings. There is a vacant position for Low and Moderate Income Renter that was established by resolution and has been on the Committee list for some time. Commissioner McCowen stated the intent is to name the interest groups/organizations that ought to be represented and recommended allowing the groups to choose their representative and alternate representative. For such groups as the Low and Moderate Income Renter, the Committee could make the determination. Commissioner Rodin noted the groups/organizations forming the Committee are named in the resolution. Commissioner McCowen stated these groups should be considered as confirmed members. He noted the North Coast Builders Exchange is represented. Commissioner Rodin inquired whether Habitat for Humanity is still an active agency. It was noted that this agency has requested funding from the Committee in the past. Habitat for Humanity is a volunteer organization so membership may not always be easy to attain. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENTAGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page $ April 19, 2006 It was further noted agencies likely cannot vote and must abstain due to conflict of interest if they are requesting funding and represented on the committee, and this can be problematic. Phil Baldwin inquired whether there are any comments regarding the conflict of interest issue that the majority of the funding request applications to the Committee come from three groups that are also represented on the Committee. He further inquired whether there is concern that these agencies are essentially ranking one another on projects and often recommend funding for each other. He questioned whether there is any concern about the perception that the Committee funds for projects come from its own members. He further questioned whether there are any other agencies or organizations that have actually applied for funding other than RCHDC, the Ford Street Project, and the CDC. Commissioner McCowen commented there were actually four or five project applications that came forward for the last round of funding. Mary Lou Leonard commented more applications may be submitted for consideration if the public better understands the process rather than having members applying for funding that have an inside understanding of the process. Commissioner McCowen stated some of the applicants have been groups/organizations that do not have a local track record, and recommended funding stay with local groups that have a fully developed track record. Furthermore, this is not to say that if a group comes forward with a nice project that fair consideration would not be given. There are groups that provide a valuable service to the community and consideration should be given in this regard. Tom Kesey commented that agency representatives from such organizations as RCHDC and Ford Street provide continuity and professional expertise to the Committee, and with this role there may be some reason for concern about the perception for a conflict of interest where these agencies do get direct insight. However, the criteria relative judging the projects are already in place before the projects come forward and staff does the scoring. It is the Committee's responsible to determine whether the scoring is accurate based on the criteria. Commissioner Baldwin stated the community must be adequately made aware that anyone or agency can compete for funding. Mr. Stump reiterated that the funding procedures provide for a proficient public noticing system/process. Committee Chair Mirata explained how the Committee has over the years looked at projects from a fair and reasonable perspective based upon their merit, and sometimes determined that the tracking of such projects would be too difficult. Other types of past funding involved Deeds of Trust and loans for private residences at very Iow interest rates. Commissioner Rodin stated the Homeless Services Planning Group plans for projects, and inquired whether this group should also rank projects that go through the RDA by incorporating a prioritization process. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 6 April 19, 2006 Commissioner McCowen advised that the Homeless Services Planning Group (HSPG) operates County wide. This Group evaluates potential homeless projects/facilities and the various organizations that make up the Group may not have the necessary background to effectively evaluate housing projects. There may be a way to bring the interests and community needs of the HSPG that functions on behalf of the community before the Committee since these agencies essentially serve in dual capacities. Mary Lou Leonard stated various agencies and funding sources come together to form the Homeless Services Planning Group. Commissioner Rodin recommended development of processes in which housing projects are specifically planned and/or evaluated according to priority and long term. In this way, projects can be evaluated and better screened relative to the funding source that best fits the type of project, whether it be transitional, homeless, Iow/moderate income or other type of housing project. Mary Lou Leonard commented it may not be feasible to incorporate too many processes. It would be beneficial to decide what kind of long term projects desired where some projects may require more money than others. The community can also be involved in this activity, as a planning process with another group evaluating the actual applications. Jan Moore inquired whether HSPG, as a County agency, and URA, as a City agency, make a difference relevant to housing projects. Mary Lou Leonard stated the County works with many different local agencies having the same program initiatives. It was noted again the County is apportioned 25 percent of the setaside housing funds for projects. Lisa Hillegas addressed the issue of reviewing the role of the Committee and the potential for "inside perception" of projects relative to Committee members and those members that are requesting setaside funding for projects. She recommended providing for public education and possibly a longer public noticing period. Commissioner McCowen noted that the City's new website may be helpful in this regard. He concurred with having a longer notification period. Commissioner Baldwin stated there appears to be very little interest in expanding the number of agency members serving on the Committee. He supported the concept of looking to increasing the members to include such agencies as the Farm Bureau, the United Farm Works and/or Neuesta Casa to address such issues as farm worker housing. URA Chair Mark Ashiku commented on the matter of increasing the size of the Committee, and stated sometimes this approach is not beneficial because it may not be as effective as a decision-making body having too many members. A general discussion followed regarding the addition of other agencies that may be beneficial to the Committee. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 7 April 19, 2006 Commissioner Baldwin favors increasing the allotment by five percent. Commissioner McCowen commented that the Committee does have a role to fund projects and favors accumulating funds that would help facilitate a larger project such as housing for Iow and moderate income seniors. He commented on the matter of leveraging funds to make a project doable, and stated the accumulation of a significant amount of funds could be used to leverage a really important project such as the redevelopment of a blighted area. He suggested reserving a minimum of 25 percent of the funds for smaller projects while allowing for some flexibility/latitude, reserve a minimum of 50 percent of the funding for larger project, and reserve 25 percent of the funding to go either way for a smaller or larger project depending upon the type of project that comes forward. Commissioner Rodin concurred with this recommendation. She acknowledged the 20 percent setaside requirement, and commented it is really unfortunate that City redevelopment money is used as a "safety net" for non-profits in the community. She supports the concept that the federal government should continue to come through with its share of funding rather than being left to the UP, A. It should be possible to work on a large project for the City that not only meets the housing needs, but also addresses such issues as blight. Kari Hacket commented it is important to have a strong reserve for large projects. She further commented that non-profits do need help. Committee Chair Gary Mirata stated individual projects are important and a strategy must be formulated to effectively track affordability housing developments to ensure they remain in the affordability pool. He recalled many times when no individual projects came forward for review regardless of public notification. URA Chair Ashiku stated the UPA can make a change as to percentage of allocation. Patti Bruder commented that it may be time to review the entire funding process by looking at land trusts as an example of a way to keep housing affordable. Commissioner Rodin stated the Committee may need additional membership in order to initiate new ideas. Duane Hill commented that RCHDC projects remain affordable in perpetuity as set forth in its by-laws. However, single-family homeownerships (Self-Help projects) have become more problematic with the significant rise in housing prices where homeowners cannot sell their homes to profit from the sales. RCHDC has the right to purchase back the homes and/or have first right of refusal for the Self Help Homes. Commissioner McCowen commented that an alternative approach may be to allow these homes to be sold on the open market and reimburse the agency at approximately 50 of the initial investment. Duane Hill stated RCHDC uses this approach and anticipates a time when the agency allows homes to be sold by the homeowner in the Self Help program. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 8 April 19, 2006 Executive Director Horsley introduced Don Ballek as the City's Economic Development Coordinator and Assistant to the City Manager. He will be responsible for overseeing the Committee. Commissioner McCowen stated the issue of raising the allocation percent is a separate issue and would have to be separately agendized from the 50 percent allocation reserved for larger projects, 25 percent reserved for smaller projects, and 25 percent reserved either way in any given year depending upon the nature of the project scenario. Commissioner Baldwin concurred with this proposal. Commissioner Crane concurred with the above-referenced proposals. It was the consensus of the Commissioners and Committee Members to reconvene at a later date to continue the membership roll and responsibilities discussions of the Low and Moderate Income Advisory Committee. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:50 p.m. Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary MINUTES OF THE UKIAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY & LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Page 9 April 19, 2006 DRAFT MINUTES CITYCOUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING/PUBLIC WORKSHOP March 29, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT Doug Crane John McCowen Phil Baldwin OTHERS PRESENT Listed below, Respectively CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT Mari Rodin Mayor Ashiku PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT Ken Anderson Kevin Jennings James Mulheren, Chair Mike Whetzel PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT Judy Pruden STAFF PRESENT Candace Horsley, City Manager Charley Stump, Planning Director Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary The joint meeting of the Ukiah City Council and Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Councilmember Baldwin at 5:30 p.m. at the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, 200 School Street, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken for the City Council and the Planning Commission with the results listed above. Councilmember Crane recused himself due to a conflict of interest. It was noted that the publicized joint meeting with the Ukiah City Council and the Ukiah Planning Commission will be conducted as a Planning Commission meeting rather than a Joint Meeting due to a lack of a quorum by City Council. 2. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one from the audience came forward. . NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Direction - Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations City Planning Director Stump provided a brief history of the Hillside Zoning Regulations as follows: · Revision of the Hillside Zoning Regulations began in the late 1980s. · The Hillside Zoning Regulations were adopted in 1982. · The 1982 regulations are still in effect. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page I March 29, 2006 · Proposed new development in the western hills prompted further view as directed by City Council where a committee was formed in this regard and postponed because the primary focus was to complete the Ukiah General Plan. · The Ukiah General Plan was adopted in 1995. · In the late 1990s, City Council directed further work on the Hillside Zoning Regulations where a series of four public workshops and hearings were conducted with the Planning Commission between 2000 and 2003. · The Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council in the summer of 2003 concerning revisions of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations. · City Council conducted a public hearing in September 2003, and identified certain topics requiring further research by staff/Planning Commission such as whether to permit or prohibit second units, day care homes and the State preemption, architecture/design elements, number of allowed accessory buildings, required soils/geotechnical information, proposed upper/lower hillside areas, and Helen Avenue parcels. · The Planning Commissioner reviewed some of these issues in January 2004, and concluded that the remaining issues be further analyzed and brought back for a series of additional meetings. · The intent of tonight's discussion is for City Planning staff, the City Council, Planning Commission and the community to revisit the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations and determine how to proceed. Director Stump received a letter commenting on the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations from John Rogers, as well as an e-mail from Francine Selim today advising that she owns property in the western hills, supports the concept of Smart Growth and requested that no decision be made tonight, since she was unable to attend the workshop/discussion. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 5:40 p.m. Pinky Kushiner requested additional information concerning the most recent developments in the western hills relative to the Hull/Piffero subdivision/Hull Major Site Development Permit for primary/secondary dwellings, and Ceja Major Site Development Permit for primary/secondary dwellings and whether they fully comply with the existing Hillside Ordinance. Councilmember Baldwin inquired whether there are new plans for development in the western hills. Director Stump replied there are no new applications for development in the western hills. He commented on the Ceja project that the Planning Commission recently recommended the City Council approve, and stated staff's analysis of the project in recommending approval included review of the existing and revised Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations as a guide in determining whether the project is workable and in compliance with this document. Staff worked closely with the property owner where staff was able to appropriately address and mitigate the project issues identified to ensure a quality and architecturally pleasing project. Planning Commission Chair Mulheren commented the proposed Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations pertain to all the western hills and not just for the Hull/Piffero subdivision. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page :2 March 29, 2006 Victoria Golden commented as follows: · The Planning Commission revisions to the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are thoughtful. · Expressed concern about development in the western hills because she lived in Sonoma County for years and watched the beauty of hills in Santa Rosa disappear due to development even though there were policies/regulations in place to protect them. "Once the hillsides are gone, they are gone forever." · Enforcement is a primary concern and are there procedures/measures in place in the event of non-compliance. · Expressed concern regarding the element of allowing second units in the western hills, especially as addressed in the Ukiah Western Hills Constraints Analysis. People are moving to Ukiah and will likely desire to build second units on their property. Double development will occur in the western hills, if second units as large as 1,000 square feet are allowed. She recommended that second units not be allowed or the square footage reduced to 500 or 600 since they can be combined with accessory units, as addressed in the proposed revisions, allowing the potential for additional units on a parcel. Accessory buildings are basically guest units and secondary dwellings can be used as granny units and/or as second houses. Chair Mulheren addressed the Ceja project, and inquired whether the development of one primary residence and one secondary dwelling on 12 acres is too much. Ms. Golden stated the Constraints Analysis addresses the issues of potential fire danger, flooding and drainage on the Valley floor, erosion/grading problems as a result of development in the western hillsides. It may be that no development should be allowed or at least restrict the size of second units. The proposed revisions are basically an act of kindness on the part of the Planning Commission for people currently residing in the western hills. The real estate market for the Ukiah Valley is a bargain compared to fair market prices in other cities/counties in the State. Relatively affluent people having the affordable means to purchase/development property in the western hills are likely to come here from other areas where they can afford to build primary and secondary units on one parcel. Chair Mulheren commented the western hills can never be developed as affordable housing. He added that the people currently living in the Hull/Piffero subdivision lots are local persons and not from out of the area. Marlene Werra is a western hills resident, and has no problem "freezing" further development in the hills, provided the City purchases the parcels and reimburses the owners. The City would be responsible for the maintenance such as cutting/trimming brush, cleaning of the culverts, furnishing City fire/police protection services, and other issues that come with private property ownership. The parcels are currently owned by various persons, who have been good stewards of the land. She addressed the Hillside Ordinance Regulations as follows: · Attachment 3, page 26, Primary Access Routes (1) requiring that all primary access routes be a minimum width of 18 feet measured with an 18-inch shoulder on both sides of the roadway would be a disaster, as the cuts into the bank would be clearly visible from the Valley floor and precipitate slides. She did not favor that each individual site have an 18-foot wide driveway. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 March 29, 2006 Attachment 3, page 26, Primary Access Routes (6) requires the implementation of curbs and gutters, and stated this would not be realistic in rural areas. Attachment 3, page 32, Pedestrian Facilities addresses the topic of public trails/walkway. She is not supportive of allowing for public trails over private property. The County has numerous hiking and outdoor recreational facilities. She recommends maintaining the existing public facilities rather than accumulating additional areas to maintain/service. Allowing public access to the western hills would create the potential for fire hazard, liability, vandalism, and other health/safety/nuisance issues. Delynne Rogers referred to a letter she and her husband drafted. She lives in the western hills and generally supports the intent/objective of the Regulations. Every effort should be made to protect the natural beauty of the western hills for the benefit of all City residents and visitors to the Valley where an ordinance is necessary to provide protection. She commented on the following concerns expressed by other persons living/owning property in the hillside regarding the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations: 1. The ordinance may pave the way for a western hills trails system. Delynne's Response: It states that public pedestrian right-of-ways/walkways may be required along private streets in new subdivisions. The requirement for pedestrian facilities does not appear to apply to existing parcels. She recommends that a committee be created to review different locations for trails in the hills, as some residents may desire to research this issue. The best approach may be to keep the trails matter as separate issue from the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations. 2. Clearing the underbrush to allow for a fire break would likely require a Major Use Permit. Delynne's Response: The Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations appear to protect the hillsides from someone clear cutting a large swath of vegetation and not necessarily to prevent someone from just clearing underbrush or removing dry leaves or grasses. It may be helpful if the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations further defined or clarified the removal of vegetation. . Landowners would not be allowed to fence their properties without permission from the City. Delynne's Response: The Draft Hillside Regulations indicate that fences are allowed provided the fences meet criteria. A fence can be placed within 10 feet of a property line provided it meets certain criteria including a discretionary review process. Hillside property owners desire to provide safeguards to the development of fences on the hillsides to protect wildlife movement and to ensure the aesthetic qualities of the western hills are not compromised with a vast system of fences. . The tables of minimum parcel sizes suggest that many lots virtually will become worthless because they do meet the minimum parcel size. Delynne's Response: MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 March 29, 2006 Restrictions pertain to lands proposed for subdivision and not existing lots on record. The Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations state that existing smaller parcels may be developed. o The Planning Commission will be aflowed to dictate the appearance of new homes. Delynne's Response: It is the understanding of homeowners in the hillsides that the Planning Commission will review proposals for new homes to ensure proposals meet the standards established in the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations and not dictate appearance. Additionally, some hillside homeowners desire the Planning Commission and City Council to clarify Section 9146 8e that requires the removal of all flammable vegetation within 30 feet of a building or structure. This may require the removal of all vegetation within 30 feet of a house, which could have significant visual impacts. A more appropriate standard would be to maintain 30 feet of defensible space around a structure. Councilmember McCowen requested a copy of the letter from hillside owners expressing concern about the proposed Draft Hillside Zoning Regulation revisions. Robert Werra advised that he has a letter to give the workshop members from other hillside property owners expressing concern regarding public access to the western hills. He recommended deleting Section 9146, M, 3, Pedestrian Facilities on page 32 of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations that suggests public trails may be required. More information is needed to justify public trails in the western hills both in the City and on private property, especially regarding the issue of policing, cleaning and upkeep. The City has enough problems maintaining/policing the existing parks. Additionally, no evidence exists that the trails would be used on a regular basis, and he cited a personal example where he observed on a very nice weekend day that few people were out hiking and taking advantage of the trails available in Low Gap Park. The County has many public trails available for hiking. He is not supportive of developing public trails in the western hills. Albert Krauss stated the National Parks system was not founded based on evidence of use. There is an argument that could be made for the establishment of trail systems or any park system as an educational resource for potential future use. He commented on the issue of house designs, and stated the entire study of the western hills appears to create an internal contradiction between the notion of preserving the "veiwscape" of the hills when basically the study focuses on how to design development in a compatible manner. The reality is that houses do exist in the western hill and there will likely be more. Dictating the design and color scheme does not screen the homes from view. The virginal hillsides are lost so why not build a beautiful architecturally pleasing home for everyone to admire. He does not support that the design and color schemes be dictated for the homes developed in the western hills if there is no application of a creative architectural concept. Property owners should be allowed to design an interesting, creative, and flamboyant house. He does support the development of private trails in the context of future education for new generations of people who have lost the ability and forgotten how to hike by rediscovering this recreation. Councilmember Baldwin inquired as to the type of lighting that should be chosen for the flamboyant home in the hillsides. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 March 29, 2006 Mr, Krauss was exaggerating his view point, and stated he would not support incorporating flood lighting to enhance the beauty of the flamboyant home. Billy Smith resides in the hillsides, and does not support the development of hiking trails through private property in the western hills. It has been her experience that people trespassing on her property while hiking have created nuisances. Eric Crane stated he authorized the letter that was sent to hillside property owners. He stated that the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are very poorly written, as there are elements in the document that are contradictory that when viewed as a whole, actually negates the ability for people to have beneficial use of their land without a great deal of review. Many people have worked on the document so it has become a mishmash of special interest. He recommended review of the document and possible modifications thereof from a hillside homeowner's perspective. The document directs certain types of development as being the only way to accomplish a goal and by persons that do not have the knowledge necessary to build such homes. He recommended re-writing the entire document. He commented that allowing one house per 40 acres is ludicrous. Director Stump will meet with Mr. Crane to go over the document in more specific detail to address specific issues/concerns. Councilmember McCowen stated it would be beneficial if public members would submit in writing to Planning staff specific recommendations/comments and/or cite specific Ordinance sections that they desire deleted/added or revised. Julie Bawcom provided geotechnical information concerning hillside development in 2003. She was also part of the committee that formulated the original Hillside Zoning Regulations in 1989. She referred to Section H, Required Technical Reports on page 15 of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations, and gave her written comments to workshop members. The City needs to retain a geotechnical firm on a consultation basis to review proposed hillside projects to determine whether an engineering and geologic report should be required. The Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations give the Planning Director the authority to make this determination and this person is not really qualified to make such a determination. The same geotechnical firm needs to review all completed reports with the City to make sure that the minimum guidelines set forth by the City are in compliance. Geotechnical reports should be completed by a certified engineering geologist and geotechnical engineer where in the report a finding must be made that the proposed development would not have an adverse impact on any uphill or down slope or to adjacent properties. The burden of liability is placed on the geotechnical firm that the developer hires and reviewed by the City's consultant so that any potential liability issue is covered. A certified engineering geologist licensed in the State of California shall complete the engineering report together with an engineer. While the geological studies add a substantial expense to a developer in the hillsides, they should be required as a public safety mechanism. Ms. Bawcom commented on the storm events that occurred in late December 2005 and early January 2006, and commented on the flooding to homes on Standley Streets that was the result of substantial amounts of water flowing through the canyon. Geotechnical studies are very important because they evaluate hillside development issues and the potential impacts to people living down slope. She offered her professional services should it be necessary during the Ordinance revision process. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 March 29, 2006 Victoria Golden commented it is not ludicrous to think that allowing one house per 40 acres or allowing for one house per 60 acres is not unusual zoning when there are appropriate reasons for this type of regulation whether it is for preservation of agriculture or for safety considerations. To have a building site available on land that is largely sloping does not mean that development should occur if erosion and flooding is likely to occur. In terms of preserving property rights, everyone living in the City or County is subject to regulations concerning home renovation and/or development. The purpose of tonight's workshop is to ensure that such regulations are reasonable. Jan Moore acknowledged Ms. Bawcom's comments relative to the importance for geotechnical studies. She also provided the workshop members with information that complements Ms. Bawcon's input concerning landslides, drainage and the potential for flooding, soil identification, erosion, and other engineering geology information pertinent to western Ukiah. According to the geology information, there is a lot of soils instability in the western hills that should be considered/addressed. She commented on the flooding that occurred at the corner of Highland and Standley Streets this winter that could be attributed/related to western hills soils instability. Bill Smith is a resident of the western hillsides, and he understands the fire danger that comes with living in the hills and the precautionary measures that must be implemented to help protect people, wildlife, and property from the potential of wildland fires. He provided a brief historical description of the fire-related and logging events that have occurred in the western hills for the past 50-60 years. He addressed plans regarding the construction of hiking trails in the western hills that will not likely be completed with fire being the primary concern. He does not support allowing the public to wander around/hike in the western hills because of the danger of fire and other nuisance and vandalism problems that can occur. The trails would have to be maintained by the City and the City does not have the resources to assume this responsibility. It is very costly to develop property in the western hills. Therefore, the development of affordable housing units is not a reality for the western hillsides. In his opinion, the proposed revised Regulations must be able to effectively address all the cumulative impacts if development is to be allowed in the western hills. Chair Mulheren addressed the issue of fire in the western hills, and inquired whether the 20-foot wide paved roadway that exists for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision provides for a sufficient fire break. Mr. Smith replied that would be an ideal place to start a back fire in the event of a wildland fire. Before the Hull/Piffero Subdivision was approved, there was no fire break. He noted that development in the western hills is not necessarily a bad thing. Phil Ashiku resides in the lower portions of the hillsides. He understands the necessity to preserve the viewshed, as well as to provide adequate health and safety protections for persons living down slope. He commented on the draft Regulations, and stated the geotechnical section requires further review. He supports having the opportunity to submit written comments regarding the Regulations to the workshop members. Other document discrepancies do exist, including the request for engineering and geotechnical studies that may not be possible because they would require access to private property or adjacent private property that may not be granted. He addressed the matter of geotechnical studies and how they came about as a requirement for development, and questioned the reason for such a large divergence from what is required in the California Building Code. The MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION March 29, 2006 Page ? California Building Code establishes the parameter regulations and standards by which property is developed, including the studies required that address setback to slope issues. Geotechnical studies should be project driven as opposed to 'cook book/textbook form'. Director Stump referred to the September 2003 City Council meeting where Civil Engineer George Rau provided written comments because he was concerned with the geotechnical information. This information is available to the public and provides for a reasonable format for a geotechnical soils study. Also, Planning staff reviewed the website of the State Division of Mines and Geology, and this information is available for public review. It is a more condensed version and addresses the issue of allowing for flexibility concerning geotechnical studies for different types of projects whereas the textbook version may not be necessary depending upon the size, scope, and scale of the project. Mr. Ashiku expressed concern that there may have been an intentional effort as a way to discourage hillside development in the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations by requiring expensive geology/geotechnical studies/ or other costly developmental-related necessities to ensure compliance He cautioned pursuance of this path because such an effort 'constitutes a taking,' sanctioned by a governmental body. The document must clearly identify the parameters by which a project is judged. There can never be zero impacts. He acknowledged the elements of fire, vandalism, and trash issues that occur to private property in the western hills, which further exacerbates/reinforces that unsupervised hiking in the hillsides would be problematic. Conversely, there are people that would not exhibit this type of behavior and would respect the environment and the right to hike in the hillsides. Councilmember McCowen requested clarification that Mr. Ashiku supports the distinction between the upper and lower hillsides and inquired whether he has an opinion as to the property lines designating the distinction. Mr. Ashiku has not been able to fully review the specific boundary lines. Councilmember Baldwin commented on the issue of property values and noted real estate publications/advertisements promote dwellings on rural properties that are adjacent to public open space/public parks/BLM land/national forest and such proximity actually raises the value of the dwelling. Chair Mulheren stated many public members, Planning Commissioners, and Councilmembers participated in the public discussions that helped shape the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations, and, none of the geotechnical requirements were intentionally included to discourage building in the western hills. Mr. Ashiku recommended that the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations geotechnical study requirements preclude those that are not relevant to the size and scope of a particular project. He favored the concept of having the property engineered and having a geologist review the soils in order to make foundation, drainage, setback recommendations, as the driving process. The Planning Director does not have the expertise to determine which geotechnical studies are relevant for a project, whereby the required geotechnical expert would only duplicate the expense. A competent engineer should be hired to complete the studies, thus driving the process of development, followed by plan check and engineering group reviews that determine the validity of the studies. The draft Regulations should be revisited to avoid having to go through an unnecessary process. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 March 29, 2006 Councilmember McCowen asked if Mr. Ashiku would agree that it is appropriate to have an engineering geologist sign off to the degree that he/she is certifying the construction proposed would not create adverse impacts to the adjacent property owners. Mr. Ashiku stated it is unlikely that an engineer would sign off on a project unless he/she made the appropriate determination that the project would not create adverse impacts to the environment/adjacent property owners and would provide the assurance necessary for the project to move forward to the next phase without having to go through the expense of obtaining other studies only to get the same information. Julie Bawcom worked for the California Geological Survey who put together the minimum requirements for geological studies, and these requirements are used all over the Bay Area, Los Angeles County, San Diego County, and major metropolitan areas. The geotechnical firm hired by the City would determine which technical report should be required and not every project is going to necessitate every single part of the geotechnical requirements. She does not support the procedure of starting the construction with a geologist later coming to review the site issues/constraints. The standard practice in California is to allow a geotechnical firm to determine which technical reports are necessary and to review the work conducted. Dave Hull addressed the matter of the geotechnical standards, and stated the original Hillside Zoning Regulations were well written. His experience with hillside development has been very expensive with all the engineering and technical studies/reports, and fees. Geotechnical standards are extremely important and no developments should occur without having a professional engineer review a project to make sure the future home will remain secure on the parcel. However, the rules should not be so stringent that a property owner cannot afford to build. His only issue for compliance with the geotechnical standards pertained to the roadway because there were no such standards. Initially, the standards required a 20-foot wide roadway with curb, gutter, and sidewalk until the process lead to an 18-foot wide paved roadway with no curb, gutter, and sidewalk. He did not have a problem with the standards for the clearing of brush and other types of vegetation. He acknowledged that he has made mistakes and has learned through the process how to be a good steward of the land. He briefly explained his experience with the geotechnical aspects of his development and stated the geotechnical engineering consultant he hired was highly credentialed so when the process was complete, he was comfortable with building in the hillsides. There are many issues in addition to geotechnical associated with building in the hillsides. Mr. Hull advised that the source of the flooding problems on Highland and Standley Streets were not caused by the Hull/Piffero Subdivision developments, but from old culverts on private property in the canyon area that were not properly maintained over the years and the channel was plugged with debris. His property was checked for drainage/erosion issues as a result of the heavy rains and none were apparent. He stated drainage problems will occur in the hillsides from runoff when winter storms were as heavy as they were this year. Commissioner Whetzel asked Mr. Hull if when he was going through the subdivision process whether he was offered incentives for the clustering of homes or to create public trails relevant to his subdivision. Mr. Hull replied Councilmember Baldwin assured a 5-0 City Council vote approving his project if he and Mr. Piffero would donate 35 acres of their land for public trails. The City MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION March 29, 2006 Page 9 offered no incentives. He would be happy to assist other persons desiring to build in hillsides with better understanding of the process, as he has a lot of experience in this regard. Bob Burke has resided in the western hills since 2000, and he understands from his experience that developing a home is a very tedious process. He commended Planning and Fire Department staff for assisting him through the process. He stated there were some very stringent guidelines at the time when he build his home. He stated the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are very strict and recommends formulating "guidelines" for development that are less stringent. The geotechnical studies alone were very expensive for him where three separate engineers reviewed the property. Rick Piffero commented that the geotechnical standards established for the original Hillside Zoning Regulations were sufficient. Development in the hillsides should not be viewed as affordable housing. The development standards make it very difficult and expensive to build in the hillsides. Also, that section of the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations which addresses the clearing of brush is not realistic. He understands that maintaining the beauty of the hillsides is important to the community, and stated the homes built are quality and aesthetically pleasing unlike some structures existing in the City limits that are substandard and/or deteriorated to the degree they are an eye sore to the community. The permits allowing for development should be fair and reasonable. He acknowledged new developments create temporary scarring of the hillsides that eventually disappear when vegetation/trees planted for the project have matured. The geotechnical work has been completed for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision lots where a maximum of 10 primary and secondary structures can be developed. He does not recommend creating a whole new Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations document. He supports having effective rules concerning development that protect hillside property owners and persons residing on the Valley floor. Councilmember Baldwin inquired whether it is feasible to effectively enforce the rules established for the hillsides. Mr. Piffero stated the lots developed in the Hull/Piffero subdivision fully comply with the rules. Dotty Coplen recommended not allowing any more second units in the hillsides in the future or, as an alternative, place a maximum size of approximately 800 square feet on the units. The approval of over a 2,000 square foot second unit for the Ceja project was too large where the definition of a second unit is lost. She supports the concept of allowing for a lot split for that particular project. Chair Mulheren commented that with a lot split as many as four homes could be built as opposed to the approved two homes. A lot split could not have been done because the Subdivision lots have been established and no further subdivision is permitted. Greg Foss expressed concern about allowing for second unit developments in the western hills. It was his understanding that when the Hull/Piffero subdivision was created it would be for the development of five homes and not potentially for 10 homes. He recommended enacting a requirement relevant to any future lots created by a new subdivision in the western hills by determining/designating ahead of time which lots can be developed with second units where the remaining lots would not be allowed to be developed with second units. Future development can be restricted with the application of this approach and regulates project precedence setting where the thinking suggests that what is good MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION March 29, 2006 Page 10 development for one project would be good for another. The City has the right as a condition of approval for new developments to set certain regulations, so if the restrictions were placed in the Ordinance ahead of time, future hillside development applicants would be advised early on that second units can not be developed on certain parcels. Chair Mulheren stated the State of California limits local government's ability to restrict second units. Victoria Golden stated the Western Hills Constraints Analysis made a "big deal" about the development of second units in the hillsides, but minimized the problem by stating that very few people would desire to build in the western hills. In actuality, there are two second units allowed on the lots since accessory units can also be developed up to a maximum of 500 square feet with no kitchens. Such units are typically built as one-bedroom guest houses having kitchens with the potential for kitchens being added later after the necessary building inspections have been completed. She expressed concern about doubling or even tripling the number of homes that can be developed per lot, which can significantly contribute to drainage, fire, and erosion problems. Benj Thomas stated when it comes to establishing regulations/standards, there are elements of conflict between the absolute individual rights of property owners and the community dictating what should be in the way of rules/policies when it is the responsibility of City staff, Planning Commission, and City Council to carry out the will of the community. It often becomes difficult to balance between the rights of individuals as opposed to what the community dictates where it becomes a balancing act to measure the associated benefits. However, there are situations where the Ukiah Municipal Code or law dictates the required standards. This type of situation makes it more difficult when people come into the process in adversarial mode and it essentially becomes an issue of compromise relative to what standards should be adopted in order to preserve the integrity/beauty of the hillside. It has been his experience that the Planning Department comprehensively looks at all aspects in terms of fairness and compliance issues of regulatory documents prior to making a recommendation. Charles Mannon resides in the western hills, and he understands the fire danger that comes with living in the hillsides. He does not support allowing for free public access to the western hills. Al Beltrami resides in the western hills, and commented on the long anticipated massive influx of people to the community that is not readily evident. People will move into the area and growth is inevitable. The terrain of Mendocino County is not the same as that of Sonoma County. He noted the number of pages for the revised Hillside Ordinance Regulations have increased from 7 to 35 so there is a lot of text to review. He inquired whether there is a provision in the new Regulations that deal with public trail access. Director Stump replied there is a provision that says public pedestrian walkways shall be incorporated into the design of private streets within new subdivisions. The walkways may consist of paved or unpaved paths within the private street right-of-way or within a dedicated public easement in an alternative location. Mr. Beltrami questioned whether it is realistic to anticipate a public subdivision in the western hills. He values the hillsides, as well as the valley floor where he observes homes and/or other structures in the City limits and County that are in very poor condition and MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION March 29, 2006 Page 11 architecturally displeasing. He recommends that hillside development standards be fairly written to coincide with the standards established for valley floor developments. He addressed the issue of lighting, which is a large issue with hillside development, and noted the lighting impacts from residential/commercial establishments when he looks from the hillsides to the valley floor and stated many of these structures are not likely in compliance with Code standards. It would be unfair to ask hillside property owners to underground utilities when most of the City utilities are not. He noted the concerns regarding fire danger because developments can contribute to fire hazards. He referred to the issues of allowing for a division between lower and upper hillsides, and commented this issue likely requires further defining. Councilmember McCowen stated the Ukiah General Plan has a number of policies that address the desirability of having trails in the western hills and with developing a trails system whereby the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations document does not do this and states, "Public pedestrian right-of-ways/walkways may be required along private streets in new subdivisions, provided a City Council adopted public trails plan includes the subject property and a feasible walkway route, and the appropriate legal findings can be made to support the requirement." In order for this to occur, a public trails plan must have been adopted and in place that meets the above-referenced criteria and then such a plan could potentially be applied to a new subdivision. The two processes are separate. The Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations speak generally about a public trails system, but does not mandate or require that they be constructed. The Ukiah General Plan also does not mandate or require public trail systems be constructed. Joan Eriksen resides in the western hills, and does not support allowing for public access in the western hills due to the problems she has incurred with people walking on her property. Bill Smith stated it is the job of the City Planning Department to ensure that aesthetically pleasing projects are brought forward for discretionary review and that economical considerations be given to applicants. Robert Werra addressed the roadway width standards for the hillsides, and stated the required widths change as the City Fire Chiefs change. He is not supportive of 18-foot wide driveways that create huge erosion problems, and recommended this issue be reviewed with the current Fire Chief. He stated his driveway is 12 feet wide and City emergency vehicles can easily make the climb to his home in the western hills, which is the second longest driveway in the hillsides. He recommended further review concerning the division between the upper and lower hillsides, and suggested that measuring in terms of altitude should be the determining factor. Becky Thune commented that regulations should be reviewed every five years. She supports the concept of applying "Smart Growth" to developments. Today's hillside development have effective rules/regulations in place to ensure that such developments do not create significant impacts to the environment and to the health, safety, and general welfare of people unlike other historical hillside developments in other areas of the State that have experienced major problems. As population increases, changes in building design and locations are anticipated so it is important that regulations be adequately written to address the changes. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 12 March 29, 2006 Delynne Rogers commented that the Ordinance is not about public access on private property. She does not favor public access on private property without the appropriate permission. Bob Burke stated the issue of viewshed represents a large portion of the concerns expressed. People want to look up at the hillsides and see the hills and not homes. His neighbors' homes in the western hills are not visible because of the vegetation that has been planted to screen them from view. It takes time for newly planted vegetation to mature where homes are sufficiently screened from view. The people residing in the hillsides value the viewshed just as much as those residing in the Valley floor and are willing to take measures to effectively screen their homes. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:47 p.m. Chair Mulheren stated the discussions indicated that the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations need more work where they will again be reviewed at the Planning Commission as a public workshop. Councilmember McCowen stated the Planning Commission is essentially the only body that can give actual direction here this evening. He recommends having at least one additional Planning Commission hearing to complete the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations discussions for the eight areas of concern initially raised by the City Council at the September 2003 meeting. Director Stump stated staff's objective is to comply with the direction of Council and the community and he understands that this is a priority item. Councilmember Baldwin stated the revision process may be lengthy because people disagree about what is and should be. The matter of second units and determining the maximum amount of square footage allowed are issues that require further review. Commissioner Anderson supports the concept of having hiking trails in the western hills. He asked the question whether western hills residents would be willing to grant easements and/or work out an agreement with the City for public access. Commissioner Whetzel commented that notification of the meeting tonight was published in the Ukiah Daily Journal. He agrees that private property is exactly that, and stated being able to appropriately maintain such property is difficult enough without having to potentially manage nuisance/vandalism problems created by the public. He further commented that the Ukiah General Plan states the City should provide incentives for hillside developments and none of this is apparent. He recommends that the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations be further reviewed by the Planning Commission. Councilmember McCowen stated it is not necessary to completely begin the process again. The revised Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations reflect a lot of work by many people, and recommended the following: · The issues identified by City Council be revisited. · Take a fresh look at the process by which the additional southern parcels were added in and whether this is appropriate. · Further review of the geotechnical requirements. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION March 29, 2006 Page 13 · Further review of the requirements for Major Use Permit concerning all vegetation clearing over 2,000 square feet relative to maintaining the appropriate fire breaks. He recommended more flexibility in this regard. · Further review concerning the application of the average slope requirements, which may be overly restrictive in some cases, as the terrain for parcels vary and vary on the individual parcel as well. Adjustments to the standards may be necessary. Chair Mulheren does not favor conducting public hearing after public hearing on the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations document because this is not necessarily productive, and emphasized that City Council takes action at some point at the Planning Commission's recommendation. Commissioner Anderson stated public workshops are not beneficial for him in terms of productivity and with resolving issues, and that the process is somewhat counterproductive. He questioned this process as being the effective dialogue that it should be. For example, he has many notes and questions that did not get answered and other participants likely have questions that the workshop setting could not address in the time allotted. City Manager Horsley advised the City Council and Planning Commission can meet other than in a public workshop setting to discuss the issues/consider public input and have the effective dialogue necessary to resolve issues. It was noted that the matter of revisiting the Draft Hillside Zoning Regulations are a priority item. Commissioner Jennings does not favor spending hours with five Councilmembers and five Planning Commissioners in order to address all the hillside issues raised in terms of whether this approach would be productive. It would be difficult to answer all individual questions unless everyone has similar questions. ., CLOSED SESSION a. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Gov't Code Section 54957) There was no discussion of this agenda item. 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:09 p.m. James Mulheren, Chair Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL/UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION Page 14 March 29, 2006 CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting Minutes CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 March 1, 2006 4:15:04 PM: Department Goals Workshop- Finance, Police, Planning and Public Works Councilmembers Present: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin at 4:55 PM), and Mayor Ashiku (arrived at 4:15 PM). A synopsis of the Department Goals Workshop will be Workshop Adjourned: 5:43:57 PM 1. ROLL CALL: 6:06 PM Councilmembers Present: Crane, McCowen, Staff Present: City Manager Horsley, City Services Director Sangiacomo, and City Clerk Ulvila. and Mayor As ~unity Service= 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PM Councilmember Baldwin led the Pledg~ ~giance. 3. PROCLAMATIONS6:08:06 PM 3a. Designation of March as Women's Councilmember Rodin rea ~ Proclam~ the City of Ukiah. ilmember Rodin as Women's History Month in Arleen Shippey, Rolzinski, representin~ ,merican As,, s Poli of University Women, and Katarzyna s, accepted the Proclamation. 4. APPI 4a. R~ add #9g shoul .~r 21 2005 6:11:37 PM to page 7 in which the time that Council lot 10:02 PM. M/S amended, ap ving the Regular Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2005; as ;d by a u~ voice vote of the City Council. 4b. Joi~ Minutes of the Council and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District of 2006 6:12:07 PM M/S Rodin/McCow, pproving the Special Joint Meeting Minutes of the City Council and the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District of January 9, 2006 as presented; and carried by a unanimous voice vote of the City Council. 4c. Re_clular Meeting Minutes of January 187 2006 6:12:28 PM City Clerk Ulvila requested the minutes of the January 18, 2006 meeting be continued to the next Council meeting. 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION6:12:36 PM Mayor Ashiku read the Right to Appeal Decision statement. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR6:13:02 PM M/S Rodin/Baldwin approving Consent Calendar items "a" through "j" as follows: a. Rejected Claims for Damages Received from Carrie Brigham and Referred to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund; b. Adopted Resolution 2006-41Approving Records Destruction (City Clerk's office); c. Approved of Designation of Applicant's Agent Resolution and Project Application for Federal Assistance to Obtain Federal and State Financial As= ~ce Related to 2006 Winter Storms Local Emergency; d. Awarded Purchase of Sodium Hypochlorite to Pioneer Am~ at the Unit Price of $0.869 per Gallon for an Approximate Total Amount of e. Received Notification of Emergency Rental from Three Pumps at the Wastewater Treatment Plant for the 2005 Storm in th~ .55; Award of Bid for Purchase of a 2006 4 X 2 Chas,, ~lif Duty Material Handler and Double Man Lift with 55' R~ High Volta, ~ and Construction. g. Received Notification of Award of Bid for to Okonit6 in the Amount of $7,801.64; h. Awarded Bid for Purchase of Ferric Chloride Prod Companies in the Amount of $29,719.80; i. Awarded Bid for Purchase of Li, tmer-Emulsi~ lydyne Inc. in the Amount of $11,880.00; Awarded Bid for Purchase of Chemi~ Amount of $14,900. Motion carried by the followim roll call vote Baldwin, and Mayor Ash None. AB None. Crane, McCowen, Rodin, ~STAIN: None. 7. AUDIENCE Mr. Lee Howard concerns with the City's p other issues, that not confo with Council ITEMS 6:14:27 PM Crane and McCowen regarding his :counting procedures, bidding practices, and current bid for work at the hydro project did mber M~ regardin! ,'s 8. PUBL NGS None. Mr. Howard provide a detailed list of his concerns Staff. 9. UNFINISHED ESS 9a. Review and Di =ussion of the Existin¢ al Structure and Economics of th~ Golf Enterprise as a Prelude to Operational Revisions 6:19:28 PM City Manager Horsley advised that Councilmember Crane requested this item be placed on the agenda. Councilmember Crane stated that many people in the audience would like Staff to review the statistics of the first two questions outlined in the Staff Report concerning the trends in use, income and cost for the last 10 years and the apparent effects of the most recent rate revisions on use, income and costs. 6:20:3! PM Community Services/General Services Director Sangiacomo discussed his Staff Report with the City Council and distributed supplemental information.' He participated in a lengthy question and answer period with Council concerning items listed in the Staff Report. Public Discussion Opened: 6:29:2] Members of the audience that spoke to the issue included Robert Reid and Jon Kennedy (Captain of the Men's Golf Club). Public comment Closed: 6:36:34 Extensive discussion continued with regard to concerns of purchasing merchandise for sale at the Golf Pro Shop, to work with Staff while the City goes out for another R public input and analysis for any changes relate~ communicating with all City divisions and with the lc, the for goal setting procedures, resurrecting a Golf could be implemented, the option of engaging the s~ the Golf Course including maintenance of the course, segments of the Golf Course operations. ability issues, the issue an interim Golf Pro Golf ;ition, the need for procedures ~ Golf Course, of forums the goals for Course .service com ~y to operate ~ possibility of negotiating for all Director Sangiacomo noted that m an independent contractor, defining specifi. Id be include the cont~ language with 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9b. Discussion and Municipal Golf Community Servi, regarding the statu: of O for Golf ~e and al Services at the Ukiah iacomo provided a short presentation Staff Report with Council. Public Corn Me the Phi Golf Cl ;ue included Jon Kennedy (Men's Golf Club), Chris (Women's Golf Club), and Benj Thomas. Jimmy Ke ,, partner responding t¢ ,ur questi, Park Golf Grou could be monitore~ the future of the Gol Tayman Park Golf Group, Inc., provided a memo to Council posed by Staff in the Staff Report. He advised that the Tayman City Staff in obtaining accurate information so that trends to Director Sangiacomo and the City Council in order to plan for He discussed the possibility of a driving range, and having a master planning to prioritize the needs of the Golf Course. He stated that Tayman Park Golf Group has full capabilities and experience of operating a golf course. He noted that Tayman Park Golf Group would like to assist the City with hiring additional personnel and noted that they have experience with maintenance of a golf course. Mr. James Stewart, partner with Tayman Park Golf Group, explained that his position is service oriented and Tayman strives to get along well with the public. Upon an inquiry by Councilmember McCowen as to whether they would consider an interim position at the City's Golf Course, Mr. Stewart responded that due to the capital investment needed to operate a golf course, they would not be interested in an interim position. He stated that out of professional courtesy to Mr. McMillen, they would be willing to pursue a long term cart lease, such as a four year obligation. Other members of the public that spoke to the issue included Brad Hunt, Martin Robb, and Viola Wilds. Public Comment Closed: 7:33:25 PM A lengthy discussion followed in which Council discussed comments ;ceived by the public as well as the RFP submitted by the Mr. Stewart and Mr. Johnson of the Park Golf Group. M/S Rodin/McCowen authorizing the City Manager to Golf Group, Inc.; that the contract provide for increased res by Tayman Park Golf Group and that Frank Johnson or a~ Tayman Park Golf Group and the City Manager, be the :ract with the Tayman Park olf course maintenance utually acceptable to pro at Golf Course. A brief discussion followed with regard to the m expeditiously in assuming control of the o and Tayman P~ roup act Ukiah df Course. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cc and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: Coun~ er Crane. AB,~ mbers McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, ne. ABSTAIN: None. gm Councilmember McC; ballot argument allow for the a whom serve four year ballot measure. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Discussion of ument In Favor Appointment of Mavor from amon, Rodin/McCowen 7:59:32 PM ed that he a ballot the from ~t on to di~ ~sure AII~ for Council ouncil Members- Councilm Rodin have been working on lsure for the June 2006 election which would the five elected City Council members, all of changes to the wording of the Coun~ recomm~ ~ns for wording of the ballot measure. ku voiced hi the mayor, as may be another method of allowing the citizens of run off voting. Discussion fc that failed to Councilmember ru Council. with regi to possible wording options, past elections regarding this issue g in advance if a vacancy will occur on the Council if a current position and wins, and thereby creating a vacancy on the M/S Baldwin/Rodin adopting and supporting the suggested wording in favor of the ballot measure, as discussed at this meeting, for the June 6, 2006 election. 8:09:48 PM Mr. Terry Poplawski suggested an alternative method of directly electing the mayor. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers McCowen, Rodin, and Baldwin. NOES: Councilmember Crane and Mayor Ashiku. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Councilmember McCowen advised that he would make the recommended revisions to the ballot language and submit it to the City Clerk. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9d. Discussion and Approval of Civic Center Service Hours g: ! 7:32 PM City Manager Horsley discussed her Staff Report with the City Council and provided three recommendations for moving forward with a five day a week schedule starting on March 13, 2006 for City offices. Discussion ensued with regard to the information provided in the recommendations with regard to staffing departments, and City the City Manager's flex schedules. 8:24:28 PM Mr. John Dickerson, representing the Employers Coun, that the Employers Council conducted. discussed a poll M/S Baldwin/McCowen approving the City 1. Go forward with the five day a week schedule 2. Open the Civic Center at 7:30 am for the Plannin~ though other employees be available ar available. 3. Approve increasing the part time )nist and provide the necessary coverage, hours le,, years ago. lations of: h13. ashier functions specifically, even customer service when to full time to what was available ten This recommendation support staff McCowen, Rodin, and a 7:30 :he followir ~r Ashiku. N ning time d adding a total of 16 hours to the call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, '.S: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 10. NEW BUSINESS 10a. Annu nd for South Orchard Avenue and East 8:25 PI ~erself from the meeting. Public Director/Cil concerning fic and East Gol that intends to utilize at this location this Eriksen discussed his Staff Report with the City Council improvement fund for the intersection of South Orchard Avenue established by the City Council on May 16, 2990. His department Improvement Program (STIP) funding for designing a signal construction would begin this summer. A brief discussion foil( ;d concerning the matter. 8:30:56 PM Councilmember Rodin returned to the meeting. It was the consensus of the City Council to accept the report. 10. 10b. NEW BUSINESS Authorize City Manager to Execute Documents and Transfer Funds to Prepay Golf Course Debt 8:32:] ] PM Finance Director McCann briefly discussed his Staff Report with the City Council. 8:32:34 PM Baldwin excused himself from meeting. A brief discussion followed concerning the transfer of funds to prepay the Golf Course debt. M/S McCowen/Crane authorizing the City Manager to execute documents and transfer funds to prepay Golf Course debt with funding provided by an internal loan from the General Fund's available reserves; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ncilmember Baldwin. ABSTAIN: None. 8:34:26 PM Councilmember Baldwin returned to meeting. 10. NEW BUSINESS 10c. Discussion and Possible Consideration Moratorium- Baldwin 8:34:39 PM Mayor Ashiku stated that he may have a recusing himself from this matter. He requested the would be appropriate for him to participate in discussio~ family member that owns property on th( 3wer portion of tt Hills Buildin_a ling this issue would be a findir on whether it matter. He stated that he has a development area. 8:35:36 PM City Attorney Rapport resp( matter of conflict of interest as he is not pr noted that it would not necessarily be a violl member has property as oPl to him owr the appearance of im potential reason to recuse hims~ sion of the that should pursue the an op~ at this time. However, he Act if a close family If Mayor Ashiku feels that is suffici, then that would be a legitimate Ir. 8:36:56 PM Ma, meeting. meeting and Mayor Baldwin assumed chairing the 8:37:06 owner roperty in recused ~imself from the meeting, stating that he is part ~the City. City because it Rapport require a ;d :he City Council cannot adopt a moratorium ordinance =ifth's vote of the City Council. Vice-Mayor Bal hills of Ukiah and I: he recommends a temporary time out on building in the western read aloud the letter he submitted to Council. Public Comment O : 8:44:56 PM Members of the public that spoke to the issue included Linda Sanders, Brian Manning, Ismael Ceja, Phil Ashiku, Steve Thomas, Dave Hull, Rick Piffero, Jim Mulheren, Lisa Mammina, Paulette Arnold, Terry Poplawski, and Bruni Kobbe. Public Comment Closed: 9:17:37 PM Discussion followed regarding how to proceed with adoption of a hillside zoning ordinance, working together with the public and their views and concerns regarding development of the western hills, financial benefits to property owners located on the western hills, and issues of vandalism, trespassing, and privacy were addressed. Options discussed included holding more public workshops. The Ceja project that included a granny unit for the western hills was briefly discussed and it was felt by Councilmembers Baldwin and Rodin that the proposed structures are too large for that area as it detracts from the beauty of the area and is inconsistent with the Ukiah General Plan. There was a suggestion that more trails be incorporated into the western hillside. It was noted that the issue of western hillside development has been before the Planning Commission for consideration. Recessed: 9:30:08 PM Reconvened: 9:38:05 PM 9:38:05 PM Mayor Ashiku and Councilmember Crane 10. NEW BUSINESS 1Od. Discussion and Approval of M~ for Feasibility Study 9:3g: ] 3 PM Mayor Ashiku noted that he was in attendance McCowen during the Inland Water and Power Corn information was reviewed. Year Dam mbers Bald, Crane and (IWPC) meeting in which this City Manager Horsley reported that the I to be a sponsor of the raising of Coyote De feasibility study is approximately $5.8 milli million over an estimated study. For this fiscal towards the for the Army Corps share would eq '~eers which w sC must nc fps) to $33,333. the Cil previously agreed · rent estimated cost for the or share being half or $2.9 to complete the feasibility ~ent has an allocation of $100,000 submit its matching share of $100,000 in order with the initial stages of the study. The City's Coun~ stat~ had no Ukiah munity and Cor their equ~ nquired from the Corp, the City was told that hydro Ms. Pauli as to her opinion if it would serve the to speak with our Congressman to encourage the 9:40:35 PM Pauli, of the IWPC, responded by stating that there are many things the IW ,eds to di~ with the Corp, that being one of them. Although this is a study to raise Coyote are should be some qualification that the actual name of the study is "The Coyote Va Reduction and Water Supply Study", and is not simply about raising the dam but :ompass a number of issues any one of which might be a solution to some of our water y concerns at the present time. It was her understanding that some of the first monies spent will be in a public scoping meeting. At that time, it would be a good opportunity to ask a number of questions directly to the Corp so that we have a better understanding of that issue and how these funds will be spent. Issues discussed included identifying other entities that would participate and help pay for the study, the Corps allocation and the time period in which the funds need to be spent, matching funds, other financing possibilities, financial issues and concerns related to the cost of the study, which entities would benefit from the study, the expense of raising the dam, storage facilities for water, the possibility of Mendocino County participating, having an agreement in place regarding the share of cost among the entities participating in funding the study, and specifying the share of water that each participating entity would receive, based on its share of funding, It was the consensus of the City Council that Councilmember Baldwin, the City's IWPC representative, should work with the IWPC and the City Attorney on development of an agreement. 11. COUNCIL REPORTS]0:18:26 PM Councilmember Rodin reported that she attended a meeting Redwood Region and she reported that the League sent a fax are asking the City to sign onto a letter. They also discussed the effects they can have on cities. She recommended that Council meeting to discuss whether the Council wants to si th ue of California Cities in which they industry and agendized at the next Councilmember Rodin also reported that she attenc on attending a County committee meeting in wh McCowen, and department heads from the crim[ courthouse and associated departments might be committee and is supportive of keeping the courthouse Board rr Director were discus.~ 'isor area. I. She reported a new er is on the 12. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK City Clerk Ulvila advised that she has status of icipal Clerk. Council determined that closed session 13. CLOSED SEI None a. Public Em Title: lance Eval~ ion (Government Code Section 54957) 14. ADJOU There bei meeting was adjourned at: 10:24:24 PM Marie UI ity Clerk, ITEM NO.: 7.a DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2006 Payments made during the month of April 2006, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedule of Bills, representing the four (4) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 68709-68800, 68868-68976, 68977-69091, 69172-69246 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: 67418 Payroll check numbers: 68801-68867, 69092-69171 Payroll Manual check numbers: none Void check numbers: none 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 April 2006. 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: ~. ~~--~ Candace Horsley, Ci~ Manager KRS:WORD/AGENDAAPR06 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL 2006 Demand Payments approved: Check No.: System generated: 68709-68800, 68868-68976, 68977-69091,69172-69246. Manual: 67418 FUNDS: 100 General Fund $156,649.17 600 Airport 131 Equipment Reserve Fund 611 Sewer Construction Fund 140 Park Development $63,456.40 612 City/District Sewer 141 Museum Grants $2,251.10 615 City/District Sewer Replace 143 N.E.H.I. Museum Grant 620 Special Sewer Fund (Cap Imp) 150 Civic Center Fund 640 San Dist Revolving Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund $4,023.43 641 Sanitation District Special 201 Asset Seizure (Drug/Alcohol) 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 203 H&S Education 11489 (B)(2)(A1) 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants 661 Landfill Corrective Fund 205 Sup Law Enforce. Srv. Fund (SLESF) $2,496.87 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 206 Community Oriented Policing 670 U.S.W. Bill & Collect 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant 678 Public Safety Dispatch 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint . $1_,~_3.3_._6_5_. 679 MESA (Mendocino Emergency Srv Auth) 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund 695 Golf ·_ 250 Special Revenue Fund 696 Warehouse/Stores 260 Downtown Business Improvement $19,881.44 697 Billing Enterprise Fund 290 Bridge Fund 698 Fixed Asset Fund 301 2107 Gas Tax Fund 699 Special Projects Reserve 310 Special Aviation Fund 800 Electric 315 Airport Capital Improvement 805 Street Lighting Fund 330 Revenue Sharing Fund 806 Public Benefits Charges 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant 820 Water 333 Comm. Development Block Grant 840 Special Water Fund (Cap Imp) 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 900 Special Deposit Trust 335 Community Dev. Comm. Fund ........... 910 Worker's Comp. Fund 340 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 920 Liability Fund 341 S.T.P. 940 Payroll Posting Fund 342 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief 950 General Service (Accts Recv) 345 Off-System Roads Fund 960 Community Redev. Agency 410 Conference Center Fund $16,840.67 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 550 Lake Mendocino Bond 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund 575 Garage $2,473.86 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. 975 Russian River Watershed Assoc 976 Mixing Zone Policy JPA PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 68801-68867 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 27564-27710 PAYROLL PERIOD 3/26/06-4/8/06 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 69092-69171 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 27711-27872 PAYROLL PERIOD 4/9/06-4/22/06 VOID CHECK NUMBERS: NONE TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS $11,399.16 $236,919.97 $491,238.37 $2,509.53 $3,171.17 $19,882.93 $3,319.38 $6,505.87 $8,905.07 $302.02 $6,370.31 $7,269.60 $484,786.86 $9,086.50 $13,468.52 $38,741.91 $815,689.01 $2,189.09 $142,509.97 $344,130.94 $2,060.10 $515.32 $73,000.00 _ $40,649185 _ $3,033,928.04 $45,591.74 $130,014.42 $348,951.33 $3,558,485.53 CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on City Clerk APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER I have examined this Register and approve same. CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds. City Manager Director of Finance r,,,) · > o o o o o o o ~°°~ oo 00000 ooooo o o o o o o o o o o o o 00 ,.-4 Ln ~ · . ~° o oo o o o o ~° i m~ H~0 ~0 HHH0 ~R OO ,<o 0 O~ i H ,< i ~00000 ~0~ HHH ~0 0 kid ' > 0 0 0 O0 LD LD U~ L~'~ ¢',~ ("q C~ O O O ,,--t *-"'1 OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOO~~ O O O O O O cq ?'7 o~$ O O ~.q O O O O O O O O O O O O ~D ~D 00 o 0 o © 0 O O O ~-I CO C~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 . . CO CO · H H o~o O O '.4D MD O'~ C~ oo ~oo H~H~H~H n~o~ r. ao kid . O O O O O r-i {22> c> oo o o o o o o o IX) ",cC O O O O O O O ~ O L.n kid ~ O O O kO ~ O O 0 "0 ~ O,< .,.C O oo~ o o oo o LF} Ln U"'I · . O O O O O O o~o ,<,<O OO O~ 0 H ¢ ~0 ~ 0 ~H 0~ H~ © 0 0 i [~0 ~0 n~ H I~j H :>',H ~q E~ ~ H ~ 0 ~ 0 I ~ H i E) · > ~D 0 0 0 0 0 0 O I O O O~ O ~ ('4 ~-4 ,--4 O O ,-t ,ri r-.,I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rD(..) r-..t 0 0 0 0 0 0 o u~4 ~ O 00 ~ 0 oo oo~ 0 0 ,ri 0 C'~ LC) · . 0 0 0 0 ~ ,ri f-~ H r~o o o 0 u~o :;z:H o u~ o H o o © o ~:o o > 0 0 ,-t ,-4 6'4 (%1 cq Cq O0 oo 0 0 0 0 0 O0 000 000 O0 O0 00000000000 ooSSo 0 0 O0 O0 O0 o o o ~o H oSSos 0 0 00000 ~000~ · , , , o 0~0~ 0~0~ HHHHH~O ~oo o H © OE~E~ © ~0~00~ 0 0000000000 0000000000 ~°°~° ~g~o~oo~ 00000000~ 0000000000 O0 O0 O0 000000000 o o~oo~ o°~°°~o o o 0 ~ oo~oo O0 O0 0 00000 0 oo~o 00~~000 00~~000 00 00 00 · °~ Cxl ~ , ~-~ ce} 0o~ ~000~ ~00~ ~°°~ ~oo~o~~ ~ 000000000 ..oooo~ ~ 0 O~ ~ ~ ~ 0 Oo O~ ~° O0 O0 O0 ~????????? ~ H 0 H H ~D U ' 0 > 0 u~ 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 0000000000000 0 0 ~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000 O0 0 0 00000000000000000000~~~0~ ~ rJ 0 ~ ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH H H H m 0 H ~ H ~ . > O0 0 00000 o~ 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0"/ 04 i i OO U~ ~o 0 t~ oo0oo ~00000 ~~o o ~ 0 ~ ~ ~H 0 m~ ~00 U > o o o o o o t~ r.-q ~ 8~~8~oo oo8~oo~8~ 0000000000000 0000000000000 c) o o o 6'4 o ,-4 kid , o Ln I.--I H~ ~H ~H~ ~ ~ 0 H ~ H H~HH~HH HHO o 0~,< ,.-4 O ,--I ,--~ · ~ H Oo Z 0 O~ o H H ~) 0 0 ~1~ o o o ~ H ~ 0 ~ © H LO U , o o C) · O~ ~:o ~ ~ ~ ~o o~ (J · o o o o o o o o o o o o oo o oo o o o o i 000 00 00 00 00 0 kD oo 00 00 C~ ~ 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 000 H H H 00 000 o 0 O ["'"- O O 0 0 0 o~o O OO Ln L.~ L.n · · , 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 c0 · 0 © OOO , 0 , HH~0 0 ,---I ~:o o rJ"} o O 0 % I 0 o~ 0 i o~ ~j · 0 0 000 L~ o~ 000 00 00 0 0 000 000 00 00 00 00 0 ~ ~00 0 000 ~0 0000 0000 0000 o~o oo~ 0 0 0 · . 0 0 0 i ~os O0 O0 000 O0 000 ~H HOO HHO i~O o~o O~ H 0~.~ ¢.., := :::::, o ,,<HE-* ~000 0~ i i ~ > 0 O0 000 0 0 0 00 000 ("q (",1 {'N1 ~q cq gg° O00 000000000 mi:z: o u~ ~ 0 o~ 0 000 0 , o~ ,,, O0 · 0 0 ~0 0 O00 · , o~ , , 0 0 , H H i oo~oo oo ~ O0 0 000000000 0~000~000 ~0~0~0 0~~0000 ~~00~ oo~oo~oo O0 O0 O0 O~ ~o i o ou~ ~o I I OU'} 0 © o o © HHHHHHHHH 000000000 ~000000000 i 000 O0 000 O0 O0 O0 O0 0000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000 O0 O0 0000000 O0 0000000 0 0 ~ O0 ~0 O~ ~0 ~ O0 o.0 ..... 0..,.0 ..... 00000000000~~0~000000 H~~HHHHH HH~HH~HHHH HHHHO ~88~~~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 0000000000000000000000000 ~ ~ooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 C~ C~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o~ 0 · . ~$° · 0 · , 000~ N~NO o~ 0 0 0 · og · , 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 · 0 0 · . ~ 0 ~ 0 · 0 0 °~ 0 0 oo~ o O~ n~ O~ ~00~ o H ~o 0000 o o o o o ~D 00 O0 00000 00 0000 0000 0 0 o o · mo~ r-.-i o o (~ · . oo~o o O~ d 0 ~ 0 o o~ 0 o ~ ~ H OOH~ 0 O0 0 o~o ~ o 0000000 o o o o o ooo oooooooooo oooooooooo o o ,-t 0 0 o o o o o o · . o o , , Cq r'q r'"t cq · o o HHHHHOHHH~O ,~ H M~ O~ I~ H C~ O0 . . O~ 0 0 O~ U% ~:0 o i ~0000000000 0 00 00 o~ o~~oo ~ ~ ~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 000000000000000000000 0 ~ 00000 o 0 0 0 DD~ o§~~~o~~o~oo oo~ O0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 000000000000000000000 0 O0 O0 ~0 O0 O~ 0 O0 O~ O0 ~ ~ 00~00~0~0~~~ 000000000~0~~0000 ~u o~ o o oo ooooooooo 0 O0 O0 0 00 o~ o o ~o~ oo oooo oo o oooo o o o o ~oo~o~o O0 O0 0 OOOOOOOOO 000000000 ~0~~0~ ~~oo~o oo~o~o HHHHHHHHH o o o o o o . o o · ~ o o ~ · °~, o o o . 0 °~ 0 , · ~o o o o o o o , . o o . . ~ 0'3 · O0 tOO 0 ~ orJ'} rJ H ~ 00 ~,-.] 0 O~ 0~ 000 rj rj g8°88o ~0000 0 o ~00~0 000 oo oo ooooooo ~~~o o oo oo oo o oo ooooo ~ oo oo o o o ooooooo 0 0 o o t-x1 0 O0 0 0 0000000 o~oo~o o ~o~oo O~ O0 o o o O~ ~0 o O~ ~ OH O~ rJ'}O Mr./'} O0 ~ r~ H 0 ~H 0 0 0000 000~ U ~~g~o o 00~000 ~ ~0 ~oO~oo 00~000 ~ ~H 0000000 ~0~00 ~~oo~ · . , , , 0 ooooo~o · . oo~oo~ O0 O0 ~0~00 0~0000000000~~00 0 O0 O0 0 O0 O0 O0 oo~oo ~Oo o§~o o ~oo ~ o o OHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHH ~ oo oo oo oo oo ~. o,,,,.oo,o .......... O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 00000000000000000000 oo~ 0 O0 0 o~oo~§o 0 O0 0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 H ~~¢~~~~~ U oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~soo ~ O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 i :~0 i © ~o H~ © o~ ~o ,0 ~ H ~]~ o i i i · ~° ~8~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 · 0 , , 0 © © 0 0 C/ 0'1 ~-~ ~ u~ UJ ~ 0 I-~ ~ 0 0 O~ U"I ~ ,,.,J ~ -,,.J t_rl °g °88ggo~ 000 °88 0 O0 0 O0 08 88 OO 0 0 o~o o~ U'I 0 0 0'~ O~ 0 0 ~rl 0 0 0 0 0 0 I'''J 0 0 0 ~0 H H o~ ~,,~ ~0 tx.) oo H 0 ~ 0 0 H © o o 0 .< ooo0 mmm> ~X~ H ~ ~J ~0 H ~0 m~/~o ~ i L~ ~L~ ~0 O0 O0 < ~3 ~ H ~ 0 UO i r~ 0 © o~ O0 i i 00 o · , , ~o~o o o o ooo oo o u"l u"J Ln c~ o 00 ,,..4 o o ~ o kD O0 o o ~0 0 ,,,4 0 0 kc) ko k,g '42 0 0 0 0 oo~ o o S g § o o os o o o os o o O0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O0 0 0 0 O0 0 0 oO © r~ 0 © ,, ~H~HH~H~HHHH~HHHHHHHHHH~HH~HH i H~H H H H H i H H~H H i H i H ~o~o~o~oo~oo~oo~oo2~o~oo ~O ~O ~O OO ~O OO OO OO OO O O OO O OOOO OOOOOOOOOO OO OO ~ o ~ o Soo~ o~oo~ooS o~ oo O O OO O OO OO O OO o ~ ~ ~ H 0 ~J hh 0 OO OO 0000~00~00000000000000~~ SSoosoossoossoosoosSOOoo oo oo oo oo ooSSo°°oSoo°°~ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO U mm m u 000~ ~o u u U u o~ t~ 00 ~HHH HHH ~000 O00 · · · ~° · , , 0 OH 0 i 000000 000000 OHHHHH 0 O0 0000 ~°~ 0 · § ° o 0 OO ~0~ H H H ooo O O OOO ....1.,-.4-.3 OO O OOOOOO o~oo OOOO 0 ~ O0 ~0~ Q~ ~ ~H mm mm 0 O0 0 0 H ~ © I.-.q 0 0 © ~H ~ U ~d 0 U 0 0 ~ i ~ < ~0 © o~ boO ,o O0 0 ~4 H 0HHH HHH 0~ H H c~ ~D · 0 ~ o'~ , · ~ c~ O~U~d · o · tx.) bo · 0 0 o~o~ o ~'1 o'~ i-~ ~ 0o 0o o o o o i-~ ~ o o I-~ o o~oo o o ~ ~ o ~ o'~ I-~ ~ 0o 0o o o o o o o 0o (3o ~~00 ~ ~ ~H~ ~m~ ~ 000 H ° i o o~o~g~~ ~o OO~O~~O~~ ooo~~~~ ~~ ~HHHHHH H ZZZ ~HH~ ~NNH~ ~H oo~oo ~oo~ ~ OOOOOOOOOOOOO~O ....... OO O~ ~ OOO¢~O~~~O 0..~O..,.. .... OOO OOOOOOOOOO .......... . · ooo o~oo~oo~ OOO O OO OO OOO OOOOOOOOOO O:;dH 0 r~ ,.--] H H i H o · . ~ i-~ · 0 , , H H H~H XH H i i H ~ ~ ~O~ 0 o ooo o o oo OOO ~ O Soossoosooosoos OO OO OOO OO oo~ ooo OO O ~ O ~OOOOOOOOOO ~o~~So~ o ~A' ~&~oooooo OO~~OOOOOO O OO OO OO ~ ~goo~oo~o~ 0 0~ ~0 0 ~0 i ~r..n H ~ H~ o~ i ~0 r~ H ~O I.-I © H '-fl too ,0 o o o o o o · , · ~-~ {2> · 0 c~ <2) U ~ ,--3 0 ~ ~ 0 · · tx.) 0 ~ ~~~o~o ~ o ~88~ ~ 8~ ~H 0 ~0 O0 oo o~o~ O0 0 0 O0 00~0~ 0 o o o o o u-1 u-i u'l HHHHHHHHHHHHH. 0 0 0 ~ 000~ 0~ ~OH ~ mmm z 000~ ZZZ~ ~o ~< ~ ~ 0 0 ,--3 H ~ 0 o~ ~0 °g ,, l-.-q i i i OH~HHHHH~HHHHH 0 ~O ~ ~O O ~O~O~O~OO~OO~ OOOOOOO~OOOOO ~oo~oo~oo~oo OO OO OO OO OOOOOOOOOOOOO ~H O ~OO ..... O ~O~ .... o oo~ 0 000~ o oo ~88°~o o oo~o 0~00 .... OOOO OOOO OOOO 0 0 i~- U1 U'I O O o~o ~° 0 0~ [-q ~ ~ ~ < H o2::,, ,, ~H H ,---] U O O O , · o ~ ~ ~ o H ~ ~ ~0000'' ~ 000000000 0 0 ~oo~oo~o ~ OO ~ O O O · ........ ~OOOOOOO ~ ~ ~C o C H H ~t H · ~o~oos~ o o ~O OO ~ O O 0 0 o~oo HHHHHHHHH OO OO ~o~OO~o~ ~ O O O O O O 0'/ 0'/ 0'1 C~ ~ kO O OD CZ) O ~n t~ osoossoo 0 O0 O0 ~ ~ o H ~o o3 o H Oh i i © -~ ~0 t~ oo ~-~ o0 HHH~ HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH o~ OO O~ ~O ~O OO OO OOO~OO~~O~OOOOOOOOOO OOO~O~~OO~O~OO~ ~~O~OOOO~O~OOO~OO~ 000000000000000000000000 o°~°°~°°~°°~°°~°°~°°~oo oo oo oo oo oo 000~00000000000000000000 O O U t::2 U 00 00 00 O OO O ~:~. ¢:,,. ¢::~ ~°~°°~°°~°°~°~°°~°°~~¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo oo oo oo oo oo OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 6") ~o Q ~J o> o~ - [-.q ~H H o H ~: H 0 ~ :am o o I-I r~o o o> ~0 ,0 [-~ ,, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0~ H ~ · · :~oo [-q m t-q ~.~ ~ 0 0 · . ~ I-~ 0 0 · . 0 og mmm 0 0 0 0 ~0 0 0 ~J ~J oo~o ~ I-~ 0o 0o o o o o {J~ Lm 0 ~ 0 ~'~ ~ t~O tx.) t~ oo~ o o H ~J · H ~ o~ H ~ 0 :~ ~0 ~] o Co ~o ~o © H H H o"~ I.-q [-q 0 O~H 0 ~3H H o o 0 0 O~ 0'~ 0o 0o o o o o 00 0o $-~ o 0 0 c~ L~ U1 Ul O0 0 O~ C~ k~ ~-~ O0 O0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 ~0 ~ U © © H 0 o~, ~.~, -~ oo OH O~ H U'~ 0 O0 o o 0 Od 0 © © H [,o o o O~ 0~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ 0000~~0~0~00~0~00 o~ ~o ~0 [-q HHHHHHHHHHHHHH~ ooo© ~ ~ o © ~0 ,, (20 0 0 0 L~O L~ 0 0 , · § ~~oo~ooo~o~ ~ O0 000 O0 0 000000000~~ O0 O0 O0 O0 ~0000000000000 0 O0 · 0 · (DC>C> 00 00 00 oo i 0 000 L,~O t.,O bO O0 O0 O0 000 oo~oo~oo~oo~ oSS°°~°°SS°°SSoo oo oo 00000000000000 o~oo ooo o~o 000 <DOC) U 0 ~ ~0 < U H m~ U 00 ~0 OU H ~S~ r.~ · t~O © }-~ ooo~ 0 O~U H 0 ~0 0 o~ ~0 o r.~ ~0~ mm mm ~000 ~000 0~ 00~0 0 0 t'q o~o ~oo~ o o o o o o o o oo o U'l ~ i-~ o o o o o o ~ o 0 0 © 0 0 ~ < i * ~0 022 © o~ ~0 o o o ~ ~o~ O~ ~0 o o~o · o , , ~oo 000 °88 o 000 ~8;;~;~o o° ~ o OH ~o o 8 0~00000 · ~88~oh ~ o oo oho ~ o ........ . ~0~ 0 000 O0 0 0 000~000 0 0 0 0 o o o 8 0 ° oo~oo~ 088008 O~ © © 0 ~0 0 ~ HHHH~ 0000 ~0 I"U 0 0 m~ ~-~ H :Z:: '~ H ~0 © o> <2> 00 120 [..q o o 00 k-¢ · 0 O OO OOOOOO ~OO~OO 0~~ 2HHHH ~0000 HHHH OOOO 0~ O O OO O · . · .UJ U.J U.J I.-* i-.~ I...~ · 0 0 , 0 0 <:2> 0 ::;d ~ Q ,.--] ~0 0 0 i-]CU-., ~] }..q i i 0 0 o~ o o os §oosso 0 O0 0 O0 000000 ~oo~ ~o 000 o o o o o 0000000000000000 ~ H t~ © 0 i ~ o © o~ 0000000000000000 ~0~0000~00000000 ~oo~o~Ooo o o~oo°° 0000000000000000 00 0 O00 · · L~ i.~ U0 , C~ 0~ o~ i i b.~ 0 · C> · · 0 U~ I.-~ 0:) {'.,..) 0 O0 0 0 tx..) · tx.) , · 88°°88°°88°°8°°8oo oo oo oo °°c~ 0 0 O0 O0 tx.) bO U~ U~ 0 0 0 0 k-~ 0 0 ~0 0 ~0 ~0 8 >,o H i~ L~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ i~ ~ i~ i~ ~ i~ i~ ~ ~ Ll~ 000000000000000 ~ ~0 H H H H H H H H H H H U H H H ~ o~ c~ 00 0 0 0 $~2~~g~g~~~~ ~o ~o oo oo o~goo~ggo~o ~0~0~00000000000000000000000 ~og~o~~~~o~o~~g~o ~ O0 ~0 ~ 0~0 O0 O0 0 0 000~0~0~00~0~0~~~~~ 0.,.0, ..... ..,,, ........ 0000000000000000000000000000000 · ....... oo~oo~oo~oo~oo~oo§oo~oo~o O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 O0 0 0000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000 ~ 0 ~J ~h 0 i~. ~~~0~0~ ~ ~ ~00~0~0~000~¢ 0~~000~0~00 ~ oo~oo~o~oo~o O0 O0 0 O0 0 OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ~ o ~0~00~0~00000~000~000~ ~ O0 0 ~H~ 0 ~ H ~ H~0H~ HHHHHHH~HH~HH ~H~HHH ~ 0O000 H H~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 0000 H~ ~ H ~~ ~ o~ oo oo oo oo o o oo 0~~00~0000000000000 0 0 0000 ~0~00~00~0000~0000~00 0 ~ O0 O0 ~~~~~~00~ ¢ ~ 0000 000000000000000000~000 0 0 0000 ~oo~oo~oo~o~oo~oo o o oo~o O0 O0 O0 0 O0 O0 0 0 O0 0 000000000000000~0~0000 0 ~ ~~ 0~0~~ 0 0 OHH~~ ~ mm oossooso O0 O0 0 00000000 oossoo§ooosoo§soosooss O0 O0 000 O0 O0 O0 i ~o H ~J o~ ~0 tx.) o ~o o o · . c> · 0 mmm . . o ~ ~j :~oo u* :~ ~ ~ o ~0 O0 0 0 o~ oo o ~ 0 O0 0 00~ O0 0 ~ o~~ o ~ oo oooo · 0 OHHH 0~ oo o · . · c~ · , , o o , o ~ o o ~o o o bJ ~ o oo~o 00,,..30'1 UJ t.~ C~ 0 0 0 O0 O0 I-~ O0 o ~HH~HHHHHH~ ~ ~HH~HHHHHH O OO OOOOOOQ OOOO 0000~ ~~0 ~~H ~ ~ ~ H~ H i o~ 00 ~O~ O ~OO~O~O~ 0~H~HHHHHH ~ O0 0~~ ~ OO OOOOOO O oo 8oo8oo o O OOOOOO ~ moo oo ~o OO~OOOOOOOO . ~. ~. ~. ~. ~. O O O O O O . O O O O O O O O O O 0~~ o~ m mm ~O~ O0~O 0 0 i~. ~ I-~ oo ~oo o~oo~ ~ o oo oo o H ~ 0 o~ t~ o, ix) 0 [-q ~ ~ ,--] ,o o ~ o © I I o~ oo oo · . o 0 ~ I~ ~J ~J~ H o~ mC) ~D · o~ 0 0 0 0 F~ , O0 < ~ o © o~ o~ 0 I-~ 0 ~.J ~D · · · 0~ 0~ 0~ 0 ~ ° © 0 00 ~ 0 0 ~D O0 0000 0000 © " ,o 0 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Item No 7.b Date: May 17, 2006 SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF THE TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE OF A MODEL 2350 ELECTRIC METER TEST BOARD TO WATTHOUR ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. FROM $32,247.25 TO $35,217.25 On April 19, 2006, Council approved the purchase of and training on the Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board used for the meter calibration and change out program to Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. The meter test board is $32,217.25 including tax and training is $3,000.00, bringing the total purchase price to $35,217.25 instead of the $32,247.25 that was previously approved. (Refer to Attachment 1 - April 19, 2006 Agenda Summary Report.) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize amendment in the purchase price for the Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board, including training, to Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. in the amount of $35,217.25 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject bid and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1 - April 19, 2006 Agenda Summary Report Candace Horsley, Ci~ Manager Item No 7.e Date: April 19, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID TO WATTHOUR ENGINEERING COMPANY, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE OF A MODEL 2350 ELECTRIC METER TEST BOARD IN THE AMOUNT OF $32,247.25 Staff evaluated a number of electric meter test boards used for the City's meter calibration and change out program and found Watthour Engineering's Model 2350 to be the most precise and reliable meter testing system and is used by the majority of NCPA members. Another advantage to using this system, is the availability of "backup" from other NCPA cities should the need arise. A quotation was requested from Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. for the purchase of and training on the Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board. Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. is the sole manufacturer of this unit and sells their products directly from the factory. The meter test board is $32,217.25 including tax and has been budgeted in the 2005/2006 Fiscal Year in Account Number 800.3650.800.000. Training is $3,000.00 and has been budgeted in Account Number 800.3728.160.000. Sufficient funds are available. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bid for the purchase of a Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board, including training, to Watthour Engineering Company, Inc. in the amount of $32,247.25 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject bid and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Stan Bartolomei, Electrical Supervisor Prepared by: Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment: 1. Letter from manufacturer APPROVED:" ~L}.%~'..... ~.h:-k~-." xx'-. Candace Horsley, City ~anager Fax From : 707 467 2811 84-13-86 13:20 I ATTACHMENT' .... April 5, 2006 City of Ukiah AL'In: Purchasing Dept.. t320 Airport Rc~d Ukieh, CA 95482 Dear Sir ex' Madam: Watthour Engineering Co., Inc. is the manufacturer of the .Model 2350 Electric Meter Test Board. We utilize manufacturer representatives to sari our products direct from the factory to the customer. We do not' utilize ~stributora ~r wholesalers to sell our products and will sell our products directly to the City of Uk[ah. If you have any'questions, please contact us at ($01) g33,4)900. J.~/ee$ . RII~ YtLtIRI 1VI~,,III, AIIk:;,I tllta/.-'/. I-'ill ITEM NO.: 7.c DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE REZONING ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 003-050-29; 66; 85 & 88 (ZC No. 05-34) SUMMARY: On May 3rd, the City Council unanimously approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration and introduced an Ordinance rezoning the Estok Menton and Antonio Rocha parcels on Apple Avenue from the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District to the R-3/P-D (High Density Residential-Planned Combining) Zone. The Ordinance has been prepared in final form and is ready for adoption. Purpose of Rezoning: The purpose of this rezoning is to establish a planned townhouse development consisting of 24 townhouse properties, 2 common-space lots for the development of shared recreational areas, and a third common-space lot for the development of a cul-de-sac terminus for Apple Avenue. Precise Development Plan and Subdivision Map: The proposed townhouse development project also includes a Precise Development Plan that would allow the establishment of individual lots with the unique development standards required to develop the townhouses and a Tentative Subdivision Map to allow the division of the site into the 27 lots proposed in the development plan. These components of the project are scheduled as a separate Agenda Item on May 17, 2006 to allow the Council to hold a public hearing and consider adopting a Resolution approving the proposal. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the ordinance rezoning the subject properties from the R-3 Zoning District to the R-3/P-D Combining Zoning District. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not adopt the ordinance and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: No public notice required Requested by: Ruff & Associates for Estok Menton and Antonio Rocha, property owners Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Ordinance approving rezone of Assessor Parcel Numbers 003 -050-29; 66; 85 & 88 (ZC No. 05-34) gerCandace Horsley, City ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA The City Council of the City of Ukiah does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION ONE Pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 9009 of the Ukiah Municipal Code, the Official Zoning Map for the City of Ukiah is amended to change the zoning on a 1.44-acre site comprised of four properties at 760 and 767 Apple Avenue (Assessor Parcel Number 002-050-29, 66, 85 & 86) in the City of Ukiah from the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District to the R-3 P-D (High Density Residential-Planned Development) Combining Zoning District. SECTION TWO This rezoning action and amendment to the Official Zoning Map of the City of Ukiah is necessary to establish more flexible development standards for lot size, lot width, and yard areas, which will allow the development of 24 individually-owned townhouse units and three common-space lots for outdoor recreation and a paved cul-de-sac terminus at the north end of Apple Avenue, as shown in Exhibit A of this ordinance and subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval shown in Exhibit B of this ordinance. SECTION THREE This ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ukiah. SECTION FOUR This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after adoption. Introduced by title only on May 3, 2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku Passed and adopted on May 17, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk EXHIBIT B Recommended Conditions of Approval for General Plan Amendment/Rezone and Site Development Permit: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Zone Change No. 05-34, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid: , No building permits shall be issued for any of the residential structures shown on the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development until the Final Subdivision Map has been approved by the Ukiah City Council and signed by the Mayor of Ukiah. . All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development approved by the City Council, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches, renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike. . Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the City Council. o In addition to any particular condition, which might be imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. 5. Applicant shall be required to obtain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency. . The Building Permits for the townhouse units permitted by the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the Final Subdivision Map (SUB No. 05-35) approval by the City Council, or they shall be subject to the City's permit revocation process and procedures. In the event the Building Permits cannot be issued within the stipulated period from the project approval date, a one year extension may be granted by the Director of Planning if no new circumstances affect the project which otherwise would render the original approval inappropriate or illegal. It is the applicant's responsibility in such cases to propose the one-year extension to the Planning Department prior to the two-year expiration date. , The approved Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project related to the development plan is not being conducted in compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established land use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty four (24) consecutive months. , Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the development plan and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. , 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Improvement Plans for interior walkways or curb, gutters, sidewalks, driveways and street paving along the Apple Avenue cul-de-sac and street frontage shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer in accordance with City Standard Drawings and submitted to the Ukiah City Engineer for review. The improvements plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any ministerial permits for site preparation activities required for the construction of any residential unit on the subject property. All improvements within the right-of-way for the Apple Avenue cul-de-sac and street frontage shall be constructed in conformance with the approved improvement plans under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. The Encroachment Permit shall be submitted to the City Engineer with a fee equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the improvements and must be approved prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project. All improvements shall be done by a properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License who shall submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability: $1,000,000; Property Damage: $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. Prior to any site development on the subject properties, a Civil Engineer shall design a stormwater detention system that will detain any increase in runoff generated as a result of this project. All storm water generated as a result of development activities shall be detained on-site so as to not create any additional impact on the downstream drainage system. The criteria for design shall be such that the runoff released from the site shall be equal to or less than that which is currently released from the site for any event, up to and including a 50 year event. This design must be submitted to the City Engineer for his approval prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits. The system must be installed prior to the final inspection of any building or grading permits. A letter of confirmation shall be provided to the City Engineer by the designer of the stormwater detention system that the system is consistent with the design approved by the City Engineer. This letter shall be received and verified by the City Engineer prior to any final inspections for building permits. A Grading and Drainage Plan that includes an Erosion and Sediment Transport Control Plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer/Public Works Director for review and shall be approved prior to the commencement of any grading, site preparation activities, or construction of buildings and paving. A licensed civil engineer shall prepare all drainage calculations and other work done on this Plan, including the following work: a. The extent of modifications to existing drainage patterns; b. The extent of storm drainage improvements and erosion control measures for building pads, driveways, parking lot areas, and other movements of soil; and c. The extent of other development the City Engineer determines could adversely affect existing drainage patterns on the site or on abutting properties or could cause wind or water erosion. 15. The City Engineer/Public Works Director shall permit no site preparation, grading, or construction of buildings and paving on the project site without first reviewing a Final Grading and Drainage Plan that includes an Erosion and Sediment Transport Control Plan. This plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer/Public Works Director for review and shall be approved prior to the commencement of the activities described above. A licensed civil engineer shall prepare all drainage calculations and other work done on this Plan, including the work described below: 16. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion; drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on-site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. 17. All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" (inches) of asphalt concrete with a 6" (inch) aggregate base, or, alternatively, any option approved by the City Engineer. 18. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. 19. All inactive soil piles on the project site shall be completely covered at all times to control fugitive dust. 20. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, and actual construction shall include a program of washing off trucks leaving the construction site to control the transport of mud and dust onto public streets. 21. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers, and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. 22. All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. 23. 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 also be required to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance to determine whether the development of a precise mitigation program will be required prior to the continuation of any site work. 24. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Public Utilities and Public Works Departments. 25. A Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted by the project applicant and approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building. This plan shall include, but not be limited to the following: a) A planting legend that includes the names, location, coverage area, and canopy cover of proposed vegetation; b) A planting schedule for all vegetation installed on the site; and c) A maintenance schedule for existing or proposed vegetation, including a watering schedule and irrigation system design. 23. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat, weed-free manner, and may not be removed or substantially altered unless the Director of Planning reviews and approves the removal or replacement of vegetation determined to be diseased, unstable, hazardous, or poorly located on the site. Any vegetation removed from the site shall be replaced with similar vegetation approved by the Planning Director. 24. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and/or ventilation equipment shall be aesthetically screened from view consistent with the architecture of the building upon which it is located. 25. Outdoor refuse/recycle containers shall be aesthetically screened from view; garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosures. 26. A recycling program that provides the opportunity for all residents of the townhouse development project to recycle shall be implemented prior to the occupancy of any of the buildings and shall remain in effect so long as the structures are occupied. This program shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and approved prior to implementation to ensure it provides efficient recycling methods consistency with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements. 27. Hours of construction shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday unless additional hours of construction for special construction activities or projects are reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 28. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, a Final Lighting Plan shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Community Development or his/her designee for review for compliance with Ukiah Municipal Code standards for on-site lighting and with "dark sky" guidelines for reducing nighttime lighting on the site. The Final Lighting Plan shall include details regarding exterior lighting for structures, garden areas, and walkways, with lighting sources that are full cut-off, hooded, and down-cast, or otherwise shielded to ensure that light does not adversely shine towards neighboring properties, or toward the night sky. Additionally, all lighting shall be the minimum wattage necessary to provide adequate security, yet shall not result in excessively bright night glow. Sufficient details regarding the proposed wattage of all site lights shall be included in the Final Lighting Plan so that the Planning Staff can determine how bright the proposed site lights will be. The Director of Planning and Community Development shall have the authority to require the Final Lighting Plan to be modified (including the wattage) and/or additional information to be submitted so that the lighting meets the requirements listed above. 29. Rental and lease agreements for all of the apartments on the subject properties shall include an advisement to potential renters that a) the apartment complex is located in close proximity to the Ukiah Municipal Airport and is subject to occasional overflights of aircraft taking off or landing at the airport, and b) the number of noise-producing flights may increase in future years. The language in this advisement shall be approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Permit of Occupancy for any of the proposed apartment buildings. 30. All conditions that do not contain a specific date or time period for completion shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 7.d DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF CONCESSION EQUIPMENT DAMAGED DURING THE NEW YEAR'S FLOOD AT THE UKIAH SPORTS COMPLEX FROM SUPERIOR OUTLET CENTER (DBA AS THE NEXT DAY GOURMET) IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,582.03. SUMMARY: During the New Year's Flood, the Ukiah Sports Complex sustained considerable damage when floodwater from the Russian River spilled over it banks to the north of the facility. As the floodwater flowed south through the Complex a number of structures and amenities were damaged. Specifically, the main building at the Complex was under four feet of water and there was substantial damage to the concession equipment. After inspecting the facility, FEMA has accepted the City's claim for damages to the identified equipment. The FEMA worksheet for Project #-48 that contains the scope of this damage is included for Council's review as Attachment #1. The initial estimate for equipment damage provided by FEMA was $34,472.50 and includes both concession and maintenance items. This amount is only an estimate and the actual costs may be higher or lower. FEMA will reimburse for the actual replacement cost of those items identified in the project scope description. Continued On Page #2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Award of bid for the purchase of concession equipment damaged during the new year's flood at the Ukiah Sports complex from Superior Outlet Center (dba as the Next Day Gourmet) in the amount of $18,582.03. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine the award of bid to Superior Outlet Center is not appropriate and award to an alternate bidder. 2. Reject all bids and remand to staff with further direction. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director, Jake Burgess, Activities/Sports Coordinator and Jarrod Myer, Parks Lead Worker Candace Horsley, City Manager and Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor 1. FEMA Project Worksheet for Concession Equipment 2. Bid Detail from Superior Outlet Center Candace Horsley, Ci~ Manager As part of the City's effort to rebuild the facility, the Purchasing Division has solicited bids from distributors listed on the City's qualified bidders list to replace the identified concession equipment. Given the variety of equipment, other items will be replaced through additional bid requests. Requests for bids to replace the concession equipment were sent to 11 distributors and three responses were received by the bid deadline of April 28, 2006. Superior Outlet Center submitted the Iow bid of $18,582.03. The following table provides a summary of all the bids received and Attachment 2 provides full detail of the bid submitted by Superior Outlet Center. Bid Summary Table Ace Mart Restaurant Supply $19,221.88 Galasource, Inc. $20,625.27 Superior Outlet Center, dba as Next Day Gourmet $18,582.03 The equipment will be charged to the Park's Division Machinery and Equipment account (100.6001.800.000.6001) and FEMA will issue a reimbursement. Attachment #1 FI/DER,AL EMEROENCY M.~'~AGEMENT SITE SHEET PROJ'ECT WORKSHEET SITE 2 OF 3 DECI.ARA. TION NO 1628 -DR- CA PROJECT N0. 1 ?XPS NO. __48 ~ 045-8I t34~00 DAZd'AGE FACId. ITY PARK BUILDENG CONTENTS ,-MND EQUIPMENT LO1~49,52,54 A_I~FLICANT COUNTY CITY OF ~ MENDOCINO i ZAT_rrUDE LONGITUDE 1/12 M27.E EAS]' OF US 101 IN URIAH, CA DAaM.~GE D~SCRIPTION A.N~D DEM~*gSION$ ,39.16003 -123.19682 OVERI.AND FLOODING FROM THE RUSSI. AN RIVER AND OR.KS CREEK DqLZNDATED THE PARK BLrI~DING TO A Iq_EIGHT OF 42 fiN-CHES DESTROYING OK DAMAGEqG TI-iL FOLLO~rlNG EQUIPME'N'I AxND CON'I~NTS: 1 DEEP FRY-ER PITCO FRIALATOR, I RANGE ~qTH GRIDDLE, 1 3-BIN STALNLESS STEEL. SIN'K, I 3X5 FLOOR FREEZER,. I SA_>,-D~,TCH RZ-FRIGERATOR. 1 6FT FRIGIDAIRE FREEZER. 12 LF OF BEVERAGE COOLER SPACE W-Fill B -tLER T,MPS, 12 LF OF FLOOR CA.BI2~TS, 15 LI-' OF COUNTERTO~, 3/4 PALETTE OF YIELD M~G CHALK, l 0 1500WATT LfGHT BULBS, 2 CASES OF SOFTBALLS, 1 CASE (12 ROLLS) OF BATHROOM TISSUE ROLLS, 1 CASE OF PPd~ER TO~rELS, 1 30-GAL WATER HEATER, 1 CLL~B CAR (GOLF C/ER'f). A P~PSI REFRIGERATOR, A BEVERAGE DtSPENSERf ICE BOX AND RELATED EQUIPMEN~r WT_i{~ ALSO DAMLAGED. BUT AI~ OV~%'ED BY ~ BEVERAGE COMPANY'. SCO?E OF WORK __ WORK CONEPLETED: REPLACED 1 30-GA&, WATER HEATER. KEPAERF_X) 1 CLUB CA~, (GOLF CA~T). VVORK TO BE COM~PLETF. D: RF. PLACE TI-rE FOLLO~,~G EQUIPMENT: 1 DEEP FRY'ER PITCO FRLa, LATOPs. 1 P,.ANGE V¢ITH GR/3DDLE, 1 3-BIN STAE',7.ESS STEEL SINK, 1 $X5 FLOOR FREEZER. 1 SAND~ICH REFRIGERATOR. 1 6FT FR/GID,~KE FREEZER. 12 LF OF BEVERAGE COOLER SPACE ~qTH BEER TAMPS. 12 LF OF FLOOR CABINETS, 15 LF OF COb.%.'TERTOP. 3/4 PJoLETTE OF FI3ELD M. ARKING CIL4LK, 10 1500~rATT LIGHT BL"LBS, 2 CASES OF SOFTBALLS: I CASE OF B~TI-EROOM TISSUE ROLLS, 1 CASE OF PAPER TOVv-ELS. COSTS ESTIM.~TED USEXlG A COM23INATION OF RS ME;%NS. APPLICANT INVOICES, AND tLESOU-KCES. SEE AITACI-~D RS ~{EANS CALCUI.ATION SISLEET, ATTACHED D'WOiCES. AND ATTACHED L~TER~%=ET PKLNTOUTS. FfARDMRD MITIGATION CON~IDEP-,.ED. NO VIABLE OPTIONS FOL~D. lfccst est'Jmalcs arc. eaten-cl, bele~; per site, PW f~e ~eet should havc lotat cost~. PRO,TECT COST ITEM CODE I NARRATf'VF. WORK COMPLET£D 5260 F.,STIbL. xTE (30 GAL WATER I-~A17ER) 2 1 9990 AF'PLICAN-F L-NWOICES -- v~'ORK TO BE COM~PLETED ' 9.o99 E QLrlP.~__N'r ESI-rMA~ 9%9 -', 0-:SnM~TE) m-rER:VF.T RESObmCES 9~)9 ,~PLIC.~T ~WOICES ~, . ,. L"'~TI' ] L.~IT t PRICE ' I~% i $545.00 I.,S $1.296.64 ES ] $34,472.50 LS t sao?.4s COST 5545 .CO $?,4,472.50 S4-07.45 $'r25.17 $72517 TOT.~L COST $37,446.76 Attachment #2 TO: CITY of UK/AEI 300 Scn'~ary A~ UJctah ~ 9.1482 ~.ou~? ~6~ ~m " FAX RE~O~8[ WI~ BE ~bOE~ED SUPERIOR OUTLET CENTER P: 408.293.3123, F: 408.2~3.3198 4/25/2(306 ITEM NO.: 7.e DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING HOUSING CORPORATION MAJOR SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 05-17 SUMMARY: Last August, the City Council conditionally approved the Housing Corporation Planned Development and Tentative Subdivision Map project on Low Gap Road. This project involved the creation of smaller than typical lots and the relaxation of some yard setbacks requirements. This Agenda Item is seeking the Council's adoption of a Resolution approving the Final Subdivision Map for the project as required by City Code. The City Engineer has reviewed and confirmed that the Final Map is in substantial conformance with the Tentative Map previously approved by the Council. BACKGROUND: The Housing Corporation Major Subdivision Map (MS No. 05-17), divides a 1.04-acre parcel into 12 parcels with areas measuring between 2,150 square feet to 9,750 square feet, and an average lot size of approximately 3,767 square feet. The subdivision also includes the development of a 20-foot wide access driveway and overflow parking spaces on one of the lots. The Planned Development approved by the Council included the development of 12 single family residences. CITY ENGINEER AND PLANNING COMMISSION CERTIFICATION: As indicated above, the City Engineer has reviewed and certified that the Final Subdivision Map is consistent with the tentative Subdivision Map approved by the City Council last August. Based on this review, Mr. Eriksen also concluded the Final Map was prepared in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2 of the Government Code of the State of California (Map Act) and with the Ukiah Municipal Code requirements for major subdivisions. On May 10, 2006, the Ukiah Planning Commission reviewed the Final Map and voted 5-0 to present the Final Map to the City Council. A copy of the Final Map presented to the Planning Commission is included as an attachment to this Agenda Summary. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Adopt Resolution approving Final Subdivision Map Application #05-17 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not approve the Final Subdivision Map and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: The Housing Corporation, property owner Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Resolution approving Final Subdivision Map 2. Final Map of Major Subdivision No. 05-17 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manage'k, ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH APPROVING FINAL MAP NO. 05-17 WHEREAS, on May 8, 2006, Tim Eriksen, the Ukiah City Engineer, reviewed and checked the Final Map for Major Subdivision No. 05-17, as submitted by The Housing Corporation, and certified it is substantially the same as it appears on the Tentative Subdivision Map approved by the City Council on August 17, 2005, and that the Final Map was prepared in accordance with Title 7, Chapter 2 of the Government Code of the State of California (Map Act) and with the Ukiah Municipal Code requirements for major subdivisions; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006, the Ukiah Planning Commission reviewed the Final Map and voted 5-0 to present the Final Map to the City Council; and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project was found adequate and complete by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the proposed lots are consistent with the Major Site Development Permit No. 05-13, which included a precise development plan approved by the City Council on August 17, 20O5. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Final Map for Major Subdivision No. 05-17 (Attached Exhibit A), is approved conditioned upon all applicable State Statutes, local ordinances, and the conditions of approval outlined in Resolution No. 2006-09 (Attached Exhibit B) for the Tentative Subdivision Map and Resolution No. 2006-10 (Attached Exhibit C) for the Major Site Development/Precise Development Plan that effectively established the Housing Corporation Planned Development project. PASSED AND ADOPTED on ,2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk EXHIBIT A-1 ~mo EXItIBIT A-2 L (.0~'9~- t,u) ,gt,'g~ , L6'6g ) RESOLUTION NO. 2006-09 · RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 05-17 EXWIBIT B WHEREAS, the Ukiah Planning Commission on June 22, 2005, conducted· and recommended approval of Tentative Map No. 05-17, as submitted .by the Housing Company, and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was-found adequate and complete by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS' the proposed site development is consistent with the Planned Development Plan approved by the City Council on August 17, 2005, and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works/City Engineer reports that the subdivision is consistent with applicable requirements of the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT Tentative Map No. 05-17 (Attached Exhibit A) for the. Housing Company Subdivision, is approved conditioned upon all applicable State Statutes, local ordinances, conditions of approval for Major Site Development Permit No. 05-13, and the following specific conditions: 1. A Final Subdivision Map shall be prepared and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval, and recOrded in a manner consistent with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements. , o Applicant shall be required to obtain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency.. Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the Zoning Administrator. , In addition to any particular condition imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. , The subdivider of the subject property shall dedicate land, pay a fee in-lieu.thereof, or both at the option of the City Council for park and recreation purposes prior to the filing of the Final Subdivision Map. , - All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application approved by the' City Council, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including" maps, sketches, renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike. , Covenant, codes, and restrictions that include, but are not limited to, the development of maintenance agreements for the continued maintenance of the private access roadway', storm drainage, sidewalks, landscaping, and other areas that will be used in common, shall be submitted to the City of Ukiah Public Works Department and the City of Ukiah Department of Planning and Community Development for review, and shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to their recordation and the recording of the Final Subdivision Map. PASSED AND ADOPTED on August 17, 2005, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku NOES: None ABSTAIN' None ABSENT: Councilmember Rodin //,M~rk ~shiku, Ma~0r ' Marie Ulvila, City Clerk · - o 1- " J .:' '-":..'.'".".. ~0'"': ' "~.~.' .J // · "';:.: ':.. ~ "'-..:,.,. · .-'."'~?,,.~ i! !! ;;4"".:::..:%.,-' ·" ' . .~ . .... ~ · , ' .. · .. ..~: ."' . ::' .... "' ~.,--~.' ,,~' '":'"~ .: ~ ~. ~ :.- . .'..,... ~. . ~..,.....,..: .~ .'~"'.:':..:"-":':.":-."'.: j '--- -'---''''''''""'"''" ~" ~ll IIIllll Illillll,llllllllllll Il L i~ ' ' *. ''. ...'.'" '!~ ~' '~ k~ ' ' .' "' .. j . .~ .~ :) . · 1: ' .. ;;I~ i !lti..~.l il:,.....~[t[t[-[ 1..-..[ ti j .... ,,.,i.,,.:.:- --',,?.'-"-"'"'1 ,.~ "! · ~, · Jt~t:..... '. · · . -...- I..~ .~ .... ~,, ·. Il ,',". "~", I~.. ., .1' Ill · .o. EXHIBIT C RESOLUTION NO. 2006-10 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH APPROVING MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 05-13 WHEREAS, the Ukiah Planning Commission on June 22, 2005, conducted and recommended approval of Major Site Development Permit No. 05-13, as submitted by the Housing Company, and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was found adequate and complete by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the proposed site development is consistent with the Planned Development Plan approved by the City Council on August 17, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT Major Site Development Permit No. 05-13 for the Housing Company Subdivision, is approved conditioned upon all applicable State Statutes, local ordinances, conditions of approval for Major Subdivision Map No. 05-17, and the following specific conditions: . No building permits shall be issued for any of the residential structures shown on the Development Plan/Site Development Permit until the Final Subdivision Map has been approved by the Ukiah City Council and signed by the Mayor of Ukiah. , All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the Development Plan approved by the City Council, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches, renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike. . Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the City Council. , In addition to any particular condition, which might be imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. 5. Applicant shall be required to obtain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency. , Building Permits shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the Development Plan/Site Development Permit, or it shall be subject to the City's permit revocation process and procedures. In the event the Building Permit cannot be issued within the stipulated period from the project approval date, a one year extension may be granted by the Director of Planning if no new circumstances affect the project which otherwise would render the original approval inappropriate or illegal. It is the applicant's responsibility in such cases to propose the one-year extension to the Planning Department prior to the two-year expiration date. , The approved Development Plan/Site Development Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project related to the Development Plan/Site Development Permit is not being conducted in compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established land use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty four (24) consecutive months. o , 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Development Plan/Site Development Permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the Development Plan/Site Development Permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. The expansion of any residential structure or garage beyond the dimensions or building heights approved as part of the Development Plan shall require the approval of a Minor Site Development Permit by the Ukiah Zoning Administrator. Improvement Plans for interior walkways or curb, gutters, sidewalks, driveways and street paving along the Low Gap Road frontage shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer in accordance with City Standard Drawings and submitted to the Ukiah City Engineer for review. The improvements plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any ministerial permits for site preparation activities required for the construction of any residential unit on the subject property. All improvements within the right-of-way for Low Gap Road shall be constructed in conformance with the approved improvement plans 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 City Engineer 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 properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License who shall submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability: $1,000,000; Property Damage: $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. A Final Grading and Drainage Plan that includes an Erosion and Sediment Transport Control Plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer/Public Works Director for review and shall be approved prior to the commencement of any grading, site preparation activities, or construction of buildings and paving. A licensed civil engineer shall prepare all drainage calculations and other work done on this Plan. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion; drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on-site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" (inches) of asphalt concrete with a 6" (inch) aggregate base, or, alternatively, any option approved by the City Engineer Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Public Utilities and Public Works Departments. A Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted by the project applicant and approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building. This plan shall include, but not be limited to the following: a) A planting legend that includes the names, location, coverage area, and canopy cover of proposed vegetation; b) A planting schedule for all vegetation installed on the site; and c) A maintenance schedule for existing or proposed vegetation, including a watering schedule and irrigation system design. 18. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat, weed-free manner, and may not be removed or substantially altered unless the Director of Planning reviews and approves the removal or replacement of vegetation determined to be diseased, unstable, hazardous, or poorly located on the site. Any vegetation removed from the site shall be replaced with similar vegetation approved by the Planning Director. 19. 20. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and/or ventilation equipment shall be aesthetically screened from view consistent with the architecture of the building upon which it is located. Outdoor refuse/recycle containers shall be aesthetically screened from view; garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosures. 21. A recycling program that provides the opportunity for all residents of the single family residential subdivision to recycle shall be implemented prior to the occupancy of any of the buildings and shall remain in effect so long as the structures are occupied. This program shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and approved prior to implementation to ensure it provides efficient recycling methods consistency with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements. 22. Hours of construction shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday unless additional hours of construction for special construction activities or projects are reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, a Final Lighting Plan shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Community Development or his/her designee for review for compliance with Ukiah Municipal Code standards for on-site lighting and with "dark sky" guidelines for reducing nighttime lighting on the site. The Final Lighting Plan shall include details regarding exterior lighting for structures, garden areas, and walkways, with lighting sources that are full cut-off, hooded, and down-cast, or otherwise shielded to ensure that light does not adversely shine towards neighboring properties, or toward the night sky. Additionally, all lighting shall be the minimum wattage necessary to provide adequate security, yet shall not result in excessively bright night glow. Sufficient details regarding the proposed wattage of all site lights shall be included in the Final Lighting Plan so that the Planning Staff can determine how bright the proposed site lights will be. The Director of Planning and Community Development shall have the authority to require the Final Lighting Plan to be modified (including the wattage) and/or additional information to be submitted so that the lighting meets the requirements listed above. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. All inactive soil piles on the project site shall be completely covered at all times to control fugitive dust. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, and actual construction shall include a program of washing off trucks leaving the construction site to control the transport of mud and dust onto public streets. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers, and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. 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 also be required to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance to determine whether the development of a precise mitigation program will be required prior to the continuation of any site work. 30. All conditions that do not contain a specific date or time period for completion shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. PASSED AND ADOPTED on Au,qust 17, 2005, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABST~N: ABSENT: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku None None Councilmember Rodin ~M'ark Ashiku, Ma~/or ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk AGENDA ITEM NO: 7.f MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT OF INVESTMENT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE APPROVAL AND SUBSEQUENT EXECUTION OF BOND PROCEEDS INVESTMENT. The Investment Oversight Committee met on April 24th and approved an investment plan for the available cash proceeds [$57,315,000] from the wastewater plant improvement bond sale using a structured investment product known as a Guaranteed Investment Contract ("GIC"). PFM Asset Management ("PFM") our investment advisors for the City's cash funds have managed the bond proceeds pending this action and their representatives presented the GIC option to the Committee. The funds held in the GIC are available for monthly draw as needed and are well protected. With Committee approval, PFM held an auction on May 3rd and received four qualified bids. Staff selected FSA Capital Management Services LLC, whose bid maximized our allowable investment return while requiring no additional assurances from the City. Tax-exempt bonds are subject to special Federal regulations regarding interest that can be earned on bond proceeds. These rules prevent government units from issuing tax- free bonds and the turning around and investing the cash in the general market, earning higher returns, which would be taxable if earned by a private party, shortchanging the IRS by requiring that the net interest gain be forfeited to the IRS. Entering into the GIC saved the project over $6,000 a month in investment management fees, since the GIC allows us to pay all fees out of "excess" interest earnings before calculating any forfeiture. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file this report of Committee action. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Provide staff with alternative direction. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mike McCann, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Minutes of Investment Oversight Committee, Apr 24, 2005 2. Investment Oversight Committee Investment Proposal Approved: ~~-~..~ Candace Horsley, City M!nager Affachment # // CTrY OF UK~H TNVESTMENT OVERSZGHT COMMI'TTEE MZNUTES Cl~C CENTER- CONFERENCE ROOM 3 300 SEMZNARY AVENUE UK/AH, CA 95482 Monday, April 24, 2006 11:00 a.m. The mccting was called to Order at 11:00 AM 11 ROLL CALL Members Present Mayor Mark Ashiku (1:1::15 AM) Candace Horsley, City Manager Allen Carter, City Treasurer Monte Hill Mari Rodin Member Absent Mike Mccann Guest Nancy Jones, Public Financial Management [nc. 1 AUTHORZZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS TO PLACE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT BOND PROCEEDS TNTO A STRUCTURED INVESTMENT PRODUCT UNTLL NEEDED FOR PAYMENT OF PLANT CONSTRUCT[ON COSTS Upon discussion and review of documents provided by PFM, MOTZON by Rodin to authorize the City Manager to execute documents to place the Wastewater Treatment Plant project bond proceeds into a structured investment product until needed for payment of plant construction costs; SECONDED by Hill AYES: ABSENT: NOES: Ashiku, Carter, Hill, Rodin McCann None 1 AD3OURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 11:45 AM Attachment # Investment Oversight Committee April 24, 2006 Investment Proposal SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS TO PLACE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PROJECT BOND PROCEEDS INTO A STRUCTURED INVESTMENT PRODUCT UNTIL NEEDED FOR PAYMENT OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION COSTS. The City completed a bond issue on March 1,2006 to finance construction at the Wastewater Treatment Plant. After reimbursing the City for $4,558,737 for FY2002' 2005 project expenses the bond trustee is holding $67,405,500 in cash and investments. PFM Asset Management ("PFM") our investment advisors for the City's funds are also managing the bond proceeds. Staff has worked with PFM to develop an investment strategy for the funds held in trust while construction is underway over the next three years. IRS rules allow the City to earn interest up to the interest cost of the bond and require the forfeiture of any additional interest earnings. One oddity of the law is that normal investment costs are not includable in these calculations, but the costs of a structured investment are, which means that the effective management cost to the City is $0. PFM and Staff are recommending that the funds be placed into a Structured Investment Product, which pre-defines investment returns and terms, known as a Guaranteed Investment Contract ("GIC"). PFM representatives have provided the following report along with additional attachments, and will be present to answer questions at the Committee's pleasure. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize City Manager to execute documents to place bond proceeds into a Structured Investment Product. Prepared by: Coordinated with: Mike McCann, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manager Background The following report was prepared by the City's investment advisors for the Committee's consideration: Introduction This report is an overview of the investment considerations and options related to the Association of Bay Area Governments Water and Wastewater 2006 Series A Revenue Bonds that were issued on March 1, 2006. Investment Objective~ The primary objectives of an investment strategy for bond proceeds are: 1. Safety. The investments should protect the safety of the funds. 2. Liquidity. The investments should provide liquidity consistent with the anticipated cash flow needs. 3. Arbitragei. The investments should optimize the issue's arbitrage rebate position consistent with Internal Revenue Services ("IRS") regulations. 4. Permitted. The investments must be authorized in the relevant financing documents. As with other City funds, Safety and Liquidity are considered the most important objectives. While the yield on the investments is important, it must be considered in relationship to the issue's arbitrage rebate position. In addition to any other considerations, the investments must comply with the requirements of the £mancing documents. Recent Market Conditions Current interest rate conditions play an integral part in developing an investment strategy. Since late 2000, we have generally been in a negative arbitrage environment. As shown by the following chart, short-term investment rates (1-year LIBOR~ rate) were well below longer-term tax-exempt borrowing rates (15-year MMD~ rate). As a result, most bond proceeds investments generated negative arbitrage. This relationship, however, has changed in recent months with a rise in short- term rates and a flattening of the yield curve. In the current environment, it is possible to earn positive arbitrage on the bond proceeds investments. Bond Investment Plan Page 2 of 6 April 24, 2006 5 Tax-Exempt Borrowing Rates vs. Taxable Short-term Investment Rates March 1999 to March 2006 = = 15-Year MMD (Avg. 4.65%) Mar- Sep- Mar- Sep- Mar- Sep- Mar- Sep- Mar- Sep- Mar- Sep- Mar- Sep- Mar- 99 99 00 00 01 01 02 02 03 03 04 04 05 05 06 Investment Options The specific funds to be invested and the bond's arbitrage yield are as follows: Project Fund: $71.8 million The Project Fund expenditure schedule extends from closing to March 2009. Capitalized Interest Fund: $2.4 million The Capitalized Interest Fund will be used to pay debt service of $1.4 million on September 1, 2006 with all remaining funds withdrawn to pay debt service on September 1, 2007. Arbitrage Yield: 4.569331% As the City is not expected to qualify for an IRS's arbitrage rebate exception, the City will have to rebate any positive arbitrage. The following is a summary of three investment approaches the City could use to invest the bond proceeds. Pooled Investment Fund. Under this option the proceeds would be invested in a pooled investment fund, such as Trustee's money market fund, CAMP or LAIF. The advantage of this investment option is that it provides the City with full flexibility to withdraw funds at any time without market price risk even if those withdrawals are sooner than currently expected. Pooled funds also offer administrative simplicity. The disadvantage of a pooled fund is that it typically offers an initial yield that is lower than the other investment options, which will vary over time based on short-term interest rates. Bond Investment Plan Page 3 of 6 April 24, 2006 Pooled funds offer reasonable safety, which can vary by fund. (PFM recommends considering only those funds which are rated AAA.) Pooled investment funds typically do not charge out-of-pocket fees; the investor receives the fund's net yield after fees are deducted. e Managed Portfolio. Under this option, a portfolio comprising U.S. Federal Agency obligations would be structured to generate a cash flow similar to the estimated draw schedule. The advantage of a managed portfolio is that it typically provides a higher yield than a money market fund with more protection against falling interest rate changes. A managed portfolio provides the highest degree of safety as the City would maintain direct ownership of the portfolio. A managed portfolio also offers some flexibility to restructure investments if liquidity needs or market conditions change. The disadvantage of a managed portfolio is that it has a greater level of market risk if securities are required to be liquidated early or if they need to be reinvested if expenditures are slower than anticipated. For structuring and managing the portfolio, PFM would charge the City under its existing contract an annual investment management fee of 12 basis points for the assets under management. Over the entire engagement, the fees are estimated at approximately $90,000. The actual dollar amount of the fees would depend on the amount and time the proceeds were being managed. As portfolio management fees are not considered qualified administrative cost under IRS regulations, they would represent an out-of-pocket cost to the City. In addition to the approaches listed above, which have been used previously by the City, the City could also invest the bond proceeds in a structured investment product. . Structured Investment Products. A variety of structured investment products are available. The product currently being considered for investing the bond proceeds is a collateralized Guaranteed Investment Contract ("GIC']. A GIC is a contract or agreement that guarantees a specific rate of return. The advantage of GIC is that it would provide the City with a guaranteed investment rate and full flexibility to withdraw at par (i.e., without market price risk) to pay project costs regardless of whether those withdrawals are faster or slower than currently anticipated. Once finalized, a GIC also provides a high degree of administrative simplicity. The disadvantage of a GIC is that it does not offer any flexibility to change the investment terms after the agreement is put in place. The City cannot restructure the agreement to take advantage of rising rates or extend the agreement beyond its maturity date. As a corporate obligation, a GIC also has some additional credit risk. However, this credit risk associated with a GIC can be mitigated by how the GIC is bid and structured. As part of its services, PFM will bid the GIC with highly-rated providers acceptable to the bond insurer. PFM also recommends the City use a collateralized GIC, which provides the City with an additional level of security because the provider's obligation to the City will be collateralized with securities (PFM requires U.S. Treasury or Federal Agency securities.) The Bond Investment Plan Page 4 of 6 April 24, 2006 collateral requirement will generally be in excess of the GIC balance and determined weekly by the collateral agent. The Collateral Securities are held in an account with the Trustee or a third-party custodian. Collateral Agreements typically state that the Collateral Securities must be free and clear of all liens and claims of third parties and shall be registered in the name of the Collateral Agent for the benefit of the Issuer. The Collateral Agent is given a perfected first priority security interest in the securities, any substituted securities, and all proceeds thereof (in the case of bearer securities, the Collateral Agent must be in possession). In theory, in the event of default resulting from a bankruptcy under the GIC, the collateral agent would liquidate the collateral and remit to the Issuer amounts equal to the then outstanding GIC balance. To structure and bid a GIC for the City, PFM would charge a flat fee of $32,000, which would be paid by the investment provider on behalf of the City. This amount is within the "safe harbor" guidelines permitted by the IRS as a qualified administrative cost in the determination of the City's arbitrage rebate calculations. The net effect, to the degree there is positive arbitrage, is that there is no out-of-pocket cost to the City for PFM's services, as the fee is paid from earnings the City would have otherwise had to rebate to the IRS. As of March 4, 2006, PFM estimates the following rates would be available for these proceeds: Money Market Fund (Wells Fargo Government 4.57% $45,000 Money Market Fund) Managed Portfolio of Federal Agencies 5.08% $445,000 Uncollateralized GIC 5.02% $475,000 Collateralized GIC/Flex Repo 4.87% $330,000 Summary Currently, all of the investment options offer a yield above the bond's arbitrage yield and could be used effectively. However, to obtain the best overall investment result, PFM recommends the City use a collateralized GIC. A GIC can be tailored to precisely meet the City's expenditure requirements while eliminating reinvestment risk. This allows the City to lock in a guaranteed yield over the entire investment period ensuring the City will optimize its investment earnings while still providing the City with full flexibility to withdraw funds to pay project costs and capitalized interest as needed. While there is some credit risk to a GIC, this can be mitigated by how the agreement is bid and structured. Arbitrage, in the context of municipal securities, is the difference between the rate at which the proceeds were borrowed and the rate at which the proceeds were invested. Bond Investment Plan Page 5 of 6 April 24, 2006 The Arbitrage Yield represents the overall effective borrowing rate for the bond issue. This yield is used for calculating arbitrage rebate requirements for the proceeds of a bond issue. Also called the Bond Yield. A bond issue has Positive Arbitrage when it earns an overall investment return on the bond proceeds above the arbitrage yield of the bond issue. Unless the issuer qualifies for an exception to the rebate requirements, the amount of positive arbitrage accumulated on the investment of the bond proceeds must be rebated to the IRS. A bond issue has Negative Arbitrage when it earns an overall investment return on the bond proceeds that is below the arbitrage yield of the bond issue. LJBOR stands for the London Interbank Offered Rate and is a daily reference rate based on the interest rates at which banks offer to lend unsecured funds to other banks in the London wholesale (or "interbank") money market. As a widely used short-term reference rate, it is being used as a proxy for short-term taxable investment rates. MMD stands for MunidpalMarket Data, which is a service of Thomson Municipal Market Monitor. The 15-Year MMD is representative of the rate on a 15-year insured tax-exempt municipal bond issue. Bond Investment Plan Page 6 of 6 April 24, 2006 AGENDA ITEM NO: 7.g MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN FORM AND LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AB 2840 RELATED TO CALIFORNIANS AGAINST HIGHER AUTO INSURANCE RATES- COUNCIL MEMBER MCCOWEN Councilmember McCowen has requested City Council's authorization for the Mayor to sign the attached form (Attachment 1) and a Letter of Support for AB 2840 (Attachment 2) which is intended to block efforts to raise auto insurance rates in rural areas. Attachment 3 is a study on potential impacts to proposed rate increases on the various Counties. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize Mayor to Sign form and Letter of Support for AB 2840 Related To Californians Against Higher Insurance Rates - Council Member McCowen ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Provide staff with alternative direction. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Councilmember McCowen Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Steering Committee Member of Californians to Stop Unfair Rate Increases Form 2 - Letter of Support for AB 2840 3 - Study on Impact of Increased Auto Rates Approved: Candace Horsley, City Manager ATTACHMENT~/ Yes, I'll Help! Yes, please list me as a Steering Committee Member of Californians to Stop Unfair Rate Increases. By signing this form I am authorizing Californians to Stop Unfair Rate Increases to list me/my organization in coalition materials including advertisements, brochures or mailings as a public member opposed to the Department of Insurance's unfair auto insurance rate regulation changes. Please select a category: [] Organization [] Company [] Individual [] Public Agency Please complete the following information: Company or Organization Name/Employer Name Title/Occupation Mailing address City State Zip County Phone number Fax number E-mail Address Signature (Required) I~. Please Email me updates I can help in the following ways: [] Write a letter to Commisioner Garamendi [] Write a letter-to-the-editor [] Place a newsletter article Please return this form to: Californians to Stop Unfair Rate Increases 1121 L Street, Suite 403 Sacramento, CA 95814 Ph: 916~443-0872 Fax: 9161442-3510 Date [] Please Fax me updates [] Communicate with employees/members [] Distribute materials [] Volunteer/Speak at local events Group Letter to the Assembly Insurance Committee ATTACHMENT The Honorable Juan Vargas, Chair Assembly Insurance Committee California State Assembly State Capitol Building, Room 2013 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Mr. Vargas, On behalf of local elected officials, chambers of commerce, taxpayers and businesses we strongly support AB 2840, a bipartisan bill coauthored by Assemblymembers John J. Benoit (R-Palm Desert), Joe Canciamilla (D-Pittsburg), Nicole Parra (D-Hanford), Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) and Lois Wolk (D-Davis). AB 2840 would require a study to be conducted before any changes can be made to the manner in which automobile insurance rates are calculated. The study would ensure that any proposed changes are fair, non-discriminatory and accurately reflect the dsk of loss - as required by current law. AB 2840 is necessary because, in December 2005, California Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi proposed changes to auto regulations lhat, if implemented, will result in significant increases in auto insurance premiums for millions of California drivers. Commissioner Garamendi's proposed changes require insurance companies to charge rates that are no longer substantially related to the risk of loss. Two separate studies, including one conducted by the Department of Insurance, concluded that implementing the proposed regulations could result in rate increases in 52 out of the 58 counties, some as high as 30% in rural and suburban areas. Current law requires that auto rates be based on the actual costs and risks associated with providing insurance to each driver. Yet, Insurance Commissioner Garamendi's proposed changes would arbitrarily increase our auto insurance rates in order to pay for decreases for other ddvers. The result of Commissioner Garamendi's proposal, no matter which way you slice it, will be that big city drivers -- even bad drivers - will get rate cuts, but someone else will have to pay higher rates to subsidize those cuts. That's not only unfair to consumers, but poor public policy that could create a dangerous precedent in California. Despite our broad-based and aggressive opposition, the Insurance Commissioner has not given any indication he plans to abandon his plan. Nor has he articulated how it is possible to provide artificial rate decreases for some drivers without unfaidy - and illegally - shifting costs to olher drivers. AB 2840 will answer these questions and help us ensure that no driver will be forced to pay increased auto insurance rates if those rates are not found to be truly reflective of the real cost and risk to insure that driver. It is simply unfair for drivers in regions of the state that have less likelihood of being in an accident or filing a claim to pay more for auto insurance so that rates can be arbitrarily decreased for drivers in more populated, more congested regions. Rather than simply rearranging how much consumers pay for insurance, the Commissioner should focus his time on ways to reduce costs in the insurance system - such as fighting fraud. Again, we urge you to pass AB 2840 and protect consumers throughout California. Sincerely, cc: The Honorable John J. Benoit, Vice Chair The Honorable Russ Bogh The Honorable Ronald Calderon The Honorable Dario J. Frommer The Honorable Betty Kamette The Honorable Sally Lieber the Honorable Dennis Uountjoy 1'he Honorable Pedro Nava The Honorable Tom Umberg The Honorable Joe Canciamilla The Honorable Lois Wolk The Honorable Nicole Parra The Honorable Doug LaMalfa Kevin Hanley, Assembly Republican Caucus Cynthia Bryant, Governor's Office Chris Clay, Chief Consultant, Assembly Insurance Committee Kathleen Webb, Director of the Office of the Insurance Advisor Juan Gul~errez, Asst. Director of the Office of the Insurance Advisor Califomians Against Higher Insurance Rates 1121 L Street · Suite 803 .Sacramento, CA 95814 Tel 916-443-0872 · Fax 916-442-3510 ATTACHMEN"I"__~'~ - · Californians AGAINST Higher Insurance Rates · TWO DIFFERENT STUDIES -- SAME CONCLUSION GARAMENDI'S PROPOSAL WILL RESULT IN HIGHER AUTO INSURANCE RATES FOR MORE DRIVERS At the request of the State Legislature, the Department of Insurance commissioned an analysis by Mercer Actuarial Consulting to determine the impact of the Insurance Commissioner's proposal on consumers' auto insurance rates. The Mercer study, just released in January, 2006, reached virtually identical conclusions to that of an insurance industry study conducted by independent actuary Bob Downer on the same proposal when it was being considered by Commissioner Garamendi in 2004. The results confirm that if the plan studied is implemented, it will unfairly and irresponsibly cause auto insurance rates to increase for more than 60% of drivers statewide and approximately one-third of all drivers in California will see their rates go up by more than 10%. Downer 2004 · 61% of all drivers will see rates increase · 32% of all drivers will get an increase of at least 10% · 52 of 58 counties (90%) will experience rate increases · 82% of cities and towns in CA will receive rate increases · 70% of CA zip codes will see average rate increases Mercer 2006 · 62% of all drivers will see rate increases · 27% of all drivers will get an increase of at least 10% · 52 of 58 counties (90%) will experience rate increases · 82% of cities and towns in CA will receive increases · 69% of CA zip codes will see average rate increases Downer and Mercer also found that in the same 52 out of 58 counties, rates will go up. A look at the list below shows that the Commissioner's proposal would unfairly impose massive rate increases of 24.1% in Modoc County; 32.2% in Mono County; 36.5% in Imperial County; and 29% in Siskiyou County (to name a few) to provide decreases of 1.3% in Orange County; 12.7% in Los Angeles County and 11.8% in San Francisco County. County Downer Mercer Alameda 2.5% 1.9% Alpine 15.8% 14.1% Amador 15.0% 13.7% Butte 14.4% 13.9% Calaveras 15.5% 16.0% Colusa 9.0% 13.9% Contra Costa 5.6% 5.5% Del Node 20.3% 19.7% El Dorado 9.9% 4.4% Fresno -0.1% -2.3% Glenn 15.9% 19.6% Humboldt 17.9% 20.4% Imperial 24.5% 36.5% Inyo 35.1% 29.2% Kern 11.3% 12.1% Kings 9.2% 9.1% Lake 21.3% 19.8% Lassen 19.6% 22.1% Los Angeles -12.1% - 12.7% Madera 8.1% 9.0% Marin 6.4% 6.4% Madposa 15.0% 12.7% Mendocino 21.6% 24.0% Merced 7.6% 8.9% Modoc 20.3% 24.1% Mono 30.6% 32.2% Monterey 15.5% 16.2% Napa 11.5% 10.7% Nevada 14.9% 14.5% County Downer Mercer Orange -2.2% -1.3% Placer 9.2% 10.3% Plumas 19.3% 19.6% Riverside 4.9% 4.2% Sacramento -5.1% -5.1% San Benito 17.4% 18.6% San Bernardino 0.8% 1.3% San Diego 6.9% 9.3% San Francisco -10.1% -11.8% San Joaquin 2.4% 0.7% San Luis Obispo 25.0% 24.1% San Mate<) 3.7% 1.9% Santa Barbara 17.5% 172% Santa Clara 6.7% 5.0% Santa Cruz 15.3% 18.1% Shasta 17.3% 16.6% Sierra 18.0% 21.8% Siskiyou 23.2% 29.0% Solano 7.9% 10.1% Sonoma 9.0% 6.3% Stanislaus -1.3% -3.9% Suffer 8.6% 6.4% Tehama 18.2% 18.9% Trinity 18.9% 20.3% Tulare 7.0% 7.3% Tuolumne 14.8% 10.5% Ventura 3.6% 2.7% Yolo 7.4% 12.2% Yuba 7.2% 8.4% Califomians Against Higher Insurance Rates 1121 L Street. Suite 803 .Sacramento, CA 95814 Tel 916-443-0872 · Fax 916-442-3510 AGENDA ITEM NO: 7.h MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID TO WESCO FOR THE PURCHASE OF AN ABB 1500KVA 277/480V THREE PHASE TRANSFORMER FOR THE CITY'S WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $21,368.98. SUMMARY: Staff received four bids on the 1500 kVA transformer required for the City of Ukiah Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Improvement Project. The bids were as follows: Supplier Manufacturer Bid Bid+7. 75%tx Delivery (Weeks) Wesco ABB $19,832 $21,368.98 28-30 W. States Electric Cooper $33,427 $36,017.59 18-20 W. States Electric Ermco $26,038 $28,055.95 30-32 W. States Electric Pauwels $36,607 $39,444.04 36-38 (shipping $0) Staff recommends awarding the bid to WESCO for the ABB 1500kVA 277/480V 3-phase transformer in the amount of $21,368.98. Funding is available and budgeted in Account Number 611.7410.800.009. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Award bid for the purchase of an ABB 1500kVA 277/480V 3-phase transformer to WESCO in the amount of $21,368.98 including tax. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Reject all bids and provide direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Prepared by: Coordinated with: N/A Liz Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager; Judy Jenney, Purchasing & Warehouse Assistant Approved: Candace Horsley, City M'~nager ITEM NO. 9.A CITY OF UKIAH DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 300 SEMINARY AVENUE, UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 707-463-6200 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Ukiah City Council Sandra Liston, Associate Planner Minor Subdivision Exception 05-49: Gadea 733 South Oak Street DATE: MAY 17, 2006 Due to a procedural issue associated with this project, staff is recommending continuance of this matter to June 7, 2006. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9.b DATE: May 17, :!006 REPORT SUB3ECT: APPROVAL OF APPLICATION TO DEMOLISH TWO STRUCTURES OVER 50- YEARS OLD LOCATED AT S28 NORTH STATE STREET SUMMARY: The owner of the property located at 528 North State Street has applied for Demolition Permits to demolish two structures on the site. One of the structures was originally a single-family residence/cabin constructed in 1900. The second structure was constructed in 1920 and has been used as a residential duplex. Both structures are in very poor condition. A third structure on the site (primary building) located close to North State Street was recently destroyed by a fire, and pursuant to section 3016 (B)(2), no formal historical review is required to demolish the structure. The owner of the property is planning on redeveloping the parcels, possibly with a mixed commercial/residential development. The structures are over 50 years old, and therefore, according to the Ukiah City Code, the City Council must conduct a public hearing to review and consider the historical and architectural significance of the structures. On March 20, 2006, the City Demolition Permit Review Committee considered the application and Historica/Profi/e prepared by Judy Pruden, unanimously found that none of the criteria in Ukiah City Code Section 3016(E) (attachment 4) applied, and therefore the structures are not historically or architecturally significant. Accordingly, Staff is recommending that the Demolition Permit be approved. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Demolition Permits for the two structures located at 528 North State Street based on the finding that the structures do not have historical or architectural significance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. APPROVED: Property Owner Mark IVlountanos, Property Owner Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Candace Horsley, City Manager Demolition Permit Application and Location Map Historical Profile (Pruden) Demolition Permit Review Committee minutes, dated March 20, 2006 Ukiah Municipal Code Section 3016 CEQA Exemption C~'~ce kiorsley, city Manager LU ,..I ~ '§.:-~ ~8 .'~-~ ~o ~ o , , ,S "' .~ .... §~. .0 Z ~ ,-,,, .. ~ C:~>- o o O~ 6 ,:. ~-" ~ .- - z '- ~:~ o I I I _ ~.. ,,-. ~, OZA, ~0 :D _: Z;, ~'" "~0 *- '" · _.: ,<~ ,,,.,- \ o >.z ~ ~,~ o -- -,, -,, z-o,,-°o~ --.. '-0 ~ o-"'" z ~, ioo ~-,~o mo ? z ~ .9. '~< O...s ~ < ~z~ ~g ~ ; ~.zo =z~ _<. ,,,z . o ~ r- -~ ~<, .,,,~ <~ '..-.'-s '- ~ "'">'- -.<~-~ < %-- ~ ~ ~ ~-~ _- .,_ ,_., ~<. .~ ~ ~ = ,. ~ - - ,.,: .,,, z.. ,.z ' - Z:E:m "~ uJ ,~l . "~.~ ,-- · ~:::~,.,<'- r.,~ <.. _tSD I ~= =.-. O~ .-' I ~ X:,.Z :,,, ---'"-= -o -~ Z~ :' "~ ~ _~o~ ~ii ~`'' ~~~,_ ~ ~< ._..~..:....~.-oo,; ._,.~ ': 6g/-9-g9~ (Z. OZ) 'Hd /~('~ ~//2 AiWa:id oNia'lin8 ~,,,~,,,o'.¥.~,r, ~1~/~ IlOd NOIAV:)IlddV 'a^v At:lYNllN:l$'00g ,~doo Property Owner: ~ ~ ~__.~,. Property Address: ~ St ~ Zoning: DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION SURVEY (FOR STRUCTURES OVER 50 YEARS OLD) CITY OF UKIAH CODE SECTION 3016 · Age of structure: k~P..--r~ ~T,,r'r~ ST. General Plan Designation: How was age determined? Applicant: Assessor's Parcel No.: O O~- J ~.~,- I i Is property located in the City of Ukiah Architectural and Historical Resources Inventory? If yes, 1) Is it one of the 200 individually analyzed properties? 2) Is it included in a potential Historic District? Which one? is it one of the properties not considered worthy of specific analysis? 3) Describe structure's current condition: Describe purpose of demolition: Describe all salvageable archaic materials and any salvage plans: Can the structure be moved? I,,.J O Are there plans to move the structure? ~.~ (~ Describe any moving plans (location, timing, etc.): ~ O t,,J t° ~, General comments regarding historic, architectural, or cultural significance of building/property: Describe any unique features of building or property: I',-r o,,J C_.. Recommendation for City Council action' Describe the Demolition Permit Review Committee's actions on the application (page 2). Requested By: PROPERTY CHARACTERISTIC INFORMATION REQUEST PHONE A.P.N. SITUS c.~7-~ ADD'L SITUS OWNER NAME CURRENT ASSESSED VALUE 05 - 06 / LAND IMPR & FIX PERSONAL PROP $ Res. # I Yr. Built # Bedrooms # Baths Other Improvements ACREAGE Garage Sq. ft. Attached/Detached (circle one) Barn/Shed Sq. ft. ~/h-XX4 ! / 9~'."c~ ~_.T~-7./ Other Amenities, i.e.; fireplace, pool, basement, etc. ' Res. #2 ~'~f~'~ Sq. ft. Yr. Built / ~32 c) # Bedrooms ,,:~. # Baths ~ Garage Sq. ft. Attached/Detached (circle one) Barn/Shed Sq. ft. OTHER BUILDINGS / SQ. FT. REMARKS: I I1 I l! I Z N. STATE 'ST. I MEMO TO: DRC SUBJECT: Demolition of structure at 528 N. State St. DATE: 3-2-06 FROM' David Willou~ An application to demolish 2 Residential structures was submitted on 2-21-06. I performed a site view today, 3-2-05. The condition of the 2 buildings is as follows: Single story stucco 2 unit dwelling - Very poor condition. Later additions were made from wood for the water heater rooms. The roof is flat. Single story wood sided SFD - Poor condition. Exterior ramp at back of structure is rotted out, the under floor framing appears rotted from the under floor access, general disrepair. ATTACHMENT~ -- MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: March 16, 2006 Charley Stump, Director of Planning Judy Pruden, Chair Demolition Permit' Review Committee 528 North state Street Tax records show this structure was built in 1880. At this time, this was the northern edge of the town. The home and a large barn were part of a larger acreage that may have been part or adjoining to Samuel Orr's homestead. The surrounding areas were still small ranches in the 1880s. However, because of very general boundary descriptions, the original owner could not be found in the tax records. By 1898 Charles Bartlett had built a large Victorian three doors north of 528, which is still standing. His spinster sister, Elizabeth Bartlett, was living in her brother's home and owned 528 N. State Street. It is surmised that when the Bartlett's sold part of their very large ranch to the State of California for the mental hospital that each of the original pioneer Bartlett children received money. Charles used this .money to build his elaborate Victorian and Elizabeth used her portion to buy 528, which she used as a rental for income. Elizabeth died in 1923 at the age of 96, still residing with her brother's family. 528 then passed through a series of owners, including' E. P. Sailor, who owned a Pontiac/Cadillac dealership and Leonard Nix, who used the building as a realtor office from the late 1950s to 1980s. Although the Property has been owned by a number of prominent Ukiahians, it has been a rental property from 1900. Additional rental units were added to the rear between 1922 and 1949. The rental market shortage was so acute in the 1940s in Ukiah that we find as many as five families living on the'prOperty. The primary interest in this building is the evolutionary history of the rental market in Ukiah. From the 1890s, Ukiahians have built rental homes near the downtown. The walking distance to the center of town has kept these modest homes economically viable.' Memorandum Re: Demolition Application of 528 North State Street Page I March 16, 2006 The devastating fire in January 2006 destroyed over 50 percent of 528 North State. Street. There is limited salvage value of the channel-rustic redwood siding. The structure~has been remodeled many times, destroying most of~its original features and its history, although interesting, is not of significant value to deny a demolition application. NOTE: The Historical Profile prepared by Ms. Pruden did not include references to the two subject accessory structures on the site. It focused on the primary residence that was substantially destroyed by a recent fire. However, at the March 20, 2006 Demolition Permit Review Committee meeting, Ms. Pruden led a discussion and oral evaluation of the two subject accessory structures, and it was determined that enough information was available to conclude that the buildings did not have historic or architectural significance. · Memorandum Re: Demolition Application of 528 North State Street Page 2 March 16, 2006 A'I-i'ACHMENT ~ DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMMITTEE MEETING March 20, 2006 MEMBERS PRESENT William French Judy Pruden Charley Stump, Planning Director Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director David Willoughby, Building Inspector MEMBERS ABSENT None OTHERS PRESENT None The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Demolition Review was called to order by Chairperson, Judy Pruden at 2:00 p.m. in Conference Room #2, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 15, 2005 and December 20, 2005 ON A MOTION by Charley Stump, seconded by William French, it was carried by an all AYE voice of the members present to approve both sets of minutes, as submitted. 4. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGEND ITEMS No one from the public was present. 5. APPEAL PROCESS There is no formal appeal process of decisions made by the Committee. All decisions are advisory to the City Council. 6. DEMOLITION PRMIT REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Application for demolition for 528 N. State Street Chairperson Judy Pruden reviewed her historical research for the building at 528 N. Bush Street which was the main building. Looking at the records, there are two other buildings that are 50 years of age on the parcel. Charley Stump stated that is what the application was for, was the auxiliary buildings, because the main house has to come down as it was burned. Chairperson Pruden stated that the permit application states fire damage in main house and two units in rear. Chairperson Pruden indicated that she only did the formal Demolition Permit Review March 20, 2006 Page 1 evaluation for the main building and that the two other smaller buildings will need an oral evaluation. The Committee can make a determination after the oral evaluation. An oral evaluation and discussion of the two accessory buildings was performed by the Committee. The additional rental units were added between 1922 and 1949, as stated on the Sanborn maps. Building evaluation states both are substandard and in extremely bad shape. William French unsure what address the two dilapidated buildings are using, as they weren't called forth by another address on application. It was clarified that it is one piece of property with three buildings. The Committee reached consensus that all three buildings on the site did not have historical or architectural significance. Questions were put forth about the buildings having their own separate addresses. Typically it is one file for the address. If there are accessory structures on that property then they just show as accessory structures. ON A MOTION by Member French, seconded by Charley Stump, it was carried that 528 and 528¼ and 528~ N. State Street be considered a single piece of property and to move forward with a recommendation on all three buildings. AYES: ALL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ON A MOTION, by Charley Stump, seconded by Tim Eriksen, it was carried that all three structures at 528 N. State Street do not have any historic or architectural significance pursuant to Section 3016 of the Ukiah City Code, and therefore recommend Council to approve issuance of the demolition permit. AYES: ALL NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE Recommendation will also be made to Council to strongly encourage salvage of materials. 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m. Judy Pruden, Chairperson Demolition Permit Review March 20, 2006 Page 2 ATTACHMENT_ 3016: MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE: mo The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to applications for building permits is modified to require in an application to demolish a building, the date when the building was first constructed, if known. Bo Co Do The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to permit issuance, is modified to require that, as to buildings constructed fifty (50) years or more prior to the date of application, the Director of Planning or his/her designee shall determine whether: 1. The building is an accessory building such as, but not limited to, a garage, storage shed, or carport, whether attached or detached to a main building; except that certain accessory buildings, such as carriage houses, which are presumed to have historic or architectural significance shall be subject to further review as provided in subsection D of this Section, unless the building is subject to demolition under subsection B2 of this Section. 2. Immediate demolition of the building is necessary to protect the public health or safety and the failure to immediately demolish the building would constitute a serious threat to the public health or safety. If subsection B 1 or B2 of this Section applies to the building, no further review shall be required under this Section and the permit shall be issued in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code. If the Planning Director finds that neither of the exceptions in subsection B 1 or B2 of this Section applies to the building, the demolition permit shall be subject to further review in accordance with this Section. The Planning Director shall transmit the proposal to the Demolition Permit Review Committee, or other official reviewing body established by the City Council, for review, comment, and a recommendation to the City Council. Once the Demolition Permit Review Committee formulates a recommendation concerning the disposition of the proposed demolition permit, the Planning Director shall schedule and duly notice the matter for a public hearing and decision by the City Council. The public noticing shall indicate the day, time, place, and purpose of the public hearing, and how additional information about the subject matter can be obtained. The public noticing shall be accomplished in the following manner: 1. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. 2. Mailing or delivery at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the owner(s) of the subject property, or his/her agent, and to the project applicant, if the applicant is not the owner. 3. First class mail notice to all owners (as shown on the latest available Mendocino County Tax Assessor's equalized assessment roll) of property within three hundred feet (300') of the subject property. ~E. In reviewing proposed demolition permits, and formulating recommendations to the City Go Council, the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall consider any information provided during the meeting, and shall use the following criteria. The structure: 1. Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; or 2. Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history; or 3. Is strongly identified with persons or events significant in local, State, or national history. If the Demolition Permit Review Committee finds that any of the criteria listed in subsection E of this Section apply to the building proposed for demolition, it shall recommend denial of the demolition permit to the City. 1. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to subsection D of this Section to consider the recommendation of the Demolition Permit Review Committee, and to determine if any of the criteria listed in subsection E of this Section apply to the building proposed for demolition. If the City Council determines that any one of the criteria apply, it shall make a corresponding finding to that effect. NOTICE OF CEQA EXEMPTION ATTACHMENT_ TO: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 County Clerk County of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 FROM: City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 PROJECT TITLE: Mountanos Demolition Permit DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Demolition of two structures on one parcel that were constructed in 1880 and 1920. LOCATION: 528 North State Street, Ukiah PUBLIC AGENCY APPROVING PROJECT: City of Ukiah NAME OF PROJECT APPLICANT: Mark Mountanos CEQA EXEMPTION STATUS: Ministerial [] Categorical Exemption Section 15301, Class 1 (I) [] Statutory Exemption Section REASONS WHY PROJECT IS EXEMPT: The project involves the demolition and removal of two structures determined not to have historic or architectural siqnificance. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Charley Stump TELEPHONE: (707) 463-6200 SIGNATURE: TITLE: DA TE: Planning Director/Environmental Coordinator May 17, 2006 ITEM NO.: 9.c DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTONS APPROVING A PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR A TOWNHOUSE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TO DIVIDE THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES INTO 27 LOTS SUMMARY: This agenda item includes a Resolution approving a Precise Development Plan submitted as part of a previously approved Zone Change application (ZC 05-34) to rezone the four lots comprising the project site (APN 003-050-29, 66, 85 & 88) to the R-3 PD Combining Zone. The precise development plan component will allow the establishment of 27 individual lots with the unique lot standards required to develop the townhouse complex. These include lot areas between 1,419 to 3,689 square feet, lot widths between 24-40 feet, and smaller front, side, and rear yards than those normally found in the R-3 zone. The Resolution approving the Precise Development Plan is included as Attachment 1. Also included is a second Resolution to approve a Tentative Subdivision Map (SUB 05-35) to divide the site into the 27 lots described above, including 24 townhouse lots, two common-space lots for outdoor recreational use, and another common-use lot for the construction of a cul-de-sac terminus for Apple Avenue. The Resolution approving the tentative subdivision map and a copy of the map is included as Attachment 2. (continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Conduct a public hearing regarding the Precise Development Plan and the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Menton-Rocha Townhouse Planned Development; 2. Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the projects; 3. Adopt the Resolution establishing the Menton-Rocha Townhouse Planned Development; and 4. Adopt the Resolution approving the tentative subdivision map. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not approve the Precise Development Plan and the Tentative Subdivision Map and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Legal notice published in the Ukiah Daily Journal Requested by: Ruff & Associates for Estok Menton and Antonio Rocha, property owners Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Resolution approving Precise Development Plan with plan exhibit 2. Resolution approving Tentative Subdivision Map with map exhibit 3. Mitigated Negative Declaration (distributed on May 3, 2006 for Ordinance introduction) APPROVED: ~-'~ Candace Horsley, City Man'~er PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS: The Ukiah Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on March 22, 2006, to consider the projects described above, and after discussion, voted 3-0 (2 members absent) to recommend that the Ukiah City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and conditionally approve the Precise Development Plan. The conditions included requirements for additional landscape screening along the site's southern boundary and a disclosure clause concerning the project site's location beneath the Ukiah Municipal Airport's northern flight path. The Planning Commission also reviewed the Tentative Subdivision Map at this hearing and found it to be consistent with the provisions of the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance and the California Subdivision Map Act. Based on this determination, the Planning Commission voted 3-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the 27-1ot Tentative Subdivision Map. CONCLUSIONS: The approval of the Precise Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map will complete the multi-faceted process for establishing the Menton-Rocha Townhouse Planned Development project and allow the development of the individually-owned housing units. As noted in earlier staff reports, it is the conclusion of staff that this project, as approved, will be consistent with the goals and policies of the Ukiah General Plan. Staff further concludes that the project will be compatible with the surrounding Iow to medium density neighborhoods located to the south and will be a provide a reasonable transition development between these properties and the more densely developed lands to the north. ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH APPROVING THE PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR ZONE CHANGE NO. 05-34 WHEREAS, the Ukiah Planning Commission on March 22, 2006, conducted a public hearing and recommended approval of the Precise Development Plan for Zone Change No. 05-34, as submitted by Ruff and Associates on behalf of Estok and Miskal Menton and Antonio Rocha, and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project was found adequate and complete by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, On May 17, 2006, the Ukiah City Council conducted a public hearing and considered the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Precise Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Precise Development Plan for the Ruff- Menton-Rocha Townhouse Planned Development project (Attached Exhibit A), is conditionally approved based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions of project approval: Findings for Precise Development Plan: . The precise development plan for the townhouse project is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan since the proposed housing complex is designed in a manner that is consistent with Land Use Element siting criteria for medium to high density residential development and Housing Element implementation measures that encourage the use of "infill" lots that are designated for higher density residential development; . The precise development plan for the townhouse project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the R-3 Zoning District to provide a variety of higher density residential developments, and with the intent of the PD Combining Zone, which provides greater flexibility and design opportunities for such projects; , There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation in the architecture of the proposed townhouse structures to avoid monotony or any box-like external appearance and the buildings and surrounding grounds will generally be consistent with, or more attractive than, the design and scale of similar residential structures in the surrounding neighborhood; , The location, size, and intensity of the townhouse complex will not create hazardous or inconvenient impacts to existing vehicular traffic patterns since its development will not cause substantial traffic volume increases or alter existing traffic patterns in a substantial manner; , The inclusion of accessible off-street parking areas on each lot and in the common lot areas of the townhouse complex will provide sufficient on-site parking to limit the potential for hazardous or inconvenient conditions to adjacent surrounding uses, particularly since a network of shared driveways will provide access the Apple Avenue cul-de-sac terminus and street corridor; , The location, size, and intensity of the townhouse project will not create hazardous or inconvenient impacts to pedestrian traffic since its development plan includes pedestrian walkways along both sides of the improved cul-de-sac terminus for Apple Avenue, which has sidewalks along both sides; 7. Sufficient landscaped areas and open spaces have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the proposed townhouse structures from each other and from adjoining properties; , The proposed townhouse structures will not cut out light or air on the property since the buildings would be constructed along the perimeter areas of the property and would be set back far enough from properties to the north to limit adverse shading patterns on abutting lots; 9. The proposed townhouse structures will not cause excessive damage to or destruction of natural features on the site since there are few substantial resources present; 10. The development of the townhouse planned development will cause no significant adverse environmental effects that will not be mitigated by measures designed to reduce their impact to levels of insignificance, as determined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the project; and 11. The development of this property with townhouse structures will not have a substantial detrimental impact on the character or value of an adjacent residential zoning district since the proposed planned development is a substantial improvement to existing conditions and will utilize attractive building and site designs that are compatible with surrounding development; 12. The relatively unique townhouse project permitted by the establishment of the Menton-Rocha Townhouse Planned Development project will generally be compatible with surrounding land uses and will not be detrimental to the public's health, safety, and general welfare since the project entails a lower development density than previously permitted, is semi-secluded from the surrounding neighborhood, and will be developed in a manner that is consistent with the surrounding medium to high density lands that surround it. Conditions of Approval for Menton-Rocha Townhouse Precise Development Plan: No building permits shall be issued for any of the residential structures shown on the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development until the Final Subdivision Map has been approved by the Ukiah City Council and signed by the Mayor of Ukiah. , All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development approved by the City Council, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches, renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike. , Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the City Council. , In addition to any particular condition, which might be imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. 5. Applicant shall be required to obtain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency. , The Building Permits for the townhouse units permitted by the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the Final Subdivision Map (SUB No. 05-35) approval by the City Council, or they shall be subject to the City's permit revocation process ~and procedures. In the event the Building Permits cannot be issued within the stipulated period from the project approval date, a one year extension may be granted by the Director of Planning if no new circumstances affect the project which otherwise would render the original approval inappropriate or illegal. It is the applicant's responsibility in such cases to propose the one-year extension to the Planning Department prior to the two-year expiration date. , The approved Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project related to the development plan is not being conducted in compliance with the stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of approval; or if the established land use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for twenty four (24) consecutive months. o Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Precise Development Plan for the Planned Development shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the development plan and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. . Improvement Plans for interior walkways or curb, gutters, sidewalks, driveways and street paving along the Apple Avenue cul-de-sac and street frontage shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer in accordance with City Standard Drawings and submitted to the Ukiah City Engineer for review. The improvements plans shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any ministerial permits for site preparation activities required for the construction of any residential unit on the subject property. 10. All improvements within the right-of-way for the Apple Avenue cul-de-sac and street frontage shall be constructed in conformance with the approved improvement plans under an Encroachment Permit issued by the Public Works Department. The Encroachment Permit shall be submitted to the City Engineer with a fee equal to three percent (3%) of the cost of the improvements and must be approved prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project. 11. All improvements shall be done by a properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License who shall submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability: $1,000,000; Property Damage: $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. 12. Prior to any site development on the subject properties, a Civil Engineer shall design a stormwater detention system that will detain any increase in runoff generated as a result of this project. All storm water generated as a result of development activities shall be detained on- site so as to not create any additional impact on the downstream drainage system. The criteria for design shall be such that the runoff released from the site shall be equal to or less than that which is currently released from the site for any event, up to and including a 50 year event. This design must be submitted to the City Engineer for his approval prior to the issuance of any building or grading permits. The system must be installed prior to the final inspection of any building or grading permits. 13. A letter of confirmation shall be provided to the City Engineer by the designer of the stormwater detention system that the system is consistent with the design approved by the City Engineer. This letter shall be received and verified by the City Engineer prior to any final inspections for building permits. 14. A Grading and Drainage Plan that includes an Erosion and Sediment Transport Control Plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer/Public Works Director for review and shall be approved prior to the commencement of any grading, site preparation activities, or construction of buildings and paving. A licensed civil engineer shall prepare all drainage calculations and other work done on this Plan, including the following work: a. The extent of modifications to existing drainage patterns; b. The extent of storm drainage improvements and erosion control measures for building pads, driveways, parking lot areas, and other movements of soil; and c. The extent of other development the City Engineer determines could adversely affect existing drainage patterns on the site or on abutting properties or could cause wind or water erosion. 15. The City Engineer/Public Works Director shall permit no site preparation, grading, or construction of buildings and paving on the project site without first reviewing a Final Grading and Drainage Plan that includes an Erosion and Sediment Transport Control Plan. This plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer/Public Works Director for review and shall be approved prior to the commencement of the activities described above. A licensed civil engineer shall prepare all drainage calculations and other work done on this Plan, including the work described below: a. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion; drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on-site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. b. All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" (inches) of asphalt concrete with a 6" (inch) ' aggregate base, or, alternatively, any option approved by the City Engineer. c. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, road construction, and building construction shall institute a practice of routinely watering exposed soil to control dust, particularly during windy days. d. All inactive soil piles on the project site shall be completely covered at all times to control fugitive dust. e. All activities involving site preparation, excavation, filling, grading, and actual construction shall include a program of washing off trucks leaving the construction site to control the transport of mud and dust onto public streets. f. Low emission mobile construction equipment, such as tractors, scrapers, and bulldozers shall be used for earth moving operations. g. All earth moving and grading activities shall be suspended if wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour. 16. 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 also be required to fund the hiring of a qualified professional archaeologist to perform a field reconnaissance to determine whether the development of a precise mitigation program will be required prior to the continuation of any site work. 17. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Public Utilities and Public Works Departments. 18. A Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted by the project applicant and approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building. This plan shall include, but not be limited to the following: a) A planting legend that includes the names, location, coverage area, and canopy cover of proposed vegetation; b) A planting schedule for all vegetation installed on the site; and c) A maintenance schedule for existing or proposed vegetation, including a watering schedule and irrigation system design. 19. All landscaping shall be maintained in a neat, weed-free manner, and may not be removed or substantially altered unless the Director of Planning reviews and approves the removal or replacement of vegetation determined to be diseased, unstable, hazardous, or poorly located on the site. Any vegetation removed from the site shall be replaced with similar vegetation approved by the Planning Director. 20. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and/or ventilation equipment shall be aesthetically screened from view consistent with the architecture of the building upon which it is located. 21. Outdoor refuse/recycle containers shall be aesthetically screened from view; garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosures. 22. A recycling program that provides the opportunity for all residents of the townhouse development project to recycle shall be implemented prior to the occupancy of any of the buildings and shall remain in effect so long as the structures are occupied. This program shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and approved prior to implementation to ensure it provides efficient recycling methods consistency with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements. 23. Hours of construction shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday unless additional hours of construction for special construction activities or projects are reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 24. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, a Final Lighting Plan shall be submitted to the Director of Planning and Community Development or his/her designee for review for compliance with Ukiah Municipal Code standards for on-site lighting and with "dark sky" guidelines for reducing nighttime lighting on the site. The Final Lighting Plan shall include details regarding exterior lighting for structures, garden areas, and walkways, with lighting sources that are full cut-off, hooded, and down-cast, or otherwise shielded to ensure that light does not adversely shine towards neighboring properties, or toward the night sky. Additionally, all lighting shall be the minimum wattage necessary to provide adequate security, yet shall not result in excessively bright night glow. Sufficient details regarding the proposed wattage of all site lights shall be included in the Final Lighting Plan so that the Planning Staff can determine how bright the proposed site lights will be. The Director of Planning and Community Development shall have the authority to require the Final Lighting Plan to be modified (including the wattage) and/or additional information to be submitted so that the lighting meets the requirements listed above. 25. Rental and lease agreements for all of the apartments on the subject properties shall include an advisement to potential renters that a) the apartment complex is located in close proximity to the Ukiah Municipal Airport and is subject to occasional overflights of aircraft taking off or landing at the airport, and b) the number of noise-producing flights may increase in future years. The language in this advisement shall be approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Permit of Occupancy for any of the proposed apartment buildings. 26. All conditions that do not contain a specific date or time period for completion shall be completed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. PASSED AND ADOPTED on AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ,2006 by the following roll call vote: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ATTACNHENT 1 E~IBIT A ? S~GLE F~ILY RESIDENC~ 767 APPLE AVE., UKIA~, ~ 95482 i3 -.. l.. ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF UKIAH APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP NO. 05-35 WHEREAS, the Ukiah Planning Commission on March 22, 2006, conducted a public hearing and recommended approval of Tentative Map No. 05-17, as submitted by Ruff and Associates on behalf of Estok and Miskal Menton and Antonio Rocha, and WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was found adequate and complete by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the proposed lots are consistent with the Precise Development Plan for Zone Change No. 05-34, as approved by the City Council on May 17, 2006, and WHEREAS, the City Engineer/Director of Public Works reports that the subdivision is consistent with applicable requirements of the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT Tentative Map No. 05-35 (Attached Exhibit A) for the Ruff-Menton-Rocha Townhouse Planned Development project, is approved based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions of project approval: Findings for Menton-Rocha Townhouse Tentative Subdivision Map: 1. The division of the property into 27 lots is consistent with the requirements outlined for major subdivisions in the California Subdivision Map Act; , The division of the property into 27 lots is consistent with the Ukiah General Plan since the townhouse development project will be consistent with Land Use Element criteria for high density residential land uses and Housing Element implementation measures that encourage creativity and flexibility in establishing new housing situations; 3. The division of the property into 27 lots, as conditioned, is consistent with the applicable Type I subdivision standards of the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance; . The division of the existing property into 27 lots is consistent with the modified use and development standards.of the R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning District and with the purpose and intent of the PD Combining Zone criteria established for this development site, which allows greater flexibility in determining lot areas, lot dimensions, yard/setback areas, and requirements for public street frontage; and . The division of the existing property into 27 lots will cause no significant adverse environmental effects, as determined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for the project. Conditions of Approval for Menton-Rocha Townhouse Tentative Subdivision Map: 1. A Final Subdivision Map shall be prepared and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval, and recorded in a manner consistent with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements. 2. Applicant shall be required to obtain any permit or approval, which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance, be it required by Local, State, or Federal agency. . Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Engineering Department of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the Zoning Administrator. . In addition to any particular condition imposed, any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, regulations and ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. . The subdivider of the subject property shall dedicate land, pay a fee in-lieu thereof, or both at the option of the City Council for park and recreation purposes prior to the filing of the Final Subdivision Map. . All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application approved by the City Council, and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including maps, sketches, renderings, building elevations, landscape plans, and alike. , Covenant, codes, and restrictions that include, but are not limited to, the development of maintenance agreements for the continued maintenance of the private access roadway, storm drainage, sidewalks, landscaping, and other areas that will be used in common, shall be submitted to the City of Ukiah Public Works Department and the City of Ukiah Department of Planning and Community Development for review, and shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to their recordation and the recording of the Final Subdivision Map. PASSED AND ADOPTED on ,2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ATTACH14EI~ 2 E~IBIT A O ! B. B~LL AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10.a DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: CONTINUED DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE REGARDING CAMPAIGN REFORM - BALDWIN, RODIN Council requested to continue their discussion from the Hay 3, 2006 meeting on campaign reform as presented by Vice Mayor Baldwin and Councilmember Rodin (Attachment 1). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and possible consideration of an ordinance regarding campaign reform. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Councilmembers Baldwin and Rodin Letter- April 14, 2006 2 - City Attorney E-mail- May 8, 2006 3 - Councilmember Baldwin's E-mail- May 2, 2006 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City'~lanager TO: UKIAH CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: PHIL BALDWIN & MARl RODIN RE: CITY CAMPAIGN REFORM ORDINANCE DATE: April 14, 2006 We are pleased to present a comprehensive comparison of 11 cities' campaign finance ordinances as well as substantial background information on campaign finance reform in general. We hope this proves useful in considering an ordinance for Ukiah. As you will see, we have changed several elements of the proposal. The key elements in the revised proposal are the following: · A $100 limit on campaign contributions from individuals, businesses, and independent committees; Public disclosure of contributors who donate $50 or more to a campaign; The creation of a voluntary'"Fair Campaign" program wherein participants agree to a campaign spending cap of $5,000. A participant in the "Fair Campaign" program may identify himself/herself as a "Fair Campaign Candidate" in all campaign literature and advertisements, official ballot statement, receive space on the City website for photo and 500-word statement, receive mention in a City news release of "Fair Campaign" candidates. Additionally, the City would pay fifty percent of the ballot statement cost for those candidates agreeing to the voluntary spending limit. · No anonymous contributions; and · City Clerk scanning of FPPC filings until City has the financing to implement electronic filing. If you are interested in information, you might review the National Civic League's website at www.ncl.orq or the Center for Governmental Studies at http:/lwww.c.qs.orq/proiects/Politicalreform/index.html#campai.qn. For information specifically regarding how to write campaign reform ordinances, please see http:llwww.brennancenter.or.q/pro.qrams/pro.q ht manual.html. We also have on hand the ordinances of all eleven of the cities reviewed in the chart. We have those available upon request. At our last subcommittee meeting, we discussed a process for our discussion on Wednesday evening that would balance the need for public input and council discussion with our desire to move forward promptly and efficiently. With these competing needs in mind, we propose the following: first, we briefly present the chart that compares different cities' ordinances and the elements of our proposal for Ukiah; second, we ask for public comment; and third, we as a Council discuss each element of the following proposal in order. After briefly discussing each element, we then assess if there is agreement by at least three members for that element or some variation of it. Then we move on to the next element. Hopefully, by the time we reach the end of the proposal, we will have clear direction to give our city attorney for the crafting of a draft ordinance. Ukiah City Council · April 14, 2006 Page 1 PURPOSEANDINTENT: 1. To avoid the exercise of undue Or improper influence, or its appearance, over elected officials by contributors to or independent supporters of political campaigns; 2. To promote integrity, honesty, and fairness in municipal election campaigns; 3. To encourage wide citizen participation in .municipal elections; 4. To inform the public of the sources of campaign contributions and expenditures; 5. To supplement the requirements of state law with regard to the reporting of campaign contributions and expenditures; and 6. To limit the ever-increasing cost of municipal election campaigns. In view of these purposes, the city council finds that a voluntary Campaign spending limit will help minimize the overall cost of municipal election campaigns, that a $50 disclosure requirement will encourage integrity, honesty, and fairness, and that a contribution limit of $100 per individual contributor per candidate will advance the city council's goals of preserving citizen confidence and participation in the municipal election 'process, minimize increases in the overall cost of municipal elections, while preserving the First Amendment rights of citizens to express support for particular candidates and points of view. CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMITS: A limit of $100 per adult or business to each candidate or recall campaign during the election cycle (described below). An election cycle is the period during which contributions may be collected. A limit of $100 per adult or business to an independent committee which directly or indirectly, receives contributions or makes expenditures or contributions for the purpose of influencing or attempting to influence the action of the voters in a municipal election for · or against the nomination or election, of one or more candidates or recall (hereafter "Independent Committees") during the election cycle. Limitation of in-kind contributions or gifts to be used in campaigns to $300 for professional services and $300 for material items of any kind, based on estimated fair market value, for candidates and Independent Committees. Contributions by a person and his or her spouse shall be treated as separate contributions and shall not be aggregated. Contributions by unemancipated children are reputably presumed to constitute contributions by their parents and attributed either one- half to each parent or entirely to a single custodial parent. For the purposes of this ordinance, election cycles begin March 1 preceding a November election and October I preceding a June election. They end at 5 pm on the Tuesday prior to an election. This last day of the election cycle (the Tuesday prior to an election) is also the date on which all candidates must file a 3rd campaign statement. '6. No contributions may be accepted after the 3rd campaign statement is filed. Ukiah City Council · April 14, 2006 Page 2 No carryover of campaign funds from one election cycle to another. Leftover funds may be donated to a non-profit organization, the City general fund, or be reimbursed to campaign contributors on a pro rata basis. 8. Loans-other than commercial bank loans--are considered to be regular contributions. VOLUNTARY SPENDING LIMITS: All candidates who have either a minimum of $500 in their campaign .treasury or who have collected 200 signatures from registered Ukiah voters supporting their candidacy are eligible to participate in the City of Ukiah's voluntary "Fair Campaign" program. Participants in the program must accept a voluntary campaign spending limit of $5,000 by signing an agreement. All participants in the Fair Campaign program will receive: a. 50% of the cost of the ballot statement. b. Free inclusion of candidate photograph and up to 500-word statement displayed on the City's web site. c. Mention in a City news release within one week of election filing date of their participation in the voluntary "Fair Campaign" program. d. The option of using the designation "Fair Campaign Candidate" in their campaign literature and in their ballot statement. CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION AND SPENDING DISCLOSURE: 1. No anonymous contributions allowed. 2. Disclosure of name, address, occupation or type of business required for donations between $50 and $100~. , City clerk will scan all FPPC campaign filing forms so they are available for the public to review, The City will make electronic filing of all campaign statements possible as soon as it is financially feasible. 4. These disclosure rules are to apply for all ballot measures as well. DISCLOSURE ON MASS MAILINGS~ PRINT AND RADIO ADVERTISEMENTS~ AND TELEMARKETING/POLLS . Candidates and Independent Committees taking part in the Fair Campaign program must disclose on any mass mailings, telemarketing/phone banking of more than 50 people, radio advertising, television advertising, or opinion polling that they are a "Fair Campaign Candidate". , Candidate~, and Independent Committees who decline to be part of the Fair Campaign program must disclose in mass mailings, electronic advertisements, and in telephone polling that they declined to participate in the voluntary spending limitation program. They must also disclose their five largest contributors with their occupations and whether 40% or more of contributions are from outside of Mendocino County. On written material this disclosure must be in at least 12-point font. i The California FPPC already requires filing and public disclosure of all campaign spending and of cumulative contributions to either candidates or Independent Committees of $100 or more from individuals, businesses, or Independent Committees. This disclosure applies to ballot initiatives, referenda, and recall campaigns as well. Disclosure must include name, address, and occupation or type of business or' organization. The FPPC also requires that candidates keep an official, auditable record of the amounts, names, addresses, for all donations between $25 and $99. Ukiah City Council- April 14, 2006 Page 3 ENFORCEMENT AND PENALTIES Penalty for late submittal of FPPC filing is $500 per calendar day, or any portion of a calendar day, after the deadline, if the total budget for the campaign is within the $5,000 voluntary spending limit. If'the total budget for the campaign is over $5,000, the candidate will be liable for $500 per calendar day, or any portion of a calendar day, after the deadline, or an amount equal to the -total funds received (donation or loan) in the last filing period,, whichever is the greater amount. Penalty for failing to properly or accurately report contributions and expenditures will be three times the amount he/she fails to properly report or unlawfully contributes, expends, accepts, gives or receives, or $500 per violation, whichever is greater. , In addition to any other civil or criminal penalty under this ordinance, a winning candidate found legally to be in violation of this ordinance may be required to relinquish the seat won. OTHER 1. Severability clause. (If one portion of the ordinance is found to be invalid, the whole ordinance will not be found to be invalid.) Ukiah City Council · April 14, 2006 Page 4 ATTACHMENT 2 From: drapport [mailto:drapport@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 11:38 AM To-' Candace Horsley Subject: Baldwin email to Council members Candace - I read the email Council member Baldwin addressed to John McCowen and forwarded to all Council members prior to the last Council meeting. My understanding is that he sent the email, but there was no exchange of emails among Councilmembers, and certainly not among a majority of the Councilmembers. The City Council has asked whether sending this email violated the Brown Act. Conclusion: In my opinion, Councilmember Baldwin's one-way communication by email of his arguments did not violate the Brown Act. However, Councilmember Baldwin's email should be included in the agenda packet, when the campaign reform ordinance is considered by the City Council again. Analysis: With reference to the definitiion of meeting, the Brown Act provides in Government Code Section 54952.2, in pertinent part, as follows: (a) As used in this chapter, "meeting" includes any congregation of a majority of the members of a legislative body at the same time and place to hear, disduss, or deliberate upon any item that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body or the local agency to which it pertains. (b) Except as authorized pursuant to Section 54953, any use of direct communication, personal intermediaries, or technological devices that is employed by a majority of the members of the legislative body to develop a collective concurrence as to action to be taken on an item by the members of the legislative body is prohibited. (Emphasis added.) On its face, an email (which is a form of direct communication employing a technological device) used by one Councilmember to communicate with the other Councilmembers is not "employed by a majority of the" City Council to "develop a collective concurrence." The case law contains essentially the same prohibition. See, for example, 216 Sutter Bay Associates v. County of Sutter (1997) 58 Cal. App. 4th 860, 876-877, which states: To prevent evasion of the Brown Act, a series of private meetings (known as serial meetings) by which a majority of the members of a legislative body commit themselves to a decision concerning public business or engage in collective deliberation on public business would violate the open meeting requirement. (See Stockton Newspapers, Inc. v. Redevelopment Agency (1985) 171 Cal. App. 3d 95, 102 [214 Cal. Rptr. 561]; Frazer v. Dixon Unified School Dist., supra, 18 Cal. App. 4th at p. 795; see also Roberts v. City of Palmdale (1993) 5 Cal. 4th 363,376 [20 Cal. Rptr. 2d 330, 853 P.2d 496].) Roberts v. City of Palmdale (1993) 5 Cal. 4th 363, specifically rejected the idea that one-way communication from a single member of the legislative body to the other members would constitute a meeting within the meaning the Brown Act. At p. 377, the court wrote: the case law, the terms "meeting" and "session" are used interchangeably (see, e.g., Stockton Newspapers, Inc. v. Redevelopment Agency, supra, 171 CaI.App.3d at p. 102; Sacramento Newspaper Guild, supra, 263 CaI.App.2d at p. 47); we believe the Legislature intended the same usage in section 54956.9. The Legislature's intent is best deciphered by giving words their plain meanings. ( Wells Farqo Bank v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1082, 1095 [282 CaI.Rptr. 841, 811 P.2d 1025].)"We have declined to follow the plain meaning of a statute only when it would inevitably have frustrated the manifest purposes of the legislation as a whole or led to absurd results." ( People v. Belleci (1979) 24 Cal.3d 879, 884 [157 CaI.Rptr. 503,598 P.2d 473].) (8c) Resort to a dictionary shows that the term "meeting" is defined as "an act or process of coming together;.., a gathering .... "(Webster's Third New Internat. Dict. (1981) p. 1404.) The term "session" is defined as "an actual or constructive sitting of a body (as a court, council, or legislature); also: the actual or constructive assembly of the members of such a body for the transaction of business .... "( at pp. 2076- 2077.) Both terms obviously imply collective action. We conclude that section 54956.9 was intended to apply to collective action of local governing boards and not to the passive receipt by individuals of their mail. (11) Of course the intent of the Brown Act cannot be avoided by subterfuge; a concerted plan to engage in collective deliberation on public business through a series of letters or telephone calls passing from one member of the governing body to the next would violate the open meeting requirement. (See, e.g., Stockton Newspapers, Inc. v. Redevelopment Agency, [*377] supra, 171 Cal.App.3d at p. 102; 65 Ops. Cal.Atty. Gen. 63, 65 (1982).) There was no evidence in this case, however, that there was any collective deliberation outside of the open meeting where the parcel map was discussed and ultimately granted. (Emphasis added.) For these reasons, I do not believe Councilmember Baldwin's email violated the Brown Act. I would caution Councilmembers, however, to avoid emails like this in the future, because they risk a Brown Act violation. It is very easy to hit the Reply button and commence back and forth exchanges which could result in the occurence of a meeting in violation of the Brown Act. I would also point out that under Government Code Section 54957.5(a), a document becomes a public record as soon as it is distributed to all or a majority of the City Council. Under subsection (b): "Writings that are public records under subdivision (a) and that are distributed during a public meeting shall be made available for public inspection at the meeting if prepared by the local agency or a member of its legislative body." When this matter is taken up again, Councilmember Baldwin's email should be included in the public information made available for the consideration of that item on the agenda. David J. Rapport Rapport and Marston 405 W. Perkins Street Ukiah, Ca. 95482 Tel: 707-462-6846 Fax: 707-462-4235 Alt. Fax 501-636-4538 ATTACHMENT 3 From: Phil Baldwin [mailto:felipe@pacific.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 11:02 PM To: John McCowen Subject: Disclosure Arguments John, a few months ago you wrote to me: "Why not try to inspire us by the honesty, brilliance, logic, equity, reasonableness and public benefit of your argument?" Once again I seek to meet that standard. Here are my responses to the best arguments delivered at our last meeting against a $50 disclosure with a $100 contribution limit. These arguments are forwarded as well to the full Council to assure compliance with the Brown Act. 1. There has been major inflation since the State of California adopted the $100 disclosure level in 1974. So if that level was considered fair, progressive and enlightened in 1974, then it must be far more so today. The creation of the FPPC was to a great extent the result of the Watergate Scandal and the contribution disclosure levels were set at $100 for statewide office seekers, Senate and Assembly races, as well as major urban mayoralty races; statewide elections were already at that time in the millions of dollars. That those disclosure levels applied to Weedpatch, Weed, Woodland, Willits, and Ukiah has been incidental to their original intent which was to deal with Sacramento corruption. Of course that disclosure level remains reasonable for statewide races where each campaign is raising $30 million, but it is not reasonable in Ukiah races where the average campaign spends some $4300. 2. $100 is such a small contribution it is practically chicken feed. Virtually nobody cares about such, not the contributor, not the recipient candidate or uncontrolled committee. Real contributions will be felt by the giver and by the recipient; $95 will be felt by neither. Two points need to be made about this argument. First, 100 attendees at a Tri-Tip barbecue at $99 per ticket will raise $9900 in less than two hours and the source of that $9900 will remain unreported. That is a tremendous amount of money for Mendocino County races and any race in Ukiah. All undisclosed. Secondly, for me personally and for most Ukiahans a $100 contribution is a major sacrifice. For most Ukiahans it would be unimaginable. Most simply would not or could not make such a big donation. With the average household income here at roughly $35,000, $100 is a very big deal. A great many, if not most Ukiahans may not have $100 left in their bank account at the end of each month. When one claims that $100 is no big deal, that it is insignificant, he seems to be creating a distance, maybe a wide gap, between himself and the average working or retired Ukiahan often struggling financially at the end of the month. Maybe the perspective that $100 is chicken feed doesn't represent hostility to those without wealth, but it does seem insensitive. 3. Mendocino County Supervisor Kendall Smith says $100 is an insignificant contribution and one which never could have any influence on a candidate. Kendall Smith has run one time and been elected once to public office. She has held her seat for less than two years. That she should be made the authority on the subject of contribution disclosure thresholds seems ridiculous to me. But it is not difficult to grasp why she supports high financed campaigns. Before running herself she worked for Congressman Mike Thompson, one of the most well funded members of the House. After working at that level, it's obvious why $100 would seem to be nothing to Kendall Smith. Thompson's contributions come in the $1000 to $10,000 range. Such level of financing is the primary reason why our nation suffers such a dismal level of citizen participation in elections, (roughly 50% of eligible citizens in Presidential election years; it's below 40% for State off year elections and lower than that for Ukiah and other small cities.) 4. Many who want to be involved and to contribute to certain candidates fear for their jobs and relationship with neighbors, even spouses. With a $50 disclosure people will be afraid to contribute. Under the $50 threshold chosen by San Luis Obispo and Petaluma, those dedicated to a candidate but afraid of disclosure can give $49.99 and then volunteer to work behind closed doors. In most small city campaigns -clearly including Ukiah - a $49 contribution is a hefty one, often larger than the majority of individual contributions. Those afraid of public disclosure can help in so many other ways. Campaigns can be and should be once again more about the camaraderie of volunteer work rather than money. A lower threshold will actually encourage political volunteerism. 5. The bureaucratic red tape of a $50 disclosure threshold is unfair to novice, poor, poorly educated, and slow learning candidates. Besides, it would be so time consuming it will discourage even rapid learner, highly educated candidates. The State of California already requires candidates (smart or dumb) to keep track of all contributions of $25 or more. Any contender (or her treasurer) could fill in the FPPC forms for 100 donors between $50 and $100 in less than 50 minutes. This might take a average IQ sixth grader eighty minutes at most. All jurisdictions with a $25 and a $50 disclosure which we have contacted report that this claimed inhibition is nonexistent. Petaluma ($25), San Luis Obispo ($50), Davis ($25), Cotati ($25), Mountain View ($50), and Novato ($25) have had no problem with these thresholds under $100. So, I hope you ask: why have all these cities adopted such low disclosure thresholds? Let's wonder together: All have suffered from rapid growth, questionable planning, and a simultaneous increase in developer funding of campaigns. Oh, and none can be considered radical by any stretch of the imagination. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: 10.b DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUB3ECT: RECEIVE STATUS REPORT CONCERNING SIGN ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES SUMMARY: The purpose of this Agenda Item is to provide the City Council with a Status Report concerning Staff's efforts to enforce the City's sign ordinance. Current Siqn Violation Cases The Code Compliance Coordinator has been working on the unauthorized banner sign cases on State, Perkins, and Gobbi Streets, and only four cases remain unresolved. He has also been monitoring the resolved cases and working with business owners who are pursuing permanent signage. In the coming month, he will be expanding his investigation area to include commercial corridors such as Orchard Avenue and Talmage Road. We plan to engage the assistance of the Economic Development Coordinator in distributing sign regulation information and providing proactive and positive education to local businesses. Staff will continue to provide the Council with monthly progress reports. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by.' Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Candace Horsley, City IVlanager and Chris White, Code Compliance Coordinator 1 - List of sign violation cases Candace Horsley, City Manger ATTACHM~. __ / ,~,,~ 0 0 0 (0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0 0 o3 O3 t-- 0 8 m o > > AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: 10.c DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUB3ECT: REVIEW OF PROPOSALS AND CREATION OF PANEL TO INTERVIEW CONSULTING FIRMS FOR THE DOWNTOWN/PERKINS STREET COMMUNITY VISIONING AND FORM BASED ZONING PROJECT. SUMMARY: The City Council recently instructed Staff to review and rank the three proposals submitted for the Downtown/Perkins Street Community Visioning and Form Based Zoning project. This task has been completed and Staff has concluded that all three firms submitted creative and interesting proposals. Accordingly, Staff believes that all three firms are highly qualified and could provide outstanding consultant services to the City, and therefore all three should be interviewed by a panel. The panel could then formally rank the firms and make a final recommendation to the City Council. This agenda item is seeking Council's concurrence with interviewing the firms, and to seek Council representation on an interview panel that could include Staff and representation from the Planning Commission and Downtown Design Review Board. FIRM COST Fisher and Hall $100,000 RRM Desic!n Group Opticos $104~033 $173~800 to $231~550 NOTES Does not include costs to attend hearings. Option tasks available at additional costs. Specific form based code experience. Optional tasks available at additional cost. Very strong form based code experience. RECOMMENDED ACT]:ON: 1) Decide to interview all three firms; 2) Determine if City Council representation on the interview panel is desired; and 3) Direct Staff to assemble an interview panel comprised of a City Council member, Planning Commissioner, Design Review Board member, and Staff. ALTERNATIVE AGENCY POLICY OPTION: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens 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. Proposals (Previously distributed) Candace Horsley, Exec~ Director ITEM NO. lO.d DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF THE ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2000 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO TEMPORARY RULES IN CITY PARKS, AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 2000.2, PERTAINING TO RULES FOR CITY SPONSORED CONCERTS IN THE PARK At the May 3, 2006 meeting, the Ukiah City Council discussed and considered restricting/regulating smoking, dogs, high-back chairs, and barbeques at the Sundays in the Park Concert Series. Council concluded that smoking and high baCk chairs should be limited to the perimeter of the event and that compliance be gained through educating patrons. With regard to dogs and barbeques, Council agreed with staff's assessment that both of these items represent a serious safety issue for the attending public. Council requested that staff return with the appropriate ordinance language that would ban dogs from Todd Grove Park during Sundays in the Park events and restrict barbeques to designed picnic areas. The ordinance is included as Attachment #1 for Council's review. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce the Ordinance amending Section 2000 of the Ukiah City Code, pertaining to temporary rules in City Parks, and adding a new section 2000.2, pertaining to rules for City sponsored concerts in the park. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Provide alternative direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Ukiah City Council Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager and David Rapport, City Attorney 1. Ordinance for Adoption APPROVE , F Candace Horsley, ~y Manager In addition, staff is also recommending updating the language in the City Code related to creating temporary rules and regulations for City Parks. The current code language requires Council's confirmation of a temporary rule at its next regularly scheduled meeting and has the potential to inundate Council with non-practicable issues. For example, at times during the winter months it is sometimes necessary to close a turf area or limit the type of activity on an area due to unsafe conditions or maintenance activities. In addition, special events and activities sometimes warrant temporary restrictions for the health and safety of attendees. For example, at times staff has the need to restrict the general public from entering areas at Todd Grove Park that are utilized by our summer day camp in order to ensure the safety of kids in the program. In another instance, staff has had the need to limit alcohol and tobacco use at the Ukiah Sports Complex during school usage of the facility. The new language would allow the Director of Community Services with the approval of the City Manager to implement temporary rules when necessary for the proper administration of and the regulation of conduct in City parks. These rules would have to be posted and could not remain in force for a period of more than 4 months within a single calendar year without approval from the City Council. Long term policy regulating use and conduct in City Parks would still require Council's approval. The City Attorney and staff are recommending that the penalty for violation for both of these sections be an infraction rather than a misdemeanor. Since the maximum penalty for an infraction is a fine, there is no right to a jury trial and a citation is usually resolved informally by the court. It substantially reduces the cost and time of enforcement. Staff is recommending the introduction of the Ordinance amending Section 2000 of the Ukiah City Code, pertaining to temporary rules in City Parks, and adding a new section 2000.2, pertaining to rules for City sponsored concerts in the park. Attachment #1 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 2000 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO TEMPORARY RULES IN CITY PARKS, AND ADDING A NEW SECTION 2000.2, PERTAINING TO RULES FOR CITY SPONSORED CONCERTS IN THE PARK. The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE. Section 2000 of the Ukiah City Code is hereby amended and Section 2000.2 is hereby added to the Ukiah City Code to read as follows. §2000: TEMPORARY RULES AND REGULATIONS: The Director of Community Services, with the approval of the City Manager, may establish temporary rules and regulations as may from time to time be necessary for the proper administration of and the regulation of conduct in City parks. Such rules shall be contained in a document, subject to public inspection, which shall include the date of adoption, the signatures of the Director of Community Services and the City Manager, a precise description of the park or area where they apply, the time period during which they are effective and the content of the rules. Such rules may not remain in force for a period of more than four months in any one calendar year, unless, within that time, they are approved by resolution of the City Council. Any such temporary rules or regulations shall become effective, when notice of the rule or rules are posted at or near the main entrance way or ways to the park or area where they apply. Once posted, any person violating the rule shall be guilty of an infraction, punishable by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation of the rule, two hundred dollars ($200) for a second violation or five hundred dollars ($500) for each additional violation. §2000.2: RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR SUNDAYS IN THE PARK FREE CONCERT SERIES: Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Code to the contrary, all persons or organizations attending the Sundays in the Park Free Concert Series at Todd Grove Park shall comply with the following: A. No person shall permit a dog or other animal under his or her ownership or control to enter upon or remain in Todd Grove Park during a Sundays in the Park concert event. B. No person shall use any type of barbeque or cooking device during a Sundays in the Park concert event other than at picnic table areas designated for such use by the City Manager. Any person violating this Section shall be guilty of an infraction, punishable by a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) for a first violation, two hundred dollars ($200) for a second violation or five hundred dollars ($500) for each additional violation. SECTION TVVO 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 AGENDA ITEM NO: 10e MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Goals: Community Services (continued), Airport and Water/Sewer Staff is returning to Council to complete the discussion of the departmental goals. Community Services has only a few line items left to present and then the Airport and Water/Sewer departments will complete the goal presentations to the City Council. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review proposed goals and provide direction. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Community Services, Airport and Water/Sewer Depts. Proposed Goals for the three departments Approved' Candace Horsley, Manager · Arr^c s r__. / Parks Division Community Services Department Operation and Policy Goals 1. Increase park/golf service worker staffing levels. Staffing levels have not been increase proportionate to the addition of facilities and new projects at existing facilities including increase park-like landscapes at City parking lots, the planting of more than 500 new trees throughout the park system, and the addition of Depot Park, Riverside Park, Orchard Park, Observatory Park and the Ukiah Sports Complex. Furthermore, the usage at City Parks continues to increase, resulting in the need for increased maintenance. Currently, there is the need for 2 additional full time staff members and 1 additional summer seasonal. Timeline: Add 1 full time and 1 summer seasonal in the Fiscal Year 06/07 Budget Add an additional full time staff member in the Fiscal Year 07/08 Budget. Funding General Fund; Potentially offset cost with increase to TOT. 2. With the recent award of the State Grants for Anton Stadium, Ukiah Municipal Swimming pools and the Ukiah Skate Park, the Department is well beyond it's-staffing limits to effectively manage these projects. Each project will require a tremendous amount of coordination that will include fundraising, construction, and volunteer management. Recommend hiring a projects/grants manager that can coordinate all three projects in addition to seeking new grants for other City projects. Timeline: Hire project manager starting in FY 06/07; Will need for a minimum of 3 years. Funding: General Fund, Redevelopment, Grants 3. Develop an animal control operations manual and revise City Ordinances related to animal control. Timeline: Develop in FY 06/07 and submit to Council in FY 07/08 4. Provide additional training opportunities for staff including pool operator, pesticide applicator and playground inspection classes. Timeline: Ongoing 5. Continue to seek grant opportunities for park improvements. Timeline: Ongoing Capital Improvement Projects Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Location: Estimated Cost: Funding Source(s) Other Considerations: Playground Upgrade and Equipment Replacement Installation of new equipment to be completed Spring 2006 Mandated and Funded FY 05/06. Todd Grove Park, Oak Manor Park, Orchard park and Vinewood Park $3OO,OOO Proposition 12 and 40; CA State Park Bond Per Capita Allocations Since Park Bond funding is unpredictable, it may be desirable to establish a $25,000 per year contribution to a capital improvement fund to ensure the timely replacement of playground equipment in the future. Most playground equipment will last between 10 to 15 years. Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Orchard Park Development Summer 2006 Budgeted FY 05/06 $15,000 Completion of the Orchard Park including pathway, landscape and picnic tables. Page 1 Parks 6) MISCELLANEOUS a) Release control of GIS system b) Airport Improvement Project - Construction Summer 2006 contract has been awarded to Argonaut Summer of 2006 - ¢ e-~ ~t.~- .~ ~ ¢ -4- Project Name: Anton Stadium Renovation Timeline: FY06/07 (begin fundraising and project development) Estimated Cost: $714,286 Funding Source(s) Grants, Donations, General Fund Current/Potential Funds $75,000 Currently allocated in a City of Ukiah Capital Improvement Fund $500,000 Potential Proposition 40 Competitive Grant Award Grant requires a $214,286 local match. Project Name: Timeline: Estimated Cost: Funding Source(s) Current/Potential Funds Skate Park Development Project FY06/07 (begin fundraising and project development) $714,286 Grants, Donations, General Fund $25,000 Currently held by the Ukiah Skate Park Committee $500,000 Potential Proposition 40 Competitive Grant Award Grant requires a $214,286 local match. Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Funding Source(s) Ukiah Sports Complex Phase III Spring 2006 Budgeted FY 05/06 $25,00O Continued lighting and spectator seating upgrades General Fund / Park Development Fund Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Funding Source(s) Ukiah Sports Complex Phase IV Complete in phases as funding is available Not Currently BUdgeted $100,000 Pave the parking lot $45,000 Renovate/repair lighting .on Field 1 $45,000 Renovate/repair lighting on Field 2 General Fund, Park Development Fund, Grants, and Donations Project Name: Timeline: Estimated Cost: Funding Source(s) Current/Potential Funds Ukiah Municipal Swimming Pools Renovation Project FY06/07 (begin fundraising and project development) $714,286 Grants, Donations, Public Utility Benefit Fund $100,000 Potentially, Public Utility Benefit Funds could be used to replace the solar system and photovoltaic component.of the project. $500,000 Potential Proposition 40 Competitive Grant Award Grant requires a $214,286 local match. Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Todd Grove Park BBQ Area Renovation Project Spring 2006 . Budgeted FY 05/06 $30,OOO Project Name: Timeline: Estimated Cost: Description: Park & Golf Division Maintenance Yard FY06/07 (begin planning and capitalization of funds) Undetermined Build or renovate a maintenance yard for the Parks and Golf Divisions including office space, workshop, supply storage, and equipment storage. Page 2 Parks Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Park Amenity Replacement and Renovation Fund Ongoing Budgeted for FY 05/06 & Recommended for future years $20,000 per year Develop a fund to replace park amenities including but not limited to tables, tennis courts, benches, bathrooms, and pathways must be replaced/renovated routinely to maintain an acceptable standard for public use. Given the current inventory of amenities throughout the City's park system, an ongoing $20,000 per year capital contribution for amenity renovation/replacement is recommended to maintain current services/standards. Observatory Park Development Summer 2006 Budgeted FY 05/06 $40,000 Completion of the Observatory Park Development Project including pathway, landscape and picnic tables. Observatory Buildings Renovation FY06/07 Funds. Reserved FY 05/06 $30,000 Renovation of 5 structures at Observatory Park including house, office, observation, and two sheds. The renovation will including interior/exterior painting, roofing, and repair to interior walls. Page 3 Parks Conference Center Division Community Services Department Operation and Policy Goals 1. Update rental rates for the Conference Center within the next six months. 'Plans are to simplify the current rates, with the intent to increase the volume of use in many of the rooms. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 2. Develop a strategic marketing strategy that will begin this summer. Part of the marking strategy will be to increase visibility in the community, re.-identify our customer base, and redefine the Conference Center's image and service; i.e. not just for big events, but also for small and medium business meetings and events. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 3. Implement a new reservation system with on-line capabilities. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 4. Acquire and implement new technology to meet service demand including wireless internet access, sound systems, cable to each room, and LCD projectors. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 5. Evaluate and revise the maintenance and capital improvement plans for the Conference Center and City rental facilities. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 6. Actively updating policy and procedures for facility rentals. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 7. Develop partnerships with professional training companies and educational institutions to offer workshops, seminars, and classes. Timeline: Fiscal Year 06/07 Capital Improvement Projects Project Name: Estimated. Cost: Description: Conference Center Carpet and Tile Floor Renovation $75,000 (budgeted in phases over multiple fiscal years) Develop a fund to replace aged and worn carpet (8,600 sq. ft.) and replace damaged tile. Work can be budgeted and completed in phases. Project Name: Estimated Cost: Description: Conference Center Furniture Replacement $35,625 (budgeted in phases over multiple fiscal years) Develop a fund to replace aged and worn tables and chairs (75 tables & 600 Chairs). Project Name:. Estimated Cost: Description: Conference Center HVAC Replacement Fund $50,000 (budgeted in phases over multiple fiscal years) Develop a fund for the future replacement of aged HVAC units and clean/repair ducting. Complete' in phases and as needed. Page 4 Conference Center General Government Buildings Community Services Department Operation and Policy Goals 1. Evaluate building maintenance needs of all City Departments and increase staff accordingly to address the needs of these other non Civic Center facilities. Over the past two years, staff has identified a growing need from other Departments for facility maintenance services. This work includes everything from heavy construction to routine maintenance. The Division is currently at a point were the request for services is well beyond that which can be accommodated with our currently staffing levels. Furthermore, many of the services requested require two people for safety and/or for heavy lifting. · Timeline: Complete needs assessment prior to 06/07 Fiscal Budget Funding: General Fund and Enterprise Accounts Capital Improvement Projects Project Name: Timeline: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Civic Center Stucco Repair Summer 2006 Budgeted 05/06 $50,000 (additional funds may be needed) Repair failing exterior stucco on Civic Center building. Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Civic Center Tile Roof Replacement Not Currently Funded $250,000 (budgeted in phases over multiple fiscal years) Create a fund to replace the roof system at the facility. Currently, the tile roof and gutters of the main building need to be repaired/replaced. Complete in phases and as needed. Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Council Chamber Seating- Not Currently Funded $35,000 Replace theater seating in the Council Chambers. Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Administration Wing Partitions Not Currently Funded $75,000 Replace aged and failing partition wall system in administration wing of the Civic Center. Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Civic Center & Annex Security System Not Currently Funded $95,000 Install security system for Civic Center Buildings; currently the facilities are not protected; the system would also include cameras at the cashier stations. Page 5 General Government Golf Division Community Services Department Operation and Policy Goals · 1. Develop a detailed marketing plan that includes the collection of customer data, promotional discounts during Iow play periods, and direct and mass marketing strategies. Timeline: Start in Fiscal Year 06/07; Continually modify. 2. Create new customers t.hrough increased instructional programs specifically targeting youth and baby boomers. Timeline: Start in Fiscal Year 06/07 3. Complete a course master plan that will outline and prioritize improvement including the expansion of practice facilities including the possibility of a driving range. Timeline: Start in Fiscal Year 06/07; Complete within two years Capital Improvement Projects Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Cart Path Replacement Fund Contingent on availability of funds $100,000 Ongoing replacement/renovation of aged and damaged asphalt. Complete in phases and as needed. Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Todd Grove Building Maintenance Fund Contingent on availability of funds $i00,000 Create a fund to renovate building including interior/exterior paint, HVAC units, floodcarpet, fixtures, bathrooms, kitchen, etc. Complete in phases and as needed. Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Driving Range Contingent on availability of funds Unknown; feasibility study will be completed with Golf Pro contract. Develop a driving range at the Golf Course Bridge Renovation on #10 & #11 Damaged during winter storm; Potentially FEMA funded $20,000 Renovate damaged bridges Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Rebuild Tee Boxes Contingent on availability of funds $10,000 - $20,000 per tee (Cost may be significantly less if completed as a volunteer project) ' Renovate existing tee boxes on each hole. Complete in phases and as needed. Page 6 Golf Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Project Name: Project Classification: Location: Estimated Cost: Description: Rebuild Greens to U.S.G.A. Specifications Contingent on availability-of funds $20,000 - $30,000 per green '(Cost may be significantly less if completed as a volunteer project) Renovate existing tee boxes on each hole. Complete in phases and as needed. Drainage Renovation Fund Contingent on availability of funds 599 Park Blvd. $250,000 (Cost may be significantly less if completed as a volunteer project) Repair existing drainage systems and install new systems in needed areas throughout the course. Complete in phases and as needed. Page 7 Golf Recreation DiviSion Community Services Department Operation and Policy Goals 1. Implement recreation registration software and on-line services. Timeline: FY 06/07 Funding: General Fund 2. Secure facilities for recreation programming. Formalize use of facility agreement with Ukiah Unified School District and explore feasibility with Ukiah Valley Cultural and Recreation Center. Timeline: FY 06/07 Funding: Supported .by programs 2. Expand recreation programs, with an emphasis on developing Senior programs, create a spring and/or winter break day camp. Timeline: FY 06/07 Funding: Expenditures offset by revenue 3. Move forward with the feasibility of using the Observatory house for recreation classes and/or a child development center. Timeline: Complete Feasibility Study in FY 06~07 Funding: General Fund 4. Increase the 32-hour sports coordinator position to a full-time position contingent on program funding. Timeline: Within the next 2 fiscal years Funding: 'Expenditures offset by revenue 5. Continue to work with the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission to address the expanding recreational needs of the community. Timeline: Ongoing 6. Serve as coordinating agency for the Ukiah Country Pumpkinfest, Sundays in the Park Free Concert Series, and the Movies in the Plaza summer series. Timeline: Ongoing Page 8. Recreation Grace Hudson Museum and Sun House Community Services Department Operation and Policy Goals 1. Reinstate the part-time Museum Preparatory position that was removed due to budget cutbacks. The position assists primarily with the set-up and take down of the exhibits. Estimated number of hours per year is 800. Timeline: 3-5 years Funding: Museum Guild, donations, grants 2. Develop, promote, present and fund public educational programs to enhance understandings of exhibits. Produce and distribute free educational packets to school classes to accompany exhibits. Timeline: Ongoing 3. Finalize and approve a new long-range plan for the Museum, incorporating the roles of the Guild and Endowment. Along with updating Museum's Policies and Procedures Handbook. Timeline: FY 05/06 to 06/07 Capital Improvement Projects Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Funding Source(s) Museum Native Plants Courtyard Project Museum Guild Project $100,000 Development of courtyard including hardscape, gazebo, water. feature, native plant landscape, seating, fencing, lighting, etc. Complete in phases and as funding is available. Donations, Grants and Guild Fundraisers Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Funding Source(s) Sun House Structural Renovation Museum Guild Project $26,000 Needed structural and mechanical repairs and upgrades to Sun House as outlined in earlier Architectural Assessment Report. Donations, Grants and Guild Fundraisers Project Name: Project Classification: Estimated Cost: Description: Funding Source(s) Sun House Exhibit Renovation Museum Guild Project Unknown Restoration of the Sun HOuse studio, kitchen, back porch, bedroom, bedroom closet and bathroom to their original 1912 condition. Completed in phases contingent on funding.' Donations, Grants and Guild Fundraisers Page 9 Grace Hudson ATTACHMENT_ Airport Department Goals, Objectives and Issues May, 2006 AIRPORT HISTORY The City purchased property in the 1930's for the airport and pilots used the dirt/sod runway of about 2,000 ft. in length during those days. In 1941, the City obtained a grant from the Federal Government to build a runway and parallel taxiway 4,000 ft. in length. In the 1950's, additional Federal Funding was secured for property purchase at the south end and an additional 1,000 ft. of runway was added. The configuration and size of the airport has remained basically the same over the years with the exception of hangar and ramp development on the west side. NARRATIVE Funding for most airport projects come from three sources, Federal and State grant monies, and in house revenues. Funding from grant sources are much larger than in house revenues therefore most projects are listed through the grant process. Because FAA and CalTrans require an ongoing Airport Capital Improvement Program (ACIP) to be eligible for grant funds, the airport reviews the ACIP annually and submits to FAA. This process is ongoing now. Staff prepares the requested projects, Airport Commission reviews and amends them, and then the consultant further reviews the document before submission to FAA. The ACIP projects are prioritized by date as required by FAA, safety and Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) compliance being the most important items in this prioritization. The ACIP has been submitted to the consultant and we are waiting approval by the FAA as of this writing. ACIP PROJECTS IN PROGRESS NOW 1) FAA infrastructure grant in the amount of $715,000 (approved by council 2002) A) Additional airport security fencing B) Storm drain repair midfield due to failure C) Enclose open drainage ditch northwest side D) Pave service road to fuel facility on east side E) Construct freight/ramp operations area on northwest side 2) FAA entitlement grant in the amount of$114, 285 (approved by council 2005) · A) Reconstruct airport storm drain system phase 1 (design/study) B) Crack seal of runway FUTURE ACIP PROJECTS Project Description Est. Cost Year Requested Reconstruction of Storm Drain Phase II construction $ 675,000 2006-2007 This is the second phase of the project now in progress. The storm drain system is World War II vintage and there have been two failures in the system and repair is needed. Additional funds for 2002 grant shortfall $ 150,000 2006-2007 Due to the long delay in implementation of this grant, construction costs have risen and additional funds are needed to complete the project. This grant request is pending with FAA now. Super AWOS $ 75,000 2006-2007 This device provides aviation weather reports and most important, airport traffic advisories for our airport. Airport traffic advisories will increase safety and assist in noise abatement issues. Environmental Baseline/Airport Master Plan update $140,000 2006-2007 Our consultant has advised that an Environmental baseline will soon be required by FAA for any future project. Additionally, the current Airport Master Plan is dated 1996, and needs to be updated. Avigation easements/property purchase at south west side of airport property $ 1,100,000 2007-2008 Private property significantly encroaches into the clear zone on the approach end of the south runway. FAA has suggested that this property be purchased by the city or at least obtain avigation easements for the property. Extend service road to north end $100,000 2007-2008 The service road which passes Fed Ex needs to be extended to the north end of the property for future airport development. Construct stopway/overmn on runway 33 $175,000 2007-2008 Construct a 200 ft. overrun at south end for enhanced safety. This project has been · included in the ACIP for several years and remains unfunded. Project DescriPtion Est. Cost Year Requested Construct taxiway connector on north east comer $ 150,000 2007-2008 The lumber mill property on the north east side is becoming vacant and freight businesses have stated an interest in the property. A taxiway connector is needed for access to the property. Construct secure area for fuel trucks $ 60,000 2008-2009 Construct a 20X30 area fenced, covered, and bermed for secure storage of fUel trucks. This will be required in the future for secondary containment of fuel vehicles per state requirements. Pave public parking area west side $165,000 2008-2009 This area south west of Fed Ex is dirt and needs to be paved for public parking. Construct taxiway on east side $ 500,000 2009-2010 A 2,000 ft. taxiway on the east side will allow aircraft access to the property on that side including access to the fuel facility. Repave runway and taxiway $ 1,425,000 2010-2011 The Runway was originally constructed in 1941, and a paving overlay was completed in 1984. Additionally, a slurry seal was added in 1997. In order to maintain pavement integrity, the facility needs to be paved again. IN HOUSE AIRPORT REVENUES As mentioned earlier, the third means of funding source for projects is from the annual airport budget. The Airport has experienced several years of deferred maintenance and staff has addressed this by instituting two new programs and increasing staff resources to address the maintenance issue. In addition to the maintenance programs, there are issues that staff is addressing this year which are not costly budget items but are important to keeping the airport operational and financially viable. Below are the programs/projects begun to further improve the airport. 1) Pavement maintenance program (began in 2004) 2) Building maintenance program (began in 2005) 3) Lease negotiations - CDF facility '4) Updates of required operational/safety manuals (HMBP, SOP, SPCC, SWPP) 5) Weed abatement/landscaping OTHER FUNDING SOURCES 1) Airport terminal building in the amount of $2,636,000 (approved by council 2001) In 2002, the city went in a new direction for airport development funds for its airport. An application for assistance was filed with Economic Development Administration (EDA) to build a new Airport Terminal Building. The existing building of approximately 1,500 sq. ft., was purchased used in 1962 from a lumber company, and then moved to the airport. When the application was filed in 2002 and since, there tiave been requests for additional lease space from both of our car rental companies, one fixed base operator, and even a pharmaceutical company. Additionally, the original EDA application states: "New industries contacted by local economic developers, list access to air transport and air freight as a significant factor in location decisions. Modernizing air travel infrastructure will assist in business and job gro.wth in the county. Other businesses have expressed interest in locating to the airport but cannot due to the lack of space availability." EDA funding for the project was allocated to another state last year, thus the delay in the project, however funding looks good for this year. EDA also asked that this project be bundled with the Brush Street Triangle project to make one larger project. A decision on the funding from EDA should be forthcoming this spring or summer. The structure of this grant is different from FAA grants in that they are funded 60%, the remaining 40% to be funded with USDA loans. Our loan payment for this grant will be $45,000 annually. This loan payment will come from the airport fund. $25,000 of the loan payment will take the place of the recently paid off bulk fuel tank loan payment, the remainder from airport revenues. By: Ann Burck and Andy Luke Date: 5/~.7/06 Goals and Objectives: Purpose: Accomplish by: Time frame Funding Source: objective: 1. WWTP Improvement Maintain compliance with NPDES Contractor, Construction 04/21/2009 $75,060,000 Project Discharge Permit and increase plant Manager and City Staff 611-7410-800 capacity to permit sewer connections from the City and UVSD for next 20 years. 2. Cai-OSHA Compliant Trainings, materials and equipment to Safety Consultant and 12/31/2006 $5,000 Safety Program ensure compliance at VVVVTP with all Cai- City Staff Not budgeted. OSHA safety regulations. Monthly service charge revenues. 3. Televideo Inspection Locate and identify defects and City Staff 01/13/2010 612-3510-110 Program of Entire obstructions in sewer collection system Sewer Collection for cleaning and repairs. Mandated System under new NPDES Discharge Permit. 4. Percolation Pond Determine if a hydraulic connection Engineering Consultant Workplan - $115,000 Hydrogeologic Study exists between ponds and Russian River. and City Staff 12/20/06 Not budgeted. Mandated by new NPDES Discharge Report - Monthly service charge Permit. 12/20/09 revenues. 5. Levee Maintenance Repair rodent damage and regrade Contractor and City Staff 10/01/2006 $30,000 and Repair percolation pond levees needed for Not budgeted. secondary effluent disposal. Monthly service charge revenues. 6. Reclaimed Water initial design study for a reclaimed water Engineering Consultant 07/01/2008 State and Local Grants System Study system to reduce use of potable water and City Staff for irrigation. 7. Asset Management Software program to manage assets to Software Consultant and 07/01/2007 $35,000 Program improve efficiency, reduce costs, and City Staff $17,500 in FY 05-06 maximize life of public assets. 612-3505-800-000 Compliance with GASB 34 and State SSMP Program. Mandated under new NPDES Discharge Permit. 8. Grease Control Enforcement of new Grease Interceptor City Staff 01/01/2007 612-3580-110 Program Ordinance to eliminate SSOs due to grease in sewer collection system. Compliance with State SSMP Program. 9. Laboratory Technician Additional sampling and tests mandated City Staff 09/01/2006 Not budgeted. by new NPDES Discharge Permit will Monthly service charge require a full time Lab Tech. revenues. By: Ann Burck and Dan Hunt Date: 5/17/06 Goals and Objectives: Purpose: Accomplish by: Time frame Funding Source: objective: 1. Sewer Lateral ]~mplement Sewer Lateral Testing City Staff 01/13/2007 612-3510-110 Inspection Ordinance Ordinance to ensure integrity of sewer laterals to eliminate source of T/[. Compliance with State SSMP Program and River Watch Settlement. 2. Cai-OSHA Compliant Trainings, materials and equipment to Safety Consultant and 12/31/2006 $5,000 Safety Program ensure compliance in W/S Division with City Staff Not budgeted. all Cai-OSHA safety regulations. Monthly service charge revenues. 3. Healthy Waterways Water sampling program for creeks to Engineering Consultant 1/13/2007 $35,000. Study determine if sewer system exfiltration is and City Staff Not budgeted. occurring. Compliance with River Watch Monthly service charge settlement, revenues. 4. Backflow Device Training needed for W/S staff City Staff 07/01/2007 $4,900 in FY 05-06 Testing Program certification. Compliance with DHS 612-3505-160-000 water safety requirements. 5. Water Valve Exercising Water valves need to be exercised at City Staff 07/01/2007 $12,000 Program regular intervals to remove corrosion Not budgeted. and maintain valve function. Compliance Monthly service charge with new DHS Permit requirement, revenues. Purchase data acquisition software to archive valve data in GIS system for future O&M activities. 6. Water Line Water main tie-ins or replacements at Contractor and City Staff 10/01/2007 $377,000 Improvements 700 block of N. State St., Henderson Ln, Fund 840 Capital Corp Yd. Fire protection line, Hazel St. @ Projects 3ackson/Maple, Dora/Grove, and Cypress/Dora, Norton to Ford Ave., Spring St. btw. Perkins & Standley, Cochrane to Helen. 7. Asset Management Software program to manage assets to Software Consultant and 07/01/2007 $35,000 Program improve efficiency, reduce costs, and City Staff $17,500 in FY 05-06 maximize life of public assets. 6:1.2-3505-800-000 Compliance with GASB 34 and State SSMP Program. Mandated under new NPDES Discharge Permit. By: Ann Burck and Alan 3amison Date: 5/17/06 Goals and Objectives: Purpose: Accomplish by: Time frame Funding Source: objective: 1. WTP Improvement Maintain compliance with DHS Permit Contractor, Construction 09/06/2006 $8,318,319 in FY 05-06 Project and new regulations for municipal water Manager and City Staff 840-3850-800 systems. 2. Cai-OSHA Compliant Trainings, materials, and equipment to Safety Consultant and 12/31/2006 $5,000 Safety Program ensure compliance at WTP with all Cai- City Staff Not budgeted. OSHA safety regulations. Monthly service charge revenues. 3. Well Siting Study Determine optimum location to construct Engineering Consultant 12/31/2006 $90,000 in FY 05-06 two new groundwater wells to meet DHS and City Staff 820-3908-250-000 water source capacity requirements. 4. 2 New Groundwater Compliance with DHS water source Design Engineer, 12/31/2007 $150,000 Wells capacity requirements. Contractor, and City $110,000 in FY 05-06 Staff 820-3908-250-000 5. New Water Tank on Currently a private tank not isolated Surveyor and City Staff 12/31/2006 $5,000 in FY 05-06 San .lacinta Drive from City water system. Compliance 840-3850-690-000 with DHS water safety requirements. 6. Install 4 production Compliance with SWRCB and Title 22 Design Engineer and 07/01/2007 $35,000 in FY 05-06 meter calibration regulations. City Staff 840-3850-800-000 vaults at all well sites 7. Install new water Compliance with new EPA regulations. City Staff 10/01/2007 $9,000 in FY 05-06 sampling stations 820-3908-250-000 8. Rehabilitate Well #2 New pump and motor, new piping, and Design Engineer, 07/0:!./2007 $35,000 (75 gpm, 0.108 MGD) new switchgear needed to bring Well #2 Contractor and City Staff Not budgeted. back into service. All these items are 60 Monthly service charge years old. revenues. 9. Seismic Retrofit of Protection against earthquake damage. Tank Contractor and 07/01/2008 Not budgeted. Zone 1S Reservoir Tank was built in 1948 and does not City Staff Monthly service charge have additional strengthening for revenues. earthquake protection. 10. Asset Management Compliance with GASB 34. Software Software Consultant and 07/01/2007 $17,500 in FY 05-06 Program program to manage assets to improve City Staff 612-3505-800-000 efficiency, reduce costs, and maximize life of public assets. I1. Rehabilitate Well #4 Well needs to be cleaned, new pump Design Engineer, 07/01/2008 $150,000 (750 gpm, 1.08 MGD) and motor, new building, new electrical Contractor and City Staff Not budgeted. switchgear. All these items are 50+ Monthly service charge years old. revenues. :].2. Water Conservation Develop and implement a year-round Consultant and City 06/30/2008 Not budgeted. Program comprehensive water conservation Staff Monthly service charge program. Will require a full time revenues. program coordinator to implement and sustain program. 13. Add Operator-in- An OIT position is a cost effective means City Staff 06/30/2007 Not budgeted. Training Position at of meeting certificated staffing Monthly service charge WTP requirements at WTP. Within 8 years, all revenues. current staff will be retired. 14. Replace 100,000 Most recent inspection found the interior Contractor and City Staff 07/01/2008 $150,000 gallon PZ2 Reservoir coating was peeling and had scaling Not budgeted. (60+ yrs. Old) rust. If not replaced, this tank must Monthly service charge have new interior coating, new ladder revenues. and guardrait ($56,000) AGENDA ITEM NO: 10.f MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS OF THE LAKE MENDOCINO HYDROELECTRIC POWER PLANT EQUIPMENT REFURBISHMENT EMERGENCY BACKGROUND: The flooding that occurred at the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant resulted in the moisture and oil contamination of critical mechanical and electrical equipment. This equipment must be refurbished before it can be considered ready for use. Proper refurbishment includes disassembly, decontamination, reassembly and testing. Certain electrical components, such as the generators, must be refurbished as quickly as possible to avoid further damage that may result from extended exposure to the moisture. The time critical nature of the equipment refurbishment constitutes an emergency in that the more time that passes the greater the risk that additional, costly repairs estimated to be as much as $250,000 will also be required. In an effort to procure contract services to refurbish the power plant equipment in a timely and cost effective manner, the City developed a scope of work and issued a Request for Proposals following the Uniform Cost Accounting Procedures resulting in one bid. That bid was deemed non-responsive due to exceptions taken to the City's contract terms and conditions. The Council was notified of the bid results at its April 19th, 2006 meeting and approved staff's recommendation that all bids be rejected. Due to the emergency nature of the equipment refurbishment, Council, by resolution, authorized staff to procure contract services through open market negotiations. Open market negotiations were deemed to be significantly more effective in procuring contract services in a timely and cost effective manner than re-bidding the project. Due to the emergency status of the equipment refurbishment, Uniform Cost Accounting Procedures require that Council be provided regular updates as to the status of the open market Continued on Paqe 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council continue to declare the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant equipment refurbishment project an emergency and continue to support its resolution to procure contract services to perform the work through open market negotiations, thereby minimizing the risk of additional, costly repairs that may otherwise Occur. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: No longer declare the equipment refurbishment an emergency and require that the City re-bid the project, resulting in signifiCant time delays and potential additional, costly repairs. Citizens Advised: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Murray Grande, Interim Public Utility Director; Liz Kirkley, Electrical Distribution Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager, David Rapport, City Attorney 1. Email dated May 10, 2006 from David Rapport, City Attorney, to City Councilmembers and letter from Sally Riley Approved City%anager Candace Horsley, negotiations and equipment refurbishment and to recognize that an emergency still exists. Please refer to the attached e-mail from the City Attorney on this issue (Attachment 1). Current Project Status: At the time this Agenda Summary Report is being written, staff has received two time and material quotes to perform the necessary work to refurbish the equipment. Staff is presently engaged in negotiations around price estimates and terms and conditions associated with those quotes and is expected to have selected a contractor by the May 17, 2006 City Council Meeting. Work will commence immediately after a contract is signed and a purchase order is issued, estimated to be on or about Monday, May 22®. The duration of the project is projected to be 5 to 6 weeks with completion by the end of June. ATTACHMENT Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Power Plant Equipment Refurbishment Attachment I ..... Original Message ..... From: drapport To: Phil Baldwin; marl rodin ;'Douglas F. Crane';John McCowen; Mark Ashiku Cc: Candace Horsley; Murray Grande Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 9:02 AM Subject: Sally Riley letter re: hydroplant contract Councilmembers- I talked to Sally Riley from the Construction Industry Force Account Council before she sent her letter to the City Council. At the end of the conversation, we disagreed about whether the work on the generators and related equipment at the Lake Mendocino Hydroelectric Plant qualifies as an emergency. For the reasons explained below, this matter should go on the Council agenda for May 17 and the City Council must find by a 4/5 vote that an emergency condition still exists. There is no definition of "emergency" in the uniform cost accounting bidding procedures. Ms. Riley contends that an emergency means an immediate threat of property damage or injury. Public Contracts Code Section 22050, however, says it applies to emergency action taken pursuant to Public Contracts Code Section 20168, which is the provision that applies to emergency work for cities that have not adopted the uniform cost accounting requirements. That section refers to a city council resolution" ... declaring that the public interest and necessity demand the immediate expenditure of public money to safeguard life, health, or property. Moreover, Section 22050 requires a finding that the emergency will not permit the delay caused by following the public bidding procedure. Consequently, I think it is reasonable to interpret "emergency" to mean circumstances that could result in damage to public equipment or facilities, if the work were delayed by the amount of time necessary to comply with the public bidding requirements. If immediate action is necessary to safeguard the equipment, that necessity qualifies as an emergency. At the point in time when the City Council adopted its resolution, I think there was substantial evidence to support a finding that delaying the work for the amount of time to comply with the public bidding requirements again would cause damage to equipment and that safeguarding the equipment required repairs to be made before the City could comply with the public bidding requirements again. Ms. Riley believes that the amount of time since the flooding occurred prevents a finding of emergency. I admit that this is an unusual circumstance. The City staff believed that a certain amount of time could pass before the risk of further damage to the equipment would result from the flood damage. In its judgment, the risk of damage was acceptable for the time required to put the project out for bid. However, with the passage of time that risk has become unacceptable in staff's judgment. If the City waited to go through the public bidding process again before breaking down the equipment, the risk of damage from moisture is very high. For this reason, I believe an emergency exists, such that the emergency will not permit the delay caused by following the public bidding procedure. The City Council resolution relied on both the rejection of bids and the existence of an emergency. To fully comply with Section 22050, the staff must report to the City Council at each of its regularly scheduled meetings whether the emergency continues to exist, and the City Council should approve the existence of the continuing emergency by a 4/5 vote at each meeting, until the emergency no longer exists. Accordingly, this matter should go on the May 17 agenda. Ms. Riley also contends that in the absence of an emergency, the City was not permitted to negotiate for the hydro refurbishment project after rejecting all bids. The City's only options were to make a finding that it could do the work more cheaply itself, using its own employees, or go back out to bid. The Agenda Summary Report to the City Council relied on Public Contracts Code Section 20167, for the proposition that the City had the option of contracting without further public bidding, if it rejected all bids. Because the City has adopted the Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Act requirements, the City's options are, in fact, controlled by Public Contracts Code Section 22038, which provides that upon the rejection of bids, the City must either find that it could do the work more cheaply itself, using its own employees, or go back out to bid. Under that same section, however, if the City received no bids, "... the project may be performed by the employees of the public agency by force account, or negotiated contract without further complying with this article." (Emphasis added.) Here, the City received one non-responsive bid. If a non-responsive bid counts as a bid, then the City's options are limited as Ms. Riley contends. There is probably some room for debate about whether a non-responsive bid counts as a bid. It is not necessary to decide this question, because I believe the necessity of acting quickly to avoid further damage to public property permits the City to contract for these repairs without going through the public bidding process again. Below are quoted in full the definitions is Public Contracts Code Section 22002, the rejection of bids provisions in Section 22038 and the emergency procedures in Section 22050. § 22002. Definitions (a) "Public agency," for purposes of this chapter, means a city, county, city and county, including chartered cities and chartered counties, any special district, and any other agency of the state for the local performance of governmental or proprietary functions within limited boundaries. "Public agency" also includes a nonprofit transit corporation wholly owned by a public agency and formed to carry out the purposes of the public agency. (b) "Representatives of the construction industry" for purposes of this chapter, means a general contractor, subcontractor, or labor representative with experience in the field of public works construction. (c) "Public project" means any of the following: (1) Construction, reconstruction, erection, alteration, renovation, improvement, demolition, and repair work involving any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility. (2) Painting or repainting of any publicly owned, leased, or operated facility. (3) In the case of a publicly owned utility system, "public project" shall include only the construction, erection, improvement, or repair of dams, reservoirs, powerplants, and electrical transmission lines of 230,000 volts and higher. (d) "Public project" does not include maintenance work. For purposes of this section, "maintenance work" includes all of the following: (1) Routine, recurring, and usual work for the preservation or protection of any publicly owned or publicly operated facility for its intended purposes. (2) Minor repainting. (3) Resurfacing of streets and highways at less than one inch. (4) Landscape maintenance, including mowing, watering, trimming, pruning, planting, replacement of plants, and servicing of irrigation and sprinkler systems. (5) Work performed to keep, operate, and maintain publicly owned water, power, or waste disposal systems, including, but not limited to, dams, reservoirs, powerplants, and electrical transmission lines of 230,000 volts and higher. (e) For purposes of this chapter, "facility" means any plant, building, structure, ground facility, utility system, subject to the limitation found in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c), real property, streets and highways, or other public work improvement. § 22038. Rejection of bids; Options on rejection and when no bids are received (a) In its discretion, the public agency may reject any bids presented, if the agency, prior to rejecting all bids and declaring that the project can be more economically performed by employees of the agency, furnishes a written notice to an apparent Iow bidder. The notice shall inform the bidder of the agency's intention to reject the bid and shall be mailed at least two business days prior to the hearing at which the agency intends to reject the bid. If after the first invitation of bids all bids are rejected, after reevaluating its cost estimates of the project, the public agency shall have the option of either of the following: (1) Abandoning the project or readvertising for bids in the manner described by this article. (2) By passage of a resolution by a four-fifths vote of its governing body declaring that the project can be performed more economically by the employees of the public agency, may have the project done by force account without further complying with this article. (b) If a contract is awarded, it shall be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. If two or more bids are the same and the lowest, the public agency may accept the one it chooses. (c) If no bids are received through the formal or informal procedure, the project may be performed by the employees of the public agency by force account, or negotiated contract without further complying with this article. § 22050. Emergency contracts for repair or replacement of public facility; Review (a) (1) In the case of an emergency, a public agency, pursuant to a four-fifths vote of its governing body, may repair or replace a public facility, take any directly related and immediate action required by that emergency, and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes, without giving notice for bids to let contracts. (2) Before a governing body takes any action pursuant to paragraph (1), it shall make a finding, based on substantial evidence set forth in the minutes of its meeting, that the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids, and that the action is necessary to respond to the emergency. (b) (1) The governing body, by a four-fifths vote, may delegate, by resolution or ordinance, to the appropriate county administrative officer, city manager, chief engineer, or other nonelected agency officer, the authority to order any action pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). (2) If the public agency has no county administrative officer, city manager, chief engineer, or other nonelected agency officer, the governing body, by a four-fifths vote, may delegate to an elected officer the authority to order any action specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a). (3) If a person with authority delegated pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) orders any action specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), that person shall report to the governing body, at its next meeting required pursuant to this section, the reasons justifying why the emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids and why the action is necessary to respond to the emergency. (c) (1) If the governing body orders any action specified in subdivision (a), the governing body shall review the emergency action at its next regularly scheduled meeting and, except as specified below, at every regularly scheduled meeting thereafter until the action is terminated, to determine, by a four-fifths vote, that there is a need to continue the action. If the governing body meets weekly, it may review the emergency action in accordance with this paragraph every 14 days. (2) If a person with authority delegated pursuant to subdivision (b) orders any action specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), the governing body shall initially review the emergency action not later than seven days after the action, or at its next regularly scheduled meeting if that meeting will occur not later than 14 days after the action, and at least at every regularly scheduled meeting thereafter until the action is terminated, to determine, by a four-fifths vote, that there is a need to continue the action, unless a person with authority delegated pursuant to subdivision (b) has terminated that action prior to the governing body reviewing the emergency action and making a determination pursuant to this subdivision. If the governing body meets weekly, it may, after the initial review, review the emergency action in accordance with this paragraph every 14 days. (3) When the governing body reviews the emergency action pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2), it shall terminate the action at the earliest possible date that conditions warrant so that the remainder of the emergency action may be completed by giving notice for bids to let contracts. (d) As used in this section, "public agency" has the same meaning as defined in Section 22002. (e) A three-member governing body may take actions pursuant to subdivision (a), (b), or (c) by a two-thirds vote. (f) This section applies only 20168 20193,20205.1,2021 20331 20567, 20918 20926, 21081 21091, 21203 21212, 21351 21361, 21482 21491, 21618 21624, to emergency action taken pursuant to Sections 20133, 20134, 3,20223,20233,20253,20273,20283,20293,20303,20313, 20586,20604,20635,20645,20685,20736,20751.1,20806,20812,20914, 20931 20941 21101 21111 21221 21231 21371 21381 21501 21511 21631 21641 20961,20991,21020.2,21024,21031,21043,21061,21072, 21121,21131,21141,21151,21161,21171,21181,21191,21196, 21241,21251,21261,21271,21290,21311,21321,21331,21341, 21391,21401,21411,21421,21431,21441,21451,21461,21472, 21521,21531,21541,21552,21567,21572,21581,21591,21601, and 22035. David J. Rapport Rapport and Marston 405 W. Perkins Street Ukiah, Ca. 95482 Tel: 707-462-6846 Fax: 707-462-4235 Alt. Fax 501-636-4538 Fax £roM : 530 549 4436 85-83-86 11:31 Pg: 2 D. A. MS~Coskcr, Prcsidcn~ Cedric Porter. Vice President Wall Powcl.~, .C, ccrctary Michael ]-lcslcr. Trca.~urcr May 3, 2006 Mark Ashiku, Mayor City Council City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 sent by fax 5/3/06 Reference: Hydroelectric Refurbishment Dear Mayor Ashiku and City Council Members, This letter is to request that you reconsider proceeding with your current plan of negotiated contracts on the Hydroelectric Plant repairs. It is the opinion of the Construction Industry Force Account Council (CIFAC) that you will be out of compliance with the California .Public Contract Code. Your City is signatory to the California Uniform. Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUCCAC). Upon becoming signatory, Ukiah agreed to abide by CUCCAC requirements as outlined in the Public Contract Code.' , According to CUCCAC requirements, after bidding the project, the Public Agency may reject any bids presented. If after the first invitation of bids all bids are rejected, after revaluating its cost estimates of the project, the Public Agency shall have the option of either of the following: 1. Abandon the project, readvertise for bids in the manner described 2. By passage of a resolution by four-fift:hs vote of your governing body you can declare that you can do the project more economically with your own employees. The above options are your only options. We do not agree with your City Attorney that this project qualifies for emergency work, because a delay in getting the project started and then facing a deadline does not constitute an emergency. There is no allowance in the law to negotiate this project. By breaking the project into smaller pieces you have changed the scope of work. It would no longer be the same project you went out to bid on. CIFAC is a non;profit organization that monitors public entities for compliance with the California Public Contract Code. We represent contractors, contractor associations and building trade members. We are always available to be a resource should you have questions. Please feel fxee to contact if you have further questions regarding this or arty project. · Sally Ril~ Northern Area Field Representative P.O. Box 718 Bella Vista, CA 96008 530-5494436 CathJ~n I iiliiard. Executive Dircctm' }~3~ Arnold Drix~2. Stlilc 2{1[}. Marlinez. C'A 94553 - i,hom' 800-755-3354 · .Ib.v 925-057-1 ,~011 · ctJutil cifisc(cnsbcglobal.ncl · web www.cilhc..org ITEM NO. 11.a DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: DZSCUSSTON AND TENTATTVE APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDTNG AMONG CTTY OF UKIAH~ NORTHCOAST RATLROAD AUTHORTTY (NCAA) AND MENDOCI'NO COUNTY TRANSTT AUTHORTTY (MTA) SUMMARY: Representatives of the City, NCRA and MTA have met to discuss a cooperative effort to develop the NCRA depot property on Perkins Street. The attached Memorandum of Understanding for Development of North Coast Railroad Authority Property (Attachment 1) was presented to the Board of Directors of NCRA at its meeting on May 10, 2006. See attached letter from Chris Neary (Attachment 2). We will report the results of that meeting at the City Council meeting on May 17. NCRA representatives were told that the MOU has not been reviewed by the City Council or MTA and that changes may be requested as a result of those reviews. The MOU provides generally for a cooperative effort among the City, NCRA and MTA to develop the Depot Site as a transit center and mixed use commercial and residential area. The parties would work together to develop a work plan for accomplishing this goal. The Council's attention is directed to the following: 1. The agreement calls for the City to negotiate with MTA for a lease with approval by NCRA. (Para. 1.1 .b, p. 2.) 2. The City agrees to work with NCRA to develop a master plan for the Depot Site. (Para. 1.3.e, p. 4.) Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Tentatively approve MOU until MTA Board can provide additional comments. ALTERNATTVE COUNCTL POLTCY OPTTONS: Disapprove or request changes Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Dave Rapport, City Attorney NCRA 1. Draft MOU 2. Letter from Chris Neary Candace Horsley,'~ity Manager MOU among Ukiah, NCRA & MTA Page 2 of 2 3. NCRA is not obligated to lease a portion of the Depot Site to MTA, if its operator gives notice by July 15, 2006, that it requires the entire depot building for railroad operations. (Id.) In his letter, Chris Neary states that NCRA has received responses from potential railroad operators to its Request for Proposals, and "no responding party has singled out the Ukiah Depot for any particular use in its operations, although it is anticipated that between May 15 and July 15, NCRA will be in negotiations with its operator." 4. The two metal buildings on the property do not belong to NCRA, but to Jack Cox and Doug Baker. Under the MOU, NCRA may not extend a lease beyond its term without the approval of the City and MTA. In his letter Chris Neary indicates that the Baker lease has expired and he is on a month-to-month tenancy. The Jack Cox lease expires in April 2007. 5. Participation is voluntary. Any party can terminate the agreement on thirty days notice. However, if a party agreed to pay for a task, it would be required to pay for that portion completed before the agreement terminates. (Para. 4, p. 4.) Staff recommends that Council approve the MOU. A'I-i'ACHMENT_ / MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NORTH COAST RAILROAD AUTHORITY PROPERTY This Agreement is made and entered on May ,2006 (Effective Date") in Ukiah, California among the North Coast Railroad Authority ("NCRA"), the Mendocino Transit Authority ("MTA") and the City of Ukiah ("City"). RECITALS 1. NCRA was established by the State Legislature to own and operate a freight rail system in Humboldt, Del Norte, Mendocino, Sonoma, Marin and Napa Counties. NCRA owns right of way, easements, tracks, depot sites and railroad depots, rolling stock and related facilities in all of the aforementioned counties, including railroad right of way, a depot site and a railroad depot in the City. 2. The NCRA depot site ("Depot Site") in the City consists of approximately ten (10) acres bordered by Perkins Street to the north, Leslie Street to the east and NCRA railroad right of way to the west. The property is known as Mendocino County Assessor Parcel numbers 02-232-x01 and 02-282-x01. It is currently developed with a depot building, a metal warehouse building, a metal auto shop building and a coffee kiosk. The metal warehouse and the metal auto shop buildings are not part of the real estate but are separately owned by Jack Cox and Douglas Baker, respectively. 3. A portion of the Depot Site to the southeast of the depot building is contaminated with toxic or hazardous waste from when the Depot Site was operated as part of the Southern Pacific Railroad by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company. NCRA acquired the property from Southern Pacific. The purchase agreement obligates Union Pacific, as the successor to Southern Pacific, to clean-up the contamination to the approval of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. 4. The City has obtained one grant to restore the NCRA depot building, which is neglected and in a rundown condition, but additional funds are needed to complete the restoration. NCRA is seeking ways to generate revenues while preserving its ownership of the properties and other assets which are essential to its ability to operate freight and passenger rail service in the future. Under certain circumstances, NCRA might consider a future sale of portions of the Depot Site. 5. MTA is a joint exercise of powers agency established under the Joint Exercise of Powers Act by the incorporated cities in Mendocino County and the County to operate a bus service and to provide other transit services in Mendocino County. 6. For several years, MTA has been seeking to develop a transit center in the City that would provide a centralized location to coordinate bus service provided by MTA with bus service provided by Greyhound or other bus companies, local taxi and dial-a-ride services and rail service. The parties regard the depot property as an excellent location for such a facility, including the use of the depot building as part of the transit center and administrative offices for MTA. 7. City is a general law municipal corporation and the county seat for Mendocino County. 8. Perkins Street is the primary east-west access to the City from U.S. Highway 101 and is regarded by the City as the major "gateway" street into the City. City planning documents declare that the appearance of Perkins Street is of vital importance to the City, because travelers form their first impression of the City when they exit the freeway at Perkins Street. 9. The foregoing provides the parties with a shared interest in the development of the depot site. The parties would like MTA to locate a transit center on the site, and lease the depot building for use as part of the transit center and as administrative offices for MTA. NCRA would like to attract development to the Depot Site that would be compatible with an MTA transit center and a railroad depot. The City would like to see the renovation of the depot building and development of the Depot Site as an attractive commercial and transit center, possibly with mixed uses such as wholesale and retail commercial uses on the ground level and residential uses on the upper levels. 10. The parties anticipate that street extensions and/or realignments will be necessary to facilitate the development of the Depot Site. Roads to provide circulation on the Depot Site will also be needed. Collectively, these improvements will be referred to herein as "Infrastructure Improvements." 11. By this Agreement the parties intend to set forth the general terms and conditions under which they will each coordinate their efforts and support the development of the Depot Site under long-term leases with NCRA for the MTA transit center and for private commercial and residential development. The parties recognize that more detailed agreements will be necessary in the course of developing the Depot Site. AGREEMENT In consideration of the foregoing and the terms and conditions as stated below, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Cooperative Efforts. In general, each party agrees to support this effort as follows: 1.1 NCRA will: a. Refrain from leasing or selling any portion of the Depot Site or extending any existing leases, when they expire, pending further development of the Depot Site in accordance with this Agreement. NCRA may enter into short term leases or other agreements for the use of the Depot Site, not to exceed one (1) year, with prior written approval of MTA and the City, such approval not to be unreasonably delayed or denied. b. Lease a portion of the Depot Site to MTA, including the depot building, in accordance with terms to be negotiated in good faith between MTA and the City and presented to NCRA for approval. However, NCRA shall be relieved of this obligation if by July 15, 2006 its operator requires use of the entire depot; or if the City entertains a single governmental use of the property which is not compatible with the proposed MTA use. c. Cooperate in the development of the Depot Site by participating in meetings, including the meetings described in paragraph 2, and negotiating necessary additional agreements in good faith, working with the City to get Public Utilities Commission approval for reopening of the Clay Street rail crossing to facilitate Infrastructure Improvements, and using its best efforts to enforce the obligation of Union Pacific to clean-up contamination on the eastern portion of the Depot Site. d. Cooperate with the City in developing a master plan for the development of the entire Depot Site, including providing the City with a description of the property uses required for railroad operations, such as the use and maintenance of the railroad tracks and related facilities and use of a portion of the Depot Building for selling tickets and related purposes. 1.2 MTA will: a. Negotiate with the City in good faith for a lease of the depot building and a portion of the Depot Site for a Transit Center. b. Use its best efforts to obtain and make available for Infrastructure Improvements and other improvements to the Depot Site grant or other funds as may be available to MTA for this purpose. c. Cooperate in the development of the Depot Site by participating in meetings, including the meetings described in paragraph 2. d. Refrain from committing itself to a different location for a transit center in the Ukiah Valley, as long as the parties continue to perform under this Agreement. 1.3 The City will: a. Use its best efforts to assist in the preparation of any necessary applications for land use approvals needed for the development of the Depot Site, such as, but not limited to, subdivision or parcel maps, site development permits, variances or use permits. b. Without disrupting its operations or imposing an undue burden on them, make its staff available to assist in tasks involved in the development of the property. c. Provide grant funds that may be available to the City for the renovation of the depot building, and explore the availability of grants or other sources of funding for Infrastructure Improvements. d. Seek to identify businesses or other govemmental uses that may be interested in developing and operating commercial and residential uses under long-term leases with NCRA. e. In connection with the negotiation of a lease agreement with MTA or any other lessee of the Depot Building, work with NCRA in developing a master plan for successful development of the entire Depot Site. 2. Coordination Meetings. Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date, the parties shall begin meeting with each other to reach agreement on the following: 2.1 Order of development tasks. The order in which the development will proceed. Among those issues the parties will discuss are: a. identifying those areas within the depot site which will be set aside for the MTA transit center, commercial and/or residential development, and railroad purposes; b. obtaining the services of a civil engineer or land surveyor to develop a map of the designated areas and preparing legal descriptions for use in lease agreements, any required subdivision approvals and for other site planning and development purposes; c. the development of a lease agreement with MTA and whether the MTA development can proceed ahead of other activities, including Infrastructure Improvements; d. identifying and deciding how to proceed with land use approvals required for the development, including subdivision, site development, variance or use permit approvals from the City; and e. soliciting businesses which would develop appropriate commercial and residential uses on the Depot Site. 2.2 Allocation of responsibility. The allocation of responsibilities among the parties to accomplish the tasks identified in subsection 2.1 in the order agreed upon. 2.3 Time schedule. A time for the parties to complete each task as assigned under subsection 2.2 above. 3. Term. The term of this Agreement is three (3) years from the Effective Date. The Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date upon signature by all parties. The Agreement shall terminate at midnight on the one thousand, ninety-fifth (1,095th) day thereafter, unless earlier terminated as provided in Paragraph 4. 4. Termination. The Agreement may be terminated by any party on not less than thirty (30) days prior written notice to the other parties. Upon such termination, this Agreement shall be of no further force or effect. If any party agreed to pay for or contribute to the cost of any task, that party shall be obligated to pay for that portion of the task completed before the notice of termination was given. Each party shall remain or become the owner of any documents or other work product, to the extent that party paid for the creation of that document or other work product. 5. Notice. Notice shall be deemed given when actually received, if the notice is personally delivered, or served by fax, overnight courier or certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, or forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail with proper first class postage affixed, if mailed by U.S. Mail. Notices shall be delivered or sent to the following addresses or fax numbers: CITY OF UKIAH c/o City Manager Ukiah Civic Center 200 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482 Fax: 707-463-6204 MTA NCRA c/o Mitch Stogner 419 Talmage Road, Ste. M Ukiah, CA 95482 Fax: 707-463-3282 With a copy to: Christopher J. Neary Attorney at Law 110 S. Main St., Ste. C Willits, CA 95490 Fax: 707-459-3018 6. Paragraph Headings. Paragraph headings are inserted for the convenience of the parties and shall not affect the meaning or interpretation of this Agreement. 7. Duplicate Originals. This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals, each bearing the original signatures of the parties. Each such duplicate original shall be deemed an original agreement, admissible in any legal or administrative proceeding as evidence of the agreement among the parties. NOW, WHEREFORE, the parties have entered this Agreement of the Effective Date. NORTH COAST RAILROAD AUTHORITY By: Its: ALLAN HEMPHILL Chairman, Board of Directors Approved as to form: Christopher Neary, General Counsel CITY OF UKIAH MENDOCINO TRANSIT AGENCY By: By: Its: Its: Approved as to form: Approved as to form: David J. Rapport, City Attorney I~HRISTOPHER ,J. NEARY ATTnRNEY AT LAW lln SOUTH MAIN STREET, SUITE 0 WlLLIT5. CALIFORNIA 95490 FAX (707)459 - 301B cjneary@ pacific, net (707) 459 - 5551 ATTACHMENT__ <~ III May 1, 2006 David J. Rapport, Esq. Rapport & Marston 405 W. Perkins Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: MOU - Ukiah Depot Dear David: Enclosed please find the revised Memorandum of Understanding. As we discussed today, the July 15, 2006 at 1.1 (b) relates to the possibility that NCRA's successful operator will require the use of the entire Ukiah Depot as a condition for entering into contract. We have now received the responses to the Request for Proposals, and no responding party has singled out the Ukiah Depot for any particular use in its operations, although it is anticipated that between May 15 and July 15, NCRA will be in negotiations with its operator. This date should be interpreted as a cutoff date for NCRA to indicate whether its operator would require the use of the entire Depot. Also, since we last discussed this, we have investigated thc status of the metal warehouse building occupied by Douglas Baker and the metal-autoshop building occupied by tenants of Jack Cox. It tums out that the metal warehouse building structure is owned by Jack Baker and the metal autoshop building is owned by Jack Cox pursuant to leases entered into in the 1960s with Southern Pacific Railroad. The leases are since expired and Jack Baker is operating on a month- to-month tenancy basis and we have recently extended Jack Cox' lease for an additional year through April 2007 with advice that the rental arrangement would not be extended beyond that to accommodate this MOU process. As provided in the MOU, NCRA would not enter into any extension beyond April 2007 with Jack Baker. The NCRA Property Committee will review this Agreement in its final form on May 9, 2006 and the NCRA Board, at its meeting at City Hall in Ukiah on May 10, 2006, will consider the execution of the MOU. David J. Rapport, Esq. May 1, 2006 Page 2 If you have any comments, please feel free to contact me. Eerytruly, /. R J. NEARY CJN.jen File: 2737-61C ITEM NO. 11.b DATE: May 3, ~006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING AGREEMENT AMONG PARTIES CONTRIBUTING FUNDS TOWARD LOCAL SPONSOR SHARE OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS COYOTE DAM FEASIBILITY STUDY SUMMARY: As the City Council knows, the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission is the Local Sponsor of a study to be undertaken by the Army Corp of Engineers (Corp), for which some federal funds have been appropriated, to examine options for increasing the amount of water stored in Lake Mendocino. Three options specifically identified in the Corp Work Plan include raising the dam, dredging the lake or changing how the lake is operated to increase its yield of water for consumptive use. Additional options will be determined as the study progresses. Under the Feasibility Study Agreement with the Army Corp of Engineers, the Local Sponsor is obligated to contribute 50% of the cost of the Feasibility Study, 25% of which may consist of certain in-kind services as specified in the agreement. The estimated cost of the study is $5 Million, but only a small portion of that has been funded by the federal government so far. Some funds are available for the current federal fiscal year (September 30 - October 1). The City Council previously indicated that it would be willing to contribute toward the Local Sponsor's share of the cost, if there was some agreement among the other participants that each participant would receive a share of the benefits, if a feasible project were identified and funded, in proportion to its contribution toward the cost of Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide comments on draft agreement and direction to IWPC representative ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/a Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: City Council David ]. Rapport, City Attorney Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment 1- Draft Agreement APPROVED:_ Candace Horsley, 1F~,~ Manager Local Sponsor Participant Agreement Page 2 of 2 the feasibility study. The attached agreement provides that assurance. The attorneys for the Potter Valley Water District, Flood Control District and Redwood Valley Water District reviewed the original draft and made comments. The attached document shows the suggested changes to the original draft by individual agencies. The Agreement seeks to accomplish two main goals: (1) :It gives those Commission members who initially agree to share the cost of the feasibility study to control the terms under which additional members would be permitted to join in the study (including a provision that any such future participants must "buy into" the study); and (2) ]:t entitles each participant in the local sponsorship of the study to a project entitlement equal to its proportionate contribution toward the local sponsor share of the cost and provides that no participant may receive any project benefits, unless it joins in a Project Construction Agreement. That agreement would spell out the terms under which each participant would share in the cost a feasible project and benefit from that project. Staff is requesting Council's direction before reviewing the revised draft with the other participating agency boards. DRAFT AGREEMENT AMONG PARTIES CONTRIBUTING FUNDS TOWARD LOCAL SPONSOR SHARE OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS COYOTE DAM FEASIBILITY STUDY ATTACHMENT_. / ! i,, This Agreement is entered on ,2006 ("Effective Date")in Ukiah, California, among the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission ("Commission") and those of its members who participate in funding the local sponsor's share of the cost of the Army Corp of Engineers Coyote Dam Feasibility Study ("Study Participants"). Study Participants consist of two groups: (1) those Study Participants who sign this Agreement on the Effective Date ("Initial Study Participants"), and (2) those Study Participants who sign this Agreement after the Effective Date and who do not make an Initial Contribution toward the Local Sponsor's share of the project costs ("Subsequent Study Participants"). RECITALS This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts: 1. The Commission is a joint powers authority comprised of the Potter Valley Irrigation District, the Redwood Valley County Water District, the City of Ukiah, and the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District and such additional agencies as may in the future sign the Joint Powers Agreement ("JPA") creating the Commission and thereby join the Commission. 2. The Commission has entered an Agreement between the Department of the Army and the Inland Water and Power Commission for the Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, dated ,2005 (the "Feasibility Study Agreement"). Under the Feasibility Study Agreement, the Army Corp of Engineers ("ACOE") agrees, pursuant to a Project Study Plan, attached as an exhibit to the agreement, to study the feasibility of various options to improve flood control and increase the storage capacity and/or yield of Lake Mendocino, including (1) raising the existing earth-fill dam, (2) dredging the reservoir and (3) changing the operating conditions of the dam (the "Feasibility Study"). A copy of the Feasibility Study Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. 3. The Commission is designated as the "Local Sponsor" in the Feasibility Study Agreement, which is obligated to contribute 50% of the cost of the Feasibility Study, 25% of which may consist of certain in-kind services as specified in the agreement. 4. The Feasibility Study Agreement makes clear that there is no guarantee that any of the alternatives examined will be determined to be feasible or become a federally sponsored project. 5. ,The members of the Commission who are the initial signatories to this Agreement, the Initial Study Participants, are willing to contribute funds to meet the Local Sponsor's funding Deleted: Under the JPA, any two or more Commission members may pursue water supply projects under separate agreements among the participating members. ¶ 6. -1- obligation under the Feasibility Study Agreement, and assume the risk that the funds contributed toward the study may not result in the construction of a project that produces additional water that is available to the Study Participants, provided that any benefits that do result from the study, including additional water supplies, are shared by the Initial Study Participants in proportion to each Initial Study Participant's contribution toward the Local Sponsor's share of the study and that any Subsequent Study Participants can become Subsequent Study Participants only as further provided in this Agreement. AGREEMENT In consideration of the above-recited facts and the terms and conditions as further stated below, the parties agree as follows. I. CONTRIBUTION OF INITIAL STUDY PARTICIPANTS 1.0 Each Initial Study Participant agrees to contribute an equal share of matching funds required under the Project Study Agreement as of the Effective Date. That share equals % of the matching fund payment of $ , or $ per Initial Study Participant. 1.1 The payment specified in section 1.0 above must be received by the Commission by ,2006. Comment: Flood Control believes this item needs more clarification, but it did not describe what that clarification would say. II. SUBSEQUENT STUDY PARTICIPANTS 2.0 A Commission member may request to become a Subsequent Study Participant by submitting a written request to the Commission. Upon receipt of the request, the Commission shall determine the amount that member would have paid toward the Feasibility Study, if it had been an Initial Study Participant. The Commission shall add to that the amount of interest those funds would have earned during that time period, if invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund maintained by the State of California under the authority of Sections 16429.1 et seq. of the California Government Code. The resulting sum constitutes the "buy-in" that the member will be required to pay before it will be permitted to become a Subsequent Study Participant 2.1 The Commission shall allocate among the Initial Study Participants the funds received as a result of a buy-in in proportion to each participant's share of the matching fund payments prior to the addition of the Subsequent Study Participant. -2- 2.2 No member may become a Subsequent Study Participant, unless all of the Initial Study Participants approve the addition of the member as a Subsequent Study Participant. The Subsequent Study Participant's Project Entitlement and the commensurate adjustment of the existing Study Participant's Project Entitlements shall be determined by the Initial Study Participants concurrently with approval of the Subsequent Study Participant's participation. 2.3 A member shall become a Subsequent Study Participant, subject to the rights and obligations in this Agreement, upon approval of the Subsequent Study Participant by the Initial Study Participants, payment of the buy-in, and approval of this Agreement by the governing body of the member and execution of this Agreement by an authorized representative of the member. 2.4 Upon admission of a Subsequent Study Participant, the payment obligations of the Study Participants shall be adjusted so that each Study Participant pays an equal share of the Local Sponsor match required by the Feasibility Study Agreement. III. STUDY PARTICIPANT PAYMENT OBLIGATIONS 3.0 As long as the Commission continues as the Local Sponsor and agrees to continue making matching fund payments under the Feasibility Study Agreement, each Study Participant shall pay its proportional share of the matching fund payment. Its payment must be received by the Commission not less than ten (10) days prior to the date the Local Sponsor's payment is due under the Feasibility Study Agreement. 3.1 The Study Participants may provide "in kind services" in lieu of cash as a means of meeting cost share obligations if said in kind services are approved by the other Study Participants and the ACOE. The cash value of any in kind services rendered will be determined by the ACOE. 3.2 In the event a Study Participant fails to make a payment as required under this Agreement, it shall forfeit its Project Entitlement. However, in the event a Study Participant elects to terminate this Agreement or defaults in the payment of its share of matching funds under the Feasibility Study Agreement, whether "study costs" or "excess study costs" as defined in the Feasibility Study Agreement, that Study Participant is not relieved of liability for any such obligations arising prior to its default or termination of its participation under this Agreement. IV. STUDY MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION Comment: Change requested by PVID Deleted: 3.3 One or more of the remaining Study Participants may elect to pay the defaulting Study Participant's share of the matching payment. In that event they shall acquire the defaulting Study Participant's Project Entitlement in proportion to their payment of that share. Comment: Change requested by Flood Control District Formatted: Font: Bold, Underline Formatted: Indent: Left: 0" -3- V, 4.0 The Feasibility Study Agreement requires the ACOE and the Local Sponsor to appoint a representative to an Executive Committee. The members of the Executive Committee are required to appoint representatives to a Study Management Team. All decisions of the Commission in relation to the Feasibility Study Agreement, including appointments to the Executive Committee and the Study Management Team shall be made by majority vote of the Project Entitlements, through their representatives on the Commission Board of Directors. ALLOCATION OF PROJECT BENEFITS 5.0 Definitions - The following terms shall have the following meaning when used in this Agreement: "Project Costs" means the portion of the costs to construct a feasible project, including design, construction management and similar costs, in addition to the actual construction costs, and any other costs required to make Project Benefits available to Study Participants, including costs expended to apply and obtain approval for water rights. "Project Benefits" means additional water, project which is available to the Study Participants for beneficial use within the areas served by the Study Participants "Project Entitlement" means the percentage of Project Costs and Project Benefits to which a Study Participant is entitled under the terms of this Agreement, or upon completion of a project, of Project Benefits only. 5.1 If no feasible project is identified at the conclusion of the Feasibility Study, then, for the purposes of this Agreement, it will be assumed that there are no Project Benefits to distribute among the Study Participants. 5.2 If the Feasibility Study identifies a feasible project with Project Benefits, then each Study Participant that has paid its full share of the Local Sponsor matching funds required under the Feasibility Study Agreement and that is in full compliance with its obligations under this Agreement shall be entitled to its Project Entitlement. The details of how a Study Participant or its assignee will participate in the construction of any such project and receive Project Benefits shall be set forth in a "Construction Project Agreement," to be negotiated and executed among the Study Participants at the conclusion of the Coyote Dam Feasibility Study. No Study Participant shall receive any Project Benefit, until the Study Participants execute a Construction Project Agreement. IV. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS Deleted: resulting from the Comment: Modification of change requested by Flood Control District -4- Participant Assign tn en ts This Agreement, and the rights, duties and benefits given in it, may not be assigned by a Study Participant without the advance written consent of the other Study Participants and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. However, at the conclusion of the Feasibility Study, if a construction project is determined to be feasible, a Study Participant may assign all or any portion of its Project Entitlement. , it may do so,,it must first provide written notice to the, , offering that portion of its Project Entitlement to the on the same terms and conditions. If, · in writing to accept such assignment on those terms and conditions within ninety (90) days after such notice was given, then the Study Participant Deleted: Before Deleted: however, · Deleted: other Study Participants Deleted: other Study Participants Deleted: no other Study Participant agrees may assign that portion of its Project Entitlement, but only on those same terms and conditions. Comment: My understanding of change requested by Flood Control Distict Tertn This Agreement commences on the Effective Date and shall remain in effect until the earlier of the following: (i) a determination by the parties to withdraw from further participation in the Feasibility Study before its completion, (ii) the completion of the Feasibility Study and determination by the ACOE that a construction project is not feasible, or (iii) the effective date of a subsequent agreement among the parties, including a Project Construction Agreement. Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in several duplicate counterparts, each of which shall be an original. MENDOCINO COUNTY INLAND WATER AND POWER COMMISSION Comment: Modification of change requested by Flood Control District By -5- Chairwoman Date Attest: Date: Secretary of Inland Water and Power Commissioner Approved as to Form: Inland Water and Power Commission Legal Counsel Initial Study Participants: City of Ukiah By: Its: ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Potter Valley Irrigation District By: Its: Approved as to form: General Counsel Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District By: Its: Approved as to form: General Counsel -6- -7- DRAFT AGREEMENT AMONG PARTIES CONTRIBUTING FUNDS TOWARD LOCAL SPONSOR SHARE OF THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS COYOTE DAM FEASIBILITY STUDY ATTACHMENT / This Agreement is entered on __, 2006 ( among the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commis: of its members who participate in funding the local sponsor's of Engineers Coyote Dam Feasibility Study ("Study two groups: (1) those Study Participants who sign this Study Participants"), and (2) those Study Participant~, Date and who do not make an Initial Contribution project costs ("Subsequent Study Partici California, ("Commission") and those cost of the Army Corp >ants consist of Date ("Initial the Effective the RECITALS This Agreement is made with reference 1. The Commission is a joint District, the Redwood Valk Water County Russian River )1 and additional agencies sign the Commission and ' ' facts: the Potter Valley Irrigation and the Mendocino Improvement District and such int Powers Agreement ("JPA") creating the . the 2005 (the the exhibit increase earth-fill dam (the "Feasibility A and incorporated between the Department of the Army and __ ssion for Coyote Valley Dam Feasibility Study, dated ~. Under the Feasibility Study Agreement, pursuant to a Project Study Plan, attached as an ~,asibility of various options to improve flood control and yield of Lake Mendocino, including (1) raising the existing reservoir and (3) changing the operating conditions of the dam of the Feasibility Study Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit this reference. 3. The Commission is designated as the "Local Sponsor" in the Feasibility Study Agreement, which is obligated to contribute 50% of the cost of the Feasibility Study, 25% of which may consist of certain in-kind services as specified in the agreement. 4. The Feasibility Study Agreement makes clear that there is no guarantee that any of the alternatives examined will be determined to be feasible or become a federally sponsored project. -1- 5. ,The members of the Commission who are the initial signatories to this Agreement, the Initial Study Participants, are willing to contribute funds to meet the Local Sponsor's funding obligation under the Feasibility Study Agreement, and assume the risk that the funds contributed toward the study may not result in the construction of a project that produces additional water that is available to the Study Participants, provided that any benefits that do result from the study, inclUding additional water supplies, are shared by the Initial Study Participants in proportion to each Initial Study Participant's contribution toward the Local Sponsor's share of the study and that ubsequent Study Participants can become Subsequent Study Participants only as ided in this Agreement. AGREEMENT In consideration of the above-recited facts am below, the parties agree as follows. and condit further stated I. CONTRIBUTION OF INITIAL STUDY 1.0 Each Initial Study funds required under the share equals __% of the Initial Study Participant. agrees to equal share of matching Effective Date. That , or $.~ per 1.1 The in secti~ 0 above ;t be received by the Commission : mom Commission members may pursue water supply projects under separate agreements among the participating members. {! ~ Comment: F~ood Control believes this item needs more clarification, but it did not describe what that clarification would say. II. 2.0 ICIPANTS may request to become a Subsequent Study Participant by request to the Commission. Upon receipt of the request, the shall determine the amount that member would have paid toward the ty Study, if it had been an Initial Study Participant. The Commission shall add to that the amount of interest those funds would have earned during that time period, if invested in the Local Agency Investment Fund maintained by the State of California under the authority of Sections 16429.1 et seq. of the California Government Code. The resulting sum constitutes the "buy-in" that the member will be required to pay before it will be permitted to become a Subsequent Study Participant -2- 2.1 The Commission shall allocate among the Initial Study Participants the funds received as a result of a buy-in in proportion to each participant's share of the matching fund payments prior to the addition of the Subsequent Study Participant. 2.2 No member may become a Subsequent Study Participant, unless all of the Initial Study Participants approve the addition of the member as a Subsequent Study Participant. The Subsequent Study Participant's Project Entitlement and the commensurate adjustment of the existing Study Partici Project Entitlements shall be determined by the Initial Study Participants with approval of the Subsequent Study Participant's participation. 2.3 A member shall become a Subsequent Study obligations in this Agreement, upon by the Initial Study Participants, Agreement by the governing body by an authorized representative buy-in, and and ect to the rights and Study Participant ,val of this 2.4 Upon admission of a Subsequent Study Study Participants shall usted so that share of the Local Spons{ by the payment obligations of the Participant pays an equal lity Study Agreement. III. STUDY PARTICIPANT 3.0 As long makir Its payments pay its as the Sponsor and agrees to continue der the Feasibility Study Agreement, each share of the matching fund payment. not less than ten (10) days prior is due under the Feasibility Study 3.2 The Study of meeting tdy Partici provide "in kind services" in lieu of cash as a means if said in kind services are approved by the other tts and the ACOE. The cash value of any in kind services determined by the ACOE. In a Study Participant fails to make a payment as required under this it, it shall forfeit its Project Entitlement. However, in the event a Study Participant elects to terminate this Agreement or defaults in the payment of its share of matching funds under the Feasibility Study Agreement, whether "study costs" or "excess study costs" as defined in the Feasibility Study Agreement, that Study Participant is not relieved of liability for any such obligations arising ~ ' prior to its ~ default or termination of its participation under this Agreement. -3- IV. STUDY MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION V. 4.0 The Feasibility Study Agreement requires the ACOE and the Local Sponsor to appoint a representative to an Executive Committee. Executive Committee are required to appoint Management Team. All decisions of the CommL, Study Agreement, including appointments to Study Management Team shall be made by Entitlements, through their representativ( members of the to a Study in relation to the Feasibility ye Committee and the the Project Board of Directors. ALLOCATION OF PROJECT 5.0 Definitions - The following terms shai this Agreement: meani~ when used in "Project Costs" means including design, construcl addition to the actual Project available to 5 and for water r of the cost~ a feasible project, and sil :osts, in costs required to make costs expended to apply additio~ : · project which is ' ' beneficial use within the areas served by · Benefits the percentage of Project Costs and Project is entitled under the terms of this of a project, of Project Benefits only. 5.1 ect is identified at the conclusion of the Feasibility Study, then, of this Agreement, it will be assumed that there are no Project among the Study Participants. 5.2 If the Feasibility Study identifies a feasible project with Project Benefits, then each Study Participant that has paid its full share of the Local Sponsor matching funds required under the Feasibility Study Agreement and that is in full compliance with its obligations under this Agreement shall be entitled to its Project Entitlement. The details of how a Study Participant or its assignee will participate in the construction of any such project and receive Project Benefits shall be set forth in a "Construction Project Agreement," to be negotiated and executed among the Study Participants at the conclusion of the Coyote Dam Deleted: 3.3 . One or more of the remaining Study Participants may elect to pay the defaulting Study Participant's share of the matching payment. In that event they shall acquire the defaulting Study Participant's Project Entitlement in proportion to their payment of that share. Comment: Change requested by Flood Control District Formatted: Font: Bold, Underline Formatted: Indent: Left: O" Comment: Modtficafion of change -4- Feasibility Study. No Study Participant shall receive any Project Benefit, until the Study Participants execute a Construction Project Agreement. IV. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS Participant Assignments This Agreement, and the rights, duties and benefits given in it, may not be assigned by a Study Participant without the advance Study Participants and the U.S. Army Corps of conclusion of the Feasibility Study, if a construcm feasible, a Study Participant may assign all or Entitlement., it may do the, , Offering that portion on the same terms and c( · in writing to accept such assi those ninety (90) days after such consent of the other at the ect is determined to be of its Project written notice to to the If, terms and~ within Study Parti assign that portion of its PrO conditions. may on those same terms and . (ii) the constructl, agreement the Effective Date and shall remain in ng: (i) a determination by the parties to particip on in the Feasibility Study before its completion, Study and determination by the ACOE that a or (iii) the effective date of a subsequent including a Project Construction Agreement. I I:l~leted: Before ~ [~le4:~:~l: other Study Participants ~ ~l~: other Study Pa~cip~ts i ~1~: no other Study P~cip~t ~, a~s ~ Comment: My understanding of change requested by Flood Control I Distict Counterparts This Agreement may be executed in several duplicate counterparts, each of which shall be an original. MENDOCINO COUNTY INLAND WATER lr Cx~mmant:----"- Modification of change requested by Hood Control District -5- AND POWER COMMISSION By Chairwoman Date Attest: Date: Secretary of Inland Water and Power Commissioner Approved as to Form: Inland Water and Legal Counsel Initial Study City of 1 B~ Its: ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney By: Its: Valley Irrigation District Approved as to form: General Counsel Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Improvement District By: Its: -6- Approved as to form: General Counsel -7- ITEM NO. II. c DATE: May 17, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: REVIEW AND PRI'ORITIZATION OF PLANNING PRO.1ECTS SUMMARY: The Community Planning Division of the Planning Department is involved in a wide range of activities. The Staff process development permit applications, provide information to the public, and provide support to the Planning Commission, Paths, Open Space, and Creeks Commission, Traffic Engineering Committee, Main Street Program, Demolition Permit Review Committee, and others. The Staff also are involved with General Plan Implementation projects such as Municipal Code Amendments associated with the Housing Element, the Doolin Creek Habitat Enhancement Plan, and the Riverside Park Master Plan. The Director is working on thirteen major projects while running the day-to-day department operations, managing the budget, and responding to complex inquiries from the public. This Agenda Item is intended to share the status of these projects and to seek prioritization by the Council. RECOMMENDATION: Review and prioritize the major planning projects managed by the Director of Planning and Community Development. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens 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. Status List of Major Planning Projects APPROVED: Candace Horsley, ~anager UKIAH DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Director Major Project Status List May 2006 UK]:AH VALLEY AREA PLAN Assisting County staff with UVAP revision program as time and resources permit. Meeting and communicating regularly with County Staff. Consultant Pre-proposal conference on May 11th. Will sit on consultant selection committee with County Staff. SPHERE OF TNFLUENCE AMENDMENT City/County Subcommittee meeting regularly. Meeting with Annexation consultant. Discussions with City Council anticipated in June. Major portions complete. May. LAFCO MUNC]:PAL SERV]:CE REVTEW Other components being worked on. Draft document expected in COX/MAYFTELD ANNEXATZON - BRUSH STREET TRZANGLE Application complete. ETR required. Applicants discussing broader annexation approach with surrounding land owners. Discussions of Planned Development Prezoning. RCHDC ANNEXATION - BRUSH STREET TI~ANGLE Application complete. Draft EIR being prepared by Leonard Charles & Associates as part of County GPA/RZ. ORCHARD AVENUE BRZDGE / BRUSH STREET TRTANGLE ETR Alternative route analysis (environmental) completed. Financial feasibility analysis being prepared by staff. To Council in 3une. HTLLSTDE ZONZNG REVTSTONS Second joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting on May 10th. DOWNTOWN AND PERKTNS STREET GATEWAY FORM BASED ZON1'NG Consultant selection process to be discussed with City Council on May 17th. WATER RZGHTS AMENDMENT ETR Working closely with the City Attorney and consulting engineers. E]:R being prepared by Leonard Charles & Associates. GREEN BU1'LDI'NG PROGRAM Green building concepts discussed with Planning Commission in April and with the City Council in May. Development of public education and incentive program underway. RECYCLI'NG AND DTVERSI'ON OF CONSTRUCTZON DEBR.I:S ORD]:NANCE Draft ordinance prepared. Roundtable meeting with stakeholders conducted. Preliminary diversion rate figures produced by Solid Waste Authority in late April, Second roundtable meeting to be scheduled in May/June. STGN ORDI'NANCE REV1'SZONS City Council discussion of Planning Commission recommended draft revisions. Council direction to enforce existing ordinance before revising regulations. Monthly enforcement reports to Council RDA HOUSTNG PROGRAM LM]:HAC membership and 20% housing set-a-side program issues resolved. Transitioning program to Economic Development Coordinator. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 11.d DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE OPTIONS IN RESPONSE TO SEWER RATES ON LOW INCOME RESIDENTS, SENIOR CITIZENS AND NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS BACKGROUND: On November 2, 2005, the City Council introduced an ordinance amending Section 3707.1 of the Ukiah City Code which put into place a five year rate schedule to pay for the Wastewater Treatment Facility Rehabilitation Project. The first rate went into effect on December 1,2005. As State statute does not allow using water and sewer revenues to provide reduced rates for Iow and moderate income customers, Council directed staff to research options for Iow income and senior citizens and return in May to discuss the various issues. ISSUES: , Similar to the City's water ordinance and water rate structure, the sewer service rate structure requires property owners to pay the sewer bill for a master meter serving multiple units based on water usage. The property owner or landlord has discretion on how to recover those costs from the tenants in these multi-resident complexes (over four residential units). The simplest method for the landlord is to divide the monthly sewer fee equally by the number of units, regardless of the number of persons (and resulting water usage) living in the unit. This can have an adverse impact on those with Iow, fixed incomes such as senior citizens. The City Manager met with one such impacted senior citizen to discuss his concerns. Attachment 1 is his letter outlining recommended methods for reducing costs of sewer rates for Iow-income seniors living in multi-resident complexes with a single master water meter for all units. . In January, 2006, Staff received an email from the Ford Street Project strongly opposing the City's established sewer hook-up charges. Refer to Attachment 2 requesting consideration for reduced rates. Staff is requesting Council direction on how to respond to this request. , Concerns have been expressed related to the impact of the sewer rates on Iow income residents and senior citizens. Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion of possible options in response to sewer rates on Iow income residents, senior citizens and non-profit organizations; provide direction to staff on how to proceed. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: Mr. David Vilner, Ms. Judy Hatch, and The Ford Street Project City Council Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Letter from David Vilner, Retired Senior Citizen, dated 2/23/06 2- E-ma.ilJ. r.,om The Ford Street Project, dated 1/19/05 Cand~'~e Horsley, Cit er SURVEY: The California Society of IVlunicipal Finance Officer (CSMFO) conducted a survey to determine whether various agencies offered discounts for seniors and/or Iow income customers and if they did, what criteria was used for the reduced rates. Thirty (30) agencies (Cities, Water/Sewer and Community Services Districts) responded. Most indicated that they were legally unable to provide any reduction in rates to Iow income or senior citizens. Some stated that, in the case of seniors, a reduced rate naturally occurred as they use substantially less water than a "family unit" might, resulting in lower rates based on less consumption. Others had alternative methods for allowing for reduced rates which are discussed below. ALTERNATIVES: Proposition 218 requires that the fee for a property-related service cannot exceed the proportional cost of providing that service to the ratepayer [Cal. Const., Art. 13D, Section 6 (b)(3)]. As such, the City is not allowed to reduce the burden of the sewer fees on the Iow income residents or senior citizens through a subsidy by larger users. Below is a list of discussion points for the Council's consideration. 1. Provide Subsidies. a. Consider use General Fund monies to subsidize the cost to these individuals. The impact to the General Fund is unknown at this time and would need to be evaluated. b. Consider increasing the subsidy provided to Iow income electric users through the CARES Program. By increasing the benefit for assistance in paying electric bills, Iow income individuals would then be able to use monies typically spent on electric bills to offset the cost of the sewer bill. d. Request consultant hired to review the Public Benefits program package to evaluate possible assistance measures. 2. Establish a Special Conservation Rate Available to All Users. Since sewer rates are tied to water usage, it is assumed that households/businesses will naturally conserve water to reduce their rates. However, a possible option might be to establish a lower "conservation" rate for customers whose average monthly water usage over a twelve (12) month period is less than an "to-be-determined" cubic feet. Customers could apply for and pay a reduced conservation sewer rate. This is a very preliminary list of options for Council to consider. Based on Council's direction, staff anticipates a more in-depth analysis and evaluation of alternatives. Staff is requesting direction on what options or other issues Council would like staff to investigate further. Dear Candace, Let me first thank you for meeting with me on Tuesday, February 21, 2006, to hear my concerns about Ukiah City's increase in sewer rates and how they impact unfairly on low-income seniors living in multi-resident complexes with over 4 residential units such as the Rancho Del Rey Mobile Home Park at 660 Leslie Street. As per your request, below is a draft of a proposal to be presented at the City Counsel Meeting on April 5, 2006. Please let me know if I need to revise my presentation. TO: Candace Horsley, Ukiah City Manager FROM: David Vilner, Retired Senior Citizen DATE: February 23, 2006 Dear Mrs. Horsley, RE: Sewer Rates Here are some suggestions for reducing the cost of sewer rates for low-income seniors living in multi-resident complexes with over 4 residential units and a single master water meter for all units. 1. Ukiah City formula: * single person with a clothes washer uses 74 gallons of water per day * 30 days in a month (average) * hcf = hundred cubic feet of water * 1 hcf= 748 gallons of water * base rate = $3.29 per 1 hcf (commercial rate class) Therefore, a single person with a clothes washer uses and pays per month: 74 gals x 30 days = 2220 gals per month divided by 748 (lhcf) = 2.97 hcfx $3.29 base rate = $9.77 per month for water sewer use. VERY FAIR! . City or State Standards for Landowners to comply with in order to provide a fair sewer rate cost to individual low-income senior residents living in multi-resident complexes. For example: Rancho Del Rey Mobile Home Park for Seniors at 660 Leslie Street has 96 Mobile Home Spaces. Suppose the landowner receives a monthly City sewer bill of $2620. The landowner, in this case (landowners are unregulated and they can do as they wish to their residents as to how they get reimbursed from them), uses a simple formula: $2620 divided by 96 spaces = $27.30 per Mobile Home Space regardless of how many persons are living in that space. Because the ratio of turnover in a senior mobile home park is annually very low (seniors tend to die in the park or transfer to a nursing home near the end of their life) it would be manageable for the landowner to administer this suggestion to divide the City Monthly Sewer Bill by the number of residents in the mobile home park and then charging each space by the number of persons living in them. For example: · Rancho Del Rey has 131 residents living in 96 Spaces · One persort lives in 58% of existing spaces · Two or,~persons live in 42% of existing spaces Therefore, 58% of spaces pay $20 and 42% of spaces pay $40 or more depending on how many persons live in the latter spaces. For example: $2620 divided by 131 persons = $20.00 per person 58% -- one person living in one space owes $20.00 only 42% -- 2 or more persons living in one space owes $40.00 or more One person living in one space saves nearly $7.00 per month, given the latter method. Not much, but significant to a low-income senior. This is still too expensive for low- income seniors, yet more fair. o Finally, this may be the most fair and most sensitive approach to caring for low- income seniors, and that is providing support like the City of Ukiah's CARE, a senior energy discount. Why not provide also relief from sewer rates? Implementation of one of these suggestions would reduce significantly the cost of sewer rates for low-income seniors. This action on the part of the City Council will provide seniors with the opportunity to live out their lives in dignity and will support their independent living style. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yours sincerely, David Vilner 463-8808 Candace Horsle~ From: Sent: To: Subject: mari rodin [rodin @ pacific.net] Tuesday, January 24, 2006 10:02 AM Candace Horsley FW: Increase of sewer connection fees ATTACHMENT Hi Candace, I see that you rec'd this email from Mark too. I'm wondering if we can create some sort of a fund that could be used to subsidize hook-ups for non-profit developers of housing? Can you think of any source of money for such a fund, within the sewer enterprise? Mad you had any thoughts about this issue that Mark brings up? I'm not so excited about his idea of using redevelopment funds for this purpose. Mari Forwarded Message From: "Ford Street Project" <vanessa@fordstreet.org> Organization: Ford Street Project Reply-To: <vanessa@fordstreet.org> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:06:14 -0800 To: <Mark510@adelphia.net> Cc: <felipe@pacific.net>, <rodin@pacific.net>, <dougc@pacific.net>, <mccowen@pacific.net>, <candace@cityofukiah.com>, <charleys@cityofukiah.com> Subject: Increase of sewer connection fees January 19, 2005 Ukiah City Council City of Ukiah 300 W. Seminary Ave. To Whom It May Concern: The Ford Street Project strongly opposes the City of Ukiah's imposition of outrageously high sewer hook-up charges ($10,911 for 2 bedrooms, $12,002 for 3 bedrooms). We recognize the City's need to finance its sewage treatment system, but these charges represent a clear disincentive to build desperately needed low and moderate income housing in this city. For profit-making developers of higher-income housing, these charges could conceivably be structured into the overall cost of their projects. For non- profit organizations like Ford Street, who are already burdened by the recent imposition of a prevailing state wage scale for its publicly assisted projects, these new charges will add considerable weight to our efforts to provide affordable housing to low-income residents. To be specific, Ford Street is hoping to construct a small transitional housing cluster composed of four 3-bedroom units to serve homeless single adults. If our math is correct, this modest project will cost almost $50,000 in sewer hook-up fees alone and will severely burden our fundraising efforts. Our request to the City of Ukiah is straightforward: that it recognize the unique barrier these fees pose for non-profit developers of low-income housing and allow for the elimination or reduction of these fees; or make a certain percentage of the City's Redevelopment funds available to help defray the costs of meeting these fee obligations. I would appreciate the review of this request by the Ukiah City Council. Respectfully, Mark Rohloff Executive Director End of Forwarded Message Candace Horsle~ Fro rn: Sent: To: Subject: drapport [drapport @ pacbell.net] Monday, January 23, 2006 9:32 AM candace @ cityofukiah.com Re: Re: Increase of sewer connection fees Only by using other funds to subsidize. The RDA low and moderate income housing fund, including the set asides for the county, might be availabe for this purpose. Perhaps the funds set aside for low income subsidies in the Electric Fund could used to off-set more of the connection or other fees charged by the electric utility and the savings to Ford Street could be used by Ford Street to pay the sewer connection fee. David J. Rapport Rapport and Marston 405 W. Perkins Street Ukiah, Ca. 95482 Tel: 707-462-6846 Fax: 707-462-4235 Alt. Fax 501-636-4538 Original Message From: "Candace Horsley" <candace@cityofukiah.com> To: "David Rapport" <drapport@pacbell.net> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 6:50 AM Subject: FW: Re: Increase of sewer connection fees Dave--Do you see any 'out' for low-income housing projects at this point? Candace > > ..... Original Message ..... > From: mark510@adelphia.net [mailto:mark510@adelphia.net] > Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 7:18 PM > To: Candace > Subject: Fwd: Re: Increase of sewer connection fees > >> Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:16:57 -0500 >> From: mark510@adelphia.net >> To: vanessa@fordstreet.org >> Subject: Re: Increase of sewer connection fees >> >> Dear Mr. Rohloff >> >> All individuals, developers, institutions must play on a level field. > Government regulations make it difficult to treat "entities" differently, > and rightly so. Having said this, there may be ways to help offset the > cost > for specific types of projects such as yours. We have a very generous > community and I am sure that a way will be found to make projects for the > most disadvantaged possible. Making your plight known if the first step. >> I assume that you have addressed your concerns about this issue with the > City staff before bringing it to our attention. If not, you will find our > staff (especially Candace) very responsive to those with "special needs" > in > our community. If you have spoken with them and have not obtained > assistance, please let me know. >> >> The City Staff and Council remain positively inclined toward your efforts > to assist the disadvantaged. >> >> I can be reached at 707-272-8390. >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Mark >> >> Ford Street Project <vanessa@fordstreet.org> wrote: >> > January 19, 2005 >> > >> > >> > Ukiah City Council >> > City of Ukiah >> > 300 W. Seminary Ave. >> > >> > To Whom It May Concern: >> > >> > The Ford Street Project strongly opposes the City of Ukiah's imposition > of >> > outrageously high sewer hook-up charges ($10,911 for 2 bedrooms, >> > $12,002 > for >> > 3 bedrooms). We recognize the City's need to finance its sewage > treatment >> > system, but these charges represent a clear disincentive to build >> > desperately needed low and moderate income housing in this city. >> > >> > For profit-making developers of higher-income housing, these charges > could >> > conceivably be structured into the overall cost of their projects. For >> > non-profit organizations like Ford Street, who are already burdened by > the >> > recent imposition of a prevailing state wage scale for its publicly > assisted >> > projects, these new charges will add considerable weight to our efforts > to >> > provide affordable housing to low-income residents. >> > >> > To be specific, Ford Street is hoping to construct a small transitional >> > housing cluster composed of four 3-bedroom units to serve homeless > single >> > adults. If our math is correct, this modest project will cost almost >> > $50,000 in sewer hook-up fees alone and will severely burden our > fundraising >> > efforts. Our request to the City of Ukiah is straightforward: that it >> > recognize the unique barrier these fees pose for non-profit developers > of >> > low-income housing and allow for the elimination or reduction of these > fees; >> > or make a certain percentage of the City's Redevelopment funds >> > available > to >> > help defray the costs of meeting these fee obligations. >> ' >> > I would appreciate the review of this request by the Ukiah City >> > Council. > >> > >> > Respectfully, >> > >> > >> > Mark Rohloff >> > Executive Director >> > > > AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. ! !' e DATE: May 17, 2006 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEES SUMMARY: During the recent City Council goals discussion, Public Works and Engineering Staff discussed the need to update the fee schedule for the Department. Staff has evaluated the current Public Works and Engineering Fee Schedule and the way the Department recovers its costs for providing services. Staff has subsequently prepared the City of Ukiah Public Works & Engineering Fee Schedule 2006 with the goal of cost recovery. This Agenda Item is intended to initiate a discussion of proposed fee updates and to direct Staff to prepare a resolution for adoption at a public hearing. BACKGROUND: The last revision of the City of Ukiah Public Works & Engineering Fee Schedule occurred in January 1989. Many of these existing fees are a flat dollar amount. Many jurisdictions in California have adopted a cost recovery fee schedule for processing permits and providing other engineering services. The justification for a cost recovery program is the service is being provided to a private party rather than benefiting the community as a whole. For example, currently the City of Ukiah collects $320 for a Minor Subdivision map check. A sampling of other local agencies fees including the County of Mendocino, City of Windsor, City of Cloverdale, City of Petaluma and City of Willits average $1,150 for the same service. Consequently, the Department is currently subsidizing nearly 75% of the development plan review and inspection costs. Some of these subsidized costs are not only supported financially by staff time but in the case of subdivisions, easements, and other land division permits this subsidy is an actual direct expense to the City. For example staff estimates that the "average" Minor Subdivision map check cost the City approximately $800 to $1,000 (this is based on the Minor Subdivisions that were processed during 2004 and 2005). As compared to the $320 that was collected. This is a direct expense of nearly $500 to $700. PLAN OF ACTION: Attached is the proposed City of Ukiah Public Works & Engineering Fee Schedule 2006 Draft. It is a compilation of the services the Department provides; some of these tasks currently have associated fees and some do not. Upon approval of this draft, an edited draft would be sent to the Builders Exchanges and Mendocino County Employers Council for feedback. Then a public hearing will be scheduled to adopt a Resolution establishing the City of Ukiah Public Works & Engineering Fee Schedule 2006. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss the proposed City of Ukiah Public Works & Engineering · Fee Schedule 2006, and direct Staff to prepare a Resolution establishing a City of Ukiah Public Works & Engineering Fee Schedule 2006. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Keep the 1989 Fee Schedule in place. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED: N/A Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Ukiah Public Works & Engineering Fee Schedule 2006 Candace Horsley, Ci~Manager ATTACHMENT_ I, u 0 u 0 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. ].l. f DATE: May 17, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: SET DATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 BUDGET HEARINGS SUMMARY: The City Council typically sets two days in the last week of June for departmental presentations, public input and Council discussion and adoption of the upcoming fiscal year's proposed budget. Staff is requesting Council direction on the preferred dates for Fiscal Year 2006-07 budget hearings· A TuesdayNVednesday (June 27th and 28th) or Wednesday/Thursday (June 28th and 29th) combination is recommended. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Set dates for the Fiscal Year 2006-07 Budget Hearings and authorize the City Clerk to notice Public Hearing prior to hearings. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager · Can~]~e'HorS]'e;i'-City !anager AGENDA ITEM NO: 11 .g MEETING DATE: May 17, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND SIGN A THREE- YEAR AUDIT SERVICES CONTRACT WITH DAVIS HAMMON & CO, CPA'S FOR TOTAL FIRST YEAR COST OF NO MORE THAN $29,505. On March 2, 2006 a Request for Proposals was issued for Audit Services beginning with the FY2005-06 Financial Statements. The RFP specified a three-year contract with options for two three-year extensions. The RFP was sent to 19 apparently qualified CPA firms who had previously asked to be included in bid lists, were recommended by other finance staff from other cities or were known to staff. Responses were due by April 28, 2006 and four (4) firms submitted proposals. All proposals appeared to be responsive to the RFP and were evaluated separately by the Finance Director and Accounting Operations Manager. While all four firms did meet the City's requirements, staff found significant differences in the level of expertise, work hours scheduled and costs provided by the four. The two highest bids averaged 39% more than the two lowest ($40,650 vs. 29,252), without providing additional services. The two Iow bidders varied significantly in the hourly cost, total hours committed and experience level of their staff. C.G Uhlenberg, LLP, the Iow bidder at $28,500 is planning to complete the audit using only 185 billable hours and guarantees that "not more that one first-year staff will be assigned". Staff is concerned that this is only half of the hours currently spent on audit services. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize City Manager to negotiate and sign three- year Audit Services Contract (including options for two 3-year extensions) with Davis Hammon & Co. CPA's at total first year cost of no more than $29,505. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Provide staff with alternative direction. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mike McCann, Finance Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - RFP Ranking 2- RFP Mailing List Approved' Candace Horsley, Ci'~Manager Staff is recommending that we accept the other Iow bidder at $29,505, which is our current audit firm, Davis Hammon & Co, CPA's. After working with the City for five years, they are planning to use 439 hours on the audit, specifying senior CPA staff throughout the process. This is more than double the labor hours, with more senior staff, on an account that is already setup in their files. Mr. Steve Herr is CFO and a shareholder in Davis Hammon & Co. He would continue to be in charge of the audit. Staff has worked directly with Mr. Herr for five years and found him to be personable, knowledgeable and conscientious. Recommendation Independent Auditors work directly for the City Council, "helping to preserve the integrity of the public finance functions and maintaining citizens' confidence in their elected leaders" in the words of the Government Finance Officers Association Recommended Practice on the subject. Following this Recommended Practice, staff issued this RFP as "a full-scale competitive process for the selection of independent auditors" at the conclusion of the current contract with Davis Hammon & Co. Respondents were evaluated first on their ability to "perform a quality audit", and then on the cost and other considerations. After carefully evaluating all four responses staff recommends that the Council accept the proposal from Davis Hammon & Co. in the first year amount of $29,505 and authorize City Manager to negotiate and sign a three-year contract (with two three-year options) for Audit Services. Audt Services Contract Page 2 of 2 May 17, 2006 ATTACHMENI"_ ~ ! Criteria C.G. Uhlenberg LLP Moss, Levy & Hartzheim Davis Hammon & Co. R.J. Ricciardi, Inc. Licensing Yes Yes Yes Yes Independence Yes Yes Yes Yes Peer Review (AICPA) Yes Yes Yes Yes Qualifications Partner Manager Senior Auditors Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes not identified Yes Yes Yes may have 1 first-year staff 3 Experience in auditing CA cities Yes Yes Yes Yes 4 References of local Govt clients list provided list provided list provided list provided with contacts with contacts with contacts 5 Thoroughness of approach Yes Yes Moderate Moderate 6 Understanding of the scope Yes Yes Yes Moderate 7 Commitment to timelin Yes Yes Yes Yes Maximum fees FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 $28,500 $29,500 $39,600 $29,000 $30,255 $39,600 $29,500 $31,015 $39,600 $41,700 9 Adherence to RFP instructions Yes Yes Yes No Billable Hours PartnedPrincipals 12 226 117 Audit Manager 26 204 132 Supervisor 64 Sr. Accountant 45 136 Staff Accountant 24 199 Clerical 14 9 55 145 76 74 Total 185 439 639 295 Davis Hammon & Co. Certified Public Accountants 2080 Myers Street Oroville, CA 95966-5341 (530) 533-3392 Don Cole & Company Certified Public Accountant 2701 Del Paso Road, Suite 130-131 Sacramento, CA 95835 (916) 925-5216 Chris S. Millias, Partner Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Co. LLP 465 California Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 434-3744 Robert W. Johnson, C.P.A. 6234 Birdcage Street Citrus Heights, CA 95610-5949 (916) 723-2555 Caporicci & Larson Certified Public Accountants 3184-D Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (877) 862-2200 Brad Constantine, CPA Bartig, Basler & Ray 1520 Eureka Road, Suite 110 Roseville, CA 95661 (916) 784-7800 Jeff Ira, CPA CG Uhlenberg 333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 230 Redwood City, CA 94065 (650) 802-8668 Peggy Vande Vooren Gilbert Associates, Inc, 2880 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA 95833 (916) 646-6464 Eliodoro Batingana Grant Thornton, LLP 1000 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 596-6701 Cindi Pond Macias, Gini & Company, LLP 2175 N. California Blvd., Suite 645 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 465-3903 ATTACHMENT 2 Proposal received 04/26/06 Special districts only Declined to submit Responded to questionnaire and sent audit report 04/26/06 Proposal received 04/28/06 Declined to submit Declined to submit Maria Gianelli Maze & Associates 1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 100 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 930-0902 ext. 230 Mindy Jacobs Moreland & Associates 1201 Dove Street, Suite 680 Newport Beach, CA 92660 (949) 221-0025 ext. 226 Steve Wallaert Moss Adams, LLP 3700 Old Redwood Hwy, Suite 200 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707) 527-0800 Robert M. Moss, CPA Moss, Levy & Hartzheim 9107 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 400 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 (310)273-2745 Bill Robotham Pisenti & Brinker, LLP 3550 Round Barn Blvd., Suite 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707) 542-3343 Terry Krieg CPA 50 Old Courthouse Square, Suite 603 Santa Rosa, CA 95404 (707) 544-5684 Kevin T. Pulliam Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co. 8270 Aspen Street Rancho Cucamong, CA 91730 (909) 466-4410 Bill Ashby KPMG 400 Capital Mall, Suite 800 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 554-1658 Ralph Ricciardi CPA 1000 Fourth Street, Suite 400 San Rafael, CA 94901 (415) 457-1215 Declined to submit Declined to submit Declined to submit Proposal Received 04/28/06 Audit reports & JE sent 03/16/06 Christina Hollingsworth 201 First Street, Suite 208 Petaluma, CA 94952 Audit reports sent 03/27/06 Audit Reports & JE's sent 03/16/06 Proposal received 04/27/06