Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-04-17 Packet CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Adjourned Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 April 17, 2002 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS a. Presentations: Councilmembers Larson and Libby, and Mayor Ashiku to Read Poems b. Introduction of Community Services Assistant Tyler Eidson APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting of March 20, 2002 b. Regular Meeting of April 3, 2002 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. 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 citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Approval of Disbursements for Month of March 2002 b. Report to Council Concerning Purchase of Gator Utility Vehicle For Parks and Golf From West Cai Tractor Company in the Amount of $5,503.17 c. Rejection of Claim for Damages Received From Cheryn Ann Chips and Referral to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund d. Reject All Bids for Complete Aerial Unit with Cab and Chassis e. Report of the Acquisition of Flexible Crack Sealant From Special Asphalt Products in the Amount of $5,188.22 f. Approval of Hull/Piffero Final Subdivision Map g. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Submittal, Execution, and Acceptance of Federal Emergency Shelter Grant-2002 h. Award of Consultant Service Agreement to Taber Consultants For the Performance of Geotechnical Work Related to the Orchard Avenue Bridge Project and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Agreement 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. PUBLIC HEARING (7:00 P.M.) a. (Continued from April 3, 2002) Introduction of Ordinance Rezoning Portions of Assessor Parcel Numbers 003-472-08,003-472-13, and 003-472-14 From C-2 To C-N UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Approval of Retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for the Preparation and Filing of a Petition for Change in Place of Use for an Amount Not to Exceed $15,000 and of the City Entering Into a Cost Sharing Agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District, and the Calpella Water District b. Authorization for the Mayor to Execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485 With theWestern Area Power Administration For the Purchase of Excess Capacity c. Status Report Regarding Ukiah Recycle d. Consideration of Ballot Measures for November 2002 Election, Including Room Occupancy Tax e. Consideration of Request by the American Red Cross for Waiver of Rent and Utilities at 1800 North State Street and Receive Report From American Red Cross Regarding Assistance From Other Public Agencies 10. NEW BUSINESS a. Status Report Concerning Gang Activities-Councilmember Libby b. Status of Public Improvement Projects To Be Implemented By The Public Works Department c. Approval of Modifications to Taylor Drive Transfer Station Contract Recycling Provisions d. Consideration and Approval of Amending Resolution No. 94-34 Establishing the Demolition Permit Review Committee and Soliciting Candidates to Fill Vacancies on the Committee e. Approval of Participation With Mendocino County, Willits, and Fort Bragg For City of Ukiah's Share of Cost For Consultant Services for Cable Franchise Renewal Negotiations In An Amount Not to Exceed $11,500 f. Discussion and Possible Action Concerning Voting Procedures for City Commissions and Boards - Councilmember Libby g. Approval of $1,000 For Inland Water and Power Commission Educational Video 11.COUNCIL REPORTS 12. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK/DIRECTOR REPORTS The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. 13.CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with Labor Negotiator G.C. §54957.6 City Designated Representative: Candace Horsley, City Manager Employee Organization: Fire Unit Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litiqation Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 Case) c. Conference with Real Property Negotiator Property: Assessor's Parcel No. 184-100-03 Agency Negotiator: Candace Horsley Negotiating Parties: County of Mendocino Under Negotiation: Instructions to negotiator concerning price. 14. ADJOURNMENT ~PR--15--2OO2 08:$$ ~N P.01 Winston H, Hlckox State Water Resources Control Board 1001 ! Sram. t4m ~' S,~mua~. California 0SSl4. (9t6) 3~-5390 Lq Reply Refer To:363 :AM:A024955 Mr. Keith Tiemann, Manager Redwood Valley County Water District P.O. Box 399 Redwood Valley, CA 95470 Dear Mr. Tiemann: PERMIT 17593 (APPLICATION 24955) LAI~ MENDOCINO IN MENDOCINO COUNTY The Division of Water Rights (Division) conducted a compliance insgection on February 5, 2002, of the Redw~Md Valley County Water District (RV~) operations oovered by Permit 17593 (Application 24955). This in~p~fton was c.a~u~e5 to dot.sine the current sta~ of compliance with permit terms and oonditions and the exMnt of the beneficial use of water. Pennit 17593 authorizes the diversioa of water from thc East Fork Rtmian River at Lake Mcndocino for domestic, frost protection and the irrigation uses within the RVCWD service boundary, as described in the permit. The permit authorizes: (1) by dircct diversion, (a) 26.6 cubic feet per second (cfa) for. frost protcction use titan March 1 to April 30, and (b)l.9 cfa for domestic use from November 1 to Aprl130; and (2) by diversion to storage, 2800 acre-feet per annum to be collectcd from November 1 to April 30. The total mnount taken lb:ma the source shall not exceed 4900 acre-feet per watcr year of October l to September 30. The time to Colnple~e beneficial use of water under Permit 17953 elaps~ on December 31, 2002, Permit 17593 does not authorize the diversion of water from ~he East Fork Russian R.ivcr for any purpose from May I to October 31 of e. ac, h year. Division rccords suggest that RVCWD's diversions during that piriod wer~ covered by a co-u-aa with the Mcrutooino County Russian River Flood Control and Water Conservation Impwvcmont District (Mendocino District). The Mcadocino District confirmed tlug RVCWD laid for the water pumped from East Fork Russian River from May 1 ';Yauugh October 31 up to Fiscal Year 1999-2000, but failed to pay for the water pumped in Fiscal Year 2000-2001. Bund on Division staff's reccat inspection, the Division made the following findings relative to RVCWD's diversion and use of water under Permit 17593: 1, RVCWD is diverting water in violation of Terms 16 and 17 of the Permit which state~ no water shall be divertcd ualess the Water level in Lake Meadocino is above the conservation pool established by ~ U.S. Army Corps of~. For the past 2 y~a, the Division concludes that b~weea November I and April S0, RVCWD divcrted water on l 16 days, only ~0 of which wer~ authorized under Permit 17593 duc to the conservation pool levels at L~e Mendociao.* California Environmental lsrot~etion Agtncy Mr. Keith Ti~mann RvCWD is serving water to re'em outside the authorized place of use under its permit, RvCWD's recent Prosress Repons by including to the Call)ella County Water' District. ,. allowable 3300 acres have been Permittee for Pcrmit 1'7593 also indicate more than the inig, ated within the place of use. RvCWD is suppll/in8 water thwuih its domestic wate~ system for irri§alion use to some of div~tin$ wal~r for irrigation use without a its useta. Therefore, RVCWD may b~ dir~tl¥ RVCWD repr~-ntatives i~formed basis of fight in April a~d Nov~nber of ~h year. Division staff that custom.'rs ugn~ trea~ water for irri~fion use are billed $2.80 per 1,000 gallons ($912.35 p~r acre-foot), RVCWD is not in compliance with Ter~ 26 of the permit that r~qulres daily records of the amounts divert~l from Lske Mendocino direly to benefioial use, and of the watg surface elevation and minimum flood sta~ ofLske Mtmdocino al the time of diversion. These ~,ords are to be sub. trod to the St~ W~er l~onrc~s Control Board (SWRCB) in an amual ~zport on or b~fo~ th~ ~d of ~oh calt=dar year, While p.¥CWD has kept daily r~cords ofth~ amomm diver~ at l.ske M=xlooino and of the water diverted throu/h its lreallnmt plant, the other r~ords ~ the requiI~ ~ r~:~o~ts have never been s~tbmit~ed. p,.VCWD has failed to Comply with T~rm 31 r~quifin$ it to develop and implement a water conservation plan stat preselling a plan to *.he SWRCB for appwVal, 6, RvcWD has failed to comply with Term 32 requiring the development of a plan for submittal of dat~ and maps for tl~ quantifies of water di~tly diverted and diverted to sterne under this p~mit. RVCWD has also not complkd with Terms 23, 24 and 28 ofp~vit 17593 that pertain to thc storage ofwSI~r at local landowne~'s tess. volts within its service ar~a. Term 23 states no water shall be dirked to sterne until st c='dfled m/in.'rs rasp ia submitted showing the locations of all ~rvo~ r~eivi~ RVCWD pmjmt wsler. T~s 24 pcr~ins to individml water right requilzmems for lot, al runoffln landown~r'a ~servoi~s and Term 28 r,xlui~ metering snd · However, durins the inspection, ~ keepin~ of th~ ~nounts stored in landowner's reserving. . ' any privately do~ not store wa~ under ~ts p~nmt in Division ~ w-as informed that P. vcWD of water made by RvCWD may A~.ordin~ to M~. 'ri~'m": the only stora~ owned reservoirs, rm~rvoir s/m~i~d above th~ wat~ tr~tmmt plant. The cspaci~ of the raw be at its raw water water ~OLF IS es.timated at -- . ,., ,. ......^hli~ttion ~o mom~J- ,-,,""' .-- ' .VCWD Slloma~v~ iA, -,-, o~ . , . w~ter'W its ousWm~.. S re?er, K .... ------.~ .-..~-. How~'er, tl~ D~mon co~¢ludes fl~. r~$ardle~ whtdher AY ~ w ~ o,,, compliance with T~t, ms 23, 24 sad 28'~aould Stili be enforccd to ensu~ reasonable beneficial use of water and to iclenfif~ the type of uses mad~ under the permit. ~.,,,,~ ,~,~ tile ~tvm~ ,,~._..,..w --. _, .... ,_ ~:.,a;,,,,~ Iatill K) IlS perxmT,, o ~ to submit either st lett~ a~ our findings, it ~ letter · . · IfRvCWD ac]mowled8c~ · · contradictin8 the fi~: . Jul t, 2002. Rmluimi ~,wd~ne,~ ........ .~----, ma~,~ no lam' than y APR--1~--2082 88:54 P.(~ Mr. Keith Ticmann APR ! t 2(101 corrective actions ,houl~ include*submittal of; (1) a written statement fi'ora Mendocino District collaborating that all diversions of water from May 1 through October 31 of each year is covered under Mmdocino District's Pem~it 12947B, (2) evidence ~pgorting a basis of right to divert water from Fast Fork Ru~im ,Ri.-vcr fi'om November I of~ch year to April 3.0 of the succeedin8 year whenev~' terms sad conditions of.Permit 17593 forbids such diversions'; (3) a petition to chanse the place of use currently covered by Permit 17595, (4) a plan and timeline for the submittnl of a water conservation plan, as'required by thc Term 31 of the permit, (5) a timeline for submittal of data and mnps required by Term 32 of the permit, and (6) a petition for an extension of time for Permit 17593. RVCWD should also cltrify its position on compliance with Tams 23, 24 and 28 of Permit 1'7593, · You -*hould note that the City of Ulrich (City), Millview County Water District (Millview), and Willow County Water District (Willow County) are appar~tly meeting to develop a local solution to the Division's compliance inspection findln~, We suggest that RVCWD contac~ City represent~vc~ to see if that group has formuhted any corrective actions that may be appropriate in this case. We siso surest that RVCWD meet with the'Mendocino District to resolve its contracttul w~ter ~tpply. Please note that the time provid~ to respond does not preclude the Division from comiderin~ action pursuant to Wa~er Code section 1052, subdivision Co), Thc Division csa initiate, at its discretion, enforccment action for RVCWD's existing violations of certain permit terms. Therefore, your diligenoe in talcing corrcctive actions in this m~er will be taken into consideration in any sub~lucnt actions by the Division, If you have any qucstions reg.:ling the Division's request or your obligation, please contact Aaron Miller of my sts~ff at (916) 341-5390 or me ~t (916) 341-5446. Sincerely, · Knssel, Chief License and Compliance Section CERTIIrIED Minasian, Sprumc~:, Baber, Meith, $oares & Sexton, LLP Paul Minui~ 1681 Bird Street Oroville, CA 95965-1679 Ms, Rosalind Peterson P.O. Box 499 Redwood Vnlley, CA 95470-0~99 ITEM NO. 3b DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES ASSISTANT TYLER EIDSON The Community Services Department is pleased to introduce our new Community Services Assistant, Tyler Eidson, to the City Council. Tyler grew up in Ukiah and is a recent graduate of Ukiah High School. He is currently attending Mendocino Junior College as a liberal arts major. He is also on the track and cross-country team for the college. Tyler is a highly motivated individual with many years of experience in the recreation field. He has worked his way through the ranks of nearly every youth program offered by the City, including five seasons as an umpire with girl's youth softball, four seasons with the youth basketball program, and three seasons with the summer day camp. He is well respected among program participants, parents, and staff. We are very pleased to welcome Tyler Eidson to our Staff. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Join Staff in welcoming Tyler Eidson to the City of Ukiah team. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Supervisor Candace Horsley, City Manager and Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director None APPROVED: L~ ~¢~k~'~ Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager 4a MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting Wednesday, March 20, 2002 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on March 20, 2002, the had been legally noticed and posted, at 5:37 p.m. in the Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken Councilmembers were present: Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin, and present: Public Utilities Director Barnes, Community Services Di Assistant City Manager Fierro, City Manager Horsley, City Attorney Director Steele, Panning Director Stump, and City Clerk Ulvi!~l~ ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION. 5.38 p.m ~,~:~i~![Ii,~., ~i~ *b. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated ion Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to ~ision ~{b) of Government Section 54956.9 (1 Case) following Staff Jgh, Councilmember Baldwin arrived at 5:39 p.m. No action taken by Council. Reconvened: 6:33 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGL Councilmember Baldwin 3. PROCLAMATION 3a. Sul313orting the 64th Annual Mayor Ashiku Redwood Re March 21- Conference in Ukiah urged all citizens to attend the 64th Annual hg!~ at the Redwood Empire Fairgrounds, Joh~ the Proclamation on behalf of the Re its Board of Directors. They thanked the City for its su the conference. Assistant Shannon Riley luced Shannon Riley as the City's new Executive Assistant, replacing io recently moved to the Redding area. She comes to the City with , ii receiving top qualifying points from her past employers as providing a d~ level of administrative support, supervision coordination of major projects, and having ~' ability to work with a variety of issues throughout the day. OF MINUTES ular Meeting of March 6, 2002 C~ ilrnember Libby advised that, due to a malfunction, the last half of the meeting was not'tape-recorded and the City Clerk relied on her notes to transcribe the minutes. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 1 of 18 Councilmember Smith recommended a correction on page 8, the seventh paragraph should read "Councilmember Smith noted that upon listening to other constituents and considering the long period in which the building has been vacant, he does not want to spend any more public money on it." Councilmember Larson recommended a correction on page 8, fourth paragraph in which Mr. Rosenthall is speaking and that the second and third sentences should read, "It is estimated that the cost for the seismic retrofit would be about $4.5 million. He responded to questioning by Councilmember Libby with regard to what they would do if no money were available from the City, by stating that if the seismic retrofit should cost between $3 to $5 million, it would not be economically feasible to pursue this project." He also recommended a correction to page 9, second to last paragraph to read "Dave Hull, Ukiah property and business owner, was of the opinion that the City should not subsidize the restoration of the Palace Hotel". Councilmember Libby requested for the record that the question she asked be included on page 4, third paragraph: "If I referred to the refundings and called them refinancings would I be accurate in my terminology?" and Mr. Burnett answered, "Yes, refunding is refinancing". She also recommended that her comments on page 11, last paragraph, be included for the record so there would be an understanding of why she voted "no" on the refinancing. The following comments should replace the wording of that paragraph: "She is asking a yes vote on a $95 million refinance. This is not the first refinance. It is yet another refinancing. Refinancing and more investment are a way of life with the utilities, and these are points of major concern for me. Every refinancing is sold to the City as if it were a money saver, but it rarely is. There are usually upfront fees and right around the corner is always another investment. Our utility investment are way out of hand. I'm concerned we could be a train waiting to wreck. We need to put on the brakes. I would like to see us move away from the way things have been done. Sometimes things done at NCPA are right for others but not right for us. What is good for Palo Alto or Roseville may not be good for Ukiah. I am going to cast a "no" vote. This isn't about a single refinancing. It is about a continual patter of refinancing, coupled with more investments that are burying our ratepayers. I would like to see a change of direction in our thinking". M/S Smith/Libby approving the Regular Meeting Minutes of March 6, 2002, as amended, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Mayor Ashiku read the appeal process. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR M/S/Smith/Larson approving items a through d of the Consent Calendar as follows: a. Approved Disbursements for Month of February 2002; Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 2 of 18 b. Rejected Claim for Damages Received from Julia D. Acevedo and Referred to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund; c. Approved Energy Conservation Program Personnel Changes; d. Received Notification to the City Council Regarding Emergency Repairs to ne (#6584) in the Amount of $15,442.12 by Stewart & Stevenson. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Lars( Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Ih, Libby,: 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Judy Pruden, 304 South Hortense, Ukiah, referred to c Councilmembers at the last meeting in which they used the was of the opinion that Council holds a non-partisan boundaries except the City Limits of Ukiah. Steve Harm, 825 Pomo Drive, Ukiah, thanked Councilmembers Baldwin and Smith for res Council consider changing the collection rules by :here are no district Mayor Ashiku, and He requested that Mayor Ashiku noted that the City Manager would work this issue. Mark Friedman, State Certificate of Appreciation to 1 Red Cross. rnia, presented a for the American Mayor Ashiku accepted the that the City also expresses its a for the Ukiah co the ehalf of the City. He noted Red Cross for all it has done 9a. an~dget Amendment to Plowshares for Cit~ March 6, 2002 meeting, Council directed Staffto return with )0 for the Plowshares Meals-on-Wheels Program. Plowshares ;ntly assumed the obligation of the Senior Citizen Center's home aggressive volunteer efforts, have been able to reduce the the availability of $4,000 in unspent funds within the Information Services Budget. M/S Smith.son approving a donation in the amount of $4,000 to Plowshares for the Meals-on-W Is home delivery program and amendment to the 2001-2002 budget. expressed his appreciation to Plowshares for rescuing the program and for work. C~ Libby recommended that any new information concerning the Senior Center be forwarded to Council. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 3 of 18 Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9b. Adoption of Ordinance Amending Ukiah City Code to Establish for Electrical Service to Hard to Serve Areas City Clerk Ulvila advised that at its March 6, 2002 meeting, Ordinance establishing special rules for electrical service to hard to to two vote of Council. A summary of the proposed Ordinance newspaper and the Ordinance is now being presented to Cou cil for an ~ree M/S Libby/Smith adopting Ordinance No. 1035, Addin 4 of the Ukiah City Code establishing special rules areas". 7 of Division ice to "hard to serve Councilmember Larson clarified that the con~ meeting are not a reflection of any trust issues t objections and concerns were more based on previous the future, for when the current City Manager is no longer could occur again. previous Council y City staff. His ers and the potential in the situation Motion carried by the folio, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. None. Smith, Libby, :NT: None. ABSTAIN: 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9c. Reconsi; City because )ort Lease with Ukiah Wholesale Lumber ding the matter be postponed 10. Community operation and would program po., uest for Waiver of Rent for Homeless (North Fire Station) in the Amount of $250 Director DeKnoblough advised that a homeless shelter has been since November 2001 and the lease expires in April the Ford Street Project to waive the rent for the use of shelter for the last fifteen days of the shelter's the request, based on the rent value of $500, would be $250 the use of the facility to April 15, 2002. Staff has been advised that the minimal funds to continue the shelter between April 1 and April 15 and uesting assistance. Libby inquired if they are seeking funds for other things to extend )ril 15th. LaUra Golina DeLovato, Director of the Community Development Commission, explained Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 4 of 18 that the Commission is a partner with Ford Street in providing services to the homeless. Part of the funds that will keep the shelter open through April 15th are coming from a patchwork of funding sources that Ford Street has put together, including state, county and local funds. To her knowledge, Ford Street is not soliciting additional funds to he shelter, however, there are solicitations being conducted for various aspects services. M/S Larson/Smith approving Ford Street Project's request for waiver 1800 North State Street between April 1 and April 15, 2002 in the by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. rent at ried 10. NEW BUSINESS 10b. Consideration of Request by the American and Waiver of Rent and Utilities Community Services Director DeKnobloug! voted unanimously to waive $7,430 in arrears of the American Red Cross. Since that time th financial difficulties and has gone through exercises in Director Mark Friedman has indicated that Red Cross has to provide services in Ukiah and fo~ of the Lake County office. On requesting financial. Although a $7,430 rent wail utilities, which would have forgiveness from the utility. In addi lease for a period of two to four montt with rent and utili relocation of some oth( ctober 2001, Council ,,ino County Chapter to experience ~ization. Red Cross District to continue ated out to City Staff rent and utilities. declined to waive the Electric Utility or debt ~ an extension of the th-to-month rental agreement extension period, until such time as a ~pleted or the City needs the facility for decide to waive utilities, a determination Fund would pay for it or if it would be a debt from the El{ ag the lease be extended on a month-to-month basis with management present to the Council a report at the April donations and assistance received from other local uest to waive the rent and utilities be deferred until that time. American Red Cross, explained that within the last 14 days, the Board of Lake County Chapter of the American Red Cross voted unanimously to chapter for the Mendocino County unit. As a result, they have taken ement, administrative, and fiduciary responsibilities. As of April 1, they .~ to access donations that are received and be able to make decisions regarding :nt of bills. When the Red Cross approached Council about six months ago, it was approximately $52,000 in debt and had about $20,000 in the bank. He reported that the Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 5 of 18 Chapter has reduced its debt to $22,000 and has between $8,000 and $10,000 in the bank. They have worked diligently to cut their overhead and to maximize their resources. This is inclusive of appealing to their national headquarters for a write off of nearly $6,000 in debt. The Red Cross doesn't have another facility to move to and it will be the re,, the Lake County unit to seek another facility that might be free or at a overhead. They will also take responsibility for a fund raising the Red Cross has no intension of leaving Ukiah and that during this l the Red Cross has continued to offer six to ten classes each the entire County. He explained that the largest populat r~ approximately 70% of Red Cross services and ex area. that 'iod, ~r ~'to the Uki Councilmember Libby inquired about the office in Mendocino County Board of Supervisors for and if Red Cross has asked th~ ]. Mr, Friedman explained that the Ukiah office serves not had an opportunity to approach the Board of Su County and it has City Attorney Rapport explained Chapter, the City could agree to liability associated with it. M/S Smith/Baldwin approving month-to-month basis and identifyin waiver until April 17, 2002 with the a report concerr April 17, Discus~ ~llowed and at since Lake County ha: lease and identify the and as,, meeting. ard to the moti essee that Mendocino the lease and the Red Cross on a g the rent and utility ss staff would provide Council received from other local agencies at the id it was clarified that the motion defers the ~2 City Council meeting and does not forgive Councilml :heir fair si of the Iion, it benefit he contributin¢,ir fair share. expressed a need that the Red Cross should contact the other Ukiah has 20% of the population, and approach them to contribution. Even though the City of Ukiah has only 20% of the burden. He felt the County and other cities that of the Red Cross should be approached with regard to Mark n advised that the American Red Cross is eager to comply with the forth by Council, however, in order for them to make the contacts and be to present some of their needs to other agencies within the County, more time ~,eded. Waters, Ukiah, noted one of the dangers that Council may get into is the situation of Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 6 of 18 being nickel and dimed to death by organizations around the County and perhaps Council should consider what resources already exist locally that may be able to fill a void that is left by any organization that cannot sustain. Councilmember Smith explained he is not consenting to modify the date set motion. He stated that, in response to Mr. Friedman's concern, part of th( presented on April 17th would be a plan to contact agencies with the ho those agencies within the County could be contacted prior to April 1 Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilm~ Libby, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. A Non 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8a. Acceptance of Western Hills Constraints Planning Director Stump advised that last fall Leonard Charles and Associates to prepare a (Study) for approximate 496 acres located in Planning Commission reviewed the Study in a ~°rksl liked the Study and recommended Council accept the Study is not a regulatory or policy document but does constraints to development that in the hillsid( conclusions about what potenti based on tho entered into a contract wit~ and Buildout Study District. The :oncluded that they He stressed that the :ion about the some 'aints. Public Hearing opened: 7~ Jan Moore, 1021 W. Perkins, sites that was not found in the Study. boundary ' be acre parcel City Limil included of archeological did not information related to City the study. She referred to a City owned 16- ~th of the designated area, that was not Mr. WOlJ they are co~ Information Ce Mr. Cha~ discussed archeological sites and felt they information for the public document. However, to Jiscretionary review projects to the Northwest Sonoma State for review and this will be incorporated into the '~-~'~uouc rs~ng ~;~osea ~:~z pm n followed relative to buildout based on the City s current hillside/slope density f he issue of constructing firebreaks on private property was discussed as well as the~i~ssue of CDF providing CEQA review on fire trails. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 7 of 18 James Mulheren, Ukiah, pledged $5,000 towards the project. Mary Lindley, 700 E. Gobbi, Ukiah, suggested that the kitchen in the multi-use able to accommodate use by large groups. be Roy Smith, Ukiah, advised that he had a conversation with the Director Human Development Corporation who was unable to attend this known that his organization, which also serves the Hispanic supportive of this project because so many of the people they neighborhood. Rick Piffero, Redwood Valley, commended Dr. Trotter project. He stated that he and Dave Hull would pled! with lnted it Marlene Weara, #2 Lookout Drive, Ukiah, concerning the Redevelopment Agency being,i the UVCRC and wondered how it relates to this proje could donate funds toward this project. some discussion in the area of so ~nquired if the Agency City Manager Horsley explained south of the City and most finished. lat the Redevelopment be completed befof north and project is Public Hearing Closed: 8:10 pm Councilmember Baldwin ex income groups d with th, individuals. ect's ability to serve targeted Dr. that :tivities Iow lave an tt ~ere is no lay after schoo this is a Iow income are of the City and and during the summer at no or targeted income group. they succeed ex[ the facility built. concern with ongoing funding each year after explaine¢ now has agreed to prepare the site development and the the first year's budget in its initial fundraising. He stated that reat of success in fundraising efforts in the community and it was his cost $220,000 to $250,000 to operate yearly. He continued to discuss rts, applying for grants, and funding available for after school programs. He :he Board's priorities would be to meet the needs of the neighborhood. noted the generosity of the community in contributing toward the facility and his confidence in Dr.-I'rotter's involvement. =ilmember Libby stated that she has been on the Board for about three years and Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 9 of 18 noted the accomplishments of the Board are due to the countless hours and dedication of its members and their vision for this project. She felt the facility will have a huge impact on the south end of town and will compliment the new Grace Hudson School. M/S Libby/Smith approving Resolution 2002-31, approwng an apphcabon from the General/Native American Allocation of the State Community Devel~nt BIO~i?~!~.~ Grant (CDBG) Program and authorizing the execution of a Grant Agr~t. and any amendments thereto w th the State of Ca ~forn~a for the purposes of thtS~~i~i Councilmember Baldwin advised that he would support the ~ t, expressed concern with ongoing funding and the number of non- )rg competing for the same dollars within the community. recreational district, with a tax base, might be nece~ future. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: Libby, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: No~ that point, the program for the Larson, Smith, E~STAIN: None. Recessed: 8:25 p.m. Reconvened: 8:35 p.m. 10. NEW BUSINESS 10c. Discussion and Airl~ort Industrial Planning Director Stum discussed a preliminary approach area in the Airport Industrial Park (Al the formal revie~ blic hearing p~ acres west Boulevard, Council staff in the AlP. I two ,s to Plar design and lning stan Commissioner h and to i n suppor )uncil con,, to the re to this Revisions to the Use Re the Planning Commission Industrial/Mixed-Use · ected prepare draft regulations for The area encompasses approximately 30 of Commerce Drive. in 2001, the City for the Industrial/Mixed Use Land Use on, the Planning Commission conducted ~hes to revising the regulations. However, the such approach would need to have strong Recently staff approached the Planning their conclusions about a conceptual performance zoning new Commission members to this project. The Planning Approach, document provided by staff. He Planning Commission's recommendation on the project, pursue this approach and put it into Ordinance form, and then through the public hearing process. thi ~r Larson noted that due to the Airport overlay zoning and its restrictions, of Commerce Drive appears to be less vulnerable to any impacts incurred but requires lower density residential uses than the area north of Drive that is located within the flight path of departing aircraft. He inquired if contradiction to the Airport Master Plan and if the Plan needs to be revisited if the were to pursue housing as an element of the proposed zoning. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 10 of 18 Mr. Stump explained that there is a possibility that the Airport Master Plan would need to be reviewed since density is a major constraint to development in the proposed Mixed Use area. He discussed the difficulty of understanding how the Airport compatibility ~es are drawn. Councilmember Larson also inquired if the proposed zoning labor-intensive industry. Mr. Stump explained that density refers to the number of people the land use. Upon inquiry by Councilmember Libby, Mr. Stump we~ clarify Use zoning that includes commercial businesses with reside its abc combinations. He further clarified the boundaries of the ~siness Park and the Airport Industrial Park. Councilmember Baldwin noted the Planning inquired if the high intensity lights would be all~ Mr. Stump responded negatively and noted that staff is development in the City. The Planning Commission reach~ they did not want bright lig over the property lines a lighting conflicts with the ission's'ii~i~ cern with lighting and about lighting for every concern of Councilmember Baldwin structure of a single story building second story for residential use coul mandating that the so that, at a later date, a Mr. Stump ad~ communitit of that cOncept being mandated in other ,r for future reference. Counc "ups, is compatible with "upscale" inns or Mr. Stump where with of light industry has changed in the last 30 Iht industry may include sound walls and landscaping to allow if done properly. Mayor flexibility constructio~ parking, an~ included to :u was of ~= performance based zoning allows for maximum a sol approach. With regard to an ordinance requiring two-story ~ere may be problems associated with the project to anticipate further lans for more intense use. He recommended that language could be e consideration for future expansion in any project and flexibility in the could accommodate parking and circulation. iember Libby inquired if neon signs would be allowed. p explained that the matter of neon signs came up at a Planning Commission Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 11 of 18 meeting and there was no consensus about their use. However, the Planning Commission expressed some concern with regard to the vagueness of the language. Councilmember Larson explained that since this zoning requires compatibility, also require more discretionary review as a trade-off for the market driven as zoning. Consensus of Council was for staff to move forward with the ordinance. ng an 10. NEW BUSINESS 10d. Approval of the Preparation of a Traffic Stud' Industrial Park Industrial/Mixed Use R; Planning Staff has been preparing revisions to the Ind; Airport Industrial Park (ALP) Planning Develo regulations, as recommended by the Plannin commercial, and professional office develo the three. It would also permit some limited that if the Preliminary Approach is endorsed by the have a Traffic Study prepared to evaluate the potential traffi industrial, commercial, or development. l'he ional office developme~ the et Amendment regulations in the to revising allow industrial, : any combination of has determined it will be necessary to ;ulting from full ~e residential M/S Larson/Smith a Industrial/Mixed-Use regulations 2002 Budget allowing a transfer of $ General Fund (100) and increasing the AlP Traffic Larson, Smi ABSTAIN a Study for the AlP amendment to the 2001 - t Reserve Fund (698) to the 1501.250.000 by $8,000 for roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers iku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. 10. for th Community D~ Associates for Project Manager Services :ion ~ment Direction DeKnoblough advised that staff is in the process of plans for the Civic Center Addition Project in preparation of order to assist staff with the finalization of the plans, and management of all phases of the project, staff is manager be retained. A sole source proposal was received who responded with a proposal not to exceed $51,000 for the ect. The primary person to act as project manager is Mr. Alan Breese et with him to discuss the project. The purpose of the proposed contract is construction and efficiently manage project costs. followed with regard to the City hiring Rau and Associates for other projects the firm would provide a measure of accountability. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 12 of 18 Councilmember Libby inquired if the expenditure for the project manager was budgeted in the cost of the new addition. Mr. DeKnoblough explained that although the expenditure is not a line item ider the budget, it was included in the general identification of expenses for the in M/S Smith/Larson approving the contract with Rau and management services in the amount not to exceed $51,000, carried call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. project 'ng roll 10. NEW BUSINESS 10f. Discussion of Water Issues and Plannin¢ City Manager Horsley advised that there are m considered by the various agencies within Mendoci~ City of Ukiah both operationally and fiscally. Iionally impacts of several things that are going on is S( River and Potter Valley situation. She send a letter to the Mendocino County Board of Supe Commission, Flood Control District, and the water districts i attend a joint meeting with 9 ma County Water A( staff can describe the mitigation ble costs and funding of their projects which may )es of things Mendocino County area. issues belna ~i!~/~!~ ' of which will affect of the aspects of the habitat and the Eel thorize the Mayor to Inland Water and Power members to Agency based on some be required in the The City is also concerned that we be funding issues, they should be discussing this ~ staff feels it to initiate and if there are going to agencies have not been something that the City would host in order M yor stressed of ~ue. He Jan~ role to 9ting. ling the City's partners in the Ukiah valley ley as a public member who works hard to felt the City might need to take a leadership nt meetin( · ' the Mayor to send a letter to the recommended agencies to Council and Sonoma County Water Agency, effort for m the best ~er expressed a need to know the motives of the groups behind the amounts of new sources of water. There is also a need to know if it is in of the City. lotion ~d by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 10g. ~IEW BUSINESS Introduction of Ordinance by Request of the Ukiah Unified School District to Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 13 of 18 Prohibit Skateboards on School District Property and Adoption of Resolution Designating School District Sites City Manger Horsley advised that the Superintendent of Ukiah Unified School District has requested the City Council to make clear that the prohibition of skateboard use a to School District property within the City of Ukiah. The District has skateboard use on its school grounds disrupts its educational programs and damage to school district property. To implement this request, an ordin Ukiah City Code Section 6180 to make it clear that public property inclu~ by Ukiah Unified School District is necessary. The School District the City Police Department be allowed to issue tickets in School Di= discussed the matter with the Police Chief and they do not resee request. ~mending that witt Justin Capri, Ukiah, was under the impression that skating on School District property. school property is a bad idea. tickets when ~nishm~nt to skateboarders City Manager Horsley explained that the currently in place. City Attorney Rapport explained an infraction and the penalty offences. Councilmember Larson non-nuisance or skateboarding as a not change what is the penalty for v~olat~ng ~~ ~s considered rich is ~ncreased acc the number of' oncern does not allow for any City Attorney iscussed officials. He th stipulates :he City pass a res~ skateb~ is to the discretion of the enforcement ce as it is currently written in which it the public property on which the destructi hool skateboarders ;ir property. with Dr. Brawley, he expressed concern for ~nd the liability for the School District when ;mber Bal that, as a teacher, he is aware that signs are posted on school: restrict g. Schools have many rules and regulations for students ious disciplinary actions for students that violate those rules. He felt the should be trespassing or refusal to leave, if they wanted police assistance. . felt the proposed ordinance and resolution s redundant and that it would mean that ~ ude~t could be pun shed by two jur sdictions, which is a form of double '' ~ti~opardy. Cl~!~!~orney Rapport adwsed that the courts have held that when you are being pr ~ted by more than one jurisdiction, it is not double jeopardy. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 14 of 18 Discussion followed with regard to rules imposed by schools both during and after school hours. Mark Hedges, Justin Capri, and Susan Fritz, Ukiah, spoke to the issue issued to skateboarders and the need for a skate park. Mayor Ashiku discussed an instance whereby he witnessed a police with a number of kids who were skating and riding their bikes over Plaza. The officer talked to the kids about the situation and they stayed off the planters and were not destructive, they would not be that going through the court system could be a negative 'ence. lteracting at the City Manager Horsley suggested that since it would be calling the police, perhaps some skateboarders meeting and discuss the situation whereby some transportation. The School District would have use would be ~i~chool District board as a mode that distinction. M/S Libby/Ashiku introducing Ordinance by Councilmember Baldwin advised that he would vote relating to vandalism, trespassing, ering, and disturbing sufficient. moti, rules f exist and are Motion carried by the foll¢ Libby, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. Larson, Smith, ;ENT: None. ABSTAIN: City Clerk Ulvil title of the ~ance. M/S liku int~ prohibi the roll call Ash Ordinar Ukiah City Code Section 6180 ,ublic property ted by City Council Resolution, carried by Co~ lembers Larson, Smith, Libby, and Mayor ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. M/S Smith/Libl ~, ~=~',=' 6180. ,~ ~ bb ayor ~pting Resolution 2002-32, enacted pursuant to Ukiah City Code use in school grounds of Ukiah Unified School roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Councilmember Baldwin. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: 10. JSINESS 10h. Set ;s and Times for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Budget Hearin.q Man Horsley advised that historically, the annual budget hearing has been held last week in June to meet the adoption deadline of June 30. Staff is that Council set June 25 and 26 as the dates for this year since the scheduled meeting of the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District is scheduled for 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 26. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 15 of 18 Discussion by Council followed with regard to the proposed dates. It was noted by Councilmember Smith that there is a MTA Board meeting on June 26th from 1:00-4:00 p.m. Consensus of Council was to schedule June 25th for budget hearings, at 3:00 p.m. with the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District, and reserve June time is needed. 10. NEW BUSINESS 10i. Discussion of Council Committee Assig Mayor Ashiku explained that he scheduled this matter on some recent developments, he asked that each Coum any assignments they would like to see changed or may then be rescheduled for the next meeting. him with regard to 'oblems. The matter Councilmember Smith expressed concern wi inquired if Councilmember Baldwin would Sanitization District meeting on March 25 at 11:00 a.m. attend 'cations and an Ukiah Valley Councilmember Baldwin with regard to their meetings. that he has not received notice Mayor Ashiku confirmed )n s with the District. City Manager Horsley advised notification, they should contact her take ue to have problems with )f the matter. 11. noted ir leir board ,roperty i staff. They the area of fis~ !ported that h~ with the Ukiah Senior Center and recently and the rear half of the property on the f office space that will be available. They are back to essential services, activities, and with the 1 Foundation for temporary increase in staffing in ement and facilities management. He also reported attending the Council's reception as well as an MSWMA meeting. ~ber Smit that he attended the Mendocino County Employers :ion. Main Street Board meeting there was discussion regarding with the City Manager concerning the rent and possible rent increase. n and installation is going to be a reception this year instead of a dinner on larch 22 he will attend the Employer Relations Policy Committee for the Cities meeting in which there will be consideration of legislation issues and funding to offset local costs for increased security i. He requested Council's input as to how he should vote on these bills. AB 2000 Response Training, AB21 is Peace Officers Training on Terrorism, SB27 9rgency Services for Terrorism Training, and others related to training regarding Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 16 of 18 response to terrorist acts. Although they are listed on the agenda for discussion, there is a potential they may call for a vote regarding a position to oppose, support, or to continue to watch each bill. He noted that the bills do not say how much money is involved. Consensus of Council was to continue to watch the bills and that Council n information with regard to costs involved. Councilmember Smith reported that on March 23rd he will attend th( Division meeting of the League of California Cities in Willits and will meeting concerning those bills. Tomorrow he plans to attend an Committee meeting at City Hall. He also noted that if unavailable to attend the Ukiah Valley Sanitation District m place. !mpire that ~t Councilmember Libby reported she has been att6 and attended the Mendocino County Employers meet with Assemblywoman Virginia Strom-M School and the Recreation Center. On March 22nd she will the Grace Hudson Councilmember Baldwin reported attended the Mendoc Power Commission meeting and hour-long presentation about the were extremely skeptical and wanted to obtain the first ri court doesn't want P.G.&E. to give lowers the value of the property. the same issues e )lans and most of It .nd Water and made an members ithough the majority but the bankruptcy because it supposedly 12. City Laureate favor C, meeting. CITY MA ~g~ /ised that Ap ~ittee on the para he City of The at the meetir )R REPORTS month and the City has had the Poet ~l the responsibilities of the Poet s asking that Councilmembers read their April. anE agreed to read a poem at the April 3, 2002 er that the bins for Solid Waste Systems were distributed to week. ie has asked the Public Works Department to provide a ~ prioritizing their projects. There are many projects that of being completed and Council needs to be aware of them and assist in in the newspaper about the Depot pocket park, the City received two with some people offering donations and others offering to help build it. ted that vandalism occurred to trees that were being planted near the Plaza. The ad to clean up the mess and dig the holes again. She also reported that Eladia ;s-Ganudlin has contracted to clean the two bottom floors of trash at the Palace Hotel. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 17 of 18 City Clerk Ulvila reminded Council that Statements of Economic Interests, FPPC Form 700, are due on April 2, 2002 in the City Clerk's office. She also advised that she will be out of the office from the afternoon of March 21 and will return on March 28. Tom Waters, Ukiah, advised that the City Council has a very professional enjoyed working with them. Adjourned to Closed Session: 9:58 p.m. 13. CLOSED SESSION a. G.C. §54957.6- Conference with Labor Ne Employee Negotiations: Department Head, El and Police Units Labor Negotiator: Candace Horsley No action taken. ement, Misc., b. Conference with Legal Counsel Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Section 54956.9 (1 Case) No action taken. on (b) of Government Code 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further busi~ Marie Ulvila, Cil ~urned at 11:15 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 18 of 18 M/S Libby/Larson accepting the Ukiah Western Hills Constraints Analysis Study. Councilmember Baldwin expressed his appreciation for Mr. Charles' work and noted the Catch 22 issue in that, in order to protect dwellings from a fire, an area has to be which makes them more visible to the entire valley. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Libby, Baldwin and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. Smith, 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8b. Adoption of Resolution Approving (CDBG) Application for Ukiah Valley Cultural an~ Phase Assistant City Manager Fierro advised that over Council direction and input, has been cooperating Valley Cultural and Recreation Center ( facility. He described the project, as noted awarded the UVCRC Board of Directors $1 development of the center. Desi staff, with of Directors of the Uki onstruct a community Mendocino County monies for the Dr. Marvin Trotter, member of the and layout of the facility. He be designed for both day an~ they have a goal to accomplished by July 15th, it woul~ needed to complete the project an school. He continued to discuss the £ loard of Directors of the Jrity features and :ussed funding 2002. that they could main continue to that they continued ,1 th~ Jnd raising an in donate i0 over a three- bron five we pro( :lesign facility would project and noted their funding goal is y 80% of the funds the construction of the nt and that $3.5 million would ensure the gym completed, and have over a year to at the same time as the school. He anyone wanting to participate as )eriod and their name will be placed on the ,000 has been pledged as "angels". Debra Mead CDBG, the $1 include for Director UVCRC, explained that for the purpose of this be specifically for the multi-use community facility portion and ;D is very focused on the Boys and Girls Club and the after families. Dr. Tr, started as Sisters, the' offices liege ~lained is a Public Health Department officer and that this project was measure. They hope to have Public Health, Big Brothers and Big Project, and several other organizations use the facility in the numerous the project. Mendocino College is supportive and would like to offer to the population that is unserved by Mendocino College since there is no the College after 6:00 p.m. They also hope to have a Public Health nurse the site. Public Hearing Opened: 8:05 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting March 20, 2002 Page 8 of 18 MEMO TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers City Clerk Marie Ulvila SUBJECT: City Council Meeting Minutes: April 3, 2002 DATE: April 11, 2002 Every attempt will be made to distribute draft minutes of the April 3, 2002 City Council meeting no later than Tuesday, April 16, 2002. Memos: CC041002 - Minutes ITEM NO.' 6a DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2002 Payments made during the month of March, 2002, are summarized on the attached Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the attached Schedule of Bills, representing the five (5) individual payment cycles within the month. Accounts Payable check numbers: 37925-38002, 38110-38348, 38452-38533, 38535-38618 Accounts Payable Manual check numbers: None Payroll check numbers: 37923-37924, 38003-38109, 38349-38445, 38534 Void check numbers: 38446-38451 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 March, 2002. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Kim Sechrest, Accounts Payable Specialist Gordon Elton, Director of Finance and Candace Horsley, City Manager Report of Disbursements APPROVED:~~.,.~ Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager KRS:W ORD/AGENDAMAR02 CITY OF UKIAH REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2002 Demand Payments approved: Check No. 37925-38002, 38110-38216, 38217-38348, 38452-38533, 38535-38618 FUNDS: 100 General Fund 140 Park Development 142 National Science Foundation 143 N.E.H.1. Museum Grant 150 Civic Center Fund 200 Asset Seizure Fund 203 H&S Education 11490(B)(2)(A)(I) 204 Federal Asset Seizure Grants 205 Sup Law Enforce Sty. Fd (SLESF) 206 Community Oriented Policing 207 Local Law Enforce. BIk Grant 220 Parking Dist. #10per & Maint 230 Parking Dist. #1 Revenue Fund 250 Special Revenue Fund 303 2105 Gas Tax Fund 330 Revenue Sharing Fund 332 Federal Emerg. Shelter Grant 333 Comm. Development Block Grant 334 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 335 Community Dev. Comm Fund 410 Conference Center Fund 555 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve 575 Garage 600 Airport 612 City/District Sewer 640 San Dist Revolving Fund $112,400.04 $1,500.00 $1,401.35 $3,333.32 $2,333.70 $132,227.24 $3,909.50 $25.00 $6,767.59 $991.16 $1,952.50 $6,000.00 $8,025.05 $1,205.10 $18,493.60 $35,844.09 652 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund 660 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund 664 Disposal Closure Reserve 665 Refuse/Debris Control 670 U.S.W. Bill & Collect 675 Contracted Dispatch Services 678 Public Safety Dispatch 679 MESA (Mendo Emerg Srv Auth) 695 Golf 696 Warehouse/Stores 697 Billing Enterprise Fund 698 Fixed Asset Fund 699 Special Projects Reserve 800 Electric 805 Street Lighting Fund 806 Public Benefits Charges 820 Water 900 Special Deposit Trust 910 Worker's Comp. Fund 920 Liability Fund 940 Payroll Posting Fund 950 General Service (Accts Recv) 960 Community Redev. Agency 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 965 Redevelopment Cap Imprv. Fund 966 Redevelopment Debt Svc. PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 37923-37924, 38003-38108 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 12763-12886 PAYROLL PERIOD 2/17/02-3/2/02 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS 38109, 38349-38445, 38534 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS 12887-13006 PAYROLL PERIOD 3/3/02-3/16/02 VOID CHECK NUMBERS: 38446-38451 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS TOTAL PAYROLL VENDOR CHECKS TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS TOTAL DIRECT DEPOSIT TOTAL PAYMENTS $4,308.43 $1,021.64 $1,157.40 $46,626.02 $2,682.44 $8,746.28 $3,903.64 $755.56 $6,527.08 $4,750.00 $835,546.78 $104,460.46 $3,981.39 $140,353.82 $18,225.69 $158,790.41 $1,161.04 $3,270.36 $1,682,677.68 $68,804.68 $141,110.38 $29O,396.O7 $2,182,988.81 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 ©o Z 0 ~ 0 m 0 . -1- 0,~ n. ~ · {2> rD U 0 o o o o o o o o o Z Z 0 Z r,. E~ Z 0 o o o o o .-t o r~ U c~ © rD E~ U > Z 0 U H U 0 0 E~ E~O H E~ E~ U -2- > Z c> o Z Z Z Z Z ZZ Z ~ Z Z 0 0 0 Z Z 0 0 Z Z Z oo~8oo oooooooooo ooooo o H ~Z~~Z Z ~HZ Z 0~< 0 ~ -3- tO · Z o o o oooo o o o o o o o Cc} 1~ CD 0 Z 0 Z 0 U U 0 0 ZZ 0 0 > oo m ~ U o o o o U U ~>> D D ©© 0 r~ 0 o o O n, 0 ~ n ~ > ,-]o~ 0o0 r..,~ o 0 0 U 0 0 O0 n r~ H~ 0 ~ U~ ~ Z H ~Z ,< H U Z © -4- 0,< U · o o o 0 0 q~ 0 Z 0 o o Z oo o o o o o ooo o o o ~ ~ ~ 0 O U ~ U ~ o ~ > ~ > ~ ~ ~ _ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ H~O ~ 0 0 H~O Oo <o Z 0 ~ H -5- oooooo U H 000000 0 o°~°~°~°~oo o '~ 0 0 0 u,4 0 .d o oo~o~ ~omo0~ 88 ~;o -6- U · > U ooo 0 U © Z 0 o U 0 0 0 Z o o © r~ 0 gESoo~gsgSoogSSoo ooo ooooooooooooooo ~°~~°~°°~~~ Oo U~ U ~ Z 0 ~U O~ Z Cb U~ U Zc~ Z H ~CO r~H O~ Z~ ~Z~ O~ d 0 Z 0 Z~ Z © -7- 0 ~ m~ ~o Z 0 E~ 0 E~ U H E~ 0 Z -11- E~o 0 U r~. 0 ~. E~ E-,O0 r4 E~ o ~E~ o~ ~ 0 O ~;~ H n,! O~ n ~ ~ O 0~ ~E~E~ 0 ~ o~ H O~ ~ O0 ~H~ ~ .... ~ ~ ~HH -12- oooooo o o o o U o o o o o o n. 000 ZZZ r~r~o UUO ~c'~ ~ H ~ Z 0 H E~ ~ 0 ~0 -13- oooooooo g~§oggg~o o o o o o cD ZZZ o o Z ,< > 0 oh Z 0 U E-~ Z C~ o o O Z o o o Z © o o o o r~ > ~2 ,< r..) © (J Z 0 0 .~ rj ,~ 0 Z ~ r~ > o oo o oo U Z'~- Oo U~ U~ ~o 0 Z Z E~ 0 a~ ~ ~ oo~ 0 0 0 0 O0 ~ 0'3 o o 0 0 0 Z Z 0 (J (J Z 0 urJ ~1 o o ~ 0 go° 0 0 CJ O 0 .~ 0 r..a ~ ~io~ Oo Z 0 © m 0 ~ U © rD -15- oo o oo o oooooooooo 0 ,44 D~ 0 o oooooooo o ~HHHH ~ Z ZZ HH~ Oo Um ~o Z 0 r~ 0 a~ n ~ ~n ~ ~ U U 0 ZOO00000000 -18- O~ oooooo 0 0 0 Z 0 ca Z~ ZZ H ~ H~ ~ H~ ~H ~ HO~Z~ -~ ~ ~0~0 ~OZO-O H~H~H ~OH~HOH 0 ~ H 0~ nE4 E~ n, o~ 0 -17- ooo~oooooooooo oo u rj o o o oooooooooooooo ,,:::: rD '7 © o~oooooooooooo E~ 0 ~0 u> Z'-- Oo 0 -18- ~o > Z ZZZ ZZZZ 0000 Z ~mmmmm~mmO Oo U~ U m Z 0 H Z~ > ,< 0 ~ ~ 0 ~:> ~ Z Z Z Z ZZ ~ ~ Z ZZ Z H~~~~ 0000000000000 ~ U ~ U 0 0 U o U O U ~ ~ U ~ U 0 '7 o~ mr. om (JUU 0000 ~oo~ Z Z 0 ,< Z 0 E~ Z ~O~o o°8 ~ F-~ ~ n. ZZ r~ n-: OO~ O ~1~O o ooooooooooooo o ~ooo oooo ooooooooooooo ooooooooooooo U ~ Z O~ ~ U~O~ Oo O~ U~ 0 Z~ H ~4 O0 0 0 ~ O~ no n~ ,--1 E~H ZO .~1 0 0 Z ~ H .~ 0~ O0 0 O~ 121 , -20- E~o oo~ oo~ooo~o~o~oo~ooo~o~ Z Z Z o Z © o§~oo§~oo~D~oo~ooo~ooo~oo~ooo oooooo~oooo°§oooo°~oo~o~oo ~oo ooo°~ o oo ~ ~o~oo~o~o~oo~o~ Z ZZZZZ ZZ Z Z Z ZZ Z ZZZZ Z Z Z Z ZZ ZZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ 000000000000000000000000000000000 o Z 0 U > Z~ O~ Z ~ Z 0 6 -21 - 0 ~ > rD Z o o o o 0 U F. zl © Z 0 ~0 000 ~Z~O © 000000000 ~ ~.... Oo Z 0 Z H ~ U 0 ~ > 0 0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ 0 ~ Z Z Z Z ZZ Z Z Z ~000000000 ~c~ U U U U U U ~J ~J ~J --22-- U oooooooo 0 0 Zm~mO o 0~ © -2S- E-,CD 0000 0 0 (DO o o~ 0000 o o o 0 CD 0 © O~ © > D ~0 ~0 0 ZH ~ 0 H~ 0 ~ H~ ~Q 0 0 ~00~0 Z 0 O< -24- > rD o o o o o o UUU 0 0 0 U U 0 o ~0 ~JUE~ D D ~1 0 ::>ca::> Oo Um 0 ~ U 0 m > r~ 0 0 ,.~2 U 0 U~ ~0 0 -25- 0 0 Z 0 Oo ~:o Z 0 Z ~ Z~ 0 r~ 0 f~ -26- 0 M > Z © Z Z Z~ ~ ~ ~©~ ~0~ Z < U ,< © · -2-?- > ?? m ~ o 0 0 0 Z 0 Z 0 0 ZZO o o Z 0 ~ H o Z Z 0 (..) <2> Z 0 O~ Z ¢~ ~Z OC~ 0 0 ~ n r~ 0 r..) ,< rn -28- r.. 0,~ ~ · > 000 000 0 U Z D 0 E~ Z 0 o o 0 n~ n Z oq E~ Z ~ Z ~ o 00~ © Z 0~ , r~ U U Z Z O0 E~ E~ -29- O~ > Z > ,< Z Z Z Z 0 Z 0 Z © Z 0 8 Z Z 0 > 8 o o o cq ,< H >~ 0 u~ 0 ~ Z 8gg c~ 0 Z r~ H 0 0 8 8 0 Z o o m (.9 Z 0 ~ 0~ r~ r~ © Z D Z iD ~m ~o © 0 0 O -313- r~ro 0,~ O OOOO O OOOO o o Z Z D ooooooooooooooooooo~oooooooo o n~ 0 r~ 0~ rD-.. 0 0ca ~HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000000 ~000000000000000 HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 000000000000000 000000000000000 r..) ~ 0,~ E-,o D · o o ooo~ ~o ~ g g ~~ ~ Z 0 © Z 0 S HOHHO ~H~Z o OZ~ ZH~' ~ Z i > m a~zz o<< 0 < Z 0 Z Z ZO ~ ~ H~ O~ ~ -32- > ~2 0 H ~,~ r~ o ~ m° Z mm D D ~ mm> oo 0 Z 0 0 Z OZZZZZZ 0000000 Z 0~ ~ ~D 0 0000 0~ O ~ -33- o °o g oo o o o oo ooooo o o g ,-,n 0::: 0 0 · g o o 0~0 ~0 ZO~ 0~ Z 0 Or~ Z ~ 0 ~4 r~ H Z ~0 ~ Z H CD © -34- Z U ooo ooo o oooooooooo 0 n 0 ooooooo o .... oSoooo oo S~Soooo o°°Sooo o 0000000000000~00000000000000000000 o o o o E~ 0 E~ 0 > O0 ~00~ -35- O~ U Z U o U 0 U Z 0 o8g88888°'~SgSg°°Eg°°gSE°g88°gg8goooooogoo°o o o° gooooooooooo°°o O0 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0 Z Z~ ~ Z~ Z ~ ~ ~ZZ Z Z ZZ ZZ ~ Z ~ ~ Z Z ~ Z ~ Z Z ~ 0000000000000000000000000000000 Z 0 o o ~:o ,< o Z 0 ~ H > ~ U ~Z Z ~ , ,~, O~ 0 ~ 0 Z Z ZZ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ZZ Z Z Z Z Z ZZ Z Z Z Z ZZ 000000 O0000000 O0 O00000000000000 0 ,~ E-,o U · > r~ ooooooooooo Z 0 U n Z r~ © U o ~ o o ooo o o o o o ~ o o o o ooooooooooo o o o o o ooooo°ooo°~~o Z ~ ~ ~ ........ ~ ~ Z Z E~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ Z~. O~ U rq ~o Z 0 m u > U > ~ O~ U U 0 H~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ UO0000000000 '37 - O~ U Z Z 0 Z co o 0 UUUUU UUUUU Z 0 U © U U ,< © n-' © H 000 H~ 0 O~ Z 0 > U ~ 0 0 0,< CJ · > rD 0000 ~o~ O U © o o o o 0 U Z 0 Z 0 Z ~ r~ U © H <Z 0 n- H ~,~ 0 0 0 O~ O~ :~0 ~ ~ U O > n ~-~ U >H ~ O ~ O ~ U -39 Z H o o 0 0 o o E~ 0 rj 0 0 o rj O0 , ooooooooooooo~oo oo O0 o°~ g~~~o~~ooOO~~o Z 0 Om 0 ,,~ Or. r4 O~ -40 - U Z 0 U U U U 0 0 ,< ~0 ~HO o U~ 0 O~ O0 0 O0 O0 U cj ur.J -41- Z 0 r-,, Z r~. 0 r~ U 2 © r'nco ~0 0 ~o Z 0 0 0 r.~ > -42- O~ n~ > (.9 rD Z 0 -43- u%u~ Z > 0 0 (D ~C Z U U Z 0 U a~ c~ ~o Z 0 ~w U Z~ U Z O~ O~ >~ 0 ~ U 0 H ~ 000 H U a~ -44- > Z 0 Z © > o o o 0 0 H r~ > n H o o r~ ,< U CD 0 o o ~ o ~ ~o o~ o ~ ...... 2 o ~ °o ~ o 0 ~U O~ Z~ ,~0 UO H r~ ~ 0 H ~ U 0 Z ~ O~ Z 0 H ~ 0 ~ r~ 0 0 ~r Z ~Z 6o0 Z ~ 0 0 ~ 0 -45- 0,< rD gg g g g 0 q-4 ~ 0 0 0 o ~ r~ gg ZZ~ g oo g oo go° ~0 ~> ggoo g g © ~o Z 0 ~ H > 0 U · r,. ~t] H <0 er , m~ Z ~m ~ 000 OmO -46- 00000000 0 0 00000000 0 0 00000000 0 0 0 g 0 0 ~~ o X oooooooo o o o oo o o ~o~o o ~ o oo o o oooooooo ~ o o ~ ~ UUUUU~U~ O 0 ~ U 00000~0 < 0 ~ ~ ~< ~ 0 ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~0 0 D~ H n ~ ~00~ ~ O~ ~Z ~ ~ O~O ~ O~ O~ o O~ ~ ~00~ ' O~ OH ~ ~ ~ ~ H 0 0 U ~ 0 -47- ~,~ Z ooo ~ o ~§~ oo ooo o oo CO0 0 0 000 O0 o ooooooooo~ooooooooo~o~oo 0 0 DD~DD~DDDDD~D~D~DDODDD> E~ Z E~ UH ~N HHHHHHHHHHHHNHHHHHHHNHH ~m2DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD~ -48- Z o~ ~ o° © oooooo oo o o 0 o o o o Z 0 U c> o o Z · H ~ ~ .... , .... ,,,, ~ ~m Z~ ~H OUUUOUOU~UUU~U ZH ~k ~ 0000000000000 H~ O~ ~ ~r~ ,YE-* ~0 · ~. ~ 0 o 0 ~.~ 0 U n~ n ~0 :~0 ~:r,. ~. n Z n~ O~ ~ 0 -49- O~ ~o U . > rD o r..) ,7 © © o o r..) H > o 0 ,< o ~ o ~o~§o~o ~ o ~ ~ ~ Z ~ ZZ Z ~ Z Z ~ ~ 00000000000 0 > ~U~U~UU~UU ~ ~ ° < azzzzzzzzzzz o~ S~ ~ooooooooooo r, r,3 ~c:~ c> 0000000000000000000000 0 0 ooooo~ooo~o ~oooOO o U~ U ~ Om ~ ZZ Z Z Z~ Z Z Z Z ~Z ZZ Z Z Z ZZZ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ 0000 O00000 O00000000000 0 o o co O~ U 0 ~ U ~ Z 0 Z U -51 - z E~ cD 0 0 ~C Z o~ cq Z~. O~ U~ Um Z 0 ~ U 0 ~ Z~ > -52- O~ Z 0 U ~4 0 E~ 0 E~ -5:] - Z o o o o o o o co tX> %0 o o o o cD Z~ O< Z 0 U U r~,< oo r~o o ~ ~.> Z Z 0 U r..) ~. r..)~ <O O~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~< O~ ~Z U~ O~ r.~ D D Z<~ ~U~ > 0 n ~ U <0 0 ~ ~U O~ ~ 0 U 0 U ~ O~ r~ 0 0 ~ n -54- 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000 oooo oooo oooo oooo oo~oooo ooooooo ooooooo © 0 o o o~°~° o o oo ~ ~og~~ O~ ~ ~HUHHHH~ o o 0 Z~ o ~ > ~u ~~ o~ 0<~ ~ ~ ~H H~ ~~ ~o OU ~ ~>>> ~ ~00 ZOO00 ~ ~ r~ H O~ -55- O~ > o oooo Z o O0 Z © 0 U ~Z r~ Z 0 D 121 ~ Z Z C~ E-, 0 ~ 0 ~ n r~ U Z~ O~ H ~ r...) ~DCO <o 0 Z~ Z ~Z O0 ~Z ~ , Oc~ U ~0000 0 O0 r.J c0 ca H ~ :>., E-, H © -56- 0 Z 0 Z 0 0 g gg g~ggggg oo Z DDO ~ DDDDDO ~g~ ~ggggggn g o > O0 0 UUO~ g g O~ ~o Z 0 > ~ ~ooooR o 0 UO Z Z~ ~0 -57- 0,< U > o o o3o3:> ~J U U rD~l> r,. Z M r~ ~J U 0 n:: © 0 U~ ¥ ~ H U -58- o o o o co o o© o© go© o ~ ~o o U ~ ~ o o© ~ oooooooo 00~00~< ~HH~HHO o 0 Z~ 0 o~ > 0 U ~ > © Z~ 0 H E~ ~ 0 ~ 0 Z ~J U Z 0 Z UZ ~0 0 ~. rn r,. r~ 0 q4 r~. 0 ,-4 rJ 0 Z 0 oooooooooogoooogoo 0 oo oo o o o o o o Z Z © r~ Z~. Ot~ U~.. <o Z HO ,,~ ~.~ 0 E~ n~ rno Z 0 H ~ ~ Z ~H ~>~ > >o Z H > ~3 0 n~ ~ n~ -60- o r~ © · ~ 0 ~ ~ Z ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 ~ o o ooooooo m m m U Z 0 E~ Z E~ © o o Z 0 Z H U O0 U~ U ~ ~Z 0 0 ~ E~ -61- 0 U U 0 0 E~ c~ Oc~ U~ 0 > oo 0 0 -62- ITEM NO. 6b DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT TO COUNCIL CONCERNING PURCHASE OF GATOR UTILITY VEHICLE FOR PARKS AND GOLF FROM WEST CAL TRACTOR COMPANY IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,503.17 Pursuant to the requirements of Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, staff is filing with the City Council this report regarding the purchase of a John Deere Gator utility vehicle from West Cai Tractor Company in the amount of $5,303.17. This vehicle is being purchased to replace one of the lighter weight Club utility vehicles currently operated by the Parks and Golf Divisions. A Request for Quotations was sent out by the Purchasing Division with four firms responding. A bid summary sheet is attached for the Council's review. Of the four respondents, the Iow bidder was West Cai Tractor in the amount of $5,503.17. Funds for this purchase have been budgeted in the 695.6120.800.000 account. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding purchase of Gator utility vehicle from West Cai Tractor Company in the amount of $5,503.17 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Ap p ROVE D: ~_~_, 1 ._~,.~"-'~~ Candace Horsloy, C~ty LD/ZIP GATOR2.ASR N/A N/A Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager ? Bid Summary Sheet Manager ITEM NO. 6c DATE: APRIL 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM CHERYN ANN CHIPS AND REFERRAL TO JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND The claim from Cheryn Ann Chips was received by the City of Ukiah on March 27, 2002 and alleges damages related to a trip and fall at 323 North Main Street on February 22, 2002. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject the claim as stated and refer it to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject Claim For Damages Received From Cheryn Ann Chips And Refer It To The Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Yes Claimant Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim of Cheryn Ann Chips, pages 1-4. Candace Horsley, '~it'~ Manager mfh:asrcc02 0320CLAIM NOTICE OF CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA This claim must b e presented, as prescrib ed by Parts 3 and 4 of Division 3.6, of Tith State of California, by the claimant or by a person acting on his/her behalf. RETURN COMPLETED FORM TO: CITY OF UKIAH J CLAIMANT'S NAME: CLAIMANT'S ADDRESS: Attn: City Clerk 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 Number/Street and/or Post Office Box CITY OF UKIAH CITY CLERK'S DEPARTMENT ¢ s¢~e z;p Code ,~97. ~/t'7'-/ (_~7) Home Phcne Number Work Phone Number PERSON TO WHOM NOTICES REGARDING THIS CLAIM SHOULD BE SENT (if different, from above): Name Number/Street and/or Post Office Boy c~ DATE O'F THE ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: PLACE OF ACCIDENT OR OCCURRENCE: (' Telephone State Zip Code GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT OR'OCCURRENCE (Attach additional page(s), if more space is needed): NAME(S), if known, OF ANY PUBLIC EMPLOYEE(S) ALLEGEDLY CAUSING THE INJURY OR LOSS: WITNESS(ES), ff known (optional): Name b. Address Telephone 79 7' " DOCTOR(S)/HOSPITAL(S), if any, WHERE CLAIMANT WAS TREATED: .~ J~ame , . Address 10. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE INDEBTEDNESS, OBLIGATION, iNJURY, DAMAGE OR LOSS so far as it may be known at the time of presentafion of the claim: 1t. STATE THE AMOUNT CLAIMED if if totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any pr° st~ecEve injury, damage orloss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed (for computation use #12 below). However, if the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($ ~ 0,000), no dollar amount shall be included in tl:e claim. HoweVer, it shaft indicafe whetherthe claim would be a limited civil case (CCP § 85). ' Amount Claimed $. or Applicable Jurfsdiction 12. THE BASIS OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL AMOUNT CLAIMED IS AS FOLLOWS: a. Damages incurred to date: Expenses for medical/hospital care: Loss of earnings: Special damages = h General damages: Estimated prospective damages as far as known: Future expenses for medical and hospital care: Future loss of earnings: $ Other prospective special damages: Prospective general damages: $ :This c/aim must be signed by the claimant or by some person on his/her behalf, A claire'relating to a cause of a~'on for death or for injury to the person or to persona/properly or growing crops shaft be presented not later than six (6) calendar months o~ 182 days after the accrUal of the cause of act[on, whiChever is longer. Claims relating to any other causes of action shall be presented not later than one (1) year after accrual of the cause of action. Dated: ~ --I ~o ~ z- ~A~ ,~ ~4/43,~ ~IGNA 7~URE O/~ CLAIMANT(S) satisfies the requirements of the Government Code. The use of this form is not intended in any way to advise you of your legal dghts or to interpret any law. ff you are in doubt regarding your legal rights or the interpretation of any law, you should seek legal counsel of your choice at your own expense. Rev. 2000 March 14, 2002 CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, Ca 95482 To Whom It May Conc. er.n.: On 2-02-02 I walked out of the Hoyman-Brown Studio, 323 N. Main, Ukiah. I stepped off the curb and my left foot entered into a very large deep crack. At that same time"the toes of my right foot landed on the elevated street "Over pavement' and my right heel landed on the lower "Under pavement". Consequently I fell from the very uneven terrain. Terribly shaken and hurting my mother assisted me to the car. My mother took me to directly to Suffer Lakeside Hospital (my employer). I was seen in the Urgent Care, and after my exam and x-rays I was diagnosed with a SPRAIN AND two FRACTURES of my left ankle and a FRACTURE of my right leg. Consequently I am unable to walk. , i was instructed to see an orthopedic specialist. The injury happened late on Friday both ankles were ace-wrapped until I could be seen and casted by an orthopedist. On 3-19-02 during my follow up appointment with Dr Henning, he commented that the recovery plan will be to remain off work for 6 weeks and then return return part time for 2 weeks after that. Hopefully I will be able to work ; full time after my recovery period. I am a Registered NurSe in the operating room at Sutter Lakeside Hospital. Not only has this been a hardship on me and my family, but to my employer as well. Loss of earnings calculated as follows: Hourly wage $27.15 I am scheduled 4-8 hour shifts per week with one night on call. Also I work one full weekend on call per month. Standby wage is $8.25 per hour. When called in on standby hourly wage ranges from $44.22 to double time after 12hrs. This is not adding shift differential to this. Operating room nurses are always called in at a variety times dudng the night and weekends. It is difficult to calculate how much financial loss is from my call time. Call time is a requirement of my job. Attached please find a picture of the crack and over pavement in front of Hoyman-Brown studio. I have averaged my salary for 1 month only. Regularpay 1 mo @ $27.15 $3735. Stand by pay 54hr @ $8.25 450. Ca[['baCk pay 18hr~44.~2 800. This is an estimate for 1 month only of lost wages $4985. Sincerely, Cheryn Chips 3095 Madna view Drive Kelseyville, Ca 954.51 707-279-9174 6d ITEM NO.: DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF ALL BIDS FOR COMPLETE AERIAL UNIT WITH CAB AND CHASSIS. In the Fiscal Year 2001-2002 Budget, Account 800.3728.800.000, the Electric Department allocated $70,000 to purchase one complete aerial unit with cab and chassis to replace an existing unit. Interested vendors were requested to submit bids. Two vendors responded with three bids: Altec Industries, Inc. $72,629.70 (with tax), Pacific Utility Equipment Co. $67,105.26 (with tax), Pacific Utility Equipment Co. alternate bid, $62,088.10 (tax not included). It has been determined that this equipment cannot be purchased at this time due to budget restraints. Rejection of all bids is recommended. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject all bids. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Prepared by: Stan Bartolomei, Electric Supervisor Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager ATTACHMENTS: None APPrOVeD: Candace Horsley,~City Manager ITEM NO. 6e DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF FLEXIBLE CRACK SEALANT FROM SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,188.22 SUMMARY: In compliance with Section 1522 of the City Code, this report is being submitted to the City Council for the purpose of reporting the acquisition of supplies costing more than $5,000 but less than $10,000. The City Street Department worked with the Purchasing Department to obtain quotes for the acquisition of 10 pallets (approximately 22,500 pounds) of flexible crack sealant. The crack sealant is used to seal cracks in pavement in order to prevent water infiltration into the base rock and subgrade. Nine companies received requests for quotations. Six companies responded with quotes. The Iow bidder responded with a product different than originally specified. Jim Looney, Public Works Superintendent, verified that the product bid by the Iow bidder is an acceptable alternate to the product specified in the bid request. The purchase amount of $5,188.22 (tax included) is less than the street maintenance budget amount of $8,000. continued on page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file report of the acquisition of flexible crack sealant from Special Asphalt Products in the amount of $5,188.22. Report is submitted pursuant to City Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engineer~rr~? Rick Seanor, Deputy Director of Public Works Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Fiscal Year 2001/2002 budget sheet Candace Horsley, Cit~Manager AgcrackSealant-2.SUM Page 2 Report of the Acquisition of Flexible Crack Sealant from Special Asphalt Products in the Amount of $5,188.22 April 17, 2002 Bid Tabulation - Flexible Crack Sealant Vendor Special Asphalt Products Portland, OR Tri-American, Inc. Milpitas, CA Reed & Graham Sacramento, CA Crafco, Inc. Chandler, AZ Brewer Cote of Arizona Glendale, AZ Maintenance Inc. Wooster, OH Flexible Flexible Crack Crack Sealant Sealant Quantity Bid Amount (10 pallets)(per pound) (pounds) 22,500 $0.215 25,500 $0.225 25,200 $0.227 23,496.5 $0.260 25,200 $0.365 25,200 $0.600 Total Bid (with tax) $5,188.22 $6,153.47 $6,135.13 $6,552.00 $9,864.86 $16,216.20 m AGENDA SUMMARY DATE: REPORT ITEM NO. 6 f APRIL 17, 2002 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE HULL / PIFFERO FINAL SUBDIVISION MAP SUMMARY: On January 16, 2002, the City Council conditionally approved the Hull/Piffero western hills Subdivision and Use Permit project. The subdivision involved dividing an existing 40- acre parcel into five parcels ranging in size from approximately 5 to 15 acres. While most communities have a Staff level administrative process for reviewing the Final Map for consistency with the approved Tentative Subdivision Map, the requirements of the local Subdivision Ordinance, and the provisions of the State Subdivision Map Act, the Ukiah Municipal Code requires a review process involving the City Engineer, Planning Commission, and City Council. The applicants have prepared and submitted the Final Subdivision Map, and it is ready for final approval by the City Council. Article 16 of the Ukiah Municipal Code (Attachment No. 2) requires the City Engineer to examine the Final Subdivision Map to insure it contains a number of technical engineering components, that it is in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Subdivision Map, and is consistent with the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and City Subdivision Ordinance. After determining that the Map is correct, the City Engineer is then required to transmit it to the Planning Commission. If the Map has been "certified as correct" by the City Engineer, and all the required data has been submitted, the Planning Commission advances it to the City Council for final approval. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Hull / Piffero Final Subdivision Map ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not approve the Final subdivision Map and provide Direction to Staff Citizen Advised: All persons expressing an interest in the project Requested by: Ron Franz, Civil Engineer for property owners Hull / Piffero Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Diana Steele, City Engineer Attachments: 1. Final Subdivision Map 2. Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes, dated April 10, 2002 3. Memorandum from the City Engineer, dated April 9, 2002 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City M~ger PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: On April 10, 2002, the City Planning Commission reviewed the Final Subdivision Map and recommendation from the City Engineer. The City Engineer, in a Memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated April 9, 2002 (Attachment No. 3), indicates that the Final Subdivision Map is complete, correct, and in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map. The Memo also indicates that the Final Map is consistent with the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act. The Planning Commission reviewed the Final Subdivision Map and report from the City Engineer, and voted 3-0 (two abstentions) to recommend approval to the City Council. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL: After receiving the Final Subdivision Map from the City Planning Commission, as well as the report from the City Engineer, the City Council must approve the map if it conforms to all the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Hull / Piffero Final Subdivision Map 2 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 Hull I Piffero Final Subdivision Map City of Ukiah Staff Report to the Planning Commission HULL / PIFFERO SUBDIVISION FINAL MAP REVIEW Item No 8(a). Meeting Date: April 10, 2002 PROJECT SUMMARY: The Engineer for the approved Hull/Piffero western hills subdivision project has submitted the Final Subdivision Map for review and approval (Attachment No. 1). While most communities have a Staff level administrative process for reviewing the map for consistency with the approved Tentative Subdivision Map, the requirements of the local Subdivision Ordinance, and the provisions of the State Subdivision Map Act, the Ukiah Municipal Code requires a review process involving the City Engineer, Planning Commission and City Council. MUNICIPAL CODE REQUIREMENTS: Article 16 of the Ukiah Municipal Code (Attachment No. 2)' requites the City Engineer to examine the Final Subdivision Map to make sure that it contains a number of technical engineering components, and that it is in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Subdivision Map and City Subdivision Ordinance. After determining that the Map is correct, the City Engineer is then required to transmit it to the Planning Commission. If the Map has been "certified as correct" by the City Engineer, and all the required data has been submitted, the Planning Commission advances it to the City Council for final approval. REVIEW BY CITY ENGINEER: The City Engineer transmits subdivision maps to a consultant for technical review. Mr. Tom Herman of T.M. Herman & Associates has reviewed the Final Map, identified a number of needed corrections, and instructed the project engineer accordingly (see Attachment No. 3). The corrections are minor, and the City Engineer is confident that the Map is very close to being technically correct and in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map, State Subdivision Map Act, and Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance. The City Engineer has provided a memorandum to the Director of Planning and Community Development explaining the status of the review, and the minor changes that are required. The City Engineer is expecting the Map to be re- submitted for final check on Monday, April 8th, at which time she expects to certify it as correct and complete. (see Attachment No. 3). If this occurs, the Map will be hand-delivered to the Commissioners on Tuesday prior to the Wednesday night meeting. REVIEW BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Article 16 requires the City Engineer to transmit the Final Map to the Planning Commission with a certification of its correctness. If the City Engineer has found the Map to be correct, and the Planning Commission agrees that all the data required in Article 16 of the Ukiah Municipal Code has been incorporated on the map, it shall then transmit it to the City Council for approval. REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY COUNCIL: After receiving the Final Subdivision Map from the City Planning Commission, the City Council must approve the map if it conforms with all the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the Ukiah subdivision Ordinance. FINDINGS: The City Engineer, with the assistance of T.M. Herman & Associates, has found the Final Subdivision Map for the Hull/Piffero western hills development project to contain the required and appropriate affidavits, certificates of dedication, acceptances of dedication, acknowledgements, surveying data and computations consistent with the State Subdivision Map Act and Adicle 16 of the Ukiah Municipal Code. The City Engineer, with the assistance of T.M. Herman & Associates, has found the Final Subdivision Map for the Hull/Piffero western hills development project to be in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Subdivision Map. 3. The City Engineer, with the assistance of T.M. Herman & Associates, has found the Final Subdivision Map for the Hull/Piffero western hills development project to be correct, and cedifies it accordingly. ENVIRONMENTAL (CEO. A) DETERMINATION: Environmental review for the Hull/Piffero Subdivision and Use Permit project has been completed. On October 17, 2001, the City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. Subsequent to that action, the City Council conditionally approved the Subdivision Map. All the adopted Mitigation Measures were incorporated into the project and listed as conditions of project approval. The CEQA Notice of Determination was filed with the County Clerk/Recorder on October 18, 2001. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the findings of the City Engineer, find the Final Subdivision Map to be correct, and recommend its approval to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2. 3. Final Subdivision Map (to be hand-delivered on Tuesday, April 9, 2002) Article 16 of the Ukiah Municipal Code Memorandum from the City Engineer 8250: FINAL MAP TO BE FILED: Within three hundred sixty five (365) days after approval of the tentative map or at a later date by mutual agreement between the City Council and the subdivider, said date not to exceed eighteen (18) months from the date of approval the subdivider shall cause the subdivision to be accurately surveyed in accordance with the tentative map and within said time he shall file with the City Engineer a final map of the subdivision conforming in all particulars of the "Map Act" and this Chapter. Any failure to so file such a final map shall terminate all proceedings. (Ord. 533, {}8. I, adopted 1958; amd. by Ord. 682, {}10, adopted 1976) 8251: SIZE AND SCALE OF FINAL MAP: The final subdivision map shall be clearly and legibly drawn upon tracing cloth of good quality. All lines, letters and figures shall be clearly and legibly drawn in black waterproof India ink. The map shall be so made and shall be in such condition when filed that clear legible prints can be made therefrom. The size of the sheets of tracing cloth shall be eighteen by twenty six inches (18" x 26") leaving a margin of two inches (2") at the left edge and one inch (1 ") at the other three (3) edges of the sheets. The scale of the map shall be sufficiently large to clearly show the details of the plan and preferably one inch equals one hundred feet (1" = 100'). (Ord. 533, {}8.2, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, §11, adopted 1976) 8252: TITLE SHEET: The title sheet shall contain the title consisting of the name of the tract, and such name shall not be the same as the name of any existing town, city, tract or subdivision of land into lots in Mendocino County or the City of which a map or plot has been previously recorded, or so nearly the same as to mislead the public or cause confusion as to the identity thereof, and if any of the land being subdivided has been previously shown on a recorded map, a subtitle referring to such recorded map shall be shown. Reference to tract and subdivisions in the description must be worded identically with the original records and reference to book and page of record must be complete. (Ord. 533, {}8.3, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, §11, adopted 1976) 8253: INFORMATION REQUIRED ON OTHER MAP SHEETS: Every sheet comprising the map shall bear the tract name, scale, north point, legend, sheet number and number of sheets comprising the map. Below the title shall be clearly noted the basis or bearing for the survey. When the final map consists of more than two (2) map sheets, a key map showing the relations of the sheets will be placed on sheet one. (Ord. 533, §8.3, adopted 1958; amd. by Ord. 682, {}12, adopted 1976) 8254: DATA TO BE SHOWN ON FINAL MAP; LOT DIMENSIONS; SOILS REPORT: Sufficient data must be shown to determine readily the bearing and length of every lot line, block line, and boundary line. Dimensions of lots shall be given as to net dimensions to the boundaries of adjoining streets and shall be shown in feet and hundreds of feet. No ditto marks shall be used. Lots containing one (1) acre or more shall show net acreage to the nearest hundredth. Bearings and distances of straight lines and such radii and arc length for all curves as may be necessary to determine the location of centers of curves shall be shown. Traverse sheets showing all blocks as closing to within one part in 5,000 shall be furnished the City Engineer. When a soils report has been prepared, this fact shall be noted on the final map, together with the date of the report and the name of the engineer making the report. (Ord. 533, {}8.41, adopted 1948; amd. by Ord. 682, {}{}11 and 12, adopted 1976) 8255: BOUNDARY AND MONUMENT DATA: The final map shall clearly show the exact location of all permanent monuments as required to be set by Article' 15 of this Chapter. The adjoining comers of all adjoining subdivisions shall be identified by lot and location numbers, tract name and place of record. (Ord. 533, {}8.42, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {}11, adopted 1976) 8256: ESTABLISHED STREET LINES: In the event that the City or Mcndocino County shall have established the center line of any street or alley in or adjacent to the proposed subdivision, such data shall be shown on the final map and all monuments found on the ground shall be shown together with a reference to a field book or a map in connection therewith. If any such points were reset by ties the fact must be stated upon the final map. Each such monument shall be subject to inspection and approval by the City Engineer before the final map is submitted for approval. (Ord. 533, {}8.43, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {} 11, adopted 1976) 8257: LOT AND BLOCK NUMBERING: All lots shall be numbered consecutively with no omissions or duplications throughout the entire subdivision including all units of any subdivision which has the same tract name but is designated by different units. No block division or numbering is required, but if desired by the subdivider, then each block shall be numbered consecutively. Circles or other geometric figures shall not be drawn around numbers. Each lot must be shown entirely on one sheet. (Ord. 533, {}8.44, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {}11, adopted 1976) 8258: STREETS TO BE SHOWN ON FINAL MAP: The final map shall show the side lines, total width, width of the portion being dedicated and width of existing dedications of all streets, and the width of railroad rights of way appearing on the map. (Ord. 533, {}8.45, adopted 1958; as renumber~d by Ord. 6'82, {}11, adopted 1976) 8259: EASEMENTS TO BE SHOWN ON FINAL MAP: The final map shall show the location and width of all easements to which the lots are subject. The easements must be clearly labeled and identified, and if already of record, its recorded reference given. If any easement is not definitely located of record, a statement of such easement must appear on the title sheet. Easements for storm drains, sewers and other purposes shall be designed by dotted lines. Distances and bearings on the sidelines of lots which are cut by an easement must be arrowed or so shown that the map will indicate clearly the actual lengths of the lot lines. The width of the easement and the lengths and bearings of the lines thereof and sufficient ties thereto to definitely locate the easement with respect to the subdivision must be shown. If the easement is being dedicated by the map, it shall be properly set out in the owner's certificate of dedication. (Ord. 533, {}8.46, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {}11, adopted 1976) 8260: PARCEL BOUNDARIES; DEDICATION TO BE SHOWN ON FINAL MAP: The final map shall particularly define, delineate and designate all lots intended for sale or reserved for private purposes, and ali parcels offered for dedications for any purpose, with all di~nensions, boundaries and courses clearly shown and defined in every case. Any or all of the parcels of land intended for any public use except those parcels, other than streets intended for the exclusive use of the lot owners, their licensees, visitors, tenants and servants in the subdivision shall be offered for dedication for public use. Parcels offered for dedication but not accepted shall be clearly designated as such on the map. (Ord. 533, {}8.47, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {} 11, adopted 1976) 8261: CERTIFICATES AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS TO BE SHOWN ON FINAL MAP: The certificates and acknowledgements set forth in this Article and all others now or hereafter required by law shall appear on the final map. Such certificates may be combined where appropriate. (Ord. 533, {}8.48, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, §11, adopted 1976) 8262: CERTIFICATE OF CONSENT; EXCEPTIONS: A certificate, signed and acknowledged by all parties having any record title interest in the real property subdivided, consenting to the preparation and recordation of the final map is required, except as follows: Neither a lien for State, County, Municipal or local taxes, nor for special assessments, nor beneficial interest under trust deeds, nor a trust interest under bond indentures, nor mechanics lien constitute a record title interest in land for the purpose of this Chapter. B. Signatures of parties owning the following types of interests may be omitted if their nmnes and the nature of their respective interests are stated on the final map: 1. Rights of way, easements or other interests which cannot ripen into a fee, except those owned by a public entity or public utility unless it is determined by the legislative body that division and development of the property in the manner set forth on the final map will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of the public entity or public utility right of way or easement; provided, that such signatures may be required by a local agency. If such signatures are not required by the local agency, the subdivider shall send, by certified mail, a sketch of the proposed final map, together with a copy of this Section, to any public entity or public utility which has previously acquired a right of way or easement. If the public entity or public utility objects to recording the final map without the signature of each public entity or public utility, it shall notify the subdivider and the legislative body within thirty (30) days after receipt thereof, otherwise the signature may be omitted. Failure of the public entity or public utility to object to recording the final map without its signature shall in no way affect its rights under a right of way or easement. 2. Rights of way, easements or reversions, which by reason of changed conditions, long disuse or lapses appear to be no longer of practical use or value and signatures are impossible or impractical to obtain. A statement of the circumstances preventing the procurement of the signatures shall also be stated on the map. 3. Interests in or rights to minerals, including but not limited to oil, gas or other hydrocarbon substances, if a) the ownership of such interests or rights does not include a right of entry on the surface of the land, or b) the use of the land, or the surface thereof, in connection with the ownership of such interests or rights, is prohibited by zoning or other local ordinances or regulations, provided that such signature may be required by a local agency. Real property originally patented by the United States or by the State of California, which original patent reserved interest to either or both of such entities, may be included in the final map without the consent of the United States or the State of California thereto or to dedications made thereon. (Ord. 682, § 13, adopted 1976) 8263: CERTIFICATE OF CIVIL ENGINEER OR SURVEYOR: A certificate by the civil engineer or the licensed surveyor responsible for the survey and final map shall appear on the final map. The certificate shall meet the requirements of Section 66441 of the Government Code. The signature of such civil engineer or surveyor must be attested unless accompanied by his seal. (Ord. 533, §8.482, adopted 1958; amd. by Ord. 682, §14, adopted 1976) 8264: CERTIFICATE OF OFFER OF DEDICATION: A certificate, signed and acknowledged by those parties having any record title interest in the real property being subdivided, subject to the provisions of §8262, offering for dedication for public use those certain parcels of land which said parties desire to dedicate shall appear on the final map. (Ord. 533, §8.483, adopted 1958; amd. by Ord. 682, §15, adopted 1976) 8265: CERTIFICATE OF CITY ENGINEER: A certificate for execution by the City Engineer shall appear on the final map. It shall contain the information required by Section 66442 of the Government Code. (Ord. 533, §8.484, adopted 1958; amd. by Ord. 682, §16, adopted 1976) 8266: CERTIFICATE OF COUNTY RECORDER: A certificate for execution by the County Recorder shall appear on the final map. (Ord. 533, §8.485, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, § 11, adopted 1976) 8267: CERTIFICATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION: A certificate for execution by the Planning Commission shall appear on the final map. (Ord. 533, {}8.486, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {}11, adopted 1976) 8268: CERTIFICATE OF COUNTY AUDITOR: A certificate for execution by the County Auditor stating that according the records of his office there are no liens against the subdivision or any part thereof for unpaid State, County, Municipal or local taxes, or special assessments, not yet payable, shall appear on the final map. (Ord. 533, {}8.487, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {}11, adopted 1976) 8269: CERTIFICATE OF TAX BOND FILED: A certificate shall appear on the final map attesting that a tax bond, cash or other securities guaranteed in payment have been filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to cover taxes and assessments against the property which are a lien but are not yet payable. (Ord. 533, {}8.488, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {} 11, adopted 1976) 8270: CERTIFICATE OF MAYOR: A certificate for execution by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk of the City Council approving the final map as submitted and accepting or not accepting the areas dedicated for public use shall appear on the final map. (Ord. 533, {}8.489, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {} 11, adopted 1976) 8271: CERTIFICATE OF TITLE AND IMPROVEMENT BONDS: There shall be filed with the final map, evidence of title issued by a reputable title insurance company, showing the names of all persons having any right, title or interest in the lands proposed to be subdivided and whose consent is necessary to convey clear title to the said land. Such evidence of the title shall be filed with the final map for record in the office of the County Recorder. There shall also bc filed with the final map, improvement bonds subject to the conditions of ..'\rticlc 14 of this Chapter, if the improvements required under Articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 or 12 have not been completed satisfactorily before the final map is filed. (Ord. 533, {}4.13, adopted 1958; amd. by Ord. 571, {}2, adopted 1965; as renumbered by Ord. 682, {}11, adopted 1976) 8272: DUTY OF CITY ENGINEER TO EXAMINE FINAL MAP: It shall be the duty of the City Engineer to examine and check said final map as to the sufficiency of affidavits, consents to the making thereof, certificates of dedication, acceptances of dedication, acknowledgements, corrections of surveying data and computations, and its compliance with the alterations designated upon the tentative map and such other maps that require checking to insure compliance with the subdivision map act and this Chapter. (Ord. 533, §8.51, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, §11, adopted 1976) 8273: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP BY PLANNING COMMISSION: Within ten (10) days after his receipt of the final map the City Engineer shall certify to its correctness and transmit it to the Planning Commission. If the final map has been certified as correct by the City Engineer and all the data required in Article 16 is in the hands of the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission shall, after the return of said map, present the same to the City Council at their next regular meeting together with the title evidence and improvement bonds as specified in Articlc 16, or if said map has not been certified as correct by the City Engineer, the Planning Commission shall, within three (3) days, return said final map, with the accompanying documents mentioned above to the subdivider, setting forth the grounds for its disapproval. (Ord. 533, §8.52, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, §11, adopted 1976) 8274: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP BY CITY COUNCIL: Upon receipt of the final map, the City Council shall, at its next regular meeting or within a period of not more than ten (10) days after such filing, approve such map if the same conforms with all of the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, this Chapter and any ruling made thereunder. The City Council shall, at the time of its action, accept or reject any or all offers of dedication. (Ord. 533, §8.53, adopted 1958; as renumbered by Ord. 682, §11, adopted 1976) MEMORANDUM From: Date: Re: City of Ukiah Planning Commissioners Diana Steele, Director of Public Works and City Engineer April 9, 2002 Final Map for Hull and Piferro Subdivision, Project # 98-37 This memo is to inform you that all of the minor issues outstanding on the Final Map for the above listed project have been resolved to the satisfaction of Tom Herman, of T. M. Herman and Associates, Inc. of Willits, and further to my satisfaction. Mr. Herman is under contract to review official documents related to the division of land, as a Licensed Land Surveyor. Mr. Herman and I will both be ready to attest, by our signatures on the final vellum copy of the map, that the map is complete, is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act and with the approved Tentative Map. T.M. Herman & Associates~ Inc. Surveying, Engineering & Planning Services Date: To: From: CC: Re: April 9, 2002 Diana Steele, Public Works Director and City Engineer - City of Ukiah Tom Herman - T.M. Herman & Associates, Inc. Ron Franz, Franz Engineering Subdivision 98-37/Use Permit 00-37 (Hull/Piffero) We have reviewed the revised Final Subdivision Map, a copy of the Preliminary Road Grading and Erosion Control Plan (with hand markings explaining right of way widths with the project) and a letter from Franz Engineering dated April 5, 2002. All of the issues raised in our memo of April 4, 2002 have been addressed to our satisfaction and the revised Final Subdivision Map is now consistant with the Subdivision Map Act and the approved Tentative Map. P.O. Box 38 493 So. Main Street Willits, California 95490 (707) 459-4818 Fax (707) 459-1884 page 2 of 2 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 6g DATE: APRIL 17, 2002 SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL, EXECUTION, AND ACCEPTANCE OF FEDERAL EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT- 2002 The California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has announced the availability of approximately $5,500,000 over the next two years for the Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (FESG) program. Eligible projects include shelters or programs which provide essential services to the homeless or assist in the prevention of homelessness. Two local organizations, Ukiah Community Center (UCC) and the Ford Street Project (FSP) have requested City assistance in applying for the grant. Two separate applications might be evaluated as competing projects, and thus, a single coordinated effort through the City is proposed. There is no direct financial participation required of the City, though staff time is necessary for administration, accounting, and auditing. Funds to compensate for these activities (1% of the total request) are to be included in the grant application. The City is currently administering a FESG with both UCC and FSP serving as subcontractors. This existing grant was initiated in 2000 and will terminate in September of this year. The City has been successful in managing this program since 1992. The proposed grant will encompass the same activities at about the same funding levels as are presently being provided i.e., homeless intake, homeless prevention programs, and emergency motel vouchers. The program has worked extremely well with substantial benefits to the community's targeted population. Staff is very pleased with the performances of UCC and FSP in the grant and believes continuation of the services is appropriate. Staff recommends that the City Council continue this partnership and authorize the submittal and acceptance of the grant by adopting the resolution. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Authorizing the Submittal, Execution, and Acceptance of Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (FESG) - 2002. ALTERNATE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine changes to the resolution are necessary, identify modifications, and adopt revised resolution. 2. Determine application is not to be submitted and take no action. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Ukiah Community Center and the Ford Street Projec, t Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution for adoption, page 1. APPROVEDf ~%~~M Candace Horsley, anager mfh:asrcc02 0417FESG RESOLUTION NO. 2002- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL, EXECUTION, AND ACCEPTANCE OF FEDERAL EMERGENCY SHELTER GRANT (FESG) - 2002 WHEREAS, 1. The State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development, Division of Community Affairs, issued a Request for Proposals under the Federal Emergency Shelter Grant (FESG) Program for 2002; and 2. The Ukiah Community Center and the Ford Street Project are non-profit corporations willing to contract with the City of Ukiah to complete the activities proposed in the grant and the City of Ukiah is willing to accept the grant; and 3. Both the Ukiah Community Center and the Ford Street Project provide essential services to the homeless, are qualified to perform the programs eligible for grant assistance, and have extensive experience in quality grant compliance and administration; and 4. The City of Ukiah certifies that if it receives a grant from the Federal Emergency Shelter Grant Program, all uses of the funds will be in compliance with Federal Emergency Shelter Grant Program Regulations and Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Ukiah City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute all required certifications, apply for and accept the Federal Emergency Shelter Grant in the amount of not more than $300,000, and to enter into a Standard Agreement and any amendment thereto with the Department of Housing and Community Development of not more than $300,000, and to perform any and all responsibilities in relationship to such contract. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ukiah this 17th day of April 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Phillip Ashiku, Mayor Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Resolution No. 2002- Page 1 of I AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 6h DATE: April 17, 2002__ SUBJECT: AWARD OF CONSULTANT SERVICE AGREEMENT TO TABER CONSULTANTS FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF GEOTECHNICAL WORK RELATED TO THE ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT SUMMARY: Submitted for the City Council's review and action is staff's recommendation that a Consultant Service Agreement for geotechnical services related to the Orchard Ave. Bridge Project be awarded to Taber Consultants of West Sacramento. It is proposed that compensation for services rendered under the agreement be made on a time and expense basis not to exceed a guaranteed maximum cost. It is further recommended that the City Manager be authorized to negotiate a maximum compensation amount for the scope of work (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Award the Consultant Service Agreement for geotechnical services to Taber Consultants of West Sacramento and authorize the City Manager to negotiate a maximum compensation amount of up to $26,000 for the investigative phase and authorize an expenditure of $12,000 for the construction phase. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Consultant Service Agreement on behalf of the City. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Consultant Service Agreement on behalf of the City to BACE Geotechnical should Taber Consultant decline to execute the Consultant Service Agreement. Compensation for the performance of the investigative work based on the scope of work presented in BACE's proposal shall not exceed $32,640 and $15,000 for the construction phase. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Reject all bids and provide direction to Staff. 2. Abandon the Orchard Ave. Bridge Project. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Diana Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Diana Steele, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Memorandum to the Director of Public Works dated April 2, 2002 concerning recommendation to award the Consultant Service Agreement to Taber Consultants 2. Taber Consultant Proposal 3. BACE Geotechnical Proposal A PPR OVED:[ _~-~ Can~ace Horsley, City rv~nager presented in the Taber proposal not exceeding $26,000 for the investigative phase, with an expenditure authorization of $12,000 for the construction phase. Should Taber Consultants decline to enter into the Consultant Service Agreement, it is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a Consultant Service Agreement on behalf of the City with BACE Geotechnical at a compensation not to exceed a guaranteed maximum cost of $32,640 based on the scope of work presented for the investigative work with an expenditure authorization of $15,000 for the construction phase. BACKGROUND: In response to the City's Request for Proposals (RFP) for the performance of geotechnical services related to the design and construction of the Orchard Ave. bridge and related road improvements, proposals from four Geotechnical Consultants were received. As indicated in the attached Memorandum to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer dated April 2, 2002, the proposals were thoroughly reviewed and ranked based on four selection criteria. Comparisons of the allocation of hours by work function and labor classification as well as a comparison of the proposed fees were made. The final ranking of the consultants as well as the ranking by selection criteria are presented in the memorandum. The RFP requested cost proposals based on a time and expense basis not to exceed a guaranteed maximum cost for both phases of the work, investigative and construction. The investigative phase is the work performed prior to construction and includes exploratory work and the preparation of a Geotechnical Report. The information presented in the Geotechnical report will be utilized by the Design Consultant for the design of the bridge foundation and the road structural section. Should Taber Consultants decline to execute the City's standard consultant service agreement, staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute on behalf of the City a consultant service agreement with BACE Geotechnical. As presented in BACE's proposal, a guaranteed maximum cost of $32,640 for the investigative work would be established based on the scope of work presented in their proposal. Staff is recommending that a guaranteed maximum cost of $15,000 be authorized for the construction phase. This amount is larger than the proposed ceiling for Taber because BACE is located in Windsor and additional time would be expended in travel to the job site on a daily basis. BACE has submitted a guaranteed maximum cost of $37,000 for the construction phase but it is noted that they have included concrete testing services which were not requested in the RFP. Should it become necessary to execute the service agreement with BACE, a scope of work for the construction phase services will need to be negotiated with the consultant. The Consultant will be reimbursed from funds within the Bridge Fund #290. that the Council award the agreement to Taber Consultants and the authorized to execute the agreement. It is recommended City Manager be GeotechnicalServices 4/17/02 2 Date: To: From: Subject: CITY Of UKIAH MEMORANDUM April 9, 2002 Diana Steele, Public Works Director/City Engineer Rick Kennedy Recommendation for the Award of Geotechnical Services Related to the Orchard Ave Bridge Project Upon the conclusion of my review and thorough examination of the four (4) proposals received in response to the City's request for Geotechnical Services for the design and construction of the Orchard Ave Bridge and Related Road Improvements, I recommend that a Service Agreement for Geotechnical Services be awarded to Taber Consultants of West Sacramento. Based on the rating criteria published in the RFP and the information provided in the respective proposals, I offer the following order of consultant selection: 1. Taber Consultants 2. BACE Geotechnical 3. Kleinfelder 4. Hallenbeck & Associates The selection criteria are as follows and they are of equal weight: 1. Adequate resources to perform the work within the time frame allowed. 2. Adequate experience in the type of work requested. 3. Client satisfaction. 4. Proposed compensation and reasonableness of billing rates. All cost proposals were in most part responsive to the requirements of the Request for Proposal. The consultants were requested to list the firm's qualifications and resources, demonstrate an understanding of the scope of work, list proposed sub-consultants and contractors, provide references, provide hourly rates and standard fees for typical expenses, base their proposed fee on a time and expense format not to exceed a guaranteed maximum cost for the pre- construction investigative phase and the construction service phase, and include other information that the consultant deemed appropriate to be considered. The consultants were advised that the construction of the project may not occur because of funding constraints and that the pre-construction services and the construction services were to stand-alone. Three of the four consultants provided estimated labor efforts which facilitated a comparison of the hours expended for various work functions and labor classifications involved in the investigative phase. Attached are comparisons of "Allocation of Fee by Work Function", "Allocation of Hours by Work Function", and "Allocation of Hours by Labor Classification". Hallenbeck & Associates did not provide an estimated labor effort breakdown and, therefore, are not included in the comparisons noted above. Also attached are "Fee Comparison" and "Hourly Rate Comparison" tables. Because consultants generally ask that their hourly rates be viewed as confidential information, I have labeled the comparison table as "Confidential". I offer the following ranking by criteria in the order of highest to lowest: Reso u rces: 1. Kleinfelder 2. Taber 3. BACE 4. Hallenbeck Kleinfelder is the largest firm with tremendous resources available Statewide and Hallenbeck appears to be the smallest firm. All firms indicated that they possess the resources to complete the geotechnical services within the time frame stipulated. Experience: 1. Taber 2. Kleinfelder 3. BACE 4. Hallenbeck Taber and Kleinfelder have extensive experience in providing geotechnical services for the type of bridge construction being proposed by. However, Taber has considerable experience of providing bridge related geotechnical services within Mendocino County. BACE has performed geotechnical services for privately owned bridgework within this County. Client Satisfaction: 1. Taber All the Consultants listed adequate references. I spoke with Doug Ellinger, Senior Civil Engineer with the Mendocino County Department of Transportation regarding his experience with the consultants. Mr. Ellinger was very familiar with Taber and had worked with BACE on non-bridge relate geotechnical services with satisfying results. Kleinfelder has performed work for the City of Ukiah as a sub-consultant to Boyle Engineering on a project at the landfill with satisfying results. For most of the County's bridge projects they have used Taber with very satisfying results. Mr. Ellinger was quite complimentary of Taber and he highly 2 recommended them. Based on my narrow inquiry, I rate Taber the highest but refrain from listing the remainder of the consultants. Reasonableness of Fees and Billing Rates: 1. Taber 2. BACE 3. Kleinfelder 4. Hallenbeck I refer your attention to the attached comparisons. Taber has provided the lowest estimated fees for both the investigative and construction phases based on estimated effort. They stand ready "to negotiate a final scope of services and a firm contract amount that will not be exceeded without prior authorization for mutually agreed change in scope of services". As they and Kleinfelder have correctly expressed in their respective proposals, the amount of labor effort needed for the construction phase is difficult to quantify because the effort is based on demands and work phases established by the Contractor. I had anticipated that the consultants would qualify the labor effort based on defined assumptions and that additional field services beyond the defined scope of field services would be in excess of the guaranteed maximum. However, I accept the estimated cost estimates for field services provided by Taber and Kleinfelder as being responsive to the RFP requirements. Taber's estimate for investigative work, however, is not per the letter of the requirements of the RFP. As indicated in the comparison of hours by labor classification and hours by work function, Tabor estimated a labor effort of 173 hours including the effort of their sub-consultant, Rau & Associates. BACE estimated a base effort of 202 hours and allowed a contingency of 5% to establish a guaranteed maximum fee. If we apply the 5% contingency directly to the hours, a total labor effort for BACE becomes 212 hours. Kleinfelder estimated an effort of 222 hours to establish their guaranteed maximum for the investigative phase. Because a guaranteed maximum cost was desired for the two phases of work, it was prudent for the consultants to incorporate a contingency within the estimate or in other words pad the labor effort for unknowns. In comparing the labor effort submitted by Taber with those submitted by BACE and Kleinfelder it appears that Taber is at a bare bone position. If we add additional hours to the Taber estimate to equal the labor effort estimated by BACE or add 39 hours to Taber's estimate and spread these hours equally between the senior engineer and staff engineer, an additional labor expense of only $3,720 is calculated. When added to Taber's estimate of $21,465 a new fee for the investigative work of $25,185 results. This compares to BACE's median cost of $28,380. As you are aware, it is not permitted pursuant to the Government Code to award engineering and architectural service agreements based solely on cost. I offer this comparison of total fee for the investigative phase for the purpose of setting a proposed maximum dollar limit that can be presented to the Council for their consideration. 3 I believe we should set a dollar limit above the estimated cost as presented by Taber. As indicated in the comparison of billing rates, both Taber and Bace have billing rates for their professional staff that are considerably lower than the rates established by Kleinfelder. It is also noted that Taber and BACE have balanced the workload between senior and staff engineers and geologists whereas Kleinfelder has placed a considerable amount of time with their senior level engineers at a greater cost. Other Considerations and Comments Taber proposes not to perform a sampled test boring in the channel as called for in the RFP because of the anticipated 4 to 6 week delay that would be required for Fish and Game permitting. They propose to perform a hand sampler probe in the channel to help confirm the soils profile and evaluate the depth of channel bedload and debris and geologically recent scour. This appears to be a very reasonable alternative. Taber has also stated that they typically perform only two borings for a bridge that is less than 100 feet in length. Taber's sub-consultant for roadway investigative work, Rau & Associates, proposes to obtain three to four soil samples for R-Value testing. This is the number of tests I had anticipated. Kleinfelder has noted that at least one R-Value test would be performed, however, they would perform 4 to 6 backhoe test pits in areas of roadway improvements which are intended to obtain information regarding road subgrade conditions, estimated stripping depths and to obtain samples for subsequent testing. After reading both the Taber and Kleinfelder proposals I was confident that both firms had considerable experience in bridgework and they knew what they were doing. Both proposals were tailored to the size project involved and were to the point. BACE addressed all scope points contained in the RFP and has performed several bridge geotechnical studies and appears to be very capable in this area. Hallenbeck's experience in geotechnical studies for bridgework does not appear to be that extensive as presented in their proposal. 4 FEE COMPARISON FOR ORCHARD AVE. BRIDGE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Firm Kleinfelder Taber Consultants BACE Geotechnical Guaranteed Max for Investigative Services $37,910 $21,465 $32,640 (2) Guaranteed Max for Construction Services $11,200 (1) $9,867 (1) $29,985 (3) Hallenbeck & Associates $33,000 $37,000 (1) Estimate only; not a guaranteed maximum (2) Range of $24,120 - $32,640 with upper end the guaranteed maximum; median at $28,380 (3) Range of $19,985 - $29,985 with upper end the guaranteed maximum; median at $24,985 HOURLY RATE COMPARISON FOR ORCHARD AVE. BRIDGE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES CONFIDENTIAL Supervisory/ Registered Staff Draftsman/! Firm Principal Senior Engineer/ En(jineer Geolocjist Engineer AutoCad Technician Admin Kleinfelder 165 155 125 - 155 95- 125 78 66 66 Taber Consultants 150 90 - 135 80 - 90 70 - 80 65 - 85 45 - 75 35 - 45 BACE Geotechnical 115 - 135 100 - 115 85 - 100 70 - 85 55 - 80 45 - 85 35 - 55 Hallenbeck & Associates 160 145 115 99 no quote 78 - 75 42 - 45 ALLOCATION OF FEE BY WORK FUNCTION FOR INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES REGARDING ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Firm En~ineerin~ Subcontractor Lab Expenses Total Fee Kleinfelder $27,250 $7,820 $2,530 $310 $37,910 Taber Consultants $9,550 $4,411 $2,380 $900 $17,241 Rau and Associates $2,616 $588 $374 $646 $4,224 Combined $12,166 $4,999 $2,754 $1,546 $21,465 BACE Geotechnical $19,070 $4,500 $4,290 $520 $28,380 Note: Total Fee for BACE is the median of the range provided ALLOCATION OF HOURS BY WORK FUNCTION FOR INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES REGARDING ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Work Function Kleinfelder BACE Taber Rau Taber & Rau Data Review/Recon 10 36 incl incl incl Field Exploration 40 46 44 16 60 Foundation/Seismic Analysis 82 46 57 57 Report 74 74 38 18 56 Meetin~ls 16 incl Total Hours I 222 I 202 I 139 I 3~ I 173 ALLOCATION OF HOURS BY LABOR CLASSIFICATION FOR INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES REGARDING ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Supervisory/ Professional Senior Project / Staff Principal Engineer/ Engineer/ Engineer/ Engineer/ AutoCad Total Firm Geologist Geologist Geologist Geologist Drafter Clerical Lab Tech Hours Kleinfelder 4 (~ $165 66 ~ $155 64 ~ $135 56 (~ $95 24 (~ $78 e (~ $66 222 Taber 43~;~$110 44(~$80 14(~$80 4(~$45 34(~$70 139 Rau 12 (~ $122 14 ~;~ $65 S (~ $70 34 173 24 @ $125; BACE 28 @ $130 104 ~ $90 40 (~ $70 6 (~ $45 202 Taber Since 1954 City of Ukiah 3911 West Capitol Avenue West Sacramento, CA 95691-2116 (916) 371-1690 (707) 575-1568 Fax (916) 371-7265 www.taberconsultants.com 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 Attention: Diana Steele, PE Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 26, 2002 Subject: Foundation Investigation Services 1P1/502/61 Orchard Avenue Bridge at Orr Creek and Related Street Improvements Mendocino County, CA We have reviewed project information provided in the Request For Proposals (RFP) and are pleased to submit this proposal to provide geotechnical engineering services for the City of Ukiah in support of project design. In addition to information in the RFP, this proposal is based on brief reconnaissance of the project site, review of in-house file data and Caltrans data for the existing Highway 101 bridges at Orr Creek, and our experience with similar projects - which includes more than 2500 bridge foundation investigations since 1954. In order to better serve the needs of the City, we are pleased to team on this project with Rau and Associates of Ukiah who will act as sub-consultants to Taber. Geotechnical study for bridge foundation design will be performed by Taber; Rau and Associates will perform geotechnical study for roadway design and will provide personnel and coordination for construction period observation and soils testing. Consistent with our typical practice (and with Caltrans practice), these design studies will be presented as separate reports. Enclosed for your use are the following company background materials: TABER CONSULTANTS · Experience-Qualifications · Local Projects & Client References · Resumes for Key Personnel R.Au AND ASSOC:[ATES · Letter of Interest · Statement of Qualifications · Resumes for Key Personnel Taber Consultants Engineers and Geologists City of Ukiah Attention: Diana Steele, PE - Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 25, 2002 Page 2 Taber Since 1954 1P1/502/61 Frank Taber, G.E. or Rick Sowers, P.E. and C.E.G. will act as the supervising geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist for this project. Both Mr. Taber and Mr. Sowers have over 25 years experience with Taber Consultants and have conducted several hundred bridge investigations in their tenure. Taber's extensive experience with bridge and roadway projects, our in-house drilling and soils laboratory capabilities that provide us an unusual degree of control over schedule and data collection quality, and the responsiveness afforded by Rau and Associates local presence, are advantages that we feel make our team uniquely qualified for this project. Backqrou nd / Basis :In accordance with the Request for Proposal (RFP), proposed roadway improvements include extending Orchard Avenue northerly from its current terminus at Orr Creek to Brush Street (850+1t) and to improve portions of Brush Street from the extension of Orchard Avenue to the Northern Pacific Railroad right of way (1500+ft). Anticipated typical sections of various segments of improved roadways are shown in the RFP. Design Traffic [ndex for Orchard Avenue is indicated to be 9.0 and for Brush Street to be 10.0. Of particular concern to the City of Ukiah is the potential for trapping moisture in the roadbed which can create a base or sub-base failure which then reflects into the pavement. The proposed bridge is a new crossing of Orr Creek. As shown on site topography provided by the city, existing ground adjacent to the channel is at about elev. 603+ and Iow channel grade is at about elev. 593±. The new bridge is expected to be about 86-ft long and 62-ft wide. A tentative layout in the Request for Proposal shows the bridge as consisting of two-spans of pre-cast concrete slab construction placed on seat-type abutments and a thin-wall pier with substructure skewed about 30° to match channel alignment. New deck grade is expected to be at or above elev. 608±, requiring 5+ft of new embankment fill at bridge abutments. This site is located less than 200-ft upstream (west) from the Highway 101 bridge over Orr Creek (Br. No. 10-194 L/R). We have obtained as-built plans (1963; as- built 1965) for this bridge and reports/memos from the Caltrans foundation section files. The Caltrans (formerly Division of Highways) Log of Test Borings from 1958 shows the results of four l-inch diameter sampler-borings and the results of pile City of Ukiah Attention: Diana Steele, PF - Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 25, 2002 Page :3 Taber Since 1954 1P1/502/61 driving. The Highway 101 site is underlain by (soft-stiff?) silt and clay to 20-25±ft depth below original ground surface adjacent to the channel, which grades downward to (compact-dense) sand and gravel to the maximum depth explored (45±ft). This bridge is supported on driven piling with 45 ton design loads; piling penetrate through the silt/clay into the underlying sand/gravel layers. Recent scour evaluations at Highway 101 (by Caltrans)indicate potential channel degradation to 10±ft below 1963 groundline and an additional :L0±ft of local scour at channel piers. No scour resistant horizon is evident from the Caltrans boring data. Scour evaluation as part of this project may indicate somewhat different values, but scour is expected to be a significant consideration in bridge foundation and substructure design. Additionally, we have reviewed data for the Bush Street bridge on Orr Creek, which was the subject of a report of foundation investigation prepared by this office in 1972. This bridge is located less than a mile upstream from the current site. The encountered soils profile is very similar to that encountered at Highway 101, with the addition of 20±ft of sand/gravel alluvium on top of soft-stiff silt/clay and/or loose- semicompact silt/sand which overlie compact-dense clayey sandy gravel at depth. Field conditions in 1972 suggested that some channel degradation had occurred. The bridge site is located within less than 1 km of the Maacama Fault and can be assigned a peak bedrock acceleration of 0.7 g in accordance with Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria. The Caltrans boring and ground motion data indicate that bridge foundation study should evaluate the potential for liquefaction and/or seismically induced ground instability. Typical Caltrans practice precludes the use of spread footing foundations bearing in soil at sites with peak bedrock accelerations of 0.6 g or greater. Our scope of bridge foundation study outlined below is directed at developing geotechnical criteria for bridge approach embankments and for "standard" (Caltrans) driven pile foundations. [f large diameter cast-in-steel-shell or cast-in-drilled-hole piles are desired, then a modified scope of work would be required. We understand that the City of Ukiah will contract with another consultant to provide bridge and roadway design services, which will include a scour evaluation. We expect to coordinate with the designer in developing final geotechnical design criteria for this project. Based on preliminary discussions with one designer, we expect that a single-span bridge will also be considered for this site. City of Ukiah Attention: Diana Steele, PE - Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 25, 2002 Page 4 Taber Since 1954 1P1/502/61 Scope of Study Tn accordance with the RFP, the initial work element will be a kick-off meeting with the City to review proposed scope of services. We also expect to take this occasion to mark prospective drill sites for utility location by USA. Roadway Subgrade ]:nvestigation Roadway subgrade investigation will be conducted by Rau & Associates with assistance by Taber Consultants. It is understood that the bridge/roadway design consultant will make the final design decisions based upon the soils data presented in the report. As indicated above, a particular concern for the City of Ukiah is the potential for trapping moisture in the roadbed - which can create a base or sub-base failure which reflects into the pavement. RAU will address this issue and make recommendations for a drained section in the roadbed or for other means to prevent such damage from occurring. Appropriate soils tests are expected to include texture analyses, which segregates the amounts of silt and clay in the fine particle portion of soils, gradations, and Atterberg Limits for plasticity. This information, combined with R-Values is expected to provide the necessary information to evaluate the underlying soils for moisture characteristics. RAU intends to obtain three or four samples of soils for R-Value testing, as subgrade characteristics may vary significantly between the railroad tracks and the bridge approaches. Taber Consultants will perform the laboratory R-value testing and report the results to RAU. RAU will then incorporate the results into its evaluation and make recommendations for a design R-Value or R-Values as required and provide alternative pavement section designs and recommendations for subgrade preparation. Pavement subgrade evaluation and structural section design will be in accordance with the Caltrans "Highway Design Manual." Evaluation of off-site or commercial material sources, pavement re-cycling, soil corrosivity, and other considerations typical of a Caltrans "Geotechnical Design Report" or "Materials Report" are understood to not be required for this project and are not included in the proposed roadway work scope. Evaluation of bridge approach embankment foundation will be incorporated in the bridge foundation study to be made by Taber Consultants as described below. City of Ukiah Attention: Diana Steele, PE - Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 25, 2002 Page § Taber Since 1954 1P1/502/61 The results of roadway subgrade investigation will be submitted in the form of a dralt "Technical Memorandum." This memorandum will summarize encountered materials and conditions and results of tests and make geotechnical recommendations for use in roadway subgrade preparation and pavement structural section design. A "final" memorandum will be submitted based on consultation with the designer and agency/designer review comments. Bridge Foundation ]:nvestigation For bridge foundation design study by Taber, subsurface exploration to adequately define earth materials and foundation conditions is expected to include a sampled, logged test boring to 50-60+ft depth at/near each abutment. To provide an adequate evaluation of liquefaction potential, we expect to use flight auger drilling methods to first groundwater encounter and mud-stabilized rotary drilling methods below groundwater to bottom of boring. These borings will be supplemented by a hand- sampler probe in the channel to help confirm the soils profile and evaluate the depth of channel bedload/debris and geologically recent scour. The above exploration corresponds to the work that we typically propose for local agency bridges less than 100-ft long. Additionally, we do not propose making a sampled test boring in the channel because of the 4-6 week delay that would be required for Fish & Game permitting. Also, the Caltrans file documents suggest that projected scour at this site may be much greater than previously experienced scour. Prior to commencing field exploration, Taber will mark proposed drill locations and notify USA for location of buried utilities. We expect to recirculate and contain drill fluid and to dispose of excess drill fluid and soil cuttings off the roadway and outside of the active channel. At completion of field study, all test borings will be backfilled with soils and surface patched as necessary. The scope of Taber's proposed services specifically excludes sampling for or evaluation of the presence or distribution of hazardous materials, if hazardous materials are encountered during field exploration, work will be stopped at that location and the client notified; a modified scope of services may be required to complete design study. We expect to recover soil samples from the borings at 5+ft intervals using Standard Penetration equipment. A 2.5-inch I.D. split-spoon sampler will be used to recover samples of soft-stiff soils in the uppermost 5-10+ft to provide samples suitable for shear and/or consolidation testing in evaluation of embankment foundation/ settlement. The encountered earth materials will be field classified and borings logged (including groundwater conditions) by an engineer/geologist. City of Ukiah Attention: Diana Steele, PE - Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 25, 2002 Page 6 Taber Since 1954 1P1/502/61 Laboratory testing to supplement field evaluation of soils parameters is expected to include moisture-density and unconfined compressive strength determinations as well as engineering classification tests (gradation and Atterberg Limits - necessary for liquefaction evaluation) and corrosivity screening (pH/minimum Resistivity/sulfate/ chloride content) on selected samples. Additional strength and/or compression testing may be required, particularly if soft clay soils are present at the banks. The draft foundation report will summarize subsurface exploration and field and laboratory soils testing, include a draft "Log of Test Borings" drawing and discuss encountered earth materials and foundation conditions. Seismic criteria for use in design (rock acceleration, soils profile type, etc.) will be provided in accordance with typical Caltrans practice, including an evaluation of the potential for seismically induced liquefaction and ground instability. The draft report will discuss embankment construction and settlement/stability, bridge foundation conditions/constraints, and provide geotechnical criteria for use in bridge design. Based on consultation and review comments from designer and others, the draft foundation report will be modified to make a final report that provides specific criteria for use in design and construction of bridge foundations. After submitting the foundation report, Taber will review structure plans with respect to earth materials and conditions and insofar as plans rely on recommendations in the foundation report. Deliverables: · Draft Foundation Report · Final Foundation Report · Log of Test Borings drawing Construction Period Services Construction period services have not been fully defined. They are expected to include observation of foundation construction (e.g. logging of pile driving) and observation and relative compaction testing of earthwork associated with roadway improvements. Schedule We are prepared to commence field exploration within 1+week alter authorization to proceed. The proposed scope of field exploration is expected to require about 2 days on-site. The draft foundation report and subgrade evaluation will be submitted within 3 weeks thereafter in accordance with the schedule in the RFP. The scheduling of final reports depends on the work of the project design consult. Revision City of Ukiah Attention: Diana Steele, PE - Director of Public Works/City Engineer March 25, 2002 Page 7 Taber Since 1954 1P1/502/61 and issuing of a "final" report typically requires about l-week after comments are received. Fees Fees for services are based on the time and effort required in accordance with current rate schedules (attached). Our estimated costs for the scope of services outlined above is attached as a "Work Effort/Cost Estimate Summary." If selected for this work, we will be pleased to negotiate a final scope of services and firm contract amount that will not be exceeded without prior authorization for mutually agreed change in scope of services. Thank you for providing us the opportunity to propose on this project. If you have questions on any of the above, or as we can be of service, please don't hesitate to call. Very truly yours, TABER CONSULTANTS Franklin P. Taber Vice President Attachments: "Work Effort and Cost Estimate" "Schedule of Fees" Taber Since 1954 Taber Consultants Engineers and Geologists 3911 West Capitol Avenue West Sacramento, CA 95691-2116 www.taberconsultants.com 1Pl/502/61 3/26/02 Fee Estimate Summary Geotechnical Services Orchard Avenue Bridge at Orr Creek and Related Street Improvements Ukiah, California Roadway Subgrade Investigation Rau & Associates (Fee + 5%) Taber Consultants Subtotal Bridge Foundation Investigation Taber Consultants Total -- Geotechnical Design Studies $4,435.00 $995.00 $5,430.00 $16,035.00 $21,465.00 Construction Period Services Rau & Associates (Fee + 5%) Taber Consultants Total - Geotechnical Construction Support $8,942.00 $925.00 $9,867.00 Notes: 1) See attached fee schedule and estimate sheets for a breakdown of estimated work effort end fees. 2) Rates for Materials Tester (Rau) and Drill Rig & Crew (Taber) are based on Prevailing VVage requirements. 3) The fees estimated for construction period support services are based on numerous assumptions and should be reviewed and revised prior to construction. Assumptions include: driven pile foundation; scarification end compaction of fill embankment foundation; 5-It dep{h of approach embankment fill; subexcavation and compaction of typical roadway subgrade; and, a single continuous construction period for the entire project. SCHEDULE OFFEES Technical or Office Assistant Staff Technician ......................................................... Senior Technician ...................................................... Supervisory Technician .................................................. Draftsman or CAD Draftsman (equipment included) ............................. Staff Engineer or Geologist ............................................... Certified Engineering Geologist or Registered Geologist .......................... Registered Civil Engineer or Geotechnical Engineer ............................ Senior Engineer, Geologist or Engineering Geologist ............................ Supervisory Engineer or Engineering Geologist ................................ Principal - Special Consultation (4-hour minimum) .............................. Drill Rig, Crew & Field Test Equipment ....................................... Taber Since 1954 $35.00-45.00/hr 45.00-55,00/hr 55.00-65.00/hr 65.00-75.00/hr 65.00-85.00/hr 70.O0-80.O0/hr 80.O0-90.O0/hr 80.O0-90.O0/hr 90.00-100.00/hr 105.00-135.00/hr 150.00/hr 155.00-195.00/hr (Rotary or Auger--includes typical geotechnical soil sampling and in-boring test equipment) Diamond Drilling-Supplemental Diamond Bit Use Charge ........................ 12.00/ft Air Drilling--Supplemental Compressor / Downhole Hammer ....................... 330.00/dy Electronic Push Cone Testing (CPT) ......................................... 6.00/ft Vehicle Use (pickup or automobile) .......................................... 0.44/mi or 6.60/hr Nuclear Compaction Test Equipment ........................................ 6.00/hr Steam Cleaner Equipment ................................................. 75.00/dy Inclinometer Survey Equipment ............................................. 240.O0/dy Seismic Timer Survey Equipment ........................................... 240.00/dy Computer Use (engineering / data analysis) ................................... 30.00/hr Auxiliary Field Equipment and Special Field Testing Equipment - - all-terrain tracked rig, ddll barge, tool boat, hand-portable drill, pavement coring, packers, flow meters, shelby and piston samplers, in-situ vane shear, resistivity survey, dilatometer, calibrated jacks, sampling compressor, development pump, HydroPunch II, PID, etc.- - Are Available In-House As Study Needs Dictate ............................ Rates Upon Request SOILS LABORATORY Laboratory Testing - Equipment, Operator and Administration ..................... 70.00/hr (Includes special testing, e.g. tdaxial compression, permeability, etc.) UNIT PRICES FOR SELECTED TESTS -- Rates For Other Soils Tests Available Upon Request Remolded Direct Shear Test (includes three saturated points) ..................... Unconfined Compression Test (tube samples) ................................. Unit Dry Weight-Moisture Content (tube or ring samples) ......................... Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D1557 & CTM 216) .............................. Grain Size Analysis-Wet Sieve (coarse or fine series) ............................ Hydrometer Grain Size Analysis (ASTM D422) ................................ Sand Equivalent (CTM 217) ............................................... Plasticity Index (ASTM D 4318) ............................................. Resistance Value (untreated soiI-CTM 301) ................................... Expansion Index (UBC 18-2) .............................................. CAD Reproduction Charges: $2.25/sq. ft. Per Diem Allowance-Field Living Expense: $90.00 per man-day or per Federal Government Guidelines (by County) Requested Technical Overtime: 125% of Regular Rates Outside Services / Rentals / Permits / Job Materials: Cost + 15% Other Rates, Unit Pdces and Service Minimums: Available Upon Request Expert Testimony and Courtroom, Deposition or Headng Attendance/Preparation: See Special Schedule 175.00/ea 35.00/ea 25.00/ea 140.00/ea 80.00/ea 140.00/ea 70.00/ea 70.00/ea 185.00/ea 70.00/ea WR4fl Tax Payer I.D. 94-1712888 May 1, 2001 Taber Since 1954 3911 West Capitol Avenue West Sacramento, CA 95691-2116 (916) 371-1690 (707) 575-1568 Fax (916) 371-7265 www.taberconsultants.com EXPER]:ENCE - QUALI~F~CAT~ONS SUMMARY Taber Consultants is an organization of foundation engineers and engineering geologists offering consulting services to engineers, architects, planners, contractors, public agencies and others who require information, evaluation and recommendations regarding earth materials and subsurface/geologic conditions for planning and engineering of projects such as bridges, buildings, dams, landslide control, roadways, land development and construction materials surveys. Corporate offices are headquartered in West Sacramento. Local services are also provided through regional offices in Santa Rosa and Oakland. The Taber Consultants professional staff includes nine civil engineers and/or engineering geologists. Three of these are registered civil engineers (in Califomia, Oregon, Nevada) -- two with the geotechnical specialty; four are certified engineering geologists (California, Oregon). H. R. Taber is both a registered civil (geotechnical) engineer and certified engineering geologist. R. D. Sowers, Director of Professional Services, is also both a registered civil engineer and certified engineering geologist. F. P. Taber, Director of Special Engineering Projects, is a registered civil (geotechnical) engineer. An important part of this organization's practice during the past 45+ years has been making or directing earth materials studies for California cities and counties. Bridge foundation, roadway alignment, roadway design and storm damage repair studies have been primary areas of service to these organizations. As a consequence of this extensive background in bddge and roadway studies, personnel and equipment have been assembled in-house that are particularly effective in carrying out such work. Spedal benefits have been achieved by use of: light rotary drill rigs capable of being operated without disruption of traffic on narrow structures; crawler tractors for placing and operating the drill in difficult access locations (such as sand or bay mud); a portable barge from which the drill can be operated in water depths ranging from :I-It to 200 It; an automatic hammer for more consistent "blow counts" and penetration tests; a completely hand-portable drill with rotary drilling/coring capability; and self-contained electronic push-cone penetration units (CPO which provide rapid subsurface in-situ data acquisition. A fully-equipped geotechnical laboratory meets requirements of typical soils engineering and research studies. Taber Consultants has performed well over 2500 individual bridge site investigations -- an average of more than one per week for every week since its formation in 1954 -- a majority of these with State or Federal financing and meeting Caltrans and FHWA criteria in design and construction. This office has also made hundreds of geotechnical roadway investigations including extensive portions of new and reconstructed alignments. The Caltrans Laboratory and Division of Structures-Office of Local Assistance (in Sacramento), in review capacity for projects with State-Federal funding, can comment on all such California work by this office as well as on assignments performed directly for them or under their supervision. Starting in 1956 and continuing to the present, Taber Consultants has made geotechnical studies for numerous Mendocino County projects such as roadway design, storm damage repair, water storage tanks, transfer stations and bridges. Below are a list of nearly 60 bridge foundation evaluation and/or investigation studies made for the county and a list of reference information for engineers in other counties for which Taber has provided similar services on a repeated basis. Taber Consultants Engineers and Geologists U Taber Since 1954 Client References Those familiar with Taber Consultants' services for similar types of projects include: Doug Ellinger, Senior Civil Engineer Mendocino County Department of Transportation Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4363 Raymond Cooper, Civil Engineer Butte County Department of Public Works 7 County Center Drive Oroville CA 95965 (530) 538-7681 Bill Taggart, Deputy Director/Engineering Trinity County Department of Transportation P.O. Drawer 2490 Weaverville, CA 96093 (530) 623-1365 Dave Robertson, Deputy Director Sonoma County Department of Transportation and Public Works 575 Administration Drive Room 117A Santa Rosa, CA 95403 (707) 565-2231 Lance Heide, Public Works Superintendent Napa County Department of Public Works 1195 Third Street, Room 201 Napa, CA 94559 (707) 944-0196 Frank Taber, P.E., G.E. Vice President, Supervising Geotechnical Engineer Taber Since 1954 Frank Taber, principal and supervising geotechnical engineer at Taber Consultants, has responsibility for direction of the firm's geotechnical study and management of the data collection process. Throughout his twenty-five years of professional service he has been continually involved (at increasing levels of responsibility) with the type of projects typical to the Taber Consultants practice - transportation related facilities and structures. Mr. Taber completed civil engineering studies at the University of California at Davis. Subsequently he has pursued extensive geologic study at California State University Sacramento. His California registrations include Civil Engineer (#30920; exp. 3-31-04) and Registered Geotechnical Engineer (#816). Mr. Taber has conducted numerous geotechnical studies for buildings, levees, grain silos, water tanks, fish screens, pipelines and hundreds of bridge, roadway and interchange projects. In addition to geotechnical input for seismic evaluation and retrofit of Mendocino County bridges, some representative bridge projects in northern California include: · Town Creek Bridge at Airport Road, Mendocino County · Rowes Creek Bridge at Sherwood Road, Mendocino County · Downie River Bridge at Pearl Street, Sierra County · N. Fork Yuba River Bridge at Nevada Street, Sierra County · Donner Summit Bridge, Nevada County · Lake Natoma Bridge, City of Folsom · Palamidessi Bridge and Overhead, City of West Sacramento · Leidesdorff Lid, City of Folsom · Douglas Boulevard/T-80 [nterchange Improvements, City of Roseville · Harder Road Grade Separation, City of Hayward · East Martinez Underpasses at BNSF, Contra Costa County · Pole Line Road Overcrossing at ]:nterstate 80 and SPRR, City of Davis · Salyer Loop Bridge at Trinity River, Trinity County · Trinity River Bridge at Eagle Creek Loop Road, Trinity County · Van Duzen River Bridge at Ruth Zenia Road, Trinity County · Aguas Frias Road Bridge at Butte Creek, Butte County · Roberts Ferry Bridge at Tuolumne River, Stanislaus County · 7th Street Bridge at Tuolumne River, Modesto · Fiddletown Road Bridge at Dry Creek, Amador County · CR 85 Bridge at Cache Creek (Capay), Yolo County · CR 102 Bridge at Willow Slough Bypass, Yolo County · Elkhorn Boulevard Bridges at Dry Creek and Dry Creek Overflow, Sacramento County · El Dorado Trail Bikeway Overcrossing at Highway 50, El Dorado County · Green Valley Road Bridge at Dry Creek, El Dorado County · Cone Grove Road at New Creek, Tehama County · Merrill Creek at Salmon River Road, Siskiyou County Caltrans Seismic Retrofit Program, Caltrans - provide engineering geologic and geotechnical input for evaluation of seismic upgrade for 100+ state highway bridges and 100+ local agency bridges including sites in Solano, Monterey, Sacramento, Yolo, San .loaquin, Stanislaus, Alameda, Mendocino, Humboldt, Butte, Sutter, Glenn, Plumas, Santa Barbara, Fresno and San Benito counties. Richard D. Sowers, P.E, C.E.G. Vice President, Director of Professional Services Taber Since 1954 Mr. Sowers has participated in geologic engineering and foundation engineering studies at various professional levels and with increasing responsibility during his 25+year tenure at Taber Consultants. He currently directs, coordinates, supervises and reviews efforts of project managers, project engineers/geologists and staff engineers/geologists, acts as project manager and/or supervisor, provides geotechnical and engineering geologic consultation to clients in connection with in-progress or completed projects of the firm and to other organizations and agencies in review, planning, design, construction, maintenance and/or service of engineering facilities or other concerns. Mr. Sowers completed geological engineering studies at the University of Nevada - Reno. He is registered in California as a Geologist (#3681), Certified Engineering Geologist (#1104) and Civil Engineer (#38788). He is also registered in Nevada as a Civil Engineer (#10203). Mr. Sowers has conducted numerous geologic/foundation studies for buildings, dams, levees, landslides, water tanks, pipelines, fault studies, timber harvest plans, and over 300 bridge projects and 30 major geotechnical roadway investigations. Representative projects in northern California and Nevada include: · Pine Avenue Replacement Bridges, Mendocino County · Robinson Creek at Robinson Creek Road, Mendocino County · Goodyear Bar Bridge, Sierra County · Quincy-LaPorte Road, Plumas County · SR 49 Bridge @ Middle Fork Yuba River, Yuba County · Burr Creek Bridge, Humboldt County · Durphy Creek Bridge, Richardson Grove State Park · Ryan Slough Bridge at Myrtle Avenue, Humboldt County · Soda Bay Road Bridge at Cole Creek, Lake County · Virgillia Road Bridge @ N. Fork Feather River, Plumas County · SR-4 Bypass in Contra Costa County · Woodbridge Dam and Fishscreens, San 3oaquin County · River Road Viaduct, Sonoma County · Numana Dam Fishway Project, Washoe County, Nevada · Truckee Agricultural Station, Nevada County · Porter Creek Road landslide, Sonoma County · Highway 101 Storm Damage Repair, Del Norte County In addition to the above selected projects, Mr. Sowers has served as primary geotechnical design review of over 50 state highway bridge locations in the Caltrans Seismic Retrofit Program since the Loma Prieta Earthquake, and has served as an expert witness for litigation involving property damage, structure distress, slope stability and landsliding throughout northern California. GEORGE C. RAU PRESIOENT WALTER HAYDON VICE PRESIDENT ROGER VINCENT V~CE PRESIDENT O AND ASSOCIATES INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS · LAND SURVEYORS March 22, 2002 Mr. Thomas Skaug Taber Consultants 3911 West Capitol Avenue West Sacramento, CA 95691-2116 Job Number R02069 RE: LETTER OF INTEREST- GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES FOR ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE AT ORR CREEK AND RELATED STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH Dear Mr. Skaug: This is to express our interest in providing Taber Consultants with technical services necessary to complete the tasks outlined by the City of Ukiah in their Request for Proposal, received on March 6, 2002, for the referenced project. This letter is intended to summarize our understanding of the project and the part that Rau and Associates, Inc. (RAU) will perform to assist you in completing the required tasks. As you know, we have worked well together over the past 25 years and collaborated on many projects similar to this one. Our strengths in road design compliments your strengths in bridge design very well. For this project RAU would do the geotechnical engineering for the road approaches and Taber Consultants would do the geotechnical evaluation and engineering for the support for the bridge. We intend to use your firm to do the R-values for the underlying soils in the road approaches. Taber would prepare the report and RAU will insert recommendations and an evaluation of the approach conditions into your report, in the appropriate areas. During construction we would be able to handle all of the onsite geotechnical engineering required, including compaction testing and pile driving monitoring. This would allow the City of Ukiah to have someone local to be on call during the construction period. We believe that the combination our two firms will provide a significant benefit to the City of Ukiah. We have attached the description of work which we would 2erform to complete our part of the services, together with some information about our firm in general. We look forward to working with you to complete this very important project for the City of Ukiah. Very truly yours, George C. Rau President Attachments: Description of Work Firm Qualifications and Descriptions Example Bridge Projects Key Personnel References Cost Estimate 100NORTH PINE STREET · P.O. BOX M · UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482 ° 707-462-6536 · FAX707-463-2729 DESCRIPTION OF WORK ORCHARD AVENUE BRIDGE AT ORR CREEK CITY OF UKIAH Rau and Associates, Inc. (RAU) will provide geotechnical evaluation and analysis and prepare the Geotechnical Report regarding Orchard avenue and Brush Street improvements, including the bridge approaches. Taber Consultants will provide information on the geological background, seismistity and foundations for the bridge. Discussion of approach fills relative to bridge construction will also be addressed by Taber. RAU will work with Taber Consultants to coordinate the work so that a cohesive, comprehensive report results. RAU will provide soil information on the approaches to the bridge and to the limits of the north approach which ends at the railroad tracks on Brush Street. Of particular concern to the City of Ukiah is the potential for trapping moisture in the roadbed which creates a base or sub-base failure which then reflects into the pavement. RAU will address this issue and make recommendations for a drained section in the roadbed or for other means to prevent such damage from occurring. Appropriate tests include texture analyses, which segregates the amounts of silt and clay in the fine particle portion of soils, gradations, and atterberg limits for plasticity. This information, combined with R-Values will provide the necessary information to evaluate the underlying soils for moisture characteristics. RAU intends to obtain three or four samples of soils for R-Value testing, as it may vary significantly between the railroad tracks and the bridge approaches. Taber Consultants will perform the actual R-value testing and report the results to RAU. RAU will then incorporate the results into its evaluation and make recommendations for a design R-Value or R-Values as required , recommendations for alternative structural sections, and recommendations for subgrade preparation. Work will be in accordance with the Caltrans "Highway Design Manual." It is understood that the bridge design consultant will make the final design decisions based upon the R-Values which are presented in the report. Evaluation of off-site material sources, soil corrosivity, and other considerations typical of a Caltrans "Materials Data Report" are understood to not be required for this project and are not included in the proposed roadway work scope. During construction RAU will provide construction review in the form of monitoring of all pile driving and providing pile logs, if that is the method of support selected. If spread footings are selected, RAU will review the bottom of excavation for those footings. RAU will also do compaction testing along the approaches of the bridge. It is anticipated that the two immediate approaches will be approximately five feet deep because of the need to raise the ridge to leave an unobstructed stream crossing. Therefore, there will be compaction testing in the stripped, reprocessed subgrade of the existing soils and then several compaction tests will be made as the approaches are raised to final subgrade elevation levels. Compaction testing is also required in the aggregate base which will support the pavement section. Along the remainder of the approaches, it is anticipated that the existing materials must be stripped and likely subexcavated to as much as 24 inches below existing surface grades to begin the compacted subgrade process. Statement of Qualifications March 2002 Rau and Associates, Inc. - Overview Introduction Rau and Associates, Inc. is a general civil engineering firm, which specializes in various types of civil site development and building construction projects. The firm's goal is to provide a complete range of services for these projects enabling clients to be fully served through Rau and Associates, Inc.'s office. Rau and Associates, Inc. has personnel who have worked in positions of responsibility for civil engineering projects in the Mendocino County Public Works Department, PG&E, City of Willits, Caltrans, City of Cotati, and City of Sebastopol. These positions were either as employees of the entities named or as consulting engineers contracted to act as City Engineer. In addition, Rau and Associates, Inc. has provided design and/or construction services to many government agencies over the years, either as a prime design professional or as a subconsultant to the prime design consultant. The emphasis on many projects is a cohesive, multi-disciplinary team whose goals and objectives are to serve the client in a comprehensive, effective and efficient manner. This background allows the firm to be up-to-date on the functioning process and expectations of the public agencies and private clients involved. It allows Rau and Associates, Inc. to provide the type of services that encompass the many tasks required by a civil engineering project. The range of services includes: · Scheduling/Feasibility · Preliminary Mapping · Conceptual/Schematic Design of Alternatives · Economic Evaluation of Alternatives and Selection of Alternative(s) · Design of Selected Alternative and Preliminary Contract Documents · Modification of Design and Development of Mitigation Measures for Environmental Impacts · Final Design of Project · Final Contract Documents · Project Feasibility - Preliminary Opinions of Probable Construction Costs · Right-of-Way Mapping, Legal Descriptions, Easement Acquisitions, Construction Right-of-Entries · Construction Engineering Services · Quality Assurance or Quality Control · Contract Administration Rau and Associates, Inc. offers an organized and comprehensive project development program which is modified to produce work which is cost effective as each project's goals are identified. There is strong reliance on client participation and feedback to accomplish the goals throughout the project life. BAND ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS 1 Statement of Qualifications March 2002 The Organization Rau and Associates, Inc. is organized into seven informal service divisions: Planning/Environmental Services include feasibility studies, environmental constraints analysis, preliminary conceptual/schematic design, alternative selection, advance planning and scheduling, traffic impact analysis, Environmental Assessments, environmental planning, coordination and administration, permit applications and administration, and preliminary right-of- way planning. Rau and Associates, Inc. closely coordinates surveys and studies outside Rau and Associates, Inc.'s field of expertise with independent consulting firms. Included are wildlife, botanical, archaeological, air quality and noise studies, as needed. Land Surveying and Mapping Services include real property boundary surveys (GPS or standard) and topographic mapping (aerial or ground), right-of-way surveying, right-of-way acquisition procedures, and permit application support mapping. Geotechnical and Geological Services include preliminary soils investigations, geologic hazard identification and mapping, Environmental Assessments, and excavation/embankment stability analysis. "Environmental Assessments" for clearance of real estate for toxic or pollutant materials are not a part of these services. Site Development Civil Engineering Services include the full range of services of project initiation and preliminary design, the incorporation of mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate environmental impacts, final design, completion of contract documents and technical specifications, and cost estimates. Typical projects include site development for commercial or industrial buildings, schools, health related buildings, subdivisions, quarries, dams, bridges and roads. Construction engineering, quality control and assurance, and contract administration are also part of these services. Structural Services include the structural design of one and two story buildings, building rehabilitation projects, bridges, hydraulic structures, retaining structures and erosion prevention structures. Specifications and cost estimates are included in these services. Construction review, shop drawing review, and quality control services complete the services offered in this division. Water System Planning and Design Services includes advance planning, assistance with funding justification and acquisition, capital improvement budgeting and planning, rate structure analysis, design of systems and components, computer or 'by hand' analysis of piping/pressure networks, ground water yield studies, construction contract preparation and administration, quality control and assurance, and construction review, shop drawing review and construction staking. Waste Water System Planning and Design Services includes advance planning, assistance with funding justification and funding acquisition, capital improvement budgeting and planning, rate structure analysis, design of systems and components, computer or 'by hand' analysis of piping/pressure networks, soil absorption capability studies, construction contract preparation and administration, quality control and assurance, and construction review, shop drawing review and construction staking. ~AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CIWL EN~NEERS - LAND SURVEYORS 2 Statement of Qualifications March 2002 Specialties Rau and Associates, Inc. is an independent small business enterprise that provides public agencies and private clients with engineering and surveying services. Rau and Associates, Inc. has its office in Ukiah, California. The company offers services to clients primarily in Mendocino County, and on a specific project basis in Sonoma County, Santa Cruz County, Lake County and Humboldt County. The services offered include: · FEASIBILITY STUDIES · ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES · WATER DISTRIBUTION · ROAD AND STREET DESIGN · COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE DESIGN · GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FOR FOUNDATIONS · MATERIALS TESTING AND CONSTRUCTION REVIEW · SEWER COLLECTION · BRIDGES · BUILDINGS · DAMS · REHABILITATION PROJECTS · SITE DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING · MASTER PLANNING FUNCTIONS · SURVEYS · CONSTRUCTION REVIEW/ADMINiSTRATION Staff Capabilities Staffed by highly qualified civil, environmental, and geotechnical engineers, land surveyors, and technical support staff, Rau and Associates, Inc. has a long experience record on many general civil engineering projects. Each person in the firm is continually educating himself or herself through seminars, classes, and in-house training to stay abreast of the methods and science in use in the engineering/surveying community at large. The majority of the staff is highly trained in the use of computers and state-of-the-ad computer applications for design functions. Rau and Associates, Inc. is continuously upgrading hardware, software, and staff education to provide competent and efficient service. The staff prides itself in being able to team up and interact competently and efficiently with other offices having similar capabilities. ~AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CML ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS 3 Statement of Qualifications March 2002 Personnel at Rau and Associates, Inc. are capable of using the following computer models and software: · HEC-1 · HEC-2 · HEC PAS · Watercad (Hardy-Cross Pipe Analysis) · PONDPACK (Soil Conservation Service Watershed Analysis) · POND-2 (Detention Pond Analysis Program) · Culvert Master (Open Channel Hydraulic Analysis) · ROADCALC HIGHWAY DESIGN PACKAGE [Includes three-dimensional computer modeling and generation · TIN's (triangular irregular networks) · AUTOCAD 13 to 2000 · EAGLEPOINT · ENERCALC · MICROSOFT: WORD, EXCEL, ACCESS, POWERPOINT · ACCESS · SURETRAK · AXlUM (Accounting) The firm uses Wild Total Station survey equipment for a fully integrated and computerized data collection system. Site mappin9 and boundary surveys are generally the first step in developing competent working drawings; Rau and Associates, Inc. carefully plans this work with the project architect to insure that all of the disciplines (civil, electrical, mechanical engineers, landscape architect and project architect) have a base map document upon which they can all rely for their work. Rau and Associates, Inc.'s company culture is continuously reviewed and changed as needed through a formal TQM (Total Quality Management) program with goals and priorities reviewed during bi-weekly meetings of a four person management team. Resources Due to the relatively small size of the firm, the principals maintain a high degree of involvement and management control over each project, thus, facilitating a close client- consultant relationship. In addition, Rau and Associates, Inc. has established close working relationships with other engineering firms and independent consultants. These resources are utilized to augment Rau and Associates, Inc.'s capabilities in order to meet the requirements of each project. The combination of long-term involvement in the local community, continual improvement of technological background and education, practical experience, and personal commitment results in Rau and Associates, Inc.'s ability to respond effectively to client's technical problems on time and within budget. BAND ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS 4 Statement of Qualifications March 2002 Equipment and Facilities In today's fast-track project scheduling, Rau and Associates, Inc. recognizes the need for efficient preparation, modification, and approval of project documents. To facilitate this, Rau and Associates, Inc.'s office is committed to using state-of-the-art computer software and hardware. All design computers are linked to one another through an internal network system. Computers are provided with modems for access to the World Wide Web and E-mail. The primary engineering design and surveying software runs within Autocad. A fully integrated system utilizes the data collectors from Rau and Associates, Inc.'s total station surveying instruments to create three-dimensional models of terrain. Design software modifies the original terrain models to designed roadway or site models for ease in quantity take-offs and plan preparation, public presentations and plan modifications, when necessary. The Microsoft "Office" package operating in Windows is used in the preparation of project study reports, contract documents, and other narrative type documents. This includes Word, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint. Primavera's "SureTrak" is used for project scheduling. Where appropriate, and upon the user's request, clients and subcontractors have access to Rau and Associates, Inc.'s data disks to make their operation and record keeping more efficient and more accurate. All data can be transferred to and from Rau and Associates, Inc.'s office via modem, for fast updates and approvals between other consultants. BAND ASSOCIATES, INC. CML ENGJNEERS - I.~ND SURVEYORS 5 Statement of Qualifications March 2002 Service Organizational Structure Construction Review/ Contract Administratitm George Pou Ron Maine Man Breese Waste Water System Planning and Design Services Mumctpal Sj,wtem. s Private George Rau Ron Maine Ste,.e Phillips Planning/ Environmental Services Master Planning Quarry Plans George Ran Ron Maine Principals George Rau Walt Haydon Roger Vincent Water System Planning and Design Services Municipal ,~vstems Private Water Companies large Private S)stems George Rau Ron M~unc Shasta tta.rmon Ja~ier Rau Ixtnd Surveying/ Mapping Services Construction Staking Boundary Surveys Topographic Surveys GI'S Surveys Javier Ran Walter Haydon Mike Bell Jim Wemer Dams PJridges ('ommerr?al Bultdmgs Resldent~al Buddings /~ehahttitatlon Projerts Roger Vincent George Rau Shasta Harmon Alan Breese Geotechnical ,%rvices and Soils Laboratory b'leld Evaluanons Materials Testing ,'qotl~ Reports George Ran Steve Phillips Jauer Rau Jim Wemer Site Develapment Civil Engineering .~rvice~ ('ornmerclat Industrial Buildlngs Schools Muniapal Heahh ('are Buildings H~gh~ays Roads George Ran RonMaine Roger Vincent Sh~n Harmon ~AND ASSOCIATES, INC. CN1L ENGINEERS - LAND SURVEYORS 6 707.462.6536 707.463.2729fax george@rauandassoc.comE-mail P.O. Box M 100 North Pine Street Ukiah, CA 95482 George C, Rau · Registered Civil Engineer · Registered Geotechnical Engineer · PrinciPal -Rau and Associates, Inc. Professional ExpeHence Mr. Rau began his own firm in June of 1978, in association with Joseph Scherf, Licensed Land Surveyor. In 1980, they formed Scherf and Rau, Inc. On April 1, 1990 the Corporation name was changed to Rau and Associates, Inc., which reflected the purchase of stock from Mr. Scherf and his retirement from the firm. Several younger principals now own minority amounts of stock in the company. Mr. Rau is responsible for various general Civil Engineering projects including: engineering feasibility studies for various infrastructure facilities, bridge and road design and construction, traffic data gathering, onsite wastewater disposal facilities, sewer design, water distribution design, project planning and environmental analysis of projects. Prior to establishing his own business, Mr. Rau worked for the Mendocino County Public Works Department for eight years. He began as a sub-professional engineer and advanced to Deputy Director -Roads and Engineering, a position which he held for three and one half years. Mr. Rau has worked with both public and private clients in his business. Much of the public work has been in connection with site development, water systems, and sewer systems, with some street design and other general civil works. Projects were usually designed and administered for the public entity through the office of Rau and Associates, Inc., or its predecessors. Private clients make up approximately two-thirds of the business of Rau and Associates, Inc.. Work performed includes a broad spectrum of civil engineering projects ranging from small hydroelectric plants, to small dams for irrigation and water supply, to structures, to the common sewer, water, road, bridge, and site development engineering. Rau and Associates, Inc. currently serves as engineer for one private water company, North Gualala Water Company. Mr. Rau is a California Registered Geotechnical Engineer in addition to holding a Civil Engineer's License. He has been involved in many soils and groundwater projects including leachfield evaluations, well testing, hydrogeologic analysis, foundation review and design, and construction review of soils related items. Rau and Associates, Inc. has a small materials laboratory where most common laboratory work for quality control for soils related projects can be carried out. Rau and Associates, Inc. also has a working relationship with a Certified Engineering Geologist (since 1971) and a materials testing laboratory (since 1981) to supplement its knowledge as needed. Mr. Rau is the principal-in-charge of this area of responsibility Work Experience Ukiah, CA 1990-Present Rau and Associates, Inc. Civil and Geotechnical Engineer · President of the firm · Principal in charge of Project Managers · Water Company Engineer, North Gualala Water Co. · City Engineer, City of Willits (1990-1994) · Engineer, Millview County Water District 1980-1990 Scherf and Rau, Inc. Civil and Geotechnical Engineer · Principal in charge of Project Managers · Vice President of Firm · Engineer, Hills Ranch Mutual Water Company · Engineer, Pacific View Mutual Water Company · Engineer, Millview County Water District · City Engineer, City of Willits (1986-1989) Ukiah, CA 1978-1979 George C. Rau, P.E. Civil Engineer · Principal Civil Engineer · Engineer, Millview County Water District Ukiah, CA 1970-1978 Mendocino Public Works Dept. Civil Engineer · Deputy Director - Roads and Engineering · Organized and controlled over 70 road and bridge contracts · Administered County Road Depadment budget · Scheduled design of large projects Ukiah, CA Education 1962 - 1966 U.C. Davis Davis, CA · B.S., Civil Engineering Accreditations Civil Engineer, No. 21908, California, 1972 · Geotechnical Engineer, No. 00710, California, 1987 Professional Memberships American Society of Civil Engineers ° National Society of Professional Engineers · California Society of Professional Engineers · American Water Works Association ° North Coast Builders Exchange · American Society of Testing and Materials ° American Concrete Institute ° Construction Specification Institute ° Mendocino County Employers Council ° Consulting Engineers and Land Surveyors of California Professional References Representative Public clients: County of Mendocino, City of Ukiah, City of Willits, City of Point Arena, Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District, Redwood Valley County Water District, U.S. Indian Health Services, Northern Circle Indian Housing Authority, Round Valley Indian Housing Authority, State of California Department of Transportation, Ukiah Unified School District, Potter Valley Unified School District, Mendocino Unified School District and Mendo-Lake College District. Representative Private clients: North Gualala Water Company, Hills Ranch Mutual Water Company, Holmes Ranch Road Association, Safeway, Cloverdale Redwoods, Louisiana Pacific Corporation, Wright Construction, Inc., BDM Construction, Parnum Paving, Inc., Stolpe Construction, Bedrock, Inc., Young America Homes, Keene Pallet Mill, Eel River Fuels, Frosty Ice, Gualala Redwoods, Inc., CH2M-HilI, and Boyle Engineering. Community Activities 1976-81 1978-84 1982 - Present Potter Valley Citizens Advisory Committee Member and President, Potter Valley Community School District Board of Trustees Air Quality Management District Headng Board Stanley E. Schubert 707462.6536 P.O. Box M 707.463,27L:xJ fax 100 North Pine Street stan@ra, uandassoc corn Ukiah, CA 95482 Project Geologist Professional Experience During employment with various consulting firms, was involved in all phases of geophysical investigations, environmental investigations, as well as site surveys for geologic hazards. Familiar with all types of geological investigations and hydro-geologic studies. Past projects have included Superfund site investigations, geophysical surveys for mining and environmental applications, aquifer contamination studies. Strong working background in soil and water sampling and gao-spatial location of sample collection points utilizing GPS technology. Work Experience September, 2000-Present Rau and Associates, Inc. Project Geologist · Geotechnical site reviews · Geologic Hazards · Reporting and Documentation · Construction Compliance 1998-2000 Self Employed · Designer / Builder 1997-1998 Heringer Ag Management Project Geologist · Surface and subsurface investigations · GPS Survey and geospatial positioning 1995-1996 Acton-Mickelson Environmental Staff Geologist · Surface and subsurface investigations · Geophysical investigations · Field safety officer 1994 PNL National Laboratory DOE Research Fellow · Hydrogeological aquifer studies · Computer analysis Ukiah, CA Hopland, CA Lower Lake, CA El Dorado Hills, CA Hanford, WA Education 1990-1992 Santa Rosa Junior College · A.S.- Geology Santa Rosa, CA 1992-1995 Sonoma State University · B.S.- Geology Rohnert Park, CA Project Experience Directly responsible or jointly responsibility for portions of the following projects: 1. Various geotechnical and/or geologic hazards investigations. Vineyard Development, Snows Lake Ranch Vineyards. GPS site survey of approximately 1600 acres with drilling, sampling, and planning for groundwater utilization and infrastructure. Environmental Investigation, 80 acre Superfund site & former munitions plant, Newhall, CA Design and implementation of geophysical surveys, data collection and compilation of sampling data. Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model for the Hanford Site Unconfined Aquifer System; Hartford Nuclear Reservation, Hartford, WA; study and characterization of the unconfined aquifer using hydrogeological methods. Writing of portions of the final, published report. References Mendocino County Department of Public Works Mr. Bob Parker, Assistant Director 340 Lake Mendocino Drive Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4363 Mr. Doug Ellinger, Sr. Engineer 340 Lake Mendocino Drive Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-4363 City of Ukiah Larry DeKnoblough, Director of Community Services 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-6200 Bill Beard, Retired Director of Public Works 461 Vichy Hills Drive Ukiah, CA 95482 (Phone number available upon request) Rick Seanor, Deputy Public Works Director 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 (707) 463-6200 County of Lake G.R. Shaul, Public Works Director 255 North Forbes Street Lakeport, CA 95453 (707) 263-2341 City of Willits Gordon Logan, City Manager 111 E. Commercial St. Willits, CA 95490 (707) 459-4601 888 8 ~mO Z 0 ~0000~0~0 0~~~ Taber Consultants SCHEDULE OF FEES -Table 19 Effective January 2, ;)002 Civil Engineer IV Civil Engineer III Civil Engineer II Land Surveyor Civil Engineer I Lab-Survey Manager Project Professional/Project Geologist Technician IV Technician III Technician II Technician I Instrument Operator (PW) Rodman (PW) Materials Tester (PW) Materials Tester W/gauge (PW) Administration Engineering Technician with Nuclear Gauge/Vehicle Vehicle Use Outside Services Over $1,000 Outside Services Under $1,000 (Aggregate amount) Requested Ovedime: Expert Witness/Testimony at Trial, Deposition, Arbitration Laboratory Tests: Texture Analysis (Mendocino County Health Dept.) Unit Dry Weight-Moisture Content (Tube Sample or Ped) Sand Equivalent (CTM 217) Sieve Analysis - Coarse Aggregates (CTM 202) Sieve Analysis - Fine Aggregate (CTM 202) Sand Equivalent & Sieve Analysis Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D1557) 4" Mold 6" Mold Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D698) Maximum Wet Density (CTM 216) Unit Weight of Aggregate (CTM 212) Method A or B Method C Crushed Particle Analysis (CTM 205) Cleanness Value (CTM 227) Durability Index (CTM 229) Specific Gravity & Absorption (CTM 206} Plasticity Index (ASTM 4318) Expansion Index (UBC Standard 29.2) Unit Weight of Fresh Concrete (CTM 518) Ball Penetration (CTM 533) Air Content of Fresh Concrete (CTM 504} Sample Preparation Times Special Equipment Rates: Computer Aided Design Software $10.00/hr. Pachometer R-Meter $50.00/per day* Stream Flow Meter $150.00/per day* All Terrain Vehicle $40.00/per day* Generator $40.00/per day* Pump $20.00/per day* ' One Day Minimum Charge Supplemental Billings: Engineering Copies Engineering Copies Stereo Air Photos Assessor's Map Copies Survey Monuments Steel Fence Posts R02069 $122.00/hr. 105.00/hr. 85.00/hr. 80.00/hr. 70.00/hr. 80.00/hr. 65.00/hr. 55.00/hr. 50.00/hr. 45.00/hr. 25.00/hr. 91.00/hr. 67.00/hr. 77.00/hr. 83.00/hr. 40.00/hr. 62.00/hr. 0.40/mile Cost + 5% Cost + 15% 150% of Regular Rate $200.00/hr. (4 hour minimum) $ 35.00/ea. 20.00/ea. 56.00/ea. 37.00/ea. 66.00/ea. 154.00/ea. 135.00/ea. 150.00/ea. 120.00/ea. 138.00/ea. 50.00/ea. 35.00lea. 62.00/ea. 62.00/ea. 130.00/ea. 63.00/ea. 150.00/ea. 180.00/ea. Technician Hourly Rate Technician Hourly Rate Technician Hourly Rate Technician Hourly Rate 24 X 36 18 X26 $1.50/sheet $1.00/sheet $18.00/pair $2.00/sheet $2.00/each $2.00/each Invoices will be rendered monthly, as a final or progress billing, whichever applies, and are payable upon receipt, unless a mutually acceptable payment schedule has been established. Late Fees at a rate of 1 '/~% per month, computed and charged monthly on the unpaid balances, shall be payable on accounts not paid within 30 days from invoice date. BACE Geotechnical A Division of Brunsing Associates, Inc. March 26, 2002 3537-PR Ms. Diana Steele, P.E. Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 RE: Proposal to Provide Geotechnical Services Related to the Design and Construction of Orchard Avenue Bridge at Orr Creek and Related Street Improvements. Dear Ms. Steele, BACE Geotechnical, a division of Brunsing Associates, Inc. (BAI) is pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Ukiah to provide a geotechnical investigation followed by construction observation and testing for the Orchard Avenue Bridge primarily over Orr Creek and Brush Street improvements. 1. Firm Qualifications BAI's principal place of business is located at 5803 Skylane Blvd, Windsor, California. BAI also has a field office located at 761 South State Street, Ukiah. BAI has offices located in Windsor and Ukiah since 1987, and has provided services in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties since it's founding in 1985. As much as possible, BAI will dispatch construction observation services from our Ukiah office in order to minimize travel cost to the client. BAI's Principal Engineering Geologist, Erik Olsborg is a former Ukiah resident, and is very familiar with the Ukiah area. BAI is a full service geosciences and engineering firm located in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties that has been practicing in geosciences and providing geotechnical engineering services since 1985. BAI is a firm with over 17 years of experience. Senior staff that would manage these projects, provide tectmical guidance, and review, each have over 25 years of experience in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties. BAI's staff is composed of over 20 professionals including two registered geotechnical engineers, three registered professional engineers, one certified engineering geologist and an additional three registered geologists. Our staff has prior employment experience as consultants, regulators, general contractors, and as municipal employees. This combined knowledge assures the City of Ukiah of P.O. Box 749, Windsor, CA 95492 Phone: (707) 838-0780 Fax: (707) 838-4420 City of Ukiah March 26, 2002 Page 2 3537-PR receiving the greatest value for their cost due to our senior staff technical experience and credentials, local knowledge of the project area, and familiarity with tile political background, permitting process, and regulatory protocol in Mendocino County. BAI has in house support services including state certified analytical, geotechnical and materials testing laboratories, as well as highly experienced certified field technicians for geotechnical testing with 40-hour health and safety training. BAI has completed over a dozen significant geotechnical projects in the area west of Highway 101 in Ukiah including the Ukiah Valley General Hospital, as well as commercial and residential projects. Therefore, BAI is extremely familiar with the Ukiah Valley alluvium, Pliocene-Pleistocene sediments, and underlying Franciscan complex bedrock known to exist in the area. BAI has completed over two dozen geotechnical studies for both major and minor road and highway bridges. Many of these projects have required compliance with CalTrans road and bridge design manuals. BAI has specific experience in bridge abutments, retaining walls, piling design, as well as scour and erosion studies for creek and river crossings. BAI has completed geotechnical studies in numerous contaminated properties and has completed extensive soils and water analysis for contaminants of concern. Plate 1 is a matrix summary of BAI's relevant project experience. Resumes of key personnel are provided and relevant experience is highlighted in blue for ease of proposal review. 2. Scope of Work Based upon the project description presented in your Request For Proposals (RFP), we anticipate the following tasks will be necessary for our investigation. The tasks would be performed in accordance with our enclosed project schedule. At notice of award of Consultant Agreement, BAI would immediately perform file following: · Schedule exploration drilling equipment for the day after the contract is to be awarded. · Prepare a workplan for the channel bank borings to submit to Fish and Game and Regional Water Quality Control Board for permitting. City of Ukiah March 26, 2002 Page 3 3537-PR · Attend a kick-off meeting with the Public Works Director/Engineer and assigned staff. · Reconnaissance of the creek channel and areas of planned street improvements. · Locate and mark planned borings and call Underground Service Alert. BAI would commence the subsurface exploration the day after execution of the Service Agreement. BAI would start the test borings (drilling, logging, and sampling) for the abutments and pile bent simultaneously (two drill rigs, if available). Relatively intact samples would be obtained from the borings using Modified California split-spoon and standard penetration samplers. · Drilling equipment would be provided by BAI's subcontractor; Weeks Drilling, Clearheart Drilling and/or Pearson Exploration. The test boring for the bent would be drilled using a portable drill rig, powered from a truck-mounted motor via hydraulic hoses. The portable drill rig would use hollow-stem or flight auger equipment. The test borings for the abutments (one near each channel bank) would be drilled with a truck-mounted drill rig using hollow-stem, or if necessary, rotary-wash equipment. · Each of the abutments and bent borings would be 40 to 60 feet in depth below the ground surface. BAI would also drill one or two auger test borings within the creek cham~el to determine seasonal bedload depth for scour analysis. The test boring(s) would be drilled, logged, and sampled using light auger (Beaver) equipment, provided by BAI's subcontractor, Compu-Draft. The boring(s) would be approximately 10 to 15 feet in depth. For the Orchard Avenue and Brush Street improvements, BAI would perform 7 to 9 test pits or borings from about 5 to 10 feet in depth. Loose bulk and undisturbed samples would be obtained for subsequent laboratory testing. · BAI would commence laboratory testing on available soil samples as the first boring(s) is/are completed. · Laboratory testing for the bridge foundation and retaining wall design criteria would consist of moisture content/dry density, classification (grain City of Ukiah March 26, 2002 Page 4 3537-PR size analysis) and triaxial shear strength on selected samples recovered from the test borings, as appropriate. Laboratory testing for the street improvements would consist of moisture content/dry density, classification (Atterberg Limits and grain size analysis), maximum dry density (compaction), and resistance (R-) value. BAI would perform all the above tests in our Windsor laboratory except R-value, which would be performed by Cooper Testing Laboratories in Petaluma. · BAI would also test the soil and ground water for sulfates, pH, resistivity, and other conditions that may have an adverse effect on subsurface concrete. BAI's Geotechnical Engineers and Engineering Geologists would analyze the soil and rock conditions encountered in our borings and tested in our laboratory in order to determine bridge, abutment, and retaining wall foundation design criteria. If spread footings appear appropriate, BAI would perform in-situ load tests on the supporting soils to determine bearing capacity. In-situ tests would be performed by BAI's subcontractor VBI In-Situ Testing. · If the foundations are to consist of piles not founded in bedrock, BAI would perform an analysis for negative skin friction. BAI's investigation and foundation design analysis would be performed in accordance with the "Bridge Design Specifications, Load Factor Design Version" dated April 2000, as published by Caltrans. For the street improvements, BAI would determine the depths of weak soil to be removed to expose firm, supporting soils for planned fills and/or street pavement. · BAI would provide recommendations for site preparation, grading and the need for street subdrainage. Based upon traffic indices (T.I.'s) of 9 and 10 for Orchard Avenue and Brush Street, respectively, BAI would use the obtained R-value test data to provide pavement section designs. · BAI's investigation and street improvement recommendations would be performed in accordance with CalTrans "Highway Design Manual". City of Ukiah March 26, 2002 Page 5 3537-PR BAI would prepare two final reports; one report would be for the bridge, retaining structures and approach fills; as well as the Orchard Avenue improvements; the other report would be for the Brush Street improvements. Both reports would include a reproducible site plan and subsurface profile with boring logs on a 24-inch by 36-inch drawing sheet. Twenty copies of each report would be presented to the city upon completion on the project. · Prior to construction, BAI would review the geotechnical related portions of the project plans for conformance with BAI's report recommendations. During bridge construction, BAI's Project Engineers and/or Engineering Technicians would be present to observe the foundation excavations and steel placement (if drilled piers or footings are used) or observe the pile driving operations. BAI's Engineering Technicians would also observe the concrete placement operations, provide field tests, and cast cylinders for subsequent laboratory testing. For the Orchard Avenue grading operations, BAI would observe the removal of weak soils and the preparation of supporting soils. BAI would then observe the fill placement operations and provide field density-relative compaction tests. · Written construction progress memorandums would be provided on a weekly basis to the city, or more-frequently as needed. BAI would prepare final reports for the bridge foundations and Orchard Avenue reconstruction. The reports would summarize BAI's Observations and results of field and laboratory tests; along with conclusions regarding conformance of the work to the project plans and BAI's recommendations. 3. Proposed Compensation Compensation for performing the work of the Geotechnical Agreement(s) will be on a time and expense basis with a not-to-exceed amount. As outline on the attached cost estimate sheets, the cost of our Geotechnical Investigation will not exceed $32,640.00 and the cost of our construction observation and testing services will not exceed $29,985.00. These costs are contingent upon these services being performed prior to the end of 2002 for the investigation and prior to the end of 2003 for the construction services. These costs are determined by BAI's Schedule of Fees, attached to this proposal. Since no Caltrans review is anticipated for this project, no time has been budgeted to provide response(s) to Caltrans comments. City of Ukiah March 26, 2002 Page 6 3537-PR 4. Proposed Subcontractors As mentioned in Section 2, above, BAI's subcontractors will include Clearheart Drilling for the bent, and they or Weeks Drilling or Pearson Exploration for the abutments and nearby street improvements. Compu-Drafts' portable Beaver drill rig will be used for the channel scour investigation. VBI In-Situ Testing will be used for in-situ load testing of the supporting soils if footings appear suitable for the bridge support. Resistance (R~) value testing will be performed by Cooper Testing Laboratory. No other subcontractors or subconsultants are planned for our investigation or construction activities. 5. Consultant References leff Morris, P.E., Morris Engineering (707) 485-1133 · Private Road Bridge over George Young Creek, Kendall Jackson Vineyards, Alexander Valley, Sonoma County · Private Road Bridge over Little Sulphur Creek, Pocket Ranch, Sonoma County · Guidiville Rancheria Bridge over Sulphur Creek, near Vichy Springs Road, Ukiah, Mendocino County · Private Driveway Bridge over San Gregorio Creek, La Honda, San Mateo County · Private Road Bridge over Windsor Creek, near Brooks Road, Windsor, Sonoma County Kathleen Amaru, Caltrans Contract Manager, Caltrans 916-227-7197 · Sacramento Street Overcrossing, Highway 37, Vallejo, Solano County · Moccoco Overcrossing, Highway 680 approach to the New Benicia-Martinez Bridge, Martinez, Contra Costa County. David Duncan, P.E.., California Parks & Recreation Department (707) 937-5804 · Two replacement Bridges over Little River, Van Damme Park, Little River, Mendocino County City of Ukiah March 26, 2002 Page 7 3537-PR Philip Sales, Sonoma Coun _ty Regional Parks (707) 565-2041 Light Vehicle/Pedestrian Bridge over Stockhoff Creek, Stillwater Cove Regional Park, Sonoma County · Pedestrian Bridge over tributary to Pruit Creek, Shiloh Ranch Regional Park, Sonoma County · Vehicle Access Bridge over Dam C Spillway, Foothill Regional Park, Sonoma County 6. Other Information As shown on the attached Planned Project Schedule, Plate 2, BAI will perform the investigation services in the time allotted in your RFP. Further, BAI currently conforms with, or exceeds your insurance requirements. Respectfully Submitted, Thomas P. Brunsing, PhD., P.E. Principal Engineer Attachments Erik E. Olsborg, E.G. Principal Engineering Geologist ttachments Thomas P. Brunsing Principal Engineer Dr. Brunsing is the Principal of BAI providing geological and environmental engineering expertise in all aspects of hazardous waste site and facility assessments and remedial design. He has managed over 200 preliminary site assessments, over 200 remedial investigations, and over 100 site cleanups. In addition, he has provided oversight on over 200 UST remediation projects. Dr. Brunsing has also provided remedial design engineering to five California State Superfund sites. He has provided oversight for dosure and post closure land use of both private and public sectors sites. Dr. Brunsing has directed groundwater investigations and mitigation efforts on nine solid waste landfill projects. Project experience includes development of treatment systems for industrial discharges and contaminated groundwater, preparation of bid documents and plans and specifications, and construction management. As a private consultant to the U.S. government, industry and to legal counsel, Dr. Brunsing has reviewed investigations and evaluations of remedial alternatives for major national sites including the Stringfellow Acid Pits site, a closed Class I landfill in Southern California, the Rocky Mountain Arsenal in Colorado, the Aerojet General site in Sacramento, the LARCO Refinery in Casper, Wyoming, and Gulf State Utilities, Lake Charles, LA_ He continues to research innovative waste removal, treatment, and disposal technologies. Dr. Brunsing has provided contractor management on citywide remediation projects for soil and groundwater contamination in three Wyoming cities. These involved detailed design and installation of 28 treatment facilities and the installation of several hundred vadose and groundwater extraction wells and subgrade conduits. The project included design and installation of subgrade and treatment system sensors and control system, as well as process logic controller and remote monitoring systems. Dr. Brunsing has provided technical management of a $2 million site cleanup as prime consultant to a general contractor; project management of the detailed design and construction of a $1.5 million dollar remedial system installation; direction of a $3 million Superfund Site project; and management of a $1.2 million dollar landfill closure and post closure development project. Education Ph.D., 19~0 M.S., 1976 B.S., 1974 Geological Engineering University of California, Berkeley, CA Geotechnical Engineering/Soil and Rock Mechanics University of California, Berkeley, CA Civil Engineering University of California, Berkeley, California Registrations, Licenses, and Certifications · Registered Professional Engineer, California 39434 · Registered Environmental Assessor, California 1090 · Registered Civil Engineer, Wyoming 5864 · Certified Environmental Manager, Nevada EM-0264 · Registered Environmental Professional, National 3076 · Environmental Manager in the State of Nevada · EAA Certified Environmental ll~pector · Certified Mine Safety Training · Certified Hazardous Waste Site Supervisor Training · OSHA Health & Safety Training, 40-hours Brunsing Associates, Inc.l Thomas P. Brunsing Special Expertise · Innovative remedial designs · HTRW and landfill site cleanups · Brownfield project expediter · Legal testimony/agency interaction · Independent project cost/benefit evaluations · Design/construct procedure expert · Options evaluations - large complex contaminated sites Project Management Experience Principal Engineer for construction monitoring and soil and groundwater management of pipeline and storage tank construction within contaminated section of Kwana Springs Road. Argonaut Constructors Principal Engineer for construction monitoring and soil and groundwater management of pipeline and storage tank construction within contaminated section of Burbank Road. Argonaut Constractors Principal Engineer for construction monitoring and soil and groundwater management of pipeline and storage tank construction within contaminated section of Cotati East Road. Argonaut Constructors · Project Director for City Wide UST remediation in Greybull and Basin (17 Sites). Approximately 2 miles of multi conduit pipeline was constructed throughout the city. State of Wyoming, DEO. · Project Director for City Wide UST remediation in Powell (11 Sites). Approximately 1.5 miles of multi conduit pipeline was constructed throughout the city. State of Wyomin_~ DEQ. · Project Director for City Wide UST remediation in Jackson (9 Sites). Approximately 1 mile of multi conduit pipeline was constructed throughout the city. State of Wyoming, DEQ. · Design Engineer for four City water supply pumpstation UST remediation/upgrades in support of construction contract. City of Santa Rosa. Principal-in-Charge, managed an investigation, remedial design, and construction of a combination slurry cut-off wall and groundwater extraction/treatment system in San Rafael. Developed a unique and innovative remedial solution, which included a partial slurry wall penetrating two aquifers in combination with dual-oriented, composite construction extraction trenches. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Project Engineer, procured an NPDES permit and designed modifications of an accompanying facility for a groundwater extraction and treatment system in Healdsburg. Included a converted water storage tank outfitted with air and water manifolding for stripping volatile organics from groundwater prior to discharging to a tributary to the Russian River. Fairchild Camera & Brunsing Associates, Inc.l i Thomas P. Brunsing InstrumenL Project Engineer, developed a continuous tunnel lining system for rapid construction of underground transit system. U.S. Depadment of Transportation. Principal Engineer for Gleason Beach Stabilization Project, design and construction management of bluff stabili~,ation and cutoff wall hydrogeologic barrier for 20 residence in a Coastal community. Gleason Beach Homeowners Assodation and 7 Individual Resident Owners. Principal Engineer, performed quality assurance and project review of over 200 UST investigations. Project Director for the RI/FS and design/construct process on a California Superfund site for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Included remedial investigation/feasibility study, public participation, and community relations planning, risk assessment, and remedial planning, design, and implementation. Sacramento Municipal Utility District. Principal-in-Charge, managed a site investigation, remedial design, and construction of a combination slurry cut-off wall and groundwater extraction/treatment system in San Rafael. Developed a unique and innovative remedial solution, which included a partial slurry wall penetrating two aquifers in combination with dual-oriented, composite construction extraction trenches. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. Project Manager, performed a remedial investigation of a multiple aquifer hexavalent chromium contamination plume. Formulated a deep groundwater investigation/remediation strategy, acquired all necessary discharge permits for groundwater extraction and remediation, and participated in public hearings. Britz Fertilizer. Senior Reviewer, prepared over 200 preliminary assessments for buyers, sellers, and lending institutions on industrial and commercial properties. Various Clients. Project Manager, applied jet grouting technology to solid and hazardous waste mitigation. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Project Manager, performed a laboratory evaluation of soil property and stratigraphic influences on application of the block displacement grouting technique to chemical waste sites. National Science Foundation. Project Manager, Remedial Design on closure of two landfills covering 75 acres at Los Alamitos Armed Forces Reserve. Work carried out under the EECA process as an expedited CERCI~ cleanup. Army National Guard. Thomas Brunsing was the Project Manager, For the A Street via duct geotechnical investigation in Rock Springs, Wyoming. The Via duct is a two cone building crossing over the Burlington Northern Railroad yard the crossing was undermined by abandoned underground coal mine working. Client Wyoming Depadaient of Environmental Quality. Brunsing Associates, Inc.,l il Erik E. Olsborg Principal Engineering Geologist Mr. Olsborg is the Principal Engineering Geologist with BAL with extensive experience including fault hazard investigations, geologic and geotechnical reconnaissance and investigation. Typical projects he has either directed or implemented include hillside developments, ocean bluff studies, landslide investigation and mitigation, groundwater investigations, landfill cap characterizations, fault hazard investigations, geologic hazard and soil investigations, and domestic well and road construction environmental investigations. Mr. Olsborg is a former member of the Well Standards Advisory Board of Sonoma County. Education B.A., 1972 Geology. Minors: Oceanography, Chemistry and Business California State University, San Jose, CA Registrations, Licenses, and Certifications · American Institute of Professional Geologists, · Certified Professional Geologist - 6822 · California, Certified Engineering Geologist - 1072 · California, Registered Geologist- 3551 · Oregon, Certified Engineering Geologist - E912 · Wyoming, Registered Professional Geologist - PG-428 · OSHA Health & Safety Training, 40 Hours. Project ExpeHence Erik Olsborg was the Engineering Geologist for the geotechnical investigation for the expansion of Hwy. 680 crossing from Martinez to Benicia. This investigation involved over a large deep geologic boring into bedrock indulging contaminated marine and alluvial sediments. Special drilling platforms were required and protection of wetlands were assured by proper management of drilling fluids and cuttings. Client Cai Trans. Erik Olsborg was the Engineering Geologist for the geotechnical study for Sacramento Street over crossing bridge over Hwy. 137 in Vallejo. California special drilling protocols were required to address drilling in a high traffic area and drilling through contaminated sediments. The study determined both abutment and bent design parameter. Client Cai Trans. County Road Bridges, Sonoma County, California - Project Geologist during geotechnical investigations for the following bridges: Watertrough Road over Atascadero Creek; Bohemian Highway over Dutch Bill Creek; Mark West Springs Road-Porter Creek Road over Mark West Creek; Valley Ford Road over Estero Americano Creek; Corona Road over Petaluma River; and two Willow Creek Road bridges over Willow Creek. Client: County of Sonoma, Dept. of Public Works Proposed Bicentennial Way Extension, Santa Rosa, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation for the road extension from Mendocino Avenue to Fountain Grove Parkway. Client: City of Santa Rosa Buzzard Rock Campground, Lake Sonoma Recreational Development, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation for a hillside recreational facility including roads, bridges, and attendant structures. Client: Harris & Associates, Civil Engineers Brunsing Associates, Inc.l l Erik E. Olsborg Russian River Aqueduct - Project Geologist for Cotati Tank Landslide Study. Client- Sonoma County Water Agency. Anadel Reservoirs 1 and 2 - Project Geologist for Seismic study for tank tie downs. Client- Sonoma County Water Agency. Lilley Creek Conduit - Project Geologist for Geotechnical investigation. Client- Sonoma County Water Agency. Commerce Blvd conduit and Cotati Highway 116 pipeline crossing - Project Geologist for the Pipe jacking studies. Client- Sonoma County Water Agency. Ten water storage tanks - Project Geologist for the Seismic evaluation for seismic upgrades throughout the city. Client: Ci_ty of Santa Rosa Brooktrail zone 3E Water Tank - Project Geologist for the Siting Study North Lakeport Water Project - Project Geologist for Clienlz Lake County Department of Public Works Project Geologist -Geotechnical Services During Construction Clienlz Callayomi CountyWater District Project Geologist -Geotechnical Services During Construction Clienl: Spring Valley Water District Project Geologist for Geotechnical Services During Construction Client: South Fort Bragg Water District Project Geologist for Geotechnical Services During Construction for Bypass study Client City of Novato Kinnybrook Subdivision, Kenwood, California - Project Manager during a geotechnical investigation for a hillside subdivision, including water tank sites and approximately three miles of roadways. Clienl: Lockwood Realty Spring Lake Park Visitor's Center, Santa Rosa, California - Project Manager during a geotechnical investigation for a recreational facility. Client: Sonoma County Water Agency Forestville Reservoir No. 2, Forestville, California - Project Manager during a geotechnical investigahon for a hillside, million-gallon water tank near the Mount Jackson Fault. Client:. Sonoma Coun _ty Water Agency Public Safety Building, Santa Rosa, California - Project Geologist during an Alquist-Priolo fault hazard investigation for design of a municipal facility. Clien~z City of Santa Rosa Heights Mutual Water Company, Sonoma County, California - Project Manager during a ground water study for a mutual water system production well. ClienP. Heights Mutual Water Company Kaiser Medical Center, Santa Rosa, California - Project Manager during an Alquist-Priolo fault hazard investigation for design of a regional hospital. Clienl: Kaiser Medical Center Field Office and Storage Pad, The Geysers, California - Project Manager for a geotechnical investigation during design and construction of an office and equipment storage facility. Client: Brunsing Associates, Inc.l~il Edk E. Olsborg GEO Operator Corporation 1111 Sonoma Avenue Medical Building, Santa Rosa, California - Project Geologist during an Alquist- Priolo fault hazard and soil investigation for design of a Medical Building. Client: Thomas Fruiht, Architect Guerneville Elementary School Addition, Guerneville, California - Project Geologist for a geologic hazard and soil investigation for a new school building. Client: Guerneville School District Redbud Hospital, Clearlake Highlands, California - Project Manager during seismic hazards investigation for the Hospital Additions. Chent: Redbud Hospital Horicon Elementary School Addition, Annapolis, California - Project Manager for a geologic hazards and soil investigation for a new school building. Client: Horicon School District Crystal Springs Subdivision, Sonoma County, California - Project Manager during a geotechnical investigation for a hillside subdivision, including a ground water study for domestic wells and construction of a new road. Client: March Partners Willits Continuation High School, Willits, California - Project Manager during an Alquist-Priolo fault hazard and soil investigation for a new site. Client: Willits Unified School District Redwood Glades Apartments, Fairfax, California - Project Manager during the monitoring of an active landslide uphill from an apartment complex. Client: Luchetti/Redwood Glades Apartments Blosser Lane Elementary School, Willits, California - Project Manager during a geologic hazards and soil investigation for a new school site. Client: Willits Unified School District Gloria Ferrer Winery, Sonoma County, California - Project Manager during a design and construction of an access road, building pads and champagne storage caves. Client: Freixenet Sonoma Well Pad 2-5.7, The Geysers, Sonoma County, California - Project Manager for a geotechnical investigation during design and construction of a geothermal well pad, sump and adjacent road realignment. Client: GEO Operator Corporation Stag's Leap Wine Cellars, Yountville, California - Project Manager during a groundwater investigation for a large-capacity production well. Client: Stag's Leap Wine Meadowood Resort Clubhouse and Additions, SE Helena, California - Project Manager during geotechnical investigations for various phases of development. Client: Pacific Union Company Healdsburg Refuse Disposal Site, Sonoma County, California - Project Geologist during a geologic/groundwater investigation. Client: County of Sonoma, Dept. of Sanitation Los Alamos Road Landslide, Sonoma County, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation of a large landslide. Client: County of Sonoma, Dept. of Public Works County Road Landslides, Mendocino County, California - Project Geologist during geotechnical investigations of landslides affecting the following County Roads: East Hill Road; Mountain View Road; Fish Rock Road; Mountain House Road; Bell Springs Road; Greenwood Road; West Side Brunsing Associates, Inc.l il Edk E. Olsborg Potter Valley Road; Usal Road; and several roads in Brooktrails. Client: County of Mendocino Pelican Plaza, Bodega Bay, California - Project Manager during an Alquist-Priolo fault hazard investigation of a retail shopping center. Client: Estes/Pelican Plaza Porto Bodega - Sandpiper Restaurant, Bodega Bay, California - Project Manager during an Alquist- Priolo fault hazard investigation for a commercial and residential development. Client: Porto Bodega Development Company Oceana Marina, Dillon Beach, California Project Manager during geologic/fault hazard investigation for an ocean-bluff condominium project. Client: California Housing Corporation Mendocino Coast Education Center, College of the Redwoods, Fort Bragg, California - Project Geologist for a geologic reconnaissance of a proposed school site. Client: College of the Redwoods Albion River Inn Expansion, Albion, California - Project Manager for a geologic reconnaissance and a geotechnical investigation for additions to the Inn facility. Client: Albion River Inn Smuggler's Inn Resort, Mendocino, California - Project Manager during a geologic hazards (coastal bluff stability) and limited soil investigation for a proposed motel/restaurant complex. Client: Private Owner The Brown Pelican Motel-Lodge, Bodega Bay, California - Project Geologist during an Alquist-Priolo fault hazard investigation for a motel-lodge complex. Client: Mr. & Mrs. }ohn LeBaron Sundstrom Building, Gualala, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation for a commercial (retail) development. Client: Jay Baker Coastal Wind Farms, Salmon Creek Road, Sonoma County, California - Project Manager during a geotechnical investigation for a commercial wind-energy projects. Client: Coastal Wind Farms Point Arena Village Apa~iments, Point Arena, California - Project Consultant during a soil investigation for an apartment complex. Client: GGP Development Mendocino Elementary School, Mendocino, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation for school additions. Client: Mendocino County Office of Education Bodega Bay Village, Bodega Bay, California - Project Manager during a geologic hazards investigation for a large residential development. Client: Molinaro/V.A. Scudero Associates The Boatel Resort, Iverness, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation for a resort building addition at the edge of Tomalas Bay. Client: The Boatel Resort Surfwood Subdivision Unit IV, Mendocino, California - Project manager during a geotechnical investigation of a 50-lot hillside subdivision. Client: Embarcadero Development Company Former Grader Fish Building, Noyo Harbor, Fort Bragg, California - Project Geologist during a geologic reconnaissance for a school addition. Client: Noyo Interests, Inc. Various single-Family Residential Projects - Project Manager or Project Geologist during geotechnical Brunsing Associates, lnc. Edk E. Olsborg investigation for coastal sites in Westport, Fort Bragg, Caspar, Point Cabrillo, Mendocino, Little River, Albion, Elk, Irish Beach, Point Arena, Anchor Bay, Gualala, The Sea Ranch, Salmon Creek, and Bodega Bay. Greenwood School Additions, Elk, California - Project Geologist during a geologic reconnaissance for a school addition. Client: Mendocino County of Education Harbor Lite Lodge Additions, Noyo Harbor, Fort Bragg, California - Project Manager during geotechnical investigations for a bluff top inn building. Client: Harbor Lite Lodge Minor Subdivision, Gualala, California - Project Geologist during a geotechnical investigation of a bluff top residential development. Client: Private Owner Arena Cove Sports Resort, Point Arena, California - Project manager during a geotechnical investigation for an inn facility, RV park, and a fish processing building. Client: Egan/Dupont Consulting Services Brunsing Associates, Inc. Peter R. Dodsworth Geotechnical Engineer Mr. Dodsworth has performed geotechnical and structural materials engineering during design and construction phases of a variety of projects. As well as traditional analysis and project management, project responsibilities have included preparation of bid documents and contract administration. In addition, Mr. Dodsworth has provided testimony and consulting services during arbitration of construction claims and planning commission/city council meetings. He has provided engineering services in various terrains, including: compressible soils around San Francisco Bay, expansive soils and hillside sites in northern and Central Valley of California, limestone/coral and volcanic soils of the Pacific Islands, the Arctic regions, and northeast and central Scotland. Projects have included commercial buildings, hospitals, emergency service facilities, highrises, reservoirs, roads and bridges, landslide evaluation and repair, seismic evaluation of water tanks/reservoirs and geotechnical instrumentation. Mr. Dodsworth has provided effective management on multi-task, multi- discipline projects including geologic reconnaissance, geophysical surveys, and hazardous materials assessments. He has also supported post-development over closed landfills. Education B.S., 1973 Registrations Civil Engineering, 1973 San Francisco State University, California · Registered Geotechnical Engineer, California 278 · Registered Civil Engineer, California 31617 Special Expertise · Geotechnical/structural engineering · Seismic evaluations and landslide repair · Geologic investigations/construction oversight · Corrosion evaluations · Foundation reviews and design criteria · Shoreline erosion protection design Project Experience Peter Dodsworth was the Geotechnical Engineer for the geotechnical investigation for the expansion of Hwy. 680 crossing from Martinez to Benicia. This investigation involved over a large deep geologic boring into bedrock indulging contaminated marine and alluvial sediments. Special drilling platforms were required and protection of wetlands were assured by proper management of drilling fluids and cuttings. Client Cal Trans. Peter Dodsworth was the Geotechnical Engineer for the geotechnical study for Sacramento Street over crossing bridge over Hwy. 137 in Vallejo. California special drilling protocols were required to address drilling in a high traffic area and drilling through contaminated sediments. The study determined both abutment and bent design parameter. Client Cai Trans. Middle Fork Tuolumne River Bridge, Tuolumne County, California - Team Leader for geotechnical investigation and consultation during design of new bridge to replace the twin culvert crossing washed away during the January 1997 storms. The new bridge is over 110 feet in length, with a span of about 60 feet. The bridge was constructed using reinforced concrete decking, and approach slabs, supported above grade, on pier caps with a drilled cast-in-place concrete pier foundation. Alternative foundation types were evaluated, including end bearing Brunsing Associates, Inc.l l Peter R, Dodsworth piers, friction piers, and spread footings, which would require a sheet Geotechnical recommendations for riprap scour protection were also provided. Engineering Bureau for Hetch Hetchy Water and Power, City of San Francisco. pile cofferdam- Client: Utilities Early Intake Bridge, Tuolumne County, California - Team Leader for geotechnical investigation for the proposed replacement bridge crossing the north fork of the Tuolumne River. Preliminary recommendations regarding the foundation type (spread footings) and riverbank protection to prevent scour were provided. Client: Utilities Engineering Bureau for Hetch Hetchy Water and Power, City of San Francisco. "A' Street Bridge and Mall Span, Santa Rosa, California - Project Engineer during installation of driven pile foundation for both structures, which span the Third Street underpass and associated retaining walls up to 18 feet high. These structures are a combination of steel frame and reinforced concrete with column loads up to 1,200 kips. Client: Hahn Development. Squaw Creek Road, The Geysers, Sonoma County, California - Project Engineer during geotechnical/geologic investigation and project manager for monitoring services during construction of a 5.3 - mile road over steep, dissected terrain with numerous landslides and creek crossings; including deep hillside compacted fills, welded-wire compacted fill walls, post-tensioned anchor and supported rock cuts, pier and lagging walls, and bridge abutments. Client: GEO Operator Corp. Lake Sonoma Recreational Facilities, Sonoma County, California - Project Manager during geologic and soil investigation for the Corps of Engineers for several miles of roads, ll0-foot boat launch, marina, large inundated fills, and a three-hinged-arch concrete bridge over steep landslide- prone terrain. Client: US Army Corps of Engineers. Koror-Balbelthaup Bridge, Palau Islands - Project Manager during field exploration for deep pile foundation in coral reef deposits over basalt bedrock, for post-tensioned box girder bridge spanning 790 feet. CHent: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Larkspur Pedestrian Bridge, Larkspur, California - Project Engineer during geotechnical engineering for box girder with a driven pile foundation constructed over compressible soils (Bay Mud) of varying thickness. Client: City of Larkspur. State Route 12, Suisun City, California - Lead Consultant at the conclusion of the materials report for California Depa~iaient of Transportation (Caltrans) for 3-mile segment of Route 12 to be widened to a four lane divided highway. Client: City of Suisun. Sealand Dock, Dutch Harbor, Alaska - Resident engineer during construction of timber dock with grouted, post-tensioned pipe pile dolphins. Included evaluation of the extent of fire damage to timber superstructure. Client: Sealand Corp. · Foutaingrove Ranch Assessment District No. 2, Santa Rosa, California - Project Manager during geotechnical Investigation of new four-lane divided roadway, existing roadway improvements, and three 0.5 to 1.5 million-gallon water storage tanks. Client:. Teachers Management Instrument Corp. Fountaingrove Parkway Extension, Santa Rosa, California - Evaluation of geologic, geotechnical and seismic hazards for initial EIR for several proposed roadway alignment alternatives. Client: Sedwa¥-Brooke for City of Santa Rosa. · Mendocino College, Ukiah, California - Project manager during geoteclmical and geologic Brunsing Associates, Inc.l Peter R. Dodsworth investigations and construction observation and testing for a new 137 acre campus requiring extensive mass-grading, including storm-water detention dikes, 2 miles of access road, water tank, off-site utilities, nine buildings and recreational facilities. Client Mendocino-Lake Community College DistricL Team Leader for geotechnical investigation for the proposed replacement bridge crossing the north fork of the Tuolumne River. Provided preliminary recommendations regarding the foundation type (spread footings) and riverbank protection to prevent scour. Utilities Engineering Bureau for Hetch Hetchy Water and Power, City of San Francisco. Project Engineer during installation of driven pile foundation for structures, which span the Third Street underpass and associated retaining wallg up to 15 feet high. These structures are a combination of steel frame and reinforced concrete with column loads up to 1,200 kips. Hahn Development. Project Manager during geotechnical investigation of new four-lane divided roadway, existing roadway improvements, and three 0.5 to 1.5 million-gallon water storage tanks. Teachers Management Instrument Corp. Project Manager during construction monitoring of a deep pile foundation basement excavation and bracing for a high rise office building (42-story) with four levels of subsurface parking garage at a compressible Bay Mud site. Porlman Associates. Consultant during geotechnical investigation and evaluation during design of shoreline protection to mitigate active erosion and improve the stability of shoreline embankments. Following evaluation of several alternatives, the project ultimately consisted of rip rap slope protection confined at the toe by driven piles with connecting panels. U.S. Coast Guard. Principal-in-Charge of geotechnical engineering services for an indefinite delivery order contract_ Projects included subsurface investigation for preliminary planning of Guadalupe River Flood Control Project; subsurface soil exploration for the Sonoma Baylands wetlands restoration; and overwater subsurface soils exploration for Maritime Administration Reserve Fleet, Suisun Bay, California. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Project Manager during geotechnical investigation and services during construction of gravity and force main underground pipeline from Conn Creek to Calistoga, including the Napa River, two creek crossings, and a pump station. Kennedy-lenks Engineers. Seismic Evaluation of 15 Steel Water Tanks, Santa Rosa, California - Project Manager during geotechnical investigation as part of the seismic evaluation of 15 water tanks for conformance with AWWA Standard D100-96 and current seismic design criteria. The investigation provided seismic parameters (including site response spectra curves), and identified geotechnical issues/conditions at the tank sites, which may warrant further evaluation or investigation. Client Harper and Associates Engineering Inc. for City of Santa Rosa. SRJC and SRCS Replacement Tanks, Santa Rosa, California - Project Manager during the preparation of technical specifications and bid documents for new fuel UST to replace those tanks removed under SCOE program. Client Santa Rosa City Schools. Contra Costa Water District, Pleasant Hill, California - Geotechnical evaluation of the cut slope adjacent to existing 1+ million gallon water tank and recommendations to mitigate drainage and slumping, as Brunsing Associates, Inc.i il Peter R. Dodsworth part of seismic evaluation of the tank and appurtenances. Client: Contra Costa Water District. California Water Company, South San Francisco, California - Lead Consultant during geotechnical consultation and services during construction during repair of the cut slope adjacent to the existing tank. Repairs included re-grading the slope, installing slope drainage, and placing shotcrete surfacing over the slope face. Client: California Water Company. California Water Company, Los Altos Hills, California - Consultant during geotechnical consultation regarding the proposed two million gallon steel tank to replace existing wood tank on ridge top site close to potentially active faulL Clienl: Califorma Water Company. One Million Gallon Water Tank, Temelec/Creekside Village, Sonoma, California - Project Manager during geotechnical investigation and services during construction for additional steel water tank for the Valley of the Moon Water District. Client: Fisher Development. One Million Gallon Water Tank, Babelthaup, Palau Islands - Project Engineer/Manager for foundation investigation in volcanic soils at a remote hillside site for a new steel water tank. Clienlz Trust Territo _fy of the Pacific Islands. Geotechnical evaluation of the cut slope adjacent to existing l+ million gallon water tank and recommendations to mitigate drainage and slumping, as part of seismic evaluation of the tank and appurtenances. Contra Costa Water District. Principal Consultant during geotechnical investigations for improvements to infrastructure, including the storm drainage system at Wherry Housing Complex, bearing characteristics and relative permeability (double ring infiltrometer tests) for design of shallow dry wells, installation of a piezometer to monitor groundwater levels, data for the design of improvements to the Battery East parking area, and field reconnaissance to evaluate the potential for slope instability adjacent to the Wherry Housing Complex. National Park Service. Director of the geotechnical consultation and investigations as part of the seismic safety evaluation of dams for the Corps of Engineers. The studies included evaluating the material properties and foundation conditions, and exploring the alluvial foundation soils using ODEX and rotary wash drilling methods. US Army Corps of Engineers. Project Manager during geotechnical investigations and contract administration during construction of a 400,000 cubic yard dredge disposal site and 250-boat marina. Sonoma County Regional Parks. Project Manager during geotechnical investigation and services for construction of a 3-story winery, with large, lined, wastewater holding pond, associated parking, driveways and utilities. Domaine Laurier. Brunsing Associates, Inc. Gary F. Sitton Principal Geotechnical Engineer Mr. Sitton, as the responsible geotechnical engineer in-charge, has performed geologic hazard evaluations, geotechnical investigations, slope stability evaluations, and geotechnical observation and testing during construction and/or repair services for a variety of projects. He also has provided testimony and consultation services during arbitration of geotechnical related construction claims. Mr. Sitton has provided geotechnical engineering services in various terrains, including compressible soils in San Francisco Bay Area, and other California Areas, and bays in Hawaii and other Pacific islands; hillside landslide areas, expansive and/or loose/weak surface soil areas in California and Nevada, Hawaii and Wyoming. For these geotechnical services he has been responsible to determine scopes of services and fee estimates and then manage geotechnical staff and other consultant and/or contractors to maintain fees within estimates while services are being performed. Mr. Sitton has more than 35 years experience as Project Manager and Geotechnical Engineer on projects in California, Nevada, Hawaii, and Wyoming. Mr. Sit-ton has experience in most phases of geotechnical engineering, including services during design and construction of high-rise buildings, dams, bridges, treatment plants, and large industrial, commercial, public, harbor, and residential developments. As a Project Manager during construction, Mr. Sitton is experienced in supervising, scheduling, and training personnel in construction related activities, and in implementing quality control procedures for geotechnical engineering services during construction. Project experience includes consultation with Caltrans engineers and utilization of Caltrans methods and procedures, and those of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Education B.S., 196~ Civil Engineering San Jose State University, California Registrations · Civil Engineer, California 23486 · Geotechnical Engineer, California 784 Special Expertise · Deep and shallow pile foundation evaluations · Geologic soil and hazard assessments · Geotechnical observation and testing · Settlement and dewatering studies · Slope stability evaluations · Expert testimony/claim arbitration · Quality control procedure implementation Brunsing Associates, Inc.l l Gary F. Sitton Project Expedence Squaw Creek Road and Well Pads 3-7B and 3-1.3, The Geysers, California - Project Engineer/Manager for Geotechnical observations and testing, materials testing, and construction management for 5.3 mile road and two geothermal well pads with drilling sumps. Project included 75-foot long bridge, culverts to 12 feet in diameter, retaining and welded-wire walls, and cut and fill grading to approximately 140-foot heights. GRI. Santa Rosa Plaza, Santa Rosa, California - Project Engineer/Manager for Geotechnical investigation and construction of a 30-acre shopping center in the downtown redevelopment area. Project required detailed settlement studies for recommendation for shallow and deep foundations for isolated loads from 5 to 1,200 kips. Ernest W. Hahn, Inc. Five Story Parking Structure Over Interstate 80 - Project Engineer/Manager for Geotechnical investigation and services during construction of Reno, Nevada deep spread footings bottomed through weak surface soils and into dense sands and gravels. A seven-story hotel may be constructed instead of parking structures. [ack A. Means & Associates. Beaver and 5th Streets Parking Structure, Santa Rosa, California - Project Engineer/Manager for Geoteclmical investigation and services during construction of a seven-story structure supported by driven piles. City of Santa Rosa. · USCE Petaluma Training Center Planned Ohio Avenue Bridge, Two Rock, California - Project Engineer/Manager for Geotechnical investigation. Client: United States Coast Guard. Jordan Winery, Sonoma County, California - Project Engineer/Manager for Geoteclmical investigation and services during construction of new winery complex, access roads, bridge and waste treatment ponds. Client: Thomas N. [ordan. Lake Sonoma Recreational Facilities, Sonoma County, California - Consulting Geotechnical Engineer during geologic and soil investigation for the Corps of Engineers for several miles of roads, ll0- foot boat launch, marina, large inundated fills, and a three-hinged-arch concrete bridge over steep landslide-prone terrain. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. · Project Engineer Russian River Aqueduct, Cotati Tank Landslide Study. Sonoma County Water Agency Project Engineer/Manager for geotechnical observations and testing, materials testing, and construction management for a 5.3 mile road and two geothermal well pads with drilling sumps. Project included 75-foot long bridge, culverts to 12 feet in diameter, retaining and welded-wire walls, and cut and fill grading to approximately 140-foot heights. GRI Project Engineer/Manager for the geotechnical investigation and services during construction of the "A" Street bridge and two-story mall over the Third Street underpass, Santa Rosa. Ernest W. Hahn, Inc. Project Engineer/Manager for geotechnical investigation and construction of a 30-acre shopping center in the downtown Santa Rosa redevelopment area. Project required detailed settlement studies and recommendations for shallow and deep foundations for isolated loads from 5 to 1,200 kips. Ernest W. Hahn~ Inc. Brunsing Associates, Inc. Gary F. Sitton Project Engineer/Manager for geotechnical investigation and services during construction for the Rail Car Bridge at 3287 I Street, Petaluma, CA. Project included deep spread footings that bottomed in supporting soil/rock below creek channel scoure and bank erosion zones. R. Clarke & Sons, General Contractors. Project Engineer for the geotechnical Investigation of Little Sulphur Creek replacement Bridge pocket Ranch, Sonoma Co., CA. Recommendations included both drilled cast-in-place concrete piers and driven piles to be bottomed below potential creek channel scoure and bank erosion zones. Sanctuary_ Realty Corporation of Delaware. Project Engineer/Manager for geotechnical investigation and services during construction of a hospital complex located along a ridge top. Project consisted of four buildings with exterior concrete slabs and asphalt-paved roadways and parking. Site grading included cuts and fills of approximately 15 feel Lakeside Communi _ty Hospital c/o Lyons Hill, Architects. Project Engineer/Manager for geotechnical investigations and services during construction expansion Phases 1, 2, and 3, including one to five-story structures with basements requiring detailed settlement analyses. Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital. Project Engineer/Manager for soil and foundation investigation of a boiler building with adjacent 73- foot-high silo. Detailed settlement studies were required so that the structure with isolated loads of between 9 and 700 kips could be supported on spread footings. Feather River Lumber Company. Project Engineer/Manager for geotechnical investigation and services during construction of new winery complex, access roads, bridge and waste treatment ponds. Thomas N. Jordan. Geotechnical Consultant during master planning, design and construction phases on numerous school sites including Santa Rosa Junior College, SRJC Petaluma Campus, Gold Ridge Elementary School in Rohnert Park, Healdsburg High School, Calistoga High School, and AP Gianni Middle School in San Francisco. Consulting Geotechnical Engineer during investigations and contract administration during construction of a 400,000 cubic yard dredge disposal site and 250 boat marina at Spud Point, Bodega Bay, California. Sonoma County Regional Parks. Gary Sitton was the Geotechnical Engineer for the A Street via duct geotechnical investigation in Rock Springs, Wyoming. The Via duct is a two cone building crossing over the Burlington Northern Railroad yard the crossing was undermined by abandoned underground coal mine working. Client Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality. Brunsing Associates, Inc. Daya Bettadapura Principal Engineer Mr. Bettadapura is a Principal Engineer and Division Manager for BAI Southern California operations. He provides civil, geotechnical and environmental engineering expertise in investigations, design, permitting, and construction management/oversight for solid waste facilities, hazardous waste sites, remediation projects, UST upgrades, and site improvements. He has provided services for multi- disciplinary multiple-site projects for local and federal governments, and private clients. He has performed investigations, analysis, design, permitting, preparation of construction documents and construction support services. Mr. Bettadapura has dealt with the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, Cai-EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control, U.S. EPA, Department of Environmental Health, Cities and Counties for design review and permitting of various construction documents. He has over 5 years experience in the design of foundations for transportation facilities and structures. Mr. Bettadapura has managed both consulting and construction projects needing a variety of technical expertise and staffing needs. These include a $15 million dollar landfill closure project in progress; a $2.5 million project involving preparation, permitting and implementation of Site Closure Workplan for soil remediation, dewatering and multi-layered capping, for a major design-build project; a $2.5 million project for pollution abatement projects, UST upgrades, stormwater discharge control, landfill expansion designs, slope remediation; construction management for earthwork, liner installation, drainage improvements, and storm drain installations, with a construction cost of over $4 million; and provided construction oversight for various other projects totaling over $10 million in construction costs. Education 1986 MS, 1983 BS, 1980 Geotechnical Engineering Graduale Studies Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio Geotechnical Engineering West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia Civil Engineering Bangalore University, India Registrations · Professional Engineer, Ohio E51261 · Professional Engineer, California C46505 Special Expertise · Geotechnical and environmental engineering · Landfill engineering/solid waste management · Regulatory compliance/permitting · Foundation design/structural evaluations · Stormwater management · Seismic hazard evaluations · Remedial design/construction management · Plans and specifications and permit documents Brunsing Associates, Inc.l~l Daya Bettadapura Project Experience Geotechnical Daya Bettadapura was the Project Manager for the geotechnical investigation for the expansion of Hwy. 680 crossing from Martinez to Benicia. This investigation involved over a large deep geologic boring into bedrock indulging contaminated marine and alluvial sedimenls. Special drilling platforms were required and protection of wetlands were assured by proper management of drilling fluids and cuttings. Client Cai Trans. Daya Bettadapura was the Project Manager for the geotechnical study for Sacramento Street over crossing bridge over Hwy. 137 in Vallejo. California special drilling protocols were required to address drilling in a high traffic area and drilling through contaminated sediments. The study determined both abutment and bent design paramometer. Client Cal Trans. Task Manager for geotechnical investigation for aboveground tank upgrade program for a major oil refinery. Managed subsurface and laboratory investigation, engineering analysis and foundation recommendations for over 20 circular tanks with diameters varying from 5' to 15' and heights to 6 feet. The recommendations were based on estimates of settlements and considerations for site improvements considering expansive soils at the site. Both ring foundations and pile foundations were recommended based on the tank size and location, and location specific subsurface conditions. Mobil Oil Corporation-Torrance. Project Manager for a subsurface investigation, geotechnical testing, and preparation of a geotechnical report with recommendations for installing an industrial building at North Island, California. Southwest Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Department of Navy_. Project Manager for design, preparation of construction documents and construction oversight for a coastal bluff evaluation, erosion control measures and slope protection at various sites at the Submarine Base in Point Loma, California. Southwest Division, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Department of Navy. Project Manager for the field investigation and slope stability analysis for cut slopes in Canyon 3 and Canyon 9 of the Puente Hills Landfill, Whittier, California. County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles Coun _ty. Project Engineer for preparing construction drawings and detailed specification for leachate. Evaluated the post-construction performance of the HDPE-lined cutoff barrier around a hazardous waste landfill. Also evaluated the alternatives for slurry wall around Class I hazardous waste unit. Envirosafe Services of Ohio, Inc. Brunsing Associates, Inc. Jeff Tawakoli Principal Engineer Mr. Tawakoli has over 17 years experience in geotechnical and construction material engineering including subsurface investigation, engineering analysis, preparation of soils reports, building and roadway inspection and engineering, project management. Education B.$., 1982 Civil Engineering University of Utah Registrations Special Expertise · Civil Engineer, California #51883 · Civil Engineer, Nevada #10869 · Civil Engineer, Utah #176290 · Deep and shallow pile foundation evaluations · Geologic soil and hazard assessments · Geotechnical observation and testing · Settlement and dewatering studies · Slope stability evaluations · Expert testimony/claim arbitration Certifications · I.C.B.O.: · Reinforced Concrete · Structural Masonry · Fireproo frog Project Experience: Silver Creek Valley Country Club, San Jose, California. Mr. Tawakoli served as Staff Engineer and provided observation on construction of six bridge structures (including pile operation), conducted observation of mass grading on 1,500 acres of hillside and provided special inspection for concrete and masonry, as well as single story homes with post tension slabs and/or pier and grade beam foundation systems. U.S. Highway 395 South, Reno, Nevada. As laboratory manager, Mr. Tawakoli was responsible for mass grading observation, field-testing of soils, concrete and asphalt for the extension of the 1.8-mile NDOT highway. Brunsing Associates, lnc. Jeff Tawakoli Bureau of Reclamation, Utah Central Valley Water Project, Provo, Utah. As project manager Mr. Tawakoli oversaw material Testing and Inspection through an onsite staffed Laboratory on installation of 1.4 miles of 80-inch concrete pipe water transmission line. Services included project management and overseeing of grading, compaction testing, and material testing on concrete, soil, aggregate, and asphalL Bureau of Reclamation, Effluent Pond and Evaporation Pond, Salt Lake City Utah. As staff engineer, Mr. Tawakoli provided observation and testing of liner installation for this 200,000 square feet pond. Services included observation of compaction and verification of permeability of the liner material. Turnberry Place Tower No. 2, Las Vegas, Nevada. Mr. Tawakoli served as Project Manager on a portion of this 19,000 square feet, forty-story tower. His responsibilities included overseeing inspection of reinforced steel, structural concrete, high strength bolting, structural steel, post tensioned slabs, structural masonry, and spray-applied fireproofing. Las Vegas Convention Center South Hall Expansion, Las Vegas, Nevada. During the foundation installation phase, as Field Services Manager, Mr. Tawakoli oversaw compliance of the project's specifications for construction observation and materials testing through six ICBO inspectors on-site. Kerr-McGee Chemical Plant Addition, Henderson, Nevada. Mr. Tawakoli oversaw this project through a project manager for compliance with the project specification and uniform building code provisions during construction. State line Hotel and Casino Expansion, Wendover, Nevada. Mr. Tawakoli served as Project Manager on a seven-story parking addition, the main casino expansion, and a five-story hotel addition through 2 ICBO inspectors on-site. Mr. Tawakoli's responsibilities included overseeing the inspection and related material testing and observation, client contact, budget management and reviewing all technical reports. Dean Witter Building, Salt Lake City, Utah. As Project Manager on a six-story special moment- resisting steel frame, Mr. Tawakoli provided inspection and related material testing and observation through 2 ICBO inspectors, and provided client contact, budget management and reviewing all technical reports. Salt Lake City Courthouse Complex, Salt Lake City, Utah. As Project Manager on a seven-story concrete and steel building, Mr. Tawakoli's responsibilities included overseeing all technical reports generated by inspectors and technicians, staffing and budget. Costco Warehouse, San Francisco, California. As Staff Engineer, Mr. Tawakoli provided special inspection on concrete during the foundation installation of the approximately 94,000 feet building footprint area. River Oak Condominiums, San Jose, California - As Staff Engineer, Mr. Tawakoli performed observation of mass grading and special inspection of concrete and masonry on six to seven-story concrete structures, as well as single-story homes within the same project area. Brunsing Associates, lnc. Keith Colorado Staff Engineer Mr. Colorado has performed field observation and testing, field exploration, laboratory testing, and geotechnical engineering analyses for various projects in Marin, Sonoma, and Mendocino Counties, California. The projects have included schools, small to large commercial/industrial facilities, roadways, bridges, hillside sites, and residential developments. His experience also includes extensive report writing, proposal development, and preparing cost estimates. Education B.A., 2000 Environmental Resources Engineering, Geotechnology Emphasis Humboldt State University, Arcata, California Registrations, Licenses~ and Certifications · EIT Certification, California 106515 Project Experience Farmers Lane FE & MN Water Treatment Plant, Santa Rosa, California - Provided construction observation and laboratory testing services during site grading for installation of booster pump, filter vessel and backwash tank. Marietta Vineyards, Yorkville, Mendocino County, California - Field exploration and data analysis during geotechnical investigation for a new reservoir site which included evaluation of on- site soils for use as impermeable liner. Fitch Mountain Elementary School Reconstruction, Healdsburg, California - Field exploration, data analysis, and report preparation during geotechnlcal investigation for new buildings, both relocatable and permanent, and asphalt pavement sections. · Veterans Building, Petaluma, California - Staff Engineer during data analysis and pavement design. · Van Damme Bridges, Van Damme State Park, Mendocino County, California - Field exploration and data analysis during geotechnical investigation for a new bridge and a replacement bridge. · Yulupa Co-Housing, Santa Rosa, California - Field exploration, data analysis and report preparation of the geotechnical investigation for multi-story low-cost housing development · Wine County Industrial Park, Sonoma, California - Staff Engineer during data analysis for volume change due to removal and recompaction of on-site soils. · Shiloh Unit 2, Lot 1 Driveway, Sonoma County, California - Field exploration and data analysis during geotechnical investigation for cut slopes and geogrid reinforced fill. Brunsing Associates, Inc.l l Bret D. Mclntyre Project Geologist Mr. McIntyre is accomplished at researching site geology and aerial photographs; reviewing construction and grading plans; performing geological and geotechnical investigations including fault studies; studying and analyzing slope stability; assisting in remedial design; acquiring permits; complying with regulatory demands; conducting field soil tests; monitoring construction activities; repairing landslides, and writing geological and geotechnical reports. Mr. McIntyre has demonstrated job proficiency in: boring/test pit drilling and geologic logging, CADD drafting, nuclear gauge field density measurements, moisture density testing, sieve analysis, concrete compression testing` tieback anchor installation/inspection, grout pumping inspection/sampling` slope inclinometer monitoring` penetrometer reading/interpretation, infiltrometer reading, PID testing, soil sampling, air sampling, water sampling, equipment procurement, product removal, photography, hazardous materials disposal, supervising excavations, well development, groundwater sampling, field equipment decontamination, and field report writing. Education 1995 Certifications Special Expertise 1993 B.S. Geology University of California, Santa Barbara, California A.S. Science Santa Rosa Junior College, Santa Rosa, California gINT Geotechnical Integrator Certification Training Nuclear Gauge Certification Geotechnical Construction Observation and Testing Training Compliance Solutions 40-Hour HAZWOPPER Certification Hazardous Waste Supervisor Certification U.S. Army Sidewinders Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical · CAD drafting/GIS systems · Nuclear gauge field density · Construction and grading plan reviews · Field/laboratory testing of air, water, and soil samples · Mapping and data presentation · Monitoring well installation/development · Stratigraphic logging Project Experience · Staff Geologist Russian River Aqueduct, Cotati Tank Landslide Study. Sonoma County Water Agency_ · Field Geologist performed trench mapping as part of several fault studies. Geologist performed logging and sampling of test pits and test borings, geologic mapping and field report writing at over 50 sites including the Mission Bay Reconstruction Project in San Francisco. Conducted grading observation and field density testing at various sites including the Treasure Brunsing Associates, Inc.l Bret Mclntyre Island and Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard Remediation Projects. · Environmental Technidan performed monitoring well development; air, soil and groundwater sample, collection; and long term O & M at over 30 UST sites. Geologic mapping and logging using AutoCAD and gINT for Brunsing Associates Geotechnical Division. Includes U.S. Government and Caltrans compliant drafting for environmental and geotechnical projects Brunsing Associates, Inc. PROJECT CLIENT "0 Permi~ ~ I I ' G~I~ic R~onnais~nce ~l BACE Geotechnical a di~sion of ORCHID AVENUE BRIDGE AND BRUSH Brunsing A~iates, inc. STREET IMPROVEMENTS (707) 838-0780 ~: ~/~J~ ~h, Job No.: 3537- PR Appr. EEO Dal~: 03-26-2002 GEOTECHNI~L INVESTIGATION COST ESTIMATE Orchard Avenue Bridge and Brush Slxeet Improvements Ukiah, California I[ One Way Mileage: 60 II FASK 1.0 - Pre-Investigation 1.1 Research, lncludin~ Reviewing Published Maps Principal Engineering Geologist 2 hrs $ 125.00 $ 250.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 2 hrs $ 90.00 $ 180.00 1.2 Project Coordination/Pre-Field Meetings Principal Engineering Geologist 8 hfs $ 125.00 $ 1,000.00 Principal Geotechnical Engineer 8 hrs $ 130.00 $ 1,040.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 16 hfs $ 90.00 $ 1,440.00 I Sub-total for Task 1.0: $ 3,910.00 YASK 2.0- Field Investigation 2.1 Surface Reconnaissance Principal Engineering GeologistI 6 hfs $ 125.00 $ 750.00 2.2 Log and Sample Borings/Test Pits Project Engineer/Geologist 40 hrs $ 90.00 $ 3,600.00 Drilling Contractors (Weeks,Clearheart, Pearson or VBI) hrs $ 4,500.00 Vehicle (assumed 2WD) 600 miles $ 0.50 $ 300.00 Subsistence 1 night $120.00 $ 120.00 I ~ Sub-total for Task 2.0: $ 9,270.00 TASK 3.0 - Laboratory Testing Moisture/Density (Brass Liner Sample) ASTM D2937 25 each $ 17.00 $ 425.00 Compaction. 6-inch Mold 4 each $ 190.00 $ 760.00 Sieve Analysis, Fines with #200 wash 16 each $ 80.00 $ 1,280.00 Resistance Value (Untreated sample), Cai 301 2 each $ 215.00 $ 430.00 Consolidation 2 each $ 270.00 $ 540.00 Triaxial Compression (Intact sample), ASTM D2850 9 each $ 95.00 $ 855.00 Sub-total for Task 3.0: $ 4,290.00 TASK.4.0 - Analysis and Report 4.1 Analysis ] Principal Engineering Geologist[ 4 hfs $ 125.00 $ 500.00 Principal Geotechnical Engineer 12 hrs $ 130.00 $ 1,560.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 30 hr~- $ 90.00 $ 2,700.00 Principal Engineering Geologist 4 hfs $ 125.00 $ 500.00 Principal Geotechnical Engineer _ 8 hrs $ 130.00 $ 1,040.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 16 hfs $ 90.00 $ 1,440.00 CAD Drafting 40 hrs $ 70.00 $ 2,800.00 Clerical/Word Processing 6 hrs $ 45.00 $ 270.00 Fax, postage, copies, etc. 1 each $ 100.00 $ 100.00 Investigation cost Estmate, prepared on 3/26/02, at 3:01 PM - Page 1 of 1 Job No.: 3537- PR Appc EEO Da~e: 03-26-2002 GEOTECHNICAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICE COST ESTIMATE Orchard Avenue Bridge and Brash Street Improvements Ukiah, California One W~ Milease: 60 Il TASK' Descn~ed in BAC~ Geotechnlcal,s Se~tce ~e~a~ FASK 1.0 - Pre-Construction: Data Review/Project Coordination Principal Engineering Geologist 4 hrs $ 125.00 $ 500.00 Principal Geotechnical Engineer 8 hrs $ 130.00 $ 1,040.00 Senior Technician 8 hrs $ 70.00 $ 560.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 16 hrs $ 90.00 $ 1,440.00 I ~ Sub-totat for Task 1.0: $ 3o540.110 TASK 2.0 - Field Work 2.1 Construction Observation (Orchard Avenue Bridge) Principal Engineering Geologist 4 hfs $ 125.00 $ 500.00 Principal Geotechnical Engineer 10 hfs $ 130.00 $ 1,300.00 Senior Technician (Concrete Testing) 25 hrs $ 70.00 $ 1,750.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 66 hrs $ 90.00 $ 5,940.00 Vehicle (assumed 2WD) 1680 miles $ 0.50 $ 840.00 Field Supplies (Concrete Cylinders) 20 each $ 3.00 $ 60.00 Subtotal Task 2.1 $ 10,390.00 2.2 Construction Testing (Orchard Avenue upgradee and Bridge Approaches Principal Engineering Geologist hrs Principal Geotechnical Engineer 12 hrs $ 130.00 $ 1,560.00 Senior Technician 20 hrs $ 70.00 $ 1,400.00 Project Engineer/Geologist 12 hrs $ 90.00 $ 1,080.00 Technician hrs $ 60.00 $ - Vehicle (assumed 2WD) 720 miles $ ~.50 $ 360.00 Field Equipment (Nuke Gauge) 20 hrs $ 15.00 $ 300.00 B ~~ ~_ . ~ Sub-total for Task 2.0: $ 15/090.00 rASK 3.0- Laboratory Testing Compaction, 6-inch mold 2 each $ 190.00 $ 380.00 Concrete or Mortar Cylinders Compression, ASTM C39 15 each $ 35.00 $ 525.00 Untested Cylinder Processing and Curing 5 each $ 20.00 $ 100.00 *-~ - ' ' - I ~ Sub-total for Task 3.0: $ 1,005.00 TASK ~1.0 - Analysis and Relpott 4.1 Analysis Principal Geotechnical Engineer I 4 hrs $ 130.00 $ 520.00 Project Engineer/Geologist I 6 hfs $ 90.00 $ 540.00 4.2 Letter/Report Writinb Peer Review, and Production Principal Engineering Geologist I I 2 hfs $ 125.00 $ 250.00 Principal Engineer - I I 8 hrs $ 130.00 $ __ 1,040.00 Project Engineer/Geologist [ I 24 hrs $ 90.00 $ 2,160.00 CAD Drafting I ~ 8 hrs $ 70.00 $ 560.00 Clerical/Word Processing [ { 4 hrs $ 45.00 $ 180.00 Fax, postage, copies, etc. III each $ 100.00 $ 100.00 ' ,~l~I ISub-totalforTask4.0:gg_~r~o_oa Construction Cost Estimate, prepared on 3/26/02, at 3:01 PM - Page 1 of 1 BRUNSING ASSOCIATES, INC. SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES California PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: Hourly Rate (Engineer, Geologist, Scientist) Assistant $ 60 - $ 70 Staff $ 70 $ 85 Project $ 85 $100 Senior $100 $115 Principal $115 $135 Expert Consultant $135 - $250* TECHNICAL SERVICES: Assistant Technician $ 45 - $ 55 Technician $ 55 - $ 65 Senior Technician $ 65 - $ 75 Supervisory Technician $ 75 $ 85 Special Laboratory Testing or Sample Preparation $ 65 $ 75 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES: Project Administrator $ 65 $ 80 Project Manager $ 95 $110 Project Superintendent $100 - $115 SUPPORT SERVICES: Clerical $ 35 - $ 45 Data Processing _ $ 45 - $ 55 Drafting Assistant $ 45 - $ 55 Drafting $ 55 $ 65 Computer (CAD) Drafting $ 70 $ 80 Telephone Calls At cost Postage At cost Copies, per page Oversize prints $ .10 $3.00 or cost plus 15% admin fee *Expert Consultant rates are increased by 50 percent for deposition, arbitration, or court testimony. Professional fees 6/01 BRUNSING ASSOCIATES, INC. SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES California VEHICLES: Auto Mileage Truck, 2 Wheel Drive Truck, 4 Wheel Drive (any off-surfaced road travel) $0.50/mile $0.50/mile $0.60/mile MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES: Subsistence Subcontractor/Subconsultant Charges and Materials $120.00 cost plus 15% admin, fee OVERTIME PREMIUM FOR TECHNICIAN SERVICES: Multiply Hourly Rate By Over 40 hours per work week or over 8 hours in one day 1.50 Up to 8 hours on Saturdays and Sundays 1.50 Over 12 hours in one day, over 8 hours on Sundays, and work on 2.00 Holidays Travel time, or two hours technician time, will be charged for services cancelled without sufficient notification to change scheduling NOTE: Rates shown for Techmcal Services and Laboratory Testing include the report of routine test results including up to 1/4 hour of review and preparation by Professional Staff, per report. Where complexity of results requires more then V4 hour of review and preparation, or when engineering analysis, conclusions or recommendations are provided, additional fees will be charged at the appropriate hourly rates. Professional fees 6/01 GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING SCHEDULE OF CHARGES California SOIL TESTS Cost/Test Moisture And Density Tests Moisture, Cal 226* Moisture/Density (Brass Liner Sample) ASTM D 2937 Unit Weight, ASTM C 29, Cai 212 Compaction, ASTM D 698 & D 1557, or AASHTO T-99 & T-180 4~inch mold 6-inch mold California Impact, Cai 216 G Relative Density, ASTM D 4253 & 4254 $ 14.00 17.00 57.00 170.00 190.00 205.00 360.00 Classification Tests Sieve Analysis Coarse and fine soils, ASTM C 136, Cal 202 Fine soils, with wash through #200 sieve Wash through #200 sieve, ASTM D 1140 Hydrometer Analysis ASTM D 422 RWQCB Bulk Density (chunk sample), RWQCB Specific Gravity (Aggregate), ASTM C 127 & D 854 (Fine soils), ASTM C 128 & D 854 Atterberg Limits (Plasticity Index) ASTM D 4318 Organic Content (Loss by Ignition) 80.00 85.00 58.00 150.00 60.00 40.00 75.00 80.00 90.00 80.00 Note: Agency abbreviations for testing standards: Cai - State of California, Department of Transportation (Caltrans) ASTM - American Society for Testing Materials AASHTO - The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials RWQCB - California Regional Water Quality Control Board SCPHD - Sonoma County Public Health Department ISRM - International Society of Rock Mechanics USBR - United States Bureau of Reclamation **2. Rates shown for laboratory testing include reporting of routine results with 1/4 hour or less of review and preparation by Professional Staff, per report. Where complexity of report requires more than 1/4 hour, or when engineering analysis, conclusions, recommendations, or field testing/sampling are provided, additional fees will be charged at the applicable hourly rates. 10/01 GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TESTING SCHEDULE OF CHARGES California Strength Tests Pocket Penetrometer Torvane Shear Direct Shear (saturated and consolidated), ASTM D 3080 Intact sample Remolded sample Unconfined Compression, ASTM D 2166 Triaxial Compression (undrained and unconsolidated), ASTM D 2850 Intact sample Remolded sample Volumetric Tests Free Swell, USBR Shrink-SwelL SCPHD Expansion Index, ASTM D 4829, UBC 29-2 Modified Expansion Index, 90% relative compaction at optimum moisture (compaction curve additional) Consolidation, ASTM D 4186 Single Load Complete Study Permeability Tests Permeability (constant head), ASTM D 2434 Intact sample Remolded sample Permeability (Triaxial cell), ASTM 5084, EPA 9100 Intact sample Remolded sample Pavement Section Design Tests Stabilometer Resistance Value (R-Value), Cal 301 Untreated sample Lime or cement-treated sample Sand Equivalent, Cal 217 Durability, Cal 229 California Bearing Ratio (per point), ASTM D 1883 10/01 Costs/Test $ 7.00 12.00 110.00 120.00 80.00 95.00 175.00 35.00 100.00 130.00 135.00 110.00 270.00 195.00 225.00 285.00 360.00 215.00 240.00 90.00 145.00 280.00 2 MATERIALS LABORATORY TESTING SCHEDULE OF CHARGES California Asphalt & Concrete Aggregate Tests Organic Impurities in Sand, ASTM C 40 Cleanness Value, Cai 227 Percent Crushed Particles, Cai 205 Absorption, Cal 538 Los Angeles Rattler (500 Revs.), ASTM 131, Cai 211 Sulfate Soundness (per sieve), ASTM C 88, Cai 214 Costs/Test $ 100.00 145.00 100.00 100.00 260.00 105.00 Asphalt Tests Asphalt Content, Ignition Furnace, Cai 382 Gradation (on extracted sample) Marshall Stability, ASTM D 1559 145.00 140.00 300.00 Concrete and Masonry Tests Cement, grab sample, retained for 60 days 25.00 Compressions, Concrete or Mortar Cylinders, ASTM C 39 35.00 Compression, Grout Prisms, ASTM C 942 50.00 Compression, Gunite Cylinders 45.00 Compression, Concrete Block or Brick 65.00 Untested Cylinder Processing and Curing 20.00 Unit Weigh of Concrete ( in Cylinders) 35.00 Flexure, Concrete, 6x6x24, ASTM C 293 120.00 Drying Shrinkage (3 samples per test, 28 day drying). ASTM C 157 450.00 Compression, Masonry Prism 120.00 Rock Core Tests Grain Size analysis, ASTM D 422 Unconfined Compressive Strength, ASTM D 2938 Direct Tensile Strength, ASTM D 2936 Split Tensile Strength, ASTM D 3967 Third Point Loading (Flexural Strength), ASTM D 1635 or C 78 Brazilian (flexural strength), ISRM 135.00 90.00 225.0O 130.00 245.00 125.00 Metals Tests Reinforcing Steel, tensile & bend tests Structural Steel, tensile tests Structural Steel, bend tests High Strength Bolts, Proofload tests (ASTM F606) High Strength Bolts, ultimate strength tests High Strength Bolts, hardness tests 10/01 3 110.00 110.00 80.00 75.00 85.00 55.00 BRUNSING ASSOCIATES, INC. SCHEDULE OF CHARGES California FIELD EOUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES FIELD EQUIPMENT RATE Standard Field Density Testing Equipment $10.00 /hour Nuclear Testing Equipment $15.00 /hour Slope Inclinometer $150.00 /day Concrete Testing Equipment $5.00 /hour Submersible Pump $50.00 /day Shure Flow Purge Pump $50.00 /day Purge Pump $25.00 /day Development Pump and Equipment $50.00 /day Peristaltic Pump $75.00 /day :Draegar Pump $25.00 /day Vacuum Pump & Gauge $25.00 /day Turbidity Meter $25.00 /day DO Meter $40.00 /day Thermo Probe Meter $8.00 /day Photoionization Detector (PID) $125.00 /day FID Meter $150.00 /day Gas Tech $75.00 /day pH/Conductivity/Temperature Meter $40.00 /day Water Level Probe $35.00 /day Interface Probe $75.00 /day ~Noise Meter $25.00 /day PVC Bailer $25.00 /day Reusable Bailer $25.00 /day Slaphammer Sampler $20.00 /day Hand Auger $25.00 /day Respirator $20.00 /day Surge Block $25.00 /day Generator $50.00 /day Ocean Kayak $50.00 /launch 06/01 \~Del1230Oa\company\Office, General~Schedule of Fees~Schedule of Fees-2OO 1 ~Vlaterial Fees Sched- Non Fund Prices-I .doc 1 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT 8a ITEM NO.: DATE: April 17, 2002 SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE REZONING PORTIONS OF ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBERS 003-472-08, 003-472-13, AND 003-472-14 FROM C-2 TO C-N. SUMMARY: Approval of the proposed Rezone (#02-03) would change the zoning for a .45-acre area of land from the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District to the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. Specifically, the affected areas include a .17-acre area on APN 003-472-08, a .20-acre area on APN 003-472-13, and a .08-acre area on APN 003-472-14, as shown on the site plan and zoning map in Attachment 1. The area proposed for rezone borders the existing Mountain View Assisted Living Facility that is located at 1343 South Dora Street (APN 003-271-27) and would be used for the expansion of this facility if the proposed rezone were approved. Background: In January of this year, Mr. John Lape submitted three applications intended to allow the expansion of the existing Mountain View Assisted Living Facility, a 27,000 square foot building with 41 rooms for persons that require assisted living. In addition to the rezone application summarized above, the applicant also applied for Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02 to shift contiguous property lines between the four parcels comprising the site and add approximately .45-acre of area from three of the lots to the lot containing the assisted living facility. Also included is a Use Permit (#02-04) to allow the construction of a 7,000 square foot addition to the existing assisted living facility. This addition would house 6 additional bedrooms for persons that require assisted living and 4 bedrooms for persons affected by Alzheimer's syndrome. (continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Conduct a public hearing regarding Rezone #02-03; 2. Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and 3. Introduce the Ordinance rezoning the affected lands from the C-2 Zoning District to the C-N Zoning District ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Do not introduce the Ordinance and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: Legal notice completed in accordance with Ukiah Municipal Code requirements Requested by: John Lape, Architect for Ukiah Assisted Living, LLC Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Proposed Rezone Ordinance with Site Plan and Zoning Map of Project Area 2. Confirmation Letter for Approval of BLA 02-02, including Condition No. 5 3. Staff Report to the City Engineer regarding BLA 02-02 4. Staff Report to the Planning Commission regarding RZ 02-03 and UP 02-04 5. Negative Declaration for BLA 02-02/RZ 02-03/UP 02-04 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City'~nager City Engineer and Planning Commission Actions: On February 27, 2002, the Ukiah City Engineer conducted a public hearing and approved the Boundary Line Adjustment to shift the property lines. This approval was based on the Findings included in the staff report (Attachment 3) and subject to five Conditions of Approval, including a condition that the BLA would become null and void if the rezone application was not approved. Later that same day, the Ukiah Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and after discussion, approved both the Negative Declaration prepared for the project and the Use Permit on a 5-0 vote. This approval was based on the Findings included in the Staff Report (Attachment 4) and is subject to 23 Conditions of Approval, including a condition that requires the approval of the rezone application by the City Council. The Commission then voted 5-0 to recommend that the City Council approve RZ #02-03. Staff concurs with the actions of the City Engineer and Planning Commission and recommends that the proposed Rezone ordinance be approved to complete the project. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORIDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH, CALIFORNIA The City Council of 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 .17-acre portion of Assessor Parcel Number 003-472-08, a .2-acre portion of Assessor Parcel Number 003-472-13, and a .08-acre portion of Assessor Parcel Number 003-472-14 from the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District to the C-N (Neigborhood Commercial)Zoning District. SECTION TWO This rezoning action and amendment to the official Zoning Map of the City of Ukiah is necessary to establish a consistent zoning classification (C-N) for the parcel on which the Mountain View Assisted Living Facility expansion would be constructed. 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 April 17, 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Ordinance No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Passed and adopted on AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAI N: ATTEST: Marie Uvila, City Clerk Ordinance No. ,2000, by the following vote: Jim Mastin, Mayor NOKOMIS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Area Affected by Proposed Rezone Zoning Map I-3 0 ~O~A ~TPJEET BE~.KI=Lt=¥ rtA¥ ~,-~ ~ ii:i:i:i:'i:-~:.!~!:i:i:!:i:!:i ~ ~:::::::: ~.::::::::::::: .:~.: .:.:.:.:~.:.:.:.: ~OUTH ~TATE Pt~IVATE ~OUTH ~O~A ~T~JE~T , RANI=E LANE tDE~KELE~"F' :::::::.:.:.:-:..-.- ':i:!:!:ii.:c.:.i:i:i:i:i:i:' ::::::::::::::::::::::::: ,O :-:~:.'-:-:-:-:-x-:-:-:-: !:i~:iti:i:i:i:i~:i:i:i:! "~< ::::::::::::::::~.::::::::: .:.:,~:.!.:.:.:.:.~:.:.:,:.: F- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: SOUTH STATE S~tET ---IZ PRIVATE ALLOCATION OF HOURS BY LABOR CLASSIFICATION FOR INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES REGARDING ORCHARD AVE BRIDGE GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES Supervisory/ Professional Senior Project / Staff Principal Engineer/ Engineer/ Engineer/ Engineer/ AutoCad Total Firm Geoloc.]ist Geologist Geologist Geologist Drafter Cledcal Lab Tech Hours Kleinfelder 4 (~ $165 66 (~ $155 64 ~;~ $135 56 @ $95 24 @ $78 8 @ $66 222 Taber 43 (~ $110 44(~ $80 14 @ $80 4 @ $45 i34 @ $70 139 Rau 12 (~ $122 14 ~ $65 8 (~ $70 34 173 24 @ $125; BACE 28 (~ $130 104 (~ $90 40 (~ $70 6 (~ $45 202 707.462.6536 P.O. Box M 707.463.2729 fax 100 Nodh Pine Street stan@rauandassoc.com Ukiah, CA 95482 Stanley E. Schubert · Project Geologist Professional Experience During employment with various consulting firms, was involved in all phases of geophysical investigations, environmental investigations, as well as site surveys for geologic hazards. Familiar with all types of geological investigations and hydro-geologic studies. Past projects have included Superfund site investigations, geophysical surveys for mining and environmental applications, aquifer contamination studies. Strong working background in soil and water sampling and geo-spatial location of sample collection points utilizing (3PS technology. Work ExpeHence September, 2000-Present Rau and Associates, Inc. Project Geologist · Geotechnical site reviews · Geologic Hazards · Reporting and Documentation · Construction Compliance 1998-2000 Self Employed · Designer / Builder 1997-1998 Heringer Ag Management Project Geologist · Surface and subsurface investigations · GPS Survey and geospatial positioning 1995-1996 Acton-Mickelson Environmental Staff Geologist · Surface and subsurface investigations · Geophysical investigations · Field safety officer 1994 PNL National Laboratory DOE Research Fellow · Hydrogeological aquifer studies · Computer analysis Ukiah, CA Hopland, CA Lower Lake, CA El Dorado Hills, CA Hanford, WA Education 1990-1992 Santa Rosa Junior College · A.S.- Geology Santa Rosa, CA 1992-1995 Sonoma State University · B.S.-Geology Rohnert Park, CA Project Experience Directly responsible or jointly responsibility for portions of the following projects: 1. Various geotechnical and/or geologic hazards investigations. Vineyard Development, Snows Lake Ranch Vineyards. GPS site survey of approximately 1600 acres with drilling, sampling, and planning for groundwater utilization and infrastructure. Environmental Investigation, 80 acre Superfund site & former munitions plant, Newhall, CA Design and implementation of geophysical surveys, data collection and compilation of sampling data. Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model for the Hanford Site Unconfined Aquifer System; Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Hanford, WA; study and characterization of the unconfined aquifer using hydrogeological methods. Writing of portions of the final, published report. o 0 rS~ W 888 0 0 000000 ~ 000000 0000 00000000 ~ 0 E O0 O0 00000000 ~ ~0 O0 00000000 E 0 Taber Consultants SCHEDULE OF FEES -Table 19 Effective January 2, 2002 Civil Engineer IV Civil Engineer III Civil Engineer II Land Surveyor Civil Engineer I Lab-Survey Manager Project Professional/Project Geologist Technician IV Technician III Technician II Technician I Instrument Operator (PW) Rodman (PW) Materials Tester (PW) Materials Tester W/gauge (PW) Administration Engineering Technician with Nuclear GaugeNehicle Vehicle Use Outside Services Over $1,000 Outside Services Under $1,000 (Aggregate amount) Requested Overtime: Expert Witness/Testimony at Trial, Deposition, Arbitration Laboratory Tests: Texture Analysis (Mendocino County Health Dept.) Unit Dry Weight-Moisture Content (Tube Sample or Pad) Sand Equivalent (CTM 217) Sieve Analysis - Coarse Aggregates (CTM 202) Sieve Analysis - Fine Aggregate (CTM 202) Sand Equivalent & Sieve Analysis Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D1557) 4" Mold 6" Mold Maximum Dry Density (ASTM D698) Maximum Wet Density (CTM 216) Unit Weight of Aggregate (CTM 212) Method A or B Method C Crushed Particle Analysis (CTM 205) Cleanness Value (CTM 227) Durability Index (CTM 229) Specific Gravity & Absorption (CTM 206) Plasticity Index (ASTM 4318) Expansion Index (UBC Standard 29.2) Unit Weight of Fresh Concrete (CTM 518) Ball Penetration (CTM 533) Air Content of Fresh Concrete (CTM 504) Sample Preparation Times Special Equipment Rates: Computer Aided Design Software $10.00/hr. Pachometer R-Meter $50.00/per day* Stream Flow Meter $150.00/per day* All Terrain Vehicle $40.00/per day* Generator $40.00/per day* Pump $20.00/per day* * One Day Minimum Charge Supplemental Billings: Engineering Copies Engineering Copies Stereo Air Photos Assessor's Map Copies Survey Monuments Steel Fence Posts R02069 $122.00/hr. 105.00/hr. 85.00/hr. 80.00/hr. 70.00/hr. 80.00/hr. 65.00/hr. 55.00/hr. 50.00/hr. 45.00/hr. 25.00/hr. 91.00/hr. 67.00/hr. 77.00/hr. 83.00/hr. 40.00/hr. 62.00/hr, 0.40/mile Cost + 5% Cost + 15% 150% of Regular Rate $200.00/hr. (4 hour minimum) $ 35,00/ea. 20.00/ea. 56.00/ea. 37.00/ea. 66.00/ea. 154.00/ea. 135.00/ea. 150.00/ea. 120.00/ea. 138.00/ea. 50.00/ea. 35.00/ea. 62.00/ea. 62.00/ea. 130.00/ea. 63.00/ea. 150.00/ea. 180.00/ea. Technician Hourly Rate Technician Hourly Rate Technician Hourly Rate Technician Hourly Rate 24 X 36 18X26 $1.50/sheet $1.00/sheet $18.00/pair $2.00/sheet $2.00/each $2.00/each Invoices will be rendered monthly, as a final or progress billing, whichever applies, and are payable upon receipt, unless a mutually acceptable payment schedule has been established. Late Fees at a rate of 1 Y2% per month, computed and charged monthly on the unpaid balances, shall be payable on accounts not paid within 30 days from invoice date. Planning Department 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 PhOne: 707/463-6200 Fax: 707/463-6204 March 1,2002 Mr. John Lape, Architect 5410 SW Macadam Avenue Suite 200 Portland, OR 97201 Re: Mountain View Assisted Living Facility Expansion Dear John: I am pleased to confirm that the City Engineer approved Boundary Line Adjustment Application #02-02 at the public hearing held on February 27, 2002, subject to the approval of the following Conditions of Approval: All taxes now due, or past due, and fees related to the Boundary Line Adjustment application, must be paid prior to the final approval and recordation of the Boundary Line Adjustment. 2. The Boundary Line Adjustment shall be reflected in deeds meeting the approval of the City Engineer and shall be recorded with the Mendocino County Recorder. If required, any existing easement, .utility, or other infrastructure affected by the Boundary Line Adjustment shall be adjusted or relocated, as determined by the City Engineer. These easements shall be reflected within, and filed concurrently with, the deeds for the properties. If required, new access and public utility easements shall be provided to the properties affected by .the Boundary Line Adjustment. These easements shall be reflected within, and filed concurrently with, the deeds for the properties. 5. The Boundary Line Adjustment shall be null and void if the Ukiah City Council does not approve Rezone Application No. 02-03 within one year from the date of this approval. These Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Boundary Line Adjustment No. 01-35, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid. Please contact Tim Eriikson, Senior Civil Engineer; at 463- 6284 regarding specific requirements for completing the Boundary Line Adjustment process. I must also advise you that you or any other person that attended the meeting may appeal the City Engineer's decision to the Planning Commission by submitting a written appeal to City Clerk Marie UIvila, who maintains offices at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue. In this case, nobody spoke in opposition to the project, but Planning staff will be required to maintain the appeal period, which ends at 5:00 p.m. on Monday, March11, 2002, since the appeal period ends on weekend. I am also pleased to confirm that the Ukiah Planning voted to adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for the project and to approve proposed Use Permit No. 02-04, subject to City Council approval of Rezone No. 02-03. The Commission also voted to recommend that this rezone be approved. Planning staff is required to notice the proposed Rezone application again since it is a separate public hearing and it is our intent to schedule the review of this project for the April 3, 2002, City Council meeting. This meeting is held at 7:00 p.m. Sincerely, Dave Lohse Associate Planner 2"2. City of Ukiah STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY ENGINEER Mountain View Assisted Living Facility Expansion Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02 ITEM NO. 8-A Meeting Date: February 27, 2002 PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project is designed to add a 7,078 square foot addition onto the existing Mountain View assisted living facility (ALF), which currently has 27,062 square feet of floor area. In order to accomplish this development, the project requires the approval of the proposed boundary line adjustment to adjust common property lines between the four lots comprising the site and effectively transfer .45 acre of land from three of the lots to the parcel containing the ALF. In addition to the boundary line adjustment, the applicants are processing Rezone No. 02-03 concurrently to change the zoning classification for the .45-acre area described above from the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District to the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. This project will ultimately be acted on by the City Council, with a recommendation from the Planning Commission. The development of the ALF addition will also require the approval of Use Permit No. 02-04 to allow the actual construction and operation of the expanded ALF facility, which were allowed by Planning Commission approval of a previous Use Permit (#99-52). The Planning Commission will ultimately act on this project at a separate hearing. The discretionary actions associated with this project are quasi-judicial in nature; therefore each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove, or modify the project. PROJECT LOCATION: The existing assisted living facility is at 1343 Dora Avenue (003-471-27), with two lots at 1346 South Street (Assessor Parcel Nos. 003-472-13 and 14) and a third lot that has no public street frontage or address (Assessor Parcel No. 003-472-08). DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02 on the grounds that the parcel dimensions established by the adjustment are consistent with the Ukiah General Plan and the applicable use and development standards of the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) and C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning Districts. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Normally, a minor land adjustment such as this would be exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), in accordance with Categorical Exemption Section 15305, Class 5(a). In this case, however, the Environmental Coordinator determined that this project was not exempt since it is being done in conjunction with a rezone and site development project that requires the preparation of an initial study. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: C (Commercial) ZONING DISTRICTS: C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) for APN Commercial) for APN 003-472-08, 13, and 14. 1 003-471-27 and C-2 (Heavy PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site consists of four contiguous parcels that stretch between Dora Street on the west and State Street on the east. The westernmost portion of the 6.35-acre project site is a 2.4-acre lot (APN 003-471-27) that has been developed with the Mountain View Assisted Living Facility. This lot also contains a paved access driveway, paved parking, and extensive landscaping. The eastern portion of the project site consists of three contiguous lots, including APN 003-472-08 with approximately 1.05-acre of area, APN 003-472-13 with 2.04 acres of area, and APN 003-472-14) with an area of .85 acre. Development on these three lots is limited to a single-family residence near the State Street frontage and a dirt driveway that runs between State Street and a paved private driveway that extends to Wabash Avenue. The proposed adjustment would shift property lines between the four lots in order to transfer acreage from the three lots on the eastern portion of the site to the lot that contains the Mountain View ALF. Existing areas and the areas proposed for transfer to the ALF ownership are listed below: APN EXISTING LOT AREA AREA TRANSFERRED NEW LOT AREA 003-472-08 1.05 acre 7,390 sq.ft./.17 acre .88 acre 003-472-13 2.05 acres 8,778 sq.ft. / .20 acre 1.85 acre 003-472-14 .85 acre 3,814 sq.ft ./.08 acre .77 acre TOTALS: 3.95 acres 19, 982 sq.ft. / .45 acre 3.5 acres The affected areas are also shown on Attachment 2 of this report. STAFF ANALYSIS: Planning staff determined that the parcels effectively established by the proposed boundary line adjustments would be consistent with the General Plan goals and policies for Iow density residential and limited commercial development. These include the specific implementation policies that relate to allowed uses and new development requirements. Consistency with Zoning Standards: All of the lot areas established by the proposed property line adjustments would conform to the standards of the C-N and C-2 Zoning Districts, as applicable, including those for lot size and setback areas. In fact, it is the opinion of Planning staff that all of the lots that would be reduced in area would retain viable areas for the development of the heavy commercial development for which they are zoned. Consistency with Airport Compatibility Standards: The 6.35-acre site is transected by the boundary between Ukiah Airport Compatibility Zones B-2 and D, which prescribed acceptable and non- acceptable land uses in areas close to the airport. In this case, the lot areas proposed for transfer are located entirely in Airport Compatibilty Zone D, in which the development of assisted living facilities and similar uses is allowed. Therefore, the development of the ten units proposed for the ALF addition would be consistent with the compatibility criteria of the airport. Most of the area on the three lots making up the eastern portion of the site is in Airport Compatibility Zone B-2, which discourages the development of assisted living facilities and similar uses. However, the criteria for this compatibility zone doe not preclude all of the heavy commercial land uses permitted in the C-2 Zoning District, and the lots would remain viable for development. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed lots are consistent with Ukiah General Plan goals and policies and the applicable development standards for building sites located in the C-N or C-2 Zoning Districts, as outlined in the Ukiah Municipal Code. Staff further concluded that the sites effectively established by the proposed adjustment would not encourage development that is inconsistent with the compatibility criteria of the Ukiah Municipal Airport. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for approval of Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02 is based, in part, on the following Findings: The lots that would be effectively established by the approval of the Boundary Line Adjustment would conform to the goals and policies of the Ukiah General Plan, the use and development standards of the C-N and C-2 Zoning Districts, respectively, and the compatibility criteria of the Ukiah Municipal Airport; The project would generate no significant adverse environmental impacts that would not be mitigated to insignificant levels by the adoption of the measures contained in the Negative Declaration/Initial Study prepared for the project; The approval of the Boundary Line Adjustment, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to the owners or occupants of surrounding properties or other nearby properties since all of the lots established by the approval would comply fully with the development standards that apply to the project site and the surrounding neighborhood. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid: 1. All taxes now due, or past due, and fees related to the Boundary Line Adjustment application, must be paid prior to the final approval and recordation of the Boundary Line Adjustment. 2. The Boundary Line Adjustment shall be reflected in deeds meeting the approval of the City Engineer and shall be recorded with the Mendocino County Recorder. If required, any existing easement, utility, or other infrastructure affected by the Boundary Line Adjustment shall be adjusted or relocated, as determined by the City Engineer. These easements shall be reflected within, and filed concurrently with, the deeds for the properties. If required, new access and public utility easements shall be provided to the properties affected by the Boundary Line Adjustment. These easements shall be reflected within, and filed concurrently with, the deeds for the properties. ADVISORY NOTE: Once the Ukiah City Engineer provides preliminary approval of the proposed lot line adjustment, the lot line application shall be completed in accordance with the attached Boundary Line Adjustment Procedure. Please contact Engineering Department staff if you have questions concerning this procedure. The applicant shall also be responsible for any further processing required by the California Department of Real Estate. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Proposed Property Lines and Zoning Exhibit 3. Site Plan for Mountain View Assisted Living Facility Building Expansion 4. Negative Declaration for Mountain View Expansion Project BLA 02-02/MOUNTAIN VIEW ALF/CE 2/20/02 City of Ukiah STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Mountain View Assisted Living Facility Expansion Rezone No. 02-03 Use Permit No. 02-04 ITEM NO. 8-A Meeting Date: February 27, 2002 PROJECT SUMMARY: The proposed project is designed to add a 7,078 square foot addition onto the existing Mountain View assisted living facility (ALF), a 27,062 square foot building containing 43 single residential units for persons that require daily assistance. In order to accomplish this development, the discretionary applications described below are being processed concurrently. Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02 is required since the property that contains the existing ALF does not have sufficient area to accommodate the proposed addition. The proposed adjustment would shift common property lines between the four lots comprising the 6.36-acre site, effectively transferring a total area of .45 acre from three of the lots to the lot that contains the existing facility. The City Engineer will act on this project in a separate hearing scheduled for 1:30 p.m. on February 20, 2002. A copy of the Staff Report for this project is attached to this report. Rezone No. 02-03 is required to change the zoning classification for the .45-acre area described above from the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District to the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District. In this case, the Planning Commission action is advisory to the City Council. Use Permit No. 02-04 is required to allow the actual construction of the addition and the expansion of the existing ALF operation, which were allowed by City Council approval of Use Permit #99-52. The discretionary actions associated with this project are quasi-judicial in nature; therefore each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove, or modify the project. PROJECT LOCATION: The project site is comprised of four parcels of record, including the one that contains the existing assisted living facility at 1343 Dora Avenue (APN 003-471-27. The site also contains two lots that are both addressed as 1346 South Street (APN 003-472-13 and 14) and a third lot that has no public street frontage or address (APN 003-472-08). DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS: Rezone: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration prepared for the project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act on the grounds that the project will not cause any significant adverse effects that would not be mitigated to insignificant levels by the adoption of the measures included in the initial study. All of the mitigation measures are also included as recommended Conditions of Approval for the project. The Planning Department also recommends that the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of Rezone No. 02-03 on the grounds that the proposed C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District proposed for the affected portion of the site is consistent with the C (Commercial) land use designation of the Ukiah General Plan and the C-2, C-N, and R-1 zoning classifications assigned to surrounding properties. Use Permit: The Planning Department recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration for the purpose of acting on the Use Permit and approve Major Use Permit No. 02-04 on the grounds that the proposed expansion of the existing assisted living facility is consistent with the C land use classification of the Ukiah General Plan, the use and development standards of the proposed C-N Zoning District, and the compatibility criteria for the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existing Site: The 6.35-acre project site consists of four contiguous parcels, including an irregular-shaped, 2.43-acre lot (APN 003-471-27) located in the C-N Zoning District. This lot was partially developed with the Mountain View Assisted Living Facility (ALF) after the City Council approved applications for a rezone, a use permit, and a boundary line adjustment (reference RZ 99-51; UP 99-52; and BLA 99-53). This 27,000 square foot facility includes 31 studio apartments and 12 one-bedroom apartments that each has private food preparation and living room areas. The building also has an interior landscaped courtyard, a library, group living and dining rooms, and an activities room with a residential-style kitchen for group activities. A reception area, manager's office, commercial kitchen and dining room, laundry facilities, and a nurse's office are located adjacent to the building's front entrance. This portion of the project site also contains a paved access driveway and 3 parking stalls on the west side of the building, with a 19-stall parking lot and landscape planter along its northern perimeter. The remaining grounds are landscaped with shrubs, lawn areas, and trees designed to shade the building and screen it from the single-family residences located on abutting lots to the south. The portion of the lot containing the ALF structure is substantially lower in elevation than the lot to the west and the building was constructed on a pad of fill materials that extends approximately 75 feet beyond its eastern wall. This pad is at least 6-8 feet higher than the lands to the east, with a relatively steep bank. Most of the site drainage from the developed and undeveloped portions of the site has been routed directly into storm drains that extend along the northern, southern and eastern perimeters of the building pad before being routed to the storm drain system along State Street. The podion of the site located east of the existing assisted living facility is located in the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District, but development has been limited to one single-family residence and a portion of a paved private access lane that extends between the northern portion of the site and Wabash Avenue. There are also isolated pockets of vegetation, with relatively mild slopes running from the east and north to the southeast. Surrounding land uses include a convalescent hospital located on the parcel to the west, a large church complex to the north, and single-family residences to the south. The State Street corridor and the Ukiah Municipal Airport are located to the east. Proposed Development: The approval of the proposed Boundary Line Adjustment (#02-02) would adjust contiguous property lines between the four parcels comprising the site to add approximately .45 acre of area to APN 003-471-27 to accommodate the proposed ALF expansion and the expansion of the existing parking lot. The proposed Rezone (#02-03) would change the zoning designation for the .36-acre area established by the lot line adjustment from C-2 (Heavy Commercial) to C-N (Neighborhood Commercial), while the proposed Use Permit (#02-04) is required to allow the construction of the proposed building addition. The project, if approved, would allow the construction of a building addition with six one-bedroom units for persons requiring assisted living and four units containing two beds each for persons with Alzheimer's syndrome. The addition would be attached to the east side of the existing assisted living facility, with wing extensions constructed around a 2,700 square foot interior courtyard reserved for use by the occupants of the Alzheimer's units. The building design, colors, and materials would match those in use on the existing ALF building. The perimeter areas would also be fenced with matching wood fencing on the south side. STAFF ANALYSIS Environmental Analysis: The City Environmental Coordinator determined that the project is not exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Planning Department staff has prepared an initial study to review potential significant adverse environmental impacts. Based on this review, staff identified potential adverse impacts to earth and soils from fill materials, grading, and compaction and impacts to water resources from grading and covering over of soils. However, the Public Works Department determined that these impacts can be eliminated wit standard grading practices, and that a Final Grading and Drainage Plan be prepared to ensure that site grading and other site preparation activities do not cause wind or soil erosion, or failure of fill materials. General Plan & facility proposed Commercial land Zoning Consistency:. Planning staff determined the modified lot sizes and assisted living in this project would be consistent with the Ukiah General Plan goals and policies for the use designation, including standards for allowable uses and siting criteria. Consistency with C-N and C-2 Zoning District Development Standards: Planning staff also determined the expanded parcel would comply with the C-N Zoning District size requirements that would apply if the proposed rezone is approved. It was likewise determined that the reduced lot areas for the parcels to the east of the ALF site would not conflict with the development standards for the C-2 Zoning District. These determinations are based, in part, on the fact that the areas to be transferred to the ALF site are not essential to the continued use of the existing single-family residence or future commercial operations that could occur on these lots. The proposed addition to the assisted living facility would also comply with the C-N development standards for building heights, building setbacks, and yard areas. The expanded facility would also comply with the rest home standard of one parking stall for every three beds since the parking lot would be expanded by 11 parking stalls to accommodate 14 new beds. This parking lot expansion is also consistent with the parking standards of the Municipal Code, including the additional landscaping that is required to shade and screen the paved parking areas. Airport Master Plan Compliance: The activities of the assisted living facility would definitely be affected by the operations at the Ukiah Municipal Airport since the eastern portions of the site are located only fifty feet west of the airport property. Due to this proximity, the 400-foot wide portion of the project site fronting State Street is located in Airport Compatibility Zone B-2 (Extended Approach-Departure), which designates areas subject to increased risk and noise impacts from airplanes flying lower than 800 feet. The assisted living facility land use is not normally allowed in this zone. However, the existing ALF and the portion of the project site proposed for its expansion are located in Airport Compatibility Zone D (Other Airport Environs). This zoning classification is assigned to lands with negligible risks and potential annoyance from aircraft overflights, and prohibits any land uses that are hazards to flight. In this case, the one-story buildings and relatively Iow canopies of existing and proposed trees would not represent a hazard to flight, so no potential hazards to site users or adverse impacts to airport operations are anticipated. Therefore, the proposed expansion is consistent with the compatibility criteria of the Airport Master Plan. Landscaping Requirements: The landscape plan included with the expansion proposal provides a planting pattern that is consistent with the landscape standards of the C-N Zoning District and the landscape plan approved for the existing assisted living facility. In fact, the landscaping proposed for the areas east and north of the ALF addition is actually more intense than the existing plantings and is expected to provide more effective shade and screening. Building Design: The proposed addition is wide enough and long enough to be considered a substantial addition to the visual mass and aesthetic impacts caused by the existing building. Fortunately, however, the addition would utilize the same design features, building materials, and colors as the existing structure, which effectively blends in with the residential structures on abutting lots. Therefore, it not anticipated that the relatively minor increase in mass would cause major aesthetic impacts. Neighborhood Compatibility: The existing assisted living facility is located in a mixed-use neighborhood that includes single family homes to the south, west, and east, a convalescent hospital to the west, and a large church complex to the north. The proposed addition would be consistent in design and use with the existing facility and a convalescent hospital and church on abutting lots, but its development and operation could cause conflicts with the single family residences located on Berkeley Street and Ranee Lane. In order to reduce potential conflicts with the abutting residential neighborhoods, the applicants intend to construct the addition with the same one-stow height used on the existing building. In addition, the expanded parking facilities would be placed on the north side of the lot to provide privacy for the residents to the south and an interior courtyard was included to ensure that the outdoor activities of the facility's occupants would be contained within building walls. Further compatibility measures include a continuation of the twenty-foot wide side yard setback along the southern property line instead of the five foot setback stipulated in the C-N Zoning District development standards. CONCLUSIONS: Planning Department staff concludes the proposed assisted living facility would be consistent with the Ukiah General Plan goals and policies for the C (Commercial) land use classification and with Housing Element goals that encourage housing for segments of the population that require nontraditional housing. The project would also comply with the applicable use and development standards for the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District, and is consistent with all applicable design standards and the appearance of the buildings on abutting lots. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for the approval of Rezone No. 02-03 and Major Use Permit #02-04 is based, in part, on the following findings: The assisted living facility expansion, as conditioned, would be consistent with the General Plan goals and policies for development of multiple-family housing in the C (Commercial) land use classification, including Housing Element policies for encouraging nontraditional residential housing; The assisted living facility expansion, as conditioned, would comply with applicable use and development standards for the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) and R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning Districts; The assisted living facility expansion would not create hazardous or inconvenient impacts to existing vehicular or pedestrian patterns since the anticipated increase in levels of average daily traffic from the site would not be substantial enough to cause service levels for abutting public streets or intersections to decline; The existing driveway and the proposed parking lot expansion would not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses since the City Engineer determined these facilities would be adequate to provide safe and efficient ingress and egress when developed to City of Ukiah standards; 4 o The proposed landscaping plan has adequate planting areas and vegetation to be consistent with existing landscaping on the site and to provide sufficient open space, shade, and screening of the building expansion; The assisted living facility expansion would not restrict or cut out light or air on abutting parcels since the building height would be a single stow high and would be set back far enough from abutting property lines that large amounts of shade would not be cast on abutting lots; 7. The assisted living facility expansion would not excessively damage or destroy natural features since none are present on the site; The assisted living facility expansion, as conditioned, would not have a detrimental effect on the character of nearby residential homes since the building has an aesthetically pleasing design that matches the existing building and would be screened by landscaping and fencing; The assisted living facility, as conditioned, would generate no significant adverse environmental impacts that would not be mitigated to levels that are not significant by the adoption of the proposed mitigation measures, as determined in the Initial Study that was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; 10. The rezoning of the site would not adversely affect land uses in the area since the area affected is relatively small, would be rezoned to a neighborhood commercial zoning district that is consistent with the zoning on the abutting lands to the west, and would allow the development of an institutional use that is generally more consistent with the Iow density residential land uses to the south than the uses allowed or permitted in the existing heavy commercial zoning; 11. The development of the assisted living facility expansion, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to the public's health, safety and general welfare since it is consistent with applicable General Plan goals and policies and the use requirements, development standards, and design guidelines for the C-N (Neighborhood Commercial) and R-3 (High Density Residential) Zoning Districts. Furthermore, the structure is designed to be compatible with nearby residential and institutional buildings and would be heavily screened by, landscaping and solid fencing. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Major Use Permit #02-04, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid: All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application approved by the Planning Commission, 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 Planning Commission. In addition to any particular condition that 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. o 10. 11. 12. 13. Building Permits shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the Use 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 Use Permit may be revoked through the City's revocation process if the approved project related to the Use 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. 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. Except as otherwise specifically noted, the Use Permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving the 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 City Engineer shall permit no site preparation or grading activities on the project site without the review and approval of a Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by a civil engineer. This Plan shall include the following: 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; 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. 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. The City Engineer shall review and approve erosion control and sediment barrier measures prior to the issuance of a Building Permit or Site Improvement Permit in order to guarantee the protection of City storm drain facilities. A letter that describes erosion control measures for implementation may be submitted in lieu of an erosion control plan if the City Engineer determines the measures are adequately defined. Construction cost estimates for on-site and off-site improvements shall be provided to Department of Public Works staff for the preparation of plan-checking fees. The fee for on-site improvements is 1.5 percent of the improvements costs and the fee for off-site improvements is 3 percent of the cost of improvements. Cost estimates for on-site or off-site work shall be itemized separately. 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. Any existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk determined to be in disrepair by City Public Works staff once a Building Permit, Site Improvement Permit, or other permit for site preparation activities is submitted shall be repaired per City Details. 14. The retaining wall that would be constructed within the public utility easement that runs along the south side of the proposed parking lot expansion shall be relocated. In the event that the Director of Public Works determines that the relocation of these facilities would be a valid hardship, the owners may instead submit a signed letter that states that "the owners of the property shall be responsible for rebuilding the proposed retaining wall and any other required improvements along the south side of the parking lot if it is necessary to remove this wall to work on the storm or sanitary sewer lines that run through the existing public utility easement." 15. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Public Utilities and Public Works Departments. 16. A Landscaping and Lighting Plan shall be submitted by the project applicant and approved by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. The landscaping plan shall be fully planted in a manner that is consistent with the plan 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; c) A maintenance schedule for existing or proposed vegetation, including a watering schedule and irrigation system design; and d) A lighting plan for any proposed exterior lighting installed or otherwise used on the site, including the design of the light standards used. 17. 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. 18. 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. 19. Any new outdoor refuse/recycle containers shall be aesthetically screened from view and garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosures. The area established for recycling bins shall be adequately sized and located in an area that makes them accessible. 20. A recycling program that provides the opportunity for all residents of the assisted living facility building addition to recycle shall be implemented by the facility managers prior to the occupancy of any of the units and shall remain in effect so long as they are occupied. This program shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to its implementation to ensure it provides an efficient method for recycling and is consistent with the requirements of the Municipal Code. 21. 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. 22. The Use Permit for the assisted living facility expansion shall become null and void if the Ukiah City Council does not approve Rezone No. 02-03. 23. 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. 4-7 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Proposed Property Line and Zoning 3. Site Plan 4. Floor Plan 5. Typical Units Floor Plan 6. Exterior Wall Elevations 7. Courtyard Elevations 8. Landscape Plan and Plant List 9. Irrigation Plan 10. Negative Declaration for Mountain View Expansion 11. Staff Report for Boundary Line Adjustment #02-02 12. Draft Zoning Map Amendment for Rezone #02-03 CITY OF UKIAH NEGATIVE DECLARATION DATE: February 1, 2002 APPLICANTS: Ukiah Assisted Living, LLC / John Lape, Architect PROJECT NO.: Boundary Line Adjustment No. 02-02; Rezone No. 02-03; and Major Use Permit No. 02-04 LOCATION: 1343 South Dora Street & 1346 South State Street, City of Ukiah, County of Mendocino (Assessor Parcel Nos. 003-471-27; 003-472-08; 003-472-13 and 14) ENVIRONMENTAL SETI'ING: The project site consists of four contiguous parcels, including an irregular-shaped, 2.43-acre lot (APN 003-471-27) located in the C-N Zoning District. This lot was partially developed with the Mountain View Assisted Living Facility (ALF) after the City Council approved applications for a rezone, a use permit, and a boundary line adjustment (reference P,Z. 99-51; UP 99-52; and BLA 99-53). This 27,000 square foot facility includes 31 studio apartments and 12 one-bedroom apartments that each has private food preparation and living room areas. The building also has an interior landscaped courtyard, a library, group living and dining rooms, and an activities room with a residential-style kitchen for group activities. A reception area, manager's office, commercial kitchen and dining room, laundry facilities, and a nurse's office are located adjacent to the building's front entrance. This portion of the project site also contains a paved access driveway and 3 parking stalls on the west side of the building, and a 19-stall parking lot and landscape planter along its northern perimeter. The remaining grounds have been landscaped with shrubs, lawn areas, and trees designed to shade the building and screen it from the single-family residences on abutting lots to the south. There is also a wooden fence along the southern podion of the site and chain link fencing along other property lines. The portion of the lot containing the ALF structure is substantially lower in elevation than the lot to the west and the existing building was constructed on a pad of fill materials that extends approximately 75 feet beyond its eastern wall. This pad is at least 6-8 feet higher than the lands to the east, with a relatively steep bank. Most of the site drainage from the developed and undeveloped podions of the site has been routed directly into storm drains that extend along the northern, southern and eastern perimeters of the building pad before being routed to the storm drain system along State Street. The portion of the site east of the existing assisted living facility is located in the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District, but development has been limited to one single-family residence and a portion of a paved private access lane that extends between the northern portion of the site and Wabash Avenue. There are also isolated pockets of vegetation, with relatively mild slopes running from the east and north to the southeast. Surrounding land uses include a convalescent hospital located on the parcel to the west, a large church complex to the north, and single-family residences to the south. The State Street corridor and the Ukiah Municipal Airpod are located to the east. 44 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project, if approved, would allow the construction of a building addition with six one-bedroom units for persons requiring assisted living and four units containing two beds each for persons with Alzheimer's syndrome. The addition would be attached to the east side of the existing assisted living facility, with wing extensions constructed around a 2,700 square foot interior courtyard reserved for use by the occupants of the Alzheimer's units. The building design, colors, and materials would match those in use on the existing ALF building. The approval of the proposed Boundary Line Adjustment (#02-02) would adjust contiguous property lines between the four parcels comprising the site to add approximately .36 acre of area to APN 003- 471-27 to accommodate the proposed ALF expansion and the expansion of the existing parking lot. The proposed Rezone (#02-03) would change the zoning designation for the .36-acre area established by the lot line adjustment from C-2 (Heavy Commercial) to C-N (Neighborhood Commercial), while the proposed Use Permit (#02°04) is required to allow the construction of the proposed building addition and parking lot in accordance with the use and development standards for the C-N Zoning District. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS: Potential significant adverse impacts identified in this initial study include the following: 1. Impacts to earth and soils from fill materials, grading, and compaction; and 2. Impacts to water resources from grading and covering over of soils. FINDINGS SUPPORTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION: 1. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the local or regional environment; 2. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in short-term impacts that will create a disadvantage to long-term environmental goals; 3. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Study, the project will not result in environmental impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. STATEMENT OF DECLARATION: After appraisal of the possible impacts of this project, the City of Ukiah has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and further, that this Negative Declaration constitutes compliance with the requirements for environmental review and analysis required by the California Environmental Quality Act. This document may be reviewed at the City of Ukiah Planning Department, Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Charles Stump, Planning Director/Environmental Coordinator City of Ukiah INITIAL STUDY OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BACKGROUNDINFORMATION 1. Project Proponent: 2. Address of Proponent: Ukiah Assisted Living, LLC by John Lape, Architect 2601 25th Street, East, Suite 450 Salem, Oregon 97302 3. Name of Project: Boundary Line Adjustment #02-02; Rezone #02-03; & Major Use Permit #02-04 4. Site Location: 1343 South Dora Street and 1346 South State Street, Ukiah, County of Mendocino, California Assessor Parcel Numbers 003-471-19; 003-472-08; 003- 472-13; & 003-472-14 5. Date of Initial Study Preparation: February 1, 2002 6. Name of Lead Agency: City of Ukiah Planning Department 7. Phone Number of Lead Agency: 707/463-6207 8. Address of Lead Agency: 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah CA 95482 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project, if approved, would allow the construction of a building addition with six one-bedroom units for persons requiring assisted living and four units containing two beds each for persons with Alzheimer's syndrome. The addition would be attached to the east side of the existing assisted living facility, with wing extensions constructed around a 2,700 square foot interior coudyard reserved for use by the occupants of the Alzheimer's units. The building design, colors, and materials would match those in use on the existing ALF building. The approval of the proposed Boundary Line Adjustment (#02-02) would adjust contiguous property lines between the four parcels comprising the site to add approximately .36 acre of area to APN 003-471-27 to accommodate the proposed ALF expansion and the expansion of the existing parking lot. The proposed Rezone (#02-03) would change the zoning designation for the .36-acre area established by the lot line adjustment from C-2 (Heavy Commercial) to C-N (Neighborhood Commercial), while the proposed Use Permit (#02-04) is required to allow the construction of the proposed building addition and parking lot in accordance with the use and development standards for the C-N Zoning District. 10. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The project site consists of four contiguous parcels, including an irregular-shaped, 2.43-acre lot (APN 003-471-27) located in the C-N Zoning District. This lot was padially developed with the Mountain View Assisted Living Facility (ALF) after the City Council approved applications for a rezone, a use permit, and a boundary line adjustment (reference RZ 99- 51; UP 99-52; and BLA 99-53). The 27,000 square foot facility includes 31 studio apartments and 12 one-bedroom apartments that each has private food preparation and living room areas. The building also has an interior landscaped courtyard, a library, group living and dining rooms, and an activities room with a residential-style kitchen for group activities. A reception area, manager's office, commercial kitchen and dining room, laundry facilities, and a nurse's office are located adjacent to the building's front entrance. This portion of the project site also contains a paved access driveway and 3 parking stalls on the west side of the building, and a 19-stall parking lot and landscape planter along its northern perimeter. The remaining grounds have been landscaped with shrubs, lawn areas, and trees designed to shade the building and screen it from the single-family residences on abutting lots to the south. The portion of the lot containing the ALF structure is substantially lower in elevation than the lot to the west and the existing building was constructed on a pad of fill materials that extends approximately 75 feet beyond its eastern wall. This pad is at least 6-8 feet higher than the lands to the east, with a relatively steep bank. Most of the site drainage from the developed and undeveloped portions of the site has been routed directly into storm drains that extend along the northern, southern and eastern perimeters of the building pad before being routed to the storm drain system along State Street. The portion of the site east of the existing assisted living facility is located in the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District, but development has been limited to one single-family residence and a portion of a paved private access lane that extends between the northern portion of the site and Wabash Avenue. There are also isolated pockets of vegetation, with relatively mild slopes running from the east and noah to the southeast. Surrounding land uses include a convalescent hospital located on the parcel to the west, a large church complex to the noah, and single-family residences to the south. The State Street corridor and the Ukiah Municipal Airport are located to the east. LOCATION MAP MOUNTAIN ~VIEW ~A~SsISTED LIVING FACILITy EXPANSION (BLA//02-02; RZ//02-03; & UP//02-04) 1343 South Dora Street (Assessor Parcel Nos. 003-471-27and 003-472-08; 13; & 14) 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 300' APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet NORTH ~ORA STREET SOUTH OOt~.A STREET RANEE LANE BERKELEY BEACON ........,,..,...-...,....... SOUTH STATE STREET =RIYATE BERKELEY BEACON x~ --tz P~IVATE ::::::::::::::::::::::::: '-.'~'.'.'-'-'-'-×.'.'.'-'- ,< :::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ .:.:~:.!.:.:.:.:..;,.-$:.:.:<.; F :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ SOUTH STATE STI;;,~.E:ET' 0 I I t~.ANEE ANE F Z c Z ~NITH ~XI~ I-/'-2' 2.50 +/- '-]'~ '- 2" I,'NITH F:Xt~TIN® BUIL,,~IN® ii= Z~ 0 G /'J"ll X = ! lO 11 'it ~ ENVlRONiViENTAL CHECKLIST : : WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No 'Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: MitigafSon 1. EARTH: a. Unstable earth conditions or changes J~J [~ J~J J~J J~JJ in geologic structures. b. Disruptions. Displacements, Oompact,on. or overcove,ng o, so,,. c. Change in topography or ground su ace rel f ,eat res. d. The destruction, covering, or [-~ mod~cation of any unique geologic or J~j physical features. e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site. f. Changes in deposition or erosion of / beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion lhaf. may J~J modify the channel of a river, stream, inlel, or bay? g. Exposure of people or properly to J-~ eadhquakes. 12 2. AIR: of any air quality standard. c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or te~rature, or any ~a.~e in dixie, e~her I~lly or r~ioflally? 3. WATER: a. Changes in Ihe ~eflls, or the fresh or ~dne wale~. b. Changes in the abso~tiofl rates, a~unt of suda~ runoff. fl~ waters or ground waters. water in any water ~y or any discharge into surface wa(er. su~a~ water quality, including but not lim~ed to tem~rature, dissolved oxygen or lucidity. flow of ground water. g. Change in ~e quantity of ground or w~hdrawals, or ~rough inte[~pt~n of an aquifer by ~[s or ex~vati°ns' water' water ot~ise available for public water sullies. j. ~ o, ~o0~ o~ ~o~.~ ,o water rela[~ hazards su~ as fl~ing or Isunamis. 4. PLANT LIFE: a. Change in the diversity of species, or including trees, shrubs, grass, ~ops. and aqualic planls. b. R~udioo of the humors of any of planls. c. In~u~n of ~w s~s of plants into an area, or in a ba~r ,o the noel replenish~nt of exis~i~ d. R~udi~ in a~eage of any agr~,ural crop. 5. ANIMAL LIFE: a. Change in Ihe divers~y of s~cies, or numar of any s~c~s of a.imals including birds, land animals, reptiles, fish, inseds, and ~thnic organisms. unique, rare, or endanger~ s~c~s of animals. c. Intr~u~ion of new s~s of animals into an area, or in a barrier Io the migration or move~n( of ani~ls' d. ~tedoration of exbting fish or wildlife hab~at. 6. NOISE: b. ~sure of ~op~ to severe noise 14 7. LIGHT AND GLARE: adverse ~pads lo existing solar collagen facilities. 8. LAND USE: a. Substantial alteration oft~ present or plan~ ~ use of a g~en area. 9. NATU~L RESOURCES: natural resourms. 10. RISK OF UPSET: a. A risk of an explosion or t~ release of hazardous substan~s, (including oil, ~stic~es, chemi~ls, or radiation) in the event of an acc~enl or upset ~nditions. b. Possible inlefferen~ w~h an evacuation ~lan_ dens~, or gr~h ra(e of hu~n ~pulations. 12. HOUSING: housin~ or ~eate a demnd for new housing? 15 13.TRANSPORTATION: or demand for new pa~ing facil~ies? Irans~dafion sysle~? d. Alte~alions Io present paQems of and/o~ vehi~s, bi~dists or ~estHans? 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. ~II the proposal have an effed upon, or result in a need for new or alter~ govern~n, se~ices in any of the following areas: 1. Fire protection? 6. Other govem~ntal sewi~s? 15. ENERGY: energy? B. Substantial in.ease in ~mand o~n ~he deve~oo~n~ of new energy sour~s~ 16 II WILL THE PROJECT RESULT No Not Significant Significant Cumulative IN THE FOLLOWING Significant Unless No Impacts Mitigated Apparent ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: Mitigation 17. AESTHETICS: a. Obstruction of any scenic vista or / __ view open to the public, or create an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 18. RECREATION: a. Impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 19. CULTURAL RESOURCES: a. Alteration or destruction cfa prehistoric or histodc archaeological site? to a prehistoric or historic building or slructure2 c. Cause a physical change that would effect the unique ethnic cultural values? 20, AIR: a. Violation of any State or Federal air quality standard. c. Alteration of air move~nt, ~isture, or tem~rature, or any ~ange in climte, either Io~ly or ]7 DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND SUGGESTED MITIGATION MEASURES EARTH/SOILS: The Ukiah Valley is part of an active seismic region that contains the Maacama Fault, which traverses the valley to the east and north of the City. According to resource materials maintained by the Ukiah Planning Department, the projected maximum credible earthquake along this fault would be 7.4 magnitude on the Richter scale. The project site contains no unique geologic or physical features, but it is lower than the parcel to the west since this property was filled to provide building pads for the Ukiah Convalescent Hospital building that covers most of the lot. The boundary between the abutting lot and the project site is now defined by a steep slope contained behind a retaining wall, but topography on the rest of the site is marked by graded slopes of less than two (2) percent that run downhill from west to east. The Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part prepared by the Soil Conservation Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture classifies the soils on the project site as "urban soils mix", which consists of naturally occurring soils that have been covered and mixed with various fill materials. In fact, the existing building was constructed entirely on fill materials that were extended approximately 75 feet beyond the eastern wall of the existing facility. a. Significance Criteria: Earth and soil impacts would be significant if the project resulted in the creation of unstable soil conditions, modifications to topography, or adverse levels of erosion. bo Impacts: According to information from the Soil Conservation Service, the majority of the site has been covered with fill materials over a period of years and additional fill materials were placed on the site during the construction of the existing assisted living facility (ALF). However, all the fill materials located under the existing building were compacted and certified by a professional engineer and inspected by City staff in accordance with the Grading and Drainage Plan required for the original ALF project. The fill materials installed as the base for the proposed addition were not originally planned for or certified during the initial ALF development. However, a geotechnical engineer hired by the applicant has since determined that all of these fill materials are stable and would not be adversely affected by the minor grading, compaction, and covering activities that would be required to prepare the ALF addition's foundation and parking lot. Therefore, no substantial changes to soil stability, site topography or existing site contours and drainage patterns are expected. The proposed construction could cause increased levels of wind and water erosion if disturbed soils were left uncovered for long periods of time. According to the City Engineer's staff, these impacts would only be significant if standard grading, paving and soil suppression measures typically used during construction are not implemented. Therefore, the City Engineer requires that a Grading and Drainage Plan for the proposed addition be reviewed and approved prior to site preparation and grading activities, and that earth modification activities be regularly inspected to ensure they are done in compliance with the provisions of the approved plan. The required components of the Grading and Drainage plan are outlined below in recommended Mitigation Measure #1. 18 Mitigation: The following measure shall be required to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with development activities required to develop the project site: No site preparation or grading activities on the project site shall be permitted until a Grading and Drainage Plan for the assisted living facility addition, access road, and parking lot has been reviewed and approved by the Ukiah City Engineer. This Plan shall include the following: 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 soils; c. Certification by a geotechnical engineer that the fill materials located below the proposed building addition are properly compacted; and d. The extent of any other development or soil modification activities that the City Engineer determines could adversely affect existing drainage patterns on the site or abutting properties or cause wind or water erosion. WATER: Water on the project site drains from the west to the east through a storm drain along the southern property line and a storm drain that runs along the northern property line before turning south to intersect with the southern storm drain. This drainage then runs through a drainage swale that runs east across State Street toward the Russian River. According to the project plans, the surface drainage created by the ALF building addition and the expanded parking lot would be routed directly into these storm drains. The Federal Insurance Rate Map (FIRM Community-Panel Number 060183 0811 B) prepared by FEMA shows the project site is located in Flood Zone C, which indicates it is not subject to 100-year flood events. There is also no evidence of localized flooding conditions. Significance Criteria: Water impacts would be significant if the project resulted in changes in currents or the course of water movements on or near the site, or caused major declines in the quantities or quality of water absorbed into the ground. Other significant water impacts would be caused if the project caused floodwaters to rise to levels that are higher than normal. Impacts: The construction of the proposed ALF addition and the paving for the expanded parking lot and access road would require minor levels of grading and covering of soils over approximately a half-acre area. Engineering Department staff anticipated these activities would cause substantial reductions in the rate of water absorption and a resultant increase in surface runoff during major storms. Furthermore, Engineering staff notes that these drainage flows could cause significant adverse impacts on the site and on adjacent lands if standard grading and paving techniques were not utilized to ensure drainage is effectively routed to the storm drain system to the east. Therefore, the City Engineer will require that all changes in drainage patterns and its affects on the safe removal of storm waters from the site are shown on the Grading and Drainage Plan recommended for the mitigation of adverse EARTH and SOILS impacts. A substantial reduction in water absorption rates and ground water quantities at the site will also occur due to the extensive amount of soils being covered by building foundations and paving. However, Planning staff does not anticipate the reduced water absorption rates to significantly affect the supplies, quality, or movements of ground waters since the water table beneath the site is regularly replenished by surface and subterranean water sources draining from the hills west of the project site. Therefore, no groundwater mitigation measures are recommended. Water usage at the site is expected to increase substantially due to human consumption and irrigation of landscaping, but the water volumes anticipated are not considered significant since the site is zoned for the proposed use and water is available from mains in the Dora Street corridor. In fact, staff of the City Water and Sewer Department noted the site could be served without causing substantial impacts to area water supplies or any reductions in water services to other parcels. Mitigation: See the surface drainage measures included in Mitigation Measure #1 under the EARTH/SOILS discussion above. PLANT LIFE: The existing assisted living facility site contains eight (8) native oak trees located along the access driveway for the facility, but none of these trees would be affected adversely by the proposed ALF expansion. Furthermore, resources maintained by the Planning Department reveal no known plant species included in Federal or State listings as rare, threatened or endangered are located on the project site. The area proposed for the ALF expansion does contain three (3) immature introduced trees that were planted as part of the landscape plan for the original facility. All of these trees would have to be removed to accommodate the proposed addition, but the existing vegetation would be replaced with shrubs and six new trees that would provide an even denser screening effect. Significance Criteria: The project would cause significant impacts to plant life if it were to adversely change the diversity or numbers of plant species, reduce the numbers of any unique, rare, or threatened plants, or result in the introduction of plants that would affect the normal replenishment of existing species. Impacts: As noted above, the eight native oak trees located on the site are not directly affected by the proposed ALF building expansion and all would be preserved in accordance with the requirements of the site and landscape plans approved for the earlier project. The removal of the introduced trees is not considered a substantial adverse impact to area vegetation since most of the existing trees on the site would be preserved, including the native oak trees discussed above. Furthermore, these trees would be replaced with six new ornamental trees that would provide denser, more effective screening and shading for the building and paved areas. These trees are also compatible with the local climate and have been used regularly in other developments in the Ukiah area without affecting the reintroduction of native plant species or the continued success of the other trees recently planted on this site. Therefore, no mitigation measures for impacts to plant life are recommended. c. Mitigation: None recommended. ANIMAL LIFE: The project site is not developed at this time, but is surrounded by residential and commercial buildings that greatly limit the potential for animal habitat or movements. In fact, the Natural Diversity Database prepared by the California Department of Fish and Game shows there are no known rare, threatened, or endangered animals using the property for habitat or migration. ao Significance Criteria: Impacts to fish and other animal life would be significant if the project caused a change in the diversity or numbers of animals in nearby areas, or the reduction in the number of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animal. Other potential impacts include the introduction of new animal species that could block the migration or movement of animals or deterioration of existing fish and wildlife habitat. 20 bo Impacts: The project site contains no known rare, threatened, or endangered animal populations, and potential wildlife habitat for animals has been greatly limited by the development of residential and commercial buildings on all sides of the properties. Therefore, no animal life mitigation measures are recommended. c. Mitigation: None recommended. NOISE: Ambient and incidental noise levels are expected to increase slightly during the construction of the proposed ALF building addition, but there are no known sources of substantial noise associated with the day-to-day operation of the assisted living facility. In fact, Planning staff has observed that its operation causes noise levels that are comparable to, or less, than the noise from the abutting residential neighborhood. Significance Criteria: Noise impacts would be significant if the project caused adverse increases in existing noise levels (i.e. short-term ambient noise increases from construction activity) or exposed persons to severe noise levels. Impacts: The construction activities needed to fully develop the ALF addition could cause substantial short-term noise increases, but there is nothing in the design of the project that warrants the use of extraordinary construction activities (such as blasting) that would expose persons to significant or hazardous noise levels. Regular construction activities may cause nuisance noises for persons residing in the convalescent hospital to the west and the residences to the east, west, and south, but the effects from this noise would be short-lived and are not expected to cause long-term health hazards or other problems. Furthermore, all construction activities would be subject to the noise standards of the Ukiah Noise Ordinance, which limits the amount and duration of noise occurrences. Therefore, no significant adverse noise impacts are expected during the construction phase of the project. Ambient and incidental noise levels at the site may also increase due to the operation of the assisted living facility, but there is nothing in the design of the proposed addition that would cause a substantial noise increase or expose persons to severe or harmful noise levels. In fact, the majority of day-to-day activities would occur within the building walls or the enclosed courtyard area. Therefore, staff recommends no noise mitigation measures be required for this project. b. Mitigation: None recommended. LIGHT AND GLARE: The development of the proposed assisted living facility addition will cause additional sources of light and glare from the windows located on the north and south sides of the structure, and the potential use of security lighting on the building and in the parking lot. Significance Criteria: Adverse light and glare impacts would result from this project if it produced significant new sources of light or glare from building windows, security lighting, or automobile headlights, or the building reduced solar exposure or other impacts to existing solar collection facilities. Impacts: Light and glare at the site would be increased over existing levels due to the addition of four to five windows each on the north and south sides of the building. Planning staff does not, however, anticipate significant adverse impacts from these lighting and glare sources since the majority of the windows would be located at least twenty feet from the nearest residential lots and would be shielded by the six-foot high wooden fence that would be extended along all abutting property lines. 2! Increased lighting impacts will also be increased as the result of the external security lighting on the building and in the expanded podion of the parking lot. However, the proposed lighting would be limited to wall lighting near building entrances or placed on Iow-level standards in landscape and parking areas, and these lighting sources would not be easily visible over the six-foot high fences proposed for the site. The proposed building addition would not adversely affect solar heating opportunities on the site since it would be located far enough from abutting lots to limit shading from structures or trees abutting the parking lot. In addition, no substantial interfererence with solar power systems use on abutting lots would be caused since the addition would be one stow high and constructed on a lot with a lower grade than abutting lots. c. Mitigation: None recommended. LAND USE: The three parcels comprising the eastern portion of the project site and the larger parcel on the western portion of the site are all designated on the General Plan Land Use Map for C (Commercial) land uses. However, the parcel containing the assisted living facility is located in the C- N (Neighborhood-Commercial) Zoning District, which is typically reserved for lower-intensity commercial uses that are more compatible with residential neighborhoods. The remaining lots, on the other hand, are located in the C-2 (Heavy Commercial) Zoning District, which permits a number of heavy commercial and light industrial land uses. Significance Criteria: Impacts to land use in the area would result if the construction and operation of the ALF addition substantially changed or affected land uses on the site or in the surrounding neighborhoods. Impacts: The proposed expansion of the assisted living facility would represent a minor expansion of a previously permitted use by the construction of a building addition and parking lot designed to mirror the appearance of the existing facilities. Based on these factors, no substantial land use changes on the site or to the abutting lots are anticipated. The residential density of the facility would remain at approximately 19 persons per acre, which is consistent with the Iow to high residential densities permitted in the General Plan's Commercial land use designation and the density requirements of the C-N Zoning District. In fact, this density is only slightly higher than the 31 to 40 persons that could occupy the 16 single family homes that could be developed on the site, and much less than if it were developed with a high density apartment complex. The portion of the project site proposed for the ALF addition is located in Airport Compatibility Zone D (Other Airport Environs), according to the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan. This compatibility zoning classification is assigned to lands with negligible risks and potential annoyance from aircraft overflights, and prohibits any land uses that are hazards to flight. In this case, the one-stow buildings and relatively Iow canopies of the trees proposed for the site would not represent a hazard to flight, so no potential hazards to side users or adverse impacts to airport operations are anticipated. c. Mitigation: None required. 22 NATURAL RESOURCES: The construction of the proposed assisted living facility addition and parking lot would require the use of common natural resources, including wood materials and other natural materials or alloys. Significance Criteria: Natural resource impacts would be significant if the project resulted in the use of substantial amounts of such resources or required the development of new sources of such resources. Impacts: The development of the proposed assisted living facility addition would require the use of woods, metals, and other natural building materials, as well as the use of earthen materials for access roadway and parking area paving. However, there is nothing in the project design that indicates that such materials would be used at a significantly higher rate than expected for a building of this size or that its construction would require the development of new sources of natural resources. Therefore, no natural resources mitigation measures are required. c. Mitigation: None required. o ao RISK OF UPSET: Operation of the facility would require the use and storage of hazardous substances such as oil, pesticides, or materials for buildings and grounds maintenance. Significance Criteria: The potential for upset would be significant if the project resulted in significant risks of explosions or the release of hazardous substances in the event of an accident or upset conditions, or if its development interfered substantially with an emergency response or evacuation plan. Impacts: The project would increase the use of hazardous substances on the site since the operation and maintenance of the assisted living facility would require the use and storage of cleaners, pesticides, and other potential contaminants that could cause pollution if not used, stored, and disposed of in the proper manner. However, there is no evidence the amounts of these substances would be substantial enough in volume or toxicity to cause adverse environmental impacts. Furthermore, the use and storage of these materials is regulated by environmental health standards enforced by the Ukiah Fire Marshal and/or the County Environmental Health Department. According to the Ukiah Municipal Airport Master Plan, the proposed assisted living facility would be developed on a portion of the site that is located in Compatibility Zone D, which demarcates those areas subject to negligible risks and noise from aircraft flying over the site. In this case, the building does not represent a major hazard to aircraft, but some of the persons living in the proposed addition would require some assistance in the event of an accident or other incident. However, the Ukiah Fire Marshal indicated that the proposed emergency access being developed on the nodh side of the addition would provide very effective ingress and egress for emergency personnel and an outlet for the occupants of the addition. Therefore, staff anticipates no significant risks or adverse impacts to the emergency evacuation plan for the area. b. Mitigation: None required. 10. POPULATION: The current population of the City of Ukiah is approximately 15,500 persons, with a projected annual growth rate of less than two percent (2.0%) per year. The proposed project could attract additional residents to Ukiah, but the development of ten additional rooms in the existing facility would effectively limit any population increase to between 14-20 persons. ao Significance Criteria: Impacts to the human population of the Ukiah area would be significant if the project significantly increased the growth rate or cause adverse alterations in the location, distribution, or density of this population. Impacts: The development of the proposed assisted living facility addition would provide 10 additional housing units for a portion of Ukiah's population that has unique housing needs. This facility may attract some persons to Ukiah due to its unique housing niche, but the resultant increase in population would not cause adverse impacts to population levels since the maximum occupancy of the 10 rooms would be between 14-20 persons. In addition, it is expected that existing Ukiah residents would occupy most of the proposed units. Therefore, no significant population increases or adverse impacts to local population levels are anticipated. c. Mitigation: None required. 11. ao HOUSING: The proposed assisted living facility addition would provide 10 rooms occupied by a total of 14-20 persons. Based on a standard ALF occupancy rate of 1.92 persons per housing unit, Planning staff determined this rate is approximately midway between the residential density rates of 13 persons per acre for Iow density residential development and 26 persons per acre for medium density residential development. Significance Criteria: Significant impacts to housing would result if the project were to adversely affect existing housing stocks or cause a demand for new housing. Impacts: The 14-20 person occupancy designed for the assisted living facility addition is considered a Iow to medium residential development that can be permitted in the C-N Zoning classification for the portion of the site that would contain the ALF addition. This density is not expected to cause adverse impacts to area housing stocks since it provides housing for a segment of the Ukiah population that has few, if any, facilities designed to accommodate their unique needs. c. Mitigation: None required. 12. TRANSPORTATION: The proposed assisted living facility addition would be located on an interior portion of a parcel that has approximately forty feet of street frontage along Dora Street. The southern portion of the site also abuts Ranee Lane, a private drive, and Berkeley Way, a public street, but project plans show that no direct access to these streets is proposed as part of this project. Planning staff used standard traffic studies listed in Trip Generation, dh Edition (Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1998) to determine the assisted living facility addition would cause traffic volumes along Dora Street to increase by approximately twenty-one (21) vehicle trip ends per day. One of these trips would occur during peak morning hours, with two trips during peak evening hours. Significance Criteria: Transportation impacts would be significant if the traffic increases associated with the project were substantial enough to cause an adverse decline in the levels of service for Dora Street or nearby intersections. Other potential adverse impacts include potential alterations to existing area transportation systems and the present patterns of circulation, or increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, pedestrians, or bicyclists. Impacts: Traffic caused by the proposed assisted living facility addition would cause minor adverse impacts to existing transportation systems and the present patterns of circulation and movements of people in the area. However, these effects would not be significant since increases in traffic from the project would be relatively Iow when compared to the traffic volumes along Dora Street. In fact, the vehicle counts done in 1996 for the City of Ukiah Speed Zone Summary Table indicate the traffic 24 volume for the segment of Dora Street between Gobbi Street and the south city limits was approximately 5,800 vehicles per day. The Segment Level of Service criteria of the Ukiah General Plan shows this two-lane segment of Dora Street is now operating at Level of Service C (LOS C), which is the LOS at which traffic still moves in the zone of stable flow with only small delays caused by turning vehicles. The traffic from this project would not cause any direct change in the level of service for this street segment since the total traffic volume for Dora Street would still be substantially less than the 8,700 vehicles per day required for a full decline in service to LOS D. There are no traffic counts for the intersection where Dora Street crosses Wabash Avenue, but Planning staff noted during site visits that this intersection appears to be functioning under conditions that are consistent with LOS A during most of the day. Minor vehicle stacking does occur during peak a.m. and p.m. travel hours as a result of morning and evening commuter traffic, but delays seldom involve the stacking of more than two or three vehicles and are generally short-lived. It is not anticipated the proposed assisted living facility addition will cause any noticeable decline in the levels of service for this intersection since it would add only one vehicle trip per day to the peak morning hour traffic and two trips per day to the peak evening hour traffic. The 21 vehicle trips per day caused by this project would contribute incrementally to cumulative traffic increases that would cause a decline in the levels of service for Dora Street and nearby intersections. However, it is not anticipated that these impacts will cause significant adverse impacts since the subject area is almost entirely built out. Furthermore, this area is generally zoned for Iow density residential or Iow intensity commercial uses that do not typically cause large volumes of traffic. c. Mitigation: None required. 13. PUBLIC SERVICES: The City of Ukiah provides a wide array of public services to the site, including the provision of public safety services and electrical, water and sewer services. The City also maintains the Dora Street frontage on the west side of the site. Significance Criteria: Public services impacts would be significant if the project had adverse effects to existing public services or resulted in the need for new or altered government services in the areas-described in the Impacts section. Impacts: Planning staff contacted various agencies that would provide public services to the site and noted that none of the agency staffs anticipate any substantial impacts to existing services or the need for substantial new services. Individual analyses are outlined below: The Ukiah Fire Marshal noted the proposed assisted living facility addition would have to comply with a number of Fire Code mandates, including building sprinklers, second key access, fire access lane requirements, and building code requirements. However, the Fire Marshal also indicated the development would have no substantial adverse impacts on fire protection services or area evacuation plans, and would not require hiring additional fire personnel. 2. City Police Department staff also reviewed the proposed development, indicating no substantial effects on police services and no additional personnel would be required to protect the site. Due to the institutional nature of this project and the lack of potential increases in the school-age population, no referral was made to the Ukiah Unified School District as the result of the development of the assisted living facility. Due to the institutional nature of this project, the lack of potential population increases, and the presence of on-site recreational areas, City Community Services staff anticipates no substantial impacts to existing recreational facilities as a result of the assisted living facility operation. 2_5 'Z7 The proposed assisted living facility addition would be pad of privately owned and operated facility, and would not require public maintenance of its facilities. It would require trenching and other work to construct underground electrical transmission lines and connection to off-site water and sewer lines. However, Public Utilities staff determined this work could be supervised and inspected by existing staff. 6. No other impacts to other governmental service would be caused by the development of the assisted living facility since no other governmental agencies provide services on the property. c. Mitigation: None required. 14. ao ENERGY: The construction and operation of the proposed assisted living facility addition would require the use of fuels and other common energy sources, such as electricity. Significance Criteria: Adverse impacts to energy resources would result if the project caused substantial increases in the amounts of fuel or other energy sources consumed, or resulted in the need to create additional energy sources. Impacts: It is not anticipated the development and operation of the proposed assisted living facility addition would require substantial levels of fuels or other energy sources since it would be constructed with an energy-efficient design and materials. In addition, the project would not substantially increase the number of gasoline-using vehicle trips in the Ukiah Valley since the number of trips is expected to be less than 21 per day (see TRANSPORTATION discussion above). It is also not anticipated the construction and operation of the assisted living facility addition would require the development of additional energy sources since the project site is in service areas for existing electrical and natural gas transmission utilities and fossil fuel dispensers. c. Mitigation: None required. 15. bo UTILITIES: The development of the assisted living facility addition would require only minor expansion of existing electrical transmission facilities and minor extensions to existing sewer and water mains that serve the site. Significance Criteria: The project would cause significant impacts to utilities if it were to cause a need for new systems or substantial alterations to existing systems for potable water, sewerage, or transmission lines. Impacts: Staff of the City Electrical Department indicated the provision of electrical service to the proposed addition will require a minor expansion of the existing electrical transmission systems located to the west, which is under the same ownership. Electrical Department staff indicated this work is not expected to cause long-term power stoppage or other significant adverse impacts to the transmission facilities in the area. Water and sewer services could also be connected to separate brought onto the site when the assisted living facility structure was constructed, according to staff from the Water and Sewer Department. This staff also determined the connections required to serve the building addtion would not cause long-term stoppages or adverse modifications to existing systems. c. Mitigation: None required. 26 16. ao HUMAN HEALTH: The subject property is in an area of the City that is generally recognized as having no known sources of contamination or other hazardous conditions that could expose persons to existing health hazards or create new health hazards. Significance Criteria: Health hazard impacts would be significant if the project caused any potential significant health hazard or exposed persons to existing hazards. Impacts: The proposed addition to the assisted living facility would be located in an area of the City of Ukiah with no known sources of contamination or other environmental hazards. Furthermore, there is nothing in the proposed design or operation of the building that would expose its occupants or users of abutting properties to such hazards. According to the project applicant, the occupants with Alzheimer's syndrome will require assistance from staff or emergency personnel if forced to evacuate the building. However, the addition will be developed with emergency door locks and staff will be trained to assist them in leaving the building. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts to site-specific or area emergency response or evacuation plans are anticipated. c. Mitigation: None required. 17. AESTHETICS: The proposed assisted living facility is a rectangular-shaped building of approximately 38,850 square feet built around an open courtyard area. The building has only one floor, but the western wing was constructed with staggered exterior walls covered by roofs that are between 20 to 26.5 feet in height, with twenty-foot high roofs over the other three wings of the building. The building presents an institutional appearance due to its large size, but the architecture purposely includes a number of features designed to make the building more compatible with the single family homes located to the south and east. These features include vertical wood siding, gabled roofs, and large paned windows on all elevations and the use of staggered elevations and patio columns on the west elevation. The proposed addition would match the existing structure in appearance by using the same design features, building materials and paint colors. It would also be partially shielded by the extension of the existing six-foot high wooden fences on the south and north sides, and the planting of landscape trees on all open sides of the building. Significance Criteria: Aesthetic impacts would be caused by the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. Impacts: The assisted living facility building addition will definitely present an institutional appearance due to its large size and the surrounding parking lot facilities. However, it is the opinion of Planning staff that the one-story height, the residential design features, and the fencing and landscaping proposed as part of the building and site design would match the existing ALF structure well enough to limit any adverse impacts to levels that are not easily noticed. Therefore, no aesthetic mitigation measures are recommended. c. Mitigation: None required. 18. RECREATION: The closest City-maintained recreation area is Observatory Park, approximately one-half mile northwest of the project site; the closest full-use park facility is Oak Manor Park, which is over one mile northeast of the site. The proposed assisted living facility addition includes a patient lounge and a large outdoor courtyard for individual or group activities by building residents. 27 ao bo Significance Criteria: Recreation impacts would be signficant if the project were to cause adverse impacts to the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. Impacts: Due to the distances between City-maintained parks and the proposed assisted living facility and the anticipated ages of the facility's residents, substantial adverse impacts to area recreational facilities are not anticipated from the development or operation of the facility. c. Mitigation: None required. 19. bo CULTURAL RESOURCES: According to resources maintained by the City of Ukiah, there are no known significant historical, architectural, or ethnic resources on the site. Significance Criteria: The project would result in significant impacts to cultural resources if it were to cause adverse alterations or destruction of a prehistoric or histodc archeological site, adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a historic building, or cause a physical change that would effect the unique ethnic cultural values of the area. Impacts: The development of the proposed assisted living facility addition would not require the demolition of any buildings or the disturbance of any known prehistoric, historical, or cultural resources since there are no known resources of this type present on the property. c. Mitigation: None required. 20. AIR QUALITY: Potential impacts to air quality at a project site are measured by the concentrations of a pollutant in the atmosphere above the site, which are largely dependent on the volumes of pollutant emitted and the atmosphere's ability to dilute the pollutant. The project site is located within the Ukiah Valley air basin, where air quality has generally been in compliance with the attainment levels required for all air-borne pollutants by federal and state air quality standards. According to information received from the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District, the only known exceptions to air quality attainment consist of isolated, but regular, occurrences of non-attainment for small particulate matter (PM-10). Significance Criteria: The development or operation of the project would result in significant impacts if it were to cause violation of any State or Federal air quality standard, the creation of substantial objectionable odors, or substantial alterations of air movement, moisture, temperature, or climate. Impacts: The development of the proposed assisted living facility addition would cause minor increases in pollutants from vehicle emissions caused by traffic to and from the site. However, this increase is not expected to cause substantial increases in emission volumes, or any violations of any State or Federal air quality standards or impacts to local or regional air quality since the number of vehicle trips would not entail substantial increases in overall traffic volumes. In fact, staff anticipates that persons already living and working in the Ukiah Valley would account for most of these trips, which would cause emission volumes to increase at an even lower rate. The project could also contribute to PM-lO levels if site soils are improperly graded or heavy construction equipment is used during construction, or open areas are exposed to wind erosion once the yard area is completed. However, the applicant intends to construct the building using standard dust suppression methods and standard construction equipment that does not typically cause major releases of PM-lO materials, and there is no evidence that such levels would increase substantially. b. Mitigation: None required. 25 21. bo 22. FI MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate impodant examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? [] YES [] NO Short-term: Does the project have the potential to achieve shod term, to the disadvantage of long term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one, which occurs, in a relatively brief, but definitive, period of time; long-term impacts will endure into the future). YES I~ NO Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may have impacts on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect on the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) [] YES [] NO Substantial Adverse: Does the project have environmental effect that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? [] YES [] NO DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that, although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described within the initial study will be incorporated into the design of the project or required by the City of Ukiah. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT shall be required. Signature Planning Director / Environmental Coordinator Title 29 Charles Stump Print Name Date MITIGATION/CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL MONITORING MATRIX Mountain View Assisted Living Facility Expansion BLA 00-02 / Rezone 00-03 / Use Permit 00-04 No site preparation or grading activities on the project site shall be permitted until a Final Grading and Drainage Plan for the assisted living facility expansion/addition, access road, and parking lot has been reviewed and approved by the Ukiah City Engineer. This Plan shall include the following: 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. c. Certification by a Geotechnical Engineer that the fill materials located below the proposed building addition are properly compacted. d. The extent of any other development or soil modification activities that the City Engineer determines could adversely affect existing drainage patterns on the site or abutting properties or cause wind or water erosion. RESPONSIBLE PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION DATE INITIALS PROGRESS PARTY PIIASE OF NOTES IMPLEMENTATION COMPLETED MONITOR METttOD Applicants Plan prcparation Prior to all site And submittal preparation and grading activities 30 4'37- RESOURCES USED TO PREPARE INITIAL STUDY For Bounda~_ry Line Ad'ustment #02-02' Rezone #02-03; & Major Use Permit #02-04 (Available for review at the Ukiah Planning Department) 1. City of Ukiah General Plan., 1995 2. Soil Survey of Mendocino County, Eastern Part ._, U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service and U. S. Department of Forestry, 1991 3. Flood Insurance Rate Ma Communit /Panel Number 060186/0002 D-revise~ 1985~, Federal Emergency Management Agency 4. Landscape Plants for Western Regions_, Land Design Publishing, 1992 5. Natural Diversity Data Base, California Department of Fish and Game, 1995 6. City of Ukiah Municipal Code-Noise Re_qulation (Chapter 1, Article 6), adopted 1980 7. _Trip Generation, (6th_edition~ Institute of Traffic Engineers, 1997 8. _Speed Zone Survey S_ummary (Group A_), Ukiah Engineering Department, 1996 9. 1993-1996 Ukiah Monthly Ozone Maximums by__Hourly Averages_, graphics produced by the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District, 1997 10. Ozone Data Summary (1992-1995), Ukiah-East Gobbi Street Monitoring Station, State Air Resources Board, 1997 11. Historical and Architectural Resources Inventory Report for the City of Ukia.h_, Historic Environment Consultants, 1985 AGENDA SUMMARY Item No. 9a Date: April 17, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: Approval of Retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for the Preparation and Filing of a Petition for Change in Place of Use for an amount not to exceed $15,000 and of the City Entering into a Cost Sharing Agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District, and the Calpella Water District. REPORT: This matter was continued from the April 3 City Council meeting to allow for additional information to be provided to the Council. The contract information requested by Council member Baldwin is attached. However, our Water Attorney was not able to respond to the legal questions raised by the Council in time to be attached to this report. His response to the questions will be distributed to the Council as soon as they are received. The City of Ukiah, as a requirement of the State Water Resource Control Board, must submit a Petition for Change in Place of Use. The petition is required to identify water utilized by Willow County Water Agency, Millview County Water Agency, Calpella Water District and the City of Ukiah, through the emergency intertie. Each of the Water Districts is also required to submit a petition for change in use, relative to the transfer of water through the emergency intertie. Rather than each Water District submitting a separate petition, staff believes it would be more cost effective to prepare a single petition that would cover all users of the emergency intertie. A meeting was held with the Water Districts and a representative of Wagner & Bonsignore to describe the proposal for a joint petition. All Districts agreed that a joint petition would be the most cost effective method of meeting the requirement, in addition to giving the Districts flexibility relative to transfer of water. Wagner & Bonsignore will prepare and submit the petition on behalf of all parties. ( Continued on Page 2 ) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve Retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for the Preparation and Filing of a Petition for Change in Place of Use for an amount not to exceed $15,000 and a Cost Sharing Agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District, and the Calpella Water District. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Approval and Define Alternative. Prepared by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment:l) Wagner & Bonsignore Proposal 2) Emergency Agreements with Millview and Willow Water County Water Districts APPROVED:! Can~lac~ H~rsley, Cit~Manager (Page 2) Total cost for preparation and filing of the petition would be approximately $15,000. Staff will propose that rather than apportion the cost based on the number of connections, to divide the cost equally. As a result, the City of Ukiah's share of the project would be approximately $3,750. It was agreed that Wagner & Bonsignore would bill the City of Ukiah for the project. The City would then bill the individual Districts for their share of the costs. As noted in the proposal from Wagner & Bonsignore the petition is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the filing of the petition may require the preparation of an environmental document. The proposed project cost, does not include the preparation of any environmental documents. In the event this document exceeds the abilities of city staff, a request for additional funding will be presented to the Council. Staff recommends that the City Council approve retaining Wagner & Bonsignore for the preparation of the Petition of Change in Use for an amount not to exceed $15,000 and participation in a cost sharing agreement with Millview County Water District, Willow County Water District and Calpella Water District. Nicholas E Bonsignore, RE. Robert C. Wagner, P.E. Paula J. Whealen Monique Robbins, P.E. Ryan E. Stolfus Wagn. er&Bo i ore Consulting Civil Engineers, A Corporation March 12, 2002 Mr. Darryl Barnes, Director of Public Utilities CiO of Uldah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Mr. Dave Redding, General Manager Willow County Water District 151 Laws Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Mr. Tim Bradley, General Manager Millview County Water District 3081 N. State Street Ukiah, CA 95482 Re: Petitions for Change in Place of Use Dear Messrs. Barnes, Bradley and Redding: It was nice to have an opportunity to meet with you last week regarding the place of use issue for your respective appropriative water rights. We understand that the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has directed the City of Ukiah (City), and Millview and Willow County Water Districts (Millview and Willow) to correct their respective places of use named in their appropriative water rights. The corrections are required, because the City, Millview and Willow have executed Interconnection Agreements to serve watcr to each oth=r during certain emergency situations. Further, we understand that the City, Millview and Willow are also serving water to areas outside the places of use allowed by their water rights. The statutory process for changing the place of use for an appropriative water right permit or license is initiated by filing a petition with the SWRCB. An engineered map must accompany the petition delineating the requested lands. The petition is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the action may require the preparation of an environmental document (either a Mitigated Negative Declaration or an Environmental Impact Report). 444 North Third Street, Suite 325, Sacramento, California 95814-0228 Pb: 916441-6850 F~c- 916-448-3866 INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT Thi.~ Agreement is made and entered in Uldah, California, on December 19 1991, by and between the City of Ukiah ("Uldah"), a general law municipal corporation and Willow County Water District ("Willow"), a county water district formed under the provisions of Water Code sections 30000 et seq. RECITALS: 1. Willow and Ukiah operate water systems that serve contiguous territory. Water mains belonging to the two agencies lie in dose proximity to each other. 2. Temporary or emergency conditions can from time to time interrupt the water serv- ice Willow and Ukiah provide their cus_tomers. 3. It would improve the reliability of water service Willow and Ukiah provide to their customers, if the water maln.~ of both systems were physically connected but separated by valv- ing that could be opened during temporary or emergency conditions. 4. The purpose of this agreement is to establish the terms and conditions under which the systems can be physically connected and the water made available to the neighboring sys- tem AGREEMENT: Wherefore, in consideration of the above-recited facts and on the term~ and conditions as further stated herein the Parties hereby agree as follows. 1. Intereonnection. On and after the effective date of this Agreement the Ukiah and Willow water systems can be physically connected using lockable valves that can only be operated by Willow and Ukiah, a water meter of sufficient capadty for the connection size, and in accordance with the further plans and specifications set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. Willow and Uldah shall share equally the cost of physically connecting the two systems and shall fully cooperate with each other by taking all necessary and reasonable steps to facilitate the interconnection. The parties shall use their best efforts to complete the connection within sixty (60) days from the ef- fective date of this Agreement. ~ ' 2. Ulfiah's Provision of water service to W'fllow. Upon written or verbal request from Willow's General Manager or his duly authorized delegate, Ukiah's City Manager or his duly authorized delegate shall open the valve allowing water to flow from Ukiah's water system to Willow's water system under the following terms and conditions: a. Willow shall give Ukiah at least 24 hours advance notice to open the valve, unless due to an unforeseen emergency a 24 hour delay could result in the loss of reliable w.at.er service to Willow customers or pr.operty damage. In such event Willow shall notify Uldah or- me nature of the emergency and of me time within which it requests interconnected service .to commence. In its request for service Willow shall indicate the 'termination date for the serv- ice r. equested. Unless earlier notified of a different termination date, Ukiah shall terminate servace on the date indicated in the notice from Willow. In any event, Ukiah may, but need not, terminate service when the limits of service imposed by subparagraph b have been reached. 1 b. Uldah shall not be required to furnish water service for longer than fourteen continuous calendar da~.s or for more than twenty total calendar days in any calendar quarter (Jan. 1 to March 31, April 1 to June 30, July 1 to September 30, October 1 to December 31). following reasons: c. Ukiah shall only be required to furnish water service to Willow for the (1) An emergency and/or equipment .failure affecting Willow's capadty to deliver water to its customers;. (2) To combat a fire within or without the Willow service area; (3) To allow for maintenance or repair of Willow equipment; or (4) Contamination of Willow's water source. 3. Payment for service provided by Ukiah Willow shall pay Uldah $.35 per 1000 gal- lons for water furnished under this Agreement. Ul~ah shall bill Willow for requested service within fifteen days after said service terminates, or within 30 days of commencing service, whichever comes first, and each 30 days thereafter until the charges for service have been paid ia .fi:~ll.. ,Pa,yment, of.each bill s.h.all b.e due no later than thirty days from the billing date. -The p. ames snaxt comer m. good fai~ at least once ever~ two years after the effective date of this ,qgree.ment to. negotiate rate adjustments, taking into consideration changes in the cost of oper.ati.o~, ancl oth. erfl.actors affe. cti,n,,,g the co,st of supplying wate. r under the terms of this Agree- ment. tn me event ot tuture mumaxty agreea upon changes in the rate, Willow understands that Ukiah may charge a higher rate for water service outside city limits than it charges for water service within city limits. If it agrees to such higher charges, it shall also release and waive an 1 ....... Y l,eg, al o,r o. th,er objoectio ,ns,it ,mt, ~h,t .o,the, rw~se_ have to paying such higher rates and agrees to fully .ae~eno, m. oe~ ,aha ,n. oia ?aan harmless from and against any claim by any Willow cus- tomer against u~uan or xts omcers, agents or employees arising out of such rate differences, ff any. 4. Provision of water service to Ukiah from Willow. Upon written or verbal request om Ukiah s City Manager or his duly authorized delegate, Willow's General Manager or his duly authorized delegate shall open the valve allowing water to flow from Willow water system to Ukiah's water system under the following terms and conditions: a. Uldah shall give Willow at least 24 hours advance notice to open the valve, un- less due to an unforeseen emergency a 24 hour delay could result in the loss of reliable water service to Uldah customers. In such event Ukiah shall notify Willow of the nature of the emer- gency and of the time within which it requests interconnected service to commence. In its request for service Uldah shall indicate the termination date for the service requested. Unless earlier notified of a different termination date, Willow shall terminate service on the date indi- cated in the notice from Ukiah. In any event, Willow may, but need not, terminate service when the limits of service imposed by subparagraph b have been reached. · b. Willow shall not be required to furnish water service for longer than fourteen continuous calendar days or for more than twenty total calendar days in any calendar quarter (Jan. 1 to March 31, April 1 to June 30, July 1 to September 30, October 1 to December 31). c. Willow shall only be required to furnish water service to Ukiah for the follow- 2 ing reason: (1) An emergency and/or equipment failure affecting Uldah's capacity to deliver water to its customers; (2) To combat a fire within or without the Ukiah service area; (3) To allow for maintenance or repair of Ukiah equipment; or (4) Contamination of Uldah's water source. 5. Payment for service provided by Willow. Ukiah shall pay Willow $.35 per 1000 gal- lons for water htmished under this Ag.r. cement. Willow shall bill Ukiah for each requested serv- ice within fifteen days after said semce terminates, or within 30 days of commencing service whichever occurs first, and each. 30 day~ thereafter until all charges are paid in fall. Payment of each bill shall be due no later man thirty days from the billing date. The parties shall confer in good faith at least once every two j~ears after the effective date of this Agreement to negotiate rate adjustments, taking into consideration changes in the cost of operations and other factors affecting the cost of supplying water under the terms of this Agreement. In the event of future mum. ally agreed upon changes in the rate for wa_ter service under this Agreement, Uldah under- stanas mat Willow may charge a hi~,her rate for water service outside its district boundaries than it charges for water sennce within those boundaries. If it agrees to such higher charges, it shall release and waive any legal or other objections it might otherwise have to paying such higher rates anti agrees to fully defend, indemni~ and hold Willow harmless from and. against any claim by any Ukiah customer against Willow or its officers, agents or employees arising out of such rate differences, ff any. 6. Waiver. Failure to enforce any breach of a provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or a different provision of the Agree- ment. 7. Compliance with law. This Agreement shall not obligate either party to furnish water to the other, if the provision of such water would violate any provision of state or federal law or any term or condition of any permit, license or other approval held by either party in connec- tion with its public water system. 8. Limits on flow. Ukiah and Willow mutually agree to limit the transfer of water under .this Agreemen. t to. a r?e.of flow that will not adversely affect the distribution system or cus- tomer service levels ot elmer system If the C-'iF Manager of Ukiah or the General Manager of Willow determines that such an adverse impact will occur, the rnonager or authorized represen- tative of the affecteci system may without prior notice discontinue or reduce flow to the other system. 10. Entire agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the partie, s concerning i.ts subje.ct matter ar}.d supersedes any. prior statements, agreem, ents or under- · . g other things, _transfer or sell water to each other, provided any such amendments or agreements are contained in a writing approved by the legislative bodies and executed by duly authorized offidals of both parties. 3 11. Notice. bWhenever written notice is required or allowed under the terms of this Agreement it shall e deemed given when personally delivered or when received by certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed as follows: City Manager City of Ukiah Uldah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 General Manager Willow Water District 150 Blue Bonnet Dr. Ukiah, California 95482 13. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be five (5) years from its effective date. The term may be extended on such terms as the parties shall agree. No such extension shall be binding unless contained in a writing signed by both parties. 14. Third party beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of Uldah and Willow and confers no fights or benefits on any persons or entities not a signatory to this Agreement. No third party beneficiaries are intended or established by this Agreement. 15. Duplicate originals. This Agreement may be executed in one or more dupliCate ori~nals and when so executed each duplicate original bearing the original signatures of the parties shall be admissible in any administrative or legal proceeding as evidence of the terms of this Agreement. WHEREFORE, the parties have entered this Agreement on the date first written above. yor Colleen B. Henderson' 4 ATrEST: WILIOW WATER DISTRICT Chairman of thc Board ~illiam L. Larramendy Acting ecretary, David N.~Nelson (S:\FROMUSA\U~AGRMTS\INTERCON.2) 5 E,,YIST/tVG I~AIM "II~A.~'. CITY OF UKIAI4 ~ X I~ TIN~ J~JA TE~ (~" A.C. P,~OP£RI'Y ~O~E A INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered in Ukiah, California, on 4'],'[ if 1993, by and between the City of Ukiah ("Ukiah"), a general law municipal corporation and Millview County Water District ("Millview"), a county water district formed under the provisions of Water Code sections 30000 et seq. RECITALS: 1. Millview and Ukiah operate water systems that serve contiguous territory. Water mains belonging to the two agencies lie in close proximity to each other. 2. Temporary or emergency conditions can from time to time interrupt the water service Millview and Ukiah provide their customers. 3. It would improve the reliability of water service Millview and Ukiah provide to their customers, if the water mains of both systems were physically connected but separated by valving that could be opened during temporary or emergency conditions. 4. The purpose of this agreement is to establish the terms and conditionS under which the systems can be physically connected and the water made available to the neighboring system. AGREEMENT: Wherefore, in consideration of the above-recited facts and on the terms and conditions as further stated herein the parties hereby agree as follows. 1. lnterconnection. On and after the effective date of this Agreement the Ukiah and Millview water systems can be physically connected using Iockable valves that can only be operated by Millview and Ukiah, a water meter of sufficient capacity for the connection size, and in accordance with the further plans and specifications set forth in the attached Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full. Millview and Ukiah shall share equally the cost of physically connecting the two systems and shall fully cooperate with each other by taking all necessary and reasonable steps to facilitate the interconnection. The parties shall use their best efforts to complete the connection within sixty (60) days from the effective date of this Agreement. 2. Ukiah's Provision of water service to Millview. Upon written Or verbal request from Millview's General Manager or his duly authorized delegate, Ukiah's City Manager or his duly authorized delegate shall open the valve allowing water to flow from Ukiah's water system to Millview's water system under the following terms and conditions: s:\u\agrmts93\mittview March 3, 1993 a. Millview shall give Ukiah at least 24 hours advance notice to open the valve, unless due to an unforeseen emergency a 24 hour delay could result in the loss of reliable water service to Millview customers or property damage. In such event Millview shall notify Ukiah of the nature of the emergency and of the time within which it requests interconnected service to commence. In its request for service Millview shall indicate the termination date for the service requested. Unless earlier notified of a different termination date, Ukiah shall terminate service on the date indicated in the notice from Millview. In any event, Ukiah may, but need not, terminate service when the limits of service imposed by subparagraph b have been reached. b. Ukiah shall not be required to furnish water service for longer than fourteen continuous calendar days or for more than twenty total calendar days in any calendar quarter (Jan. I to March 31, April 1 to June 30, July I to September 30, October 1 to December 31). c. Ukiah shall only be required to furnish water service to Millview for the following reasons: (1) An emergency and/or equipment failure affecting Millview's capacity to deliver water to its customers; (2) To combat a fire within or without the Millview service area; (3) To allow for maintenance or repair of Millview equipment; or (4) Contamination of Millview's water source. 3. Payment for service provided by Ukiah.' Millview shall pay Ukiah $.35 per 1000 gallons for water furnished under this Agreement. Ukiah shall bill Millview for requested service within fifteen days after said service terminates, or within 30 days of commencing service, whichever comes first, and each 30 days thereafter until the charges for service have been paid in full. Payment of each bill shall be due no later than thirty days from the billing date. The parties shall confer in good faith at least once every two years after the effective date of this Agreement to negotiate rate adjustments, taking into consideration changes in the cost of operations and other factors affecting the cost of supplying water under the terms of this Agreement. In the event of future mutually agreed upon changes in the rate, Millview understands that Ukiah may charge a higher rate for water service outside city limits than it charges for water service within city limits. -If it agrees to such higher charges, it shall also release and waive any legal or other objections it might otherwise have to paying such higher rates and agrees to fully defend, indemnify and hold Ukiah harmless from and against any claim by any Millview customer s:\u\agrmts93\mittview March 3~ 1993 against Ukiah or its officers, agents or employees arising out of such rate differences, if any. 4. Provision of water service to Ukiah from Millview. Upon written or verbal request from Ukiah's City Manager or' his duly authorized delegate, Millview's General Manager or his duly authorized delegate shall open the valve allowing water to flow from Millview water system to Ukiah's water system under the following terms and conditions: a. Ukiah shall give Millview at least 24 hours advance notice to open the valve, unless due to an unforeseen emergency a 24 hour delay could result in the loss of reliable water service to Ukiah customers or property damage. In such event Ukiah shall notify Millview of the nature of the emergency and of the time within which it requests interconnected service to commence. In its request for service Ukiah shall indicate the termination date for the service requested. Unless earlier notified of a different termination date, Millview shall terminate service on the date indicated in the notice from Ukiah. In any event, Millview may, but need not, terminate service when the limits of service imposed by subparagraph b have been reached. b. Millview shall not be required to furnish water service for longer than fourteen continuous calendar days or for more than twenty total calendar days in any calendar quarter (Jan. 1 to March 31, April I to June 30, July 1 to September 30, October 1 to December 31). .c. Millview shall only be required to furnish water service to Ukiah for the following reasons: (1) Ad emergency and/or equipment failure affecting Ukiah's capacity to deliver water to its customers; (2) To combat a fire within or without the Ukiah service area; (3) To allow for maintenance or repair of Ukiah equipment; or (4) Contamination of Ukiah's water source. 5. Payment for service provided by Millview. Ukiah shall pay Millview $.35 per 1000 gallons for water furnished under this Agreement. Millview shall bill Ukiah for each requested service within fifteen days after said service terminates, or within 30 days of commencing service whichever occurs first, and each 30 days thereafter until all charges are paid in full. Payment of each bill shall be due no later than thirty days from the billing date. The parties shall confer in good faith at least once every two years after the effective date of this Agreement to negotiate rate adjustments, taking into consideration changes in the cost of operations and other factors affecting the cost of supplying water under the s:\u\agrmts93\mitLvie~ March 3, 1993 terms of this Agreement. In the event of future mutually agreed upon changes in the rate for water service under this Agreement, Ukiah understands that Millview may charge a higher rate for water service outside its district boundaries than it charges for water service within those boundaries, if it agrees to such higher charges, it shall release and waive any legal or other objections it might otherwise have to paying such higher rates and agrees to fully defend, indemnify and hold Millview harmless from and against any claim by any Ukiah customer against Millview or its officers, agents or employees arising out of such rate differences, if any. 6. Waiver. Failure to enforce any breach of a provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or a different provision of the Agreement. 7. Compliance With law. This Agreement shall not obligate either party to fbrnish water to the other, if the provision of such water would violate any provision of state or federal law or any term or condition of any permit, license or other approval held by either party in connection with its public water system. 8. Limits on flow. Ukiah and Millview mutually agree to limit the transfer of water under this Agreement to a rate of flow that will not adversely affect the distribution system or customer service levels of either system. If the City Manager of Ukiah or the General Manager of Millview determines that such an adverse impact will occur, the manager or authorized representative of the affected system may without prior notice'discontinue or reduce flow to the other system. 10. Entire agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreem'ent between the parties concerning its subject matter and supersedes any prior statements, agreements or undei;standings between the parties.concerning the same subject matter. Any such prior statements, agreements or understan.dings are hereby declared null and void and of no further force or effect. The parties may amend this Agreement or enter new or additional agreements to, among other things, transfer or sell water to each other, provided any such amendments or agreements are contained in a writing approved by the legislative bodies and executed by duly authorized officials of both parties. 11. Notice. Whenever written notice is required or allowed under the terms of this Agreement it shall be deemed given when personally delivered or when received by certified mail, return receipt requested, and addressed as follows: City Manager City of Ukiah Ukiah Civic Center 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482 s:\u\agrmts93\mittvfe~ March 3~ 1993 General Manager Millview Water District 3081 North State Street Ukiah, California 95482 13. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be five (5) years from its effective date. The term may be extended on such terms as the parties shall agree. No such extension shall be binding unless contained in a writing signed by both parties. 14. Third party beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the exclusive benefit of Ukiah and Millview and confers no rights or benefits on any persons or entities not a signatory to this Agreement. No third party beneficiaries are intended or established by this Agreement. 15. Duplicate originals. This Agreement may be executed in one or more duplicate originals and when so executed each duplicate original bearing the original signatures of the parties shall be admissible in any administrative or legal proceeding as evidence of the terms of this Agreement. WHEREFORE, the parties have entered this Agreement ok' the date first written above. ATFr'EST: ~./, /' /Jj// Cathy MCay 'Secretary Susan. s: \u\ag rmts93\mi l lvi ew March 3, 1993 CITY OF UKIAH By: Mayor Fred Schneiter MILLVlEW COUNTY WATER DISTRICT By: Chairman of the Bo~ard-D~-u'n-'P-aiYa 5 A REA ~or Fu~'ur~ Pump :'lT'Y L/MIT FLeE Y.YOfCA,d/T CITY L/NIT L/AIE, .h'/ILL FI~IV R/A TER/CIT¥ OF 't¢4 T£R INTER£OtlNECT PLAN -'YLOkl D/R~TIOH THRU .'~Y ~RAVITF 7'0 ,SU?PLY CITY OF..' UK/,~ $OURC,E OPEAI VAL V,~ A/,IO ~ ~ OAt ~YPA$5. CUR~ E. XI5 T/WG ' HA I/V Fcbru~ry / c193 No ,.PC.A L.~ 9b Item No. Date: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Authorization for the Mayor to Execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485 with the Western Area Power Administration for the Purchase of Excess Capacity. REPORT: This matter was continued from the April 3 City Council meeting to allow for additional information to be provided to the Council. The information regarding the original agreement requested by Council member Libby, is attached. The City of Ukiah, as a customer of the Western Area Power Administration, paid a share of a needed up-grade to the generator windings and runners at Shasta Dam in 1995. In return for our participation in the up-grade, the City of Ukiah was given the opportunity to share in the increased capacity produced as a result of the generator up-grade. This Letter Agreement gives the City of Ukiah the right to purchase one-half of one percent (.5%) of any excess capacity and associated energy available from Shasta Dam from April 1, 2002 until March 31,2003 on a daily basis. The Agreement does not obligate the City of Ukiah to purchase the excess capacity and associated energy. However, when excess capacity under this agreement is available, we are able to replace higher cost generating capacity. Excess capacity and energy under this agreement costs $ 24.63/kwh and our average capacity and energy costs is $ 60.84/kwh. The City of Ukiah has participated in this program since 1994 and has utilized the excess capacity and energy from this program to obtain operational savings. Therefore, staff recommends that the city participate in the annual program, and requests that the Mayor be granted the authority to execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor to Execute Letter of Agreement 02-SNR- 00485 with the Western Area Power Administration for the Purchase of Excess Capacity. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Authority to Execute the Agreement. Citizen Advised: N/A Prepared by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachment: 1) Letter of Agreement 02-SNR-00485 2) June 7, 1995 City Council Agenda, minutes, and agenda summary Report with Agreement 94-SAO-00047 APPROVED:. ~ ~~ ~ candace Horsley, City rv~nager CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 June 7, 1995 ~ 6:30 p.m. 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation/Pledge of Allegiance 3. Special Order of Business a. Recognition of Emergency Medical Service Award Recipients 4. Approval/Correction of'Minutes a. Regular Adjourned Meeting of May 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 1995 b. Regular Adjourned Joint UVSD Meeting of May 17, 1995 c. Regular Meeting of May 17, 1995 o 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. 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. Deny Claim Received from Donna Boyd, and Refer to City Insurance Cartier b. Receive Report Regarding the Acquisition of Services Pursuant to Ukiah City Code for Traffic Signal Repair at Low Gap/Brush/State Street Intersection c. Approve Revocable License to Gary and Susan Miles for the Installation of a Fence on City Property d. Authorize the Acquisition of Real Property from the Savings Bank Building Corporation and the Expenditure of Public Funds in the Amount of $8,560 for Public Street Purposes e. Authorize the City Manager to Execute a Grant of Easement from Bart and Marianne Garbocci and the Expenditure of Public Funds in the Amount of $2,880 for Public Street Purposes Award of Bid for Cushman 6150 Wing Rotary Mower or Equal From Jenkins Machinery Company in the Amount of $36,175.39 Approval of Demolition Permit Applciation to Demolish a Structure (Office and Barber Shop) Over 50 Years Old Located at 154 East Gobbi Street, as Filed by Rachel and Edward Peugh Approval of Demolition Permit Application to Demolish a Single Family Residence Structure Over 50 Years Old Located at 838 North State Street, as Filed by Thomas Goforth Award of Contract to S.D. Meyers for Disposal of Transtbrmers and Miscellaneous Items for $7,608.32 go AuDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments. PUBLIC HEARING - TOO p,m, a. Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision to Deny Use Permit Application No. 95- 01, as Filed by Redwood Oil Co., to Allow The Construction And 24-hour Operation of a Card Lock Fueling Station For Commercial Subscribers on a Parcel Located at 106 Observatory Avenue, Assessor's Parcel No. 003-074-14, And Located in The C-2, Highway Commercial And Limited Industrial Zoning District b. Review and Update of South Orchard Avenue and East Gobbi Street Traffic Signal Capital Improvement Study Area and Fees PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Update on Mendocino County Public Broadcasting, aka Northern California Public Broadcasting b. Presentation by Mendocino County Water Agency and Coastal Conservancy Regarding Russian River Enhancement Plan c. Authorize Letter of Support From Council to Congressman Frank Riggs on Behalf of Rural Communities Housing Development Corporation Self-Help Housing Programs in Northcoast Communities 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Review of StaffRecommendation Regarding Highland Avenue Traffic Circulation b. Adoption of Resolution Establishing Council Nomination Procedures for Filling Vacancies on City Commissions and Boards 11. NEW BUSINESS Approval of Recommended Name for Downtown Plaza/Park as the "Alex R. Thomas Jr., Plaza" Authorize the Mayor to Execute Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 with the Western Area Power Administration and the Department of Reclamation for Funding of Maintenance Work at the Shasta Power Plant, Including the Transfer of the City of Ukiah's Share of the Project in the Amount of $105,875 from the General Operating Reserve Held at the Northern California Power Agency 12. 13. 14. CITY COUNCIL/REPORTS CITY MANAGER/DEPARTMENT HEAD REPORTS CLOSED SESSION a. G.C Section 54956.9 - Conference with Legal Counsel Regarding Potential Litigation 15. ADJOURNMENT (To June 10, 1995, 8:00 a.m., for Continued Public Hearing Review of Ukiah Valley General Plan Update) The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. 256' all AYE. ZOb. Adoption of Resolution Esta~l~shinq Council Nomination P~oce~ures for F[llinq V&o&ncies o~ City Comm~ssions and The City Manager reported as directed by the Council on April 19, 1995, the City Attorney prepared the proposed Resolution. Councilmember Malone expressed concern that this resolution does not provide for the process where the senior Councilmember made a nomination, which was not approved, then the nomination went to the next person, which he thought Council desired. M/S Shoemaker/Wattenburger to adopt Resolution No. 95-48, as submitted. The motion was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Wattenburger, Shoemaker and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: Councilmember Malone. Absent: Councilmember Mastin. Abstain: None. 11a. Approval of Recommended Name for Downtown Plaza~Par~ as tbA "Alex R. Thomas, Jr. Plaza" The City Manager explained the Thomas's could not be present but they expressed their appreciation for the opportunity. Gabriella was looking at the empty site and thought how nice it would be to have a plaza on that site. She contacted staff and was thrilled to find out there was a plaza in the works and asked if the family could be involved and acknowledged their significant contribution to the community. He explained there will be a plaque naming the park and two entryway signs. He announced the groundbreaking ceremony on 15th or 16th, will be followed by a brief reception at the Conference Center. Council expressed their appreciation for the Thomas family's financial contribution and continued community support. M/S Wattenburger/Malone to approve the recommended name for the Downtown Plaza/Park as Alex R. Thomas, Jr. Plaza. The motion was carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. Absent: Councilmember Mastin. Abstain: None. 11b. Authorize the Mayor to Execute Contract No. '94-SAO-00047 with the Western Area Power adm~nistration and ~he Department of Reolamatlon for Funding of Malnte-n-ce Work at the Shastn Power Plant. Inoludin? the Transfer of the City of Ukiah,s Share of the Project in the Amount of ~105.875 from General Operatina Reserve Held at the Northern Californie The Public Utility Director reported on this proposal. He explained the Shasta Generators have been in need of repair, and electricL generation capacity is decreasing significantly. He reported on this proposal to refinance and fund the repairs from the Dept. of Reclamation. As the capacity will be increased, it is a good investment to secure our future power, therefore authorizing this funding from our general operating reserves. M/S Malone/Shoemaker to authorize the Mayor to execute Contract No. 94-SA0-00047 with the Western Area Power Administration and the Department of Reclamation for funding of maintenance work at the Shasta Power plant, including the transfer of the City of Ukiah's share of the project in the amount of $105,875 from the general operating reserves held at the Northern California Power Agency. The motion was carreid by the follwoing roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Malone,' Wattenburger, Shoemaker and Mayor Schneiter. NOES: None. Absent: Councilmember Mastin. 110. Deny Claim Received from Donna Boyd. and Refer to City Insurance Carrier Reg. Mtg. June 7, 1995 Page 4 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT Item No. Date: SUBJECT: Authorize the Mayor to Execute Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 with the Westem Area Power Administration and the Department of Reclamation for Funding of Maintenance Work at the Shasta Power plant, including the Transfer of the City of Ukiah's Share of the Project in the Amount of $105,875 from the General Operating Reserve held at the Northern Califomia Power Agency. REPORT: Shasta Dam and Powerplant and the associated electrical power generating facilities are features of the Shasta Division of the Central Valley Project. The Department of Reclamation is responsible, for among other things, the planning, designing, construction, operations, and maintaining the electrical power generating facilities at Shasta and the Westem Area Power Administration is responsible for marketing power produced at Shasta which is not required for CVP project use. Shasta contains five (5) main generating units having a combined generating capacity of 578 Megawatts (MW). Due to age, normal wear, and deterioration, the stator windings for generating units 3, 4, and 5 at Shasta should be replaced, and certain other maintenance work should be performed to improve reliability and increase operational flexibility. The customers have offered to enter into a contributed funds agreement to fund the Shasta rewind project and the Department of Reclamation, under the terms of this Contract, has agreed to undertake and complete the Shasta rewind project, which includes replacement of the stator windings for generating units 3, 4, and 5 with increased capacity windings, installation of new thrust bearings and high pressure lubrication systems for the bearings, excitation systems, and performance of other work necessary to restore the generating units at Shasta to good operating condition. The customers, that will advance the necessary funds for Reclamation to perform the work required by this Contract, will have the right of first refusal to purchase the excess capacity and will be repaid the funds advanced, with interest, through credits on theft power bills. Staff believes that this work is vital in order to keep the Shasta Units operating. Should one of these units fail, a curtailment of Western Power allocation could be experienced, forcing Western or their customem to purchase higher cost replacement power. Experience has shown that this work has not been funded by the Federal Govemment. Theree£ore, the customem of tbe CVP have agreed to provide funding for this important work. The total project is estimated to cost approximately $21,175,000. The City of Ukiah's share would be 0.5% or $105,875. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the Mayor to Execute Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 with the Westem Area Power Administration and the Department of Reclamation for Funding of Maintenance Work at the Shasta Power plant, including the Transfer of the City of Ukiah's Share of the Project in the Amount of $105,875 from the General Operating Reserves held at the Northern Califomia Power Agency. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Deny Request and Elect to Not Participate in the Project. Acct. No. (If not budgeted): Acct. No. (if budgeted) Appropriation Request: Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Prepared by: Darryl L. Barnes, Director of Public Utilities Coordinated with:Charles L. Rough, City Manager Attachment: Contract APPROVED: Department of Energy Western Area Power Administration Sacramento Area Office 1825 Bell Street, Suite 105 Sacramento, California 95825 18 1995 Mr. Charles Rough City Manager City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 Dear Mr. Rough: Enclosed is an original and 18 signature pages of Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 for Funding of Maintenance Work at the Shasta Powerplant. This Contract provides for the funding of replacement of the stator windings for generating units 3, 4, and 5 with increased capacity windings and replacement and installation of certain other parts to restore the generating units at Shasta Powerplant to good operating condition (Rewind Project). The Western Area Power Administration (Western) is pleased to be a part of this important partnership among Western, its power customers, and the Bureau of Reclamation and recognizes the risk that the customers are taking by investing in the Shasta Rewind Project at a time when the Administration and Congress are reviewing proposals to defederalize Western. Itis Western's intention that the CVP preference power customers receive the full benefit from their investment. In recognition of this, Western will, to the best of its ability, ensure that any proposed legislation drafted by the Administration or any such proposal that the Administration has input to, will include language that provides for full reimbursement of the investment of customers for the Rewind Project if Western assets are acquired by entities other than the CVP Preference Power Customers. This Contract is being executed in counterparts and will constitute a single document when all Parties have signed. If the terms of the Contract are acceptable, please sign and date all 18 original signature pages, have the signatures attested, apply the appropriate seal, and return all 18 original signed signature pages to Zola Jackson, Assistant Area Manager for Power Marketing, at this office. Upon signature by all Parties, an executed Contract with original signature pages will be sent to you for your records. We look forward to working with you as a panner on future projects. please contact Vicki Page at (916) 649-4561. Sincerely, James C. Feider Area Manager Enclosure Page Two If you have any questions, Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT FOR FUNDING OF MAINTENANCE WORK AT SHASTA POWERPLANT WITH CITY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF BIGGS CITY OF GRIDLEY CITY OF HEALDSBURG CITY OF LODI CITY OF LOMPOC NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY CITY OF PALO ALTO PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. CITY OF REDDING CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY OF SANTA CLARA SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT FOR FUNDING OF MAINTENANCE WORK AT SHASTA POWERPLANT WITH CITY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF BIGGS CITY OF GRIDLEY CITY OF HEALDSBURG CITY OF LODI CITY OF LOMPOC NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY CITY OF PALO ALTO PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. CITY OF REDDING CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY OF SANTA CLARA SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH Table of Contents Section Page 1. PREAMBLE 2. EXPLANATORY RECITALS .................................. 2 3. AGREEMENT 4. TERM OF CONTRACT 5. DEFINITION OF TERMS 6. WORK TO BE PERFORMED FOR SHASTA ........................ 4 7. FUNDING FOR WORK AT SHASTA ............................ 6 8. REPAYMENT AND ACCOUNTING FOR CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ....... 11 9. UPRATED CAPACITY ..................................... 13 10. RATES 11. AUDIT AND OVERSIGHT RIGHTS ............................ 15 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS ................................ 16 ENFORCEABILITY ....................................... 16 PERFORMANCE OBLIGATIONS .............................. 16 DEFAULT ..................... ' ........................ 16 SEVERABILITY ......................................... 17 GENERAL POWER CONTRACT PROVISIONS .................... 17 ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIBITS MADE PART OF CONTRACT ........ 17 RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES ................................ 18 OWNERSHIP RIGHTS ..................................... 18 CUSTOMER LIABILITY .................................... 18 EXECUTION IN COUNTERPART .............................. 18 RESOLUTIONS GENERAL POWER CONTRACT PROVISIONS (JANUARY 3, 1989) EXHIBIT A (ESTIMATED FUNDING SCHEDULE) EXHIBIT B (REPAYMENT SCHEDULE) EXHIBIT C (SHASTA REWIND INCREMENTAL INCREASE IN CAPACITY) ATTACHMENT ! (ESCROW AGREEMENT) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT FOR FUNDING OF MAINTENANCE WORK AT SHASTA POWERPLANT WITH CITY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF BIGGS CITY OF GRIDLEY CITY OF HEALDSBURG CITY OF LODI CITY OF LOMPOC NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY CITY OF PALO ALTO PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. CITY OF REDDING CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY OF SANTA CLARA SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH 1. EREAMBLE: This Comract is made this __ day of , 1995, pursuant to the Acts of Congress approved June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388); August 26, 1937 (50 Stat. 844); August 4, 1939 (53 Stat. 1187); and August 4, 1977 (91 Stat. 565); and Acts amendatory or supplementary to the foregoing Acts; between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (United States), (i) acting by and through the Administrator, Western Area Power Administration, Department of Energy, hereinafter called Western, represented by the officer executing this Contract, or a duly appointed successor, hereinafter called the Contracting Officer, and (ii) acting by and through the Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, Departmem of the Interior, hereinafter called Reclamation, represented by the Regional Director, Mid- 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Pacific Region; and the CITIES OF ALAMEDA, BIGGS, GRIDLEY, HEALDSBURG, LODI, LOMPOC, PALO ALTO, REDDING, ROSEVILLE, SANTA CLARA, and UKIAH; the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY; the SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD); the SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT (BART), a rapid transit district established pursuant to California Public Utility Code Section 28500 et. seq.; the TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT (TID); and the PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, all organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, hereinafter called the Customers; and all collectively called the Parties. e EXPI.ANATORY RECITAL~q: 2.1 Shasta Dam and Powerplant (Shasta) and the associated electrical power generating facilities are features of the Shasta Division, Central Valley Project (CVP). 2.2 Reclamation is responsible, among other things, for planning, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining the electrical power generating facilities at Shasta. 2.3 Western is responsible for marketing the power produced at Shasta which is not required for CVP project use. 2.4 Shasta contains five (5) main generating units having a combined generating capacity of 578 Megawatts (MW). 2.5 Due to age, normal wear, and deterioration, the stator windings for generating units 3, 4, and 5 at Shasta should be replaced, and certain other maintenance work should be performed to improve reliability and increase operational flexibility. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2.6 The Customers have offered to enter into a contributed funds agreement to fund the Shasta rewind project and Reclamation, under the terms of this Contract, has agreed to undertake and complete the Shasta rewind project, which includes replacement of the stator windings for generating units 3, 4, and 5 with increased capacity windings, installation of new thrust bearings and high pressure lubrication systems for such bearings, excitation systems, and performance of other work, as generally set forth in Section 6 hereof, necessary to restore the generating units at Shasta to good operating condition. 2.7 The Customers, that will advance the necessary funds for Reclamation to perform the work required by this Contract, will have the right of first refusal to purchase the excess capacity as defined herein, and will be repaid the funds advanced, with interest, through credits on power bills as described herein. Pursuant to 43 U.S.C. §§ 395, 397a, the funds received from the Customers shall be available for expenditure for the specific purpose for which contributed as set forth in Section 6 in a like manner as if said sums had been specifically appropriated for said purposes. 3. AGREEMENT: The Parties agree to the terms and conditions set forth herein. 4. TERM OF CONTRACT: This Contract shall become effective on until midnight of December 31, 2004. , 1995, and shall remain in effect 5. DEFINITION OF TERMS: As used herein, the following terms have the following meanings when used with initial capitalization, whether singular or plural: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5.1 Cash_Call: A request for funds sent to each Customer from time to time by the Project Treasurer. 5.2 Custamer: A Party to this Contract that provides funds for the work to be performed by Reclamation under this Contract. 5.3 Escrow Account: An interest bearing account established by the Project Treasurer at a Federally insured bank for the purpose of holding the Customers' funds until all disbursements are made to Reclamation and the work set forth in this Contract is complete. 5.4 Project Treasurer: The entity selected by the Customers to establish the Escrow Account, issue the Cash Calls, and perform other financial duties as may be required for the work performed under this Contract. 6. WORK TO BE PERFORMED FOR TI-IE gHASTA REWIND PROJECT: Reclamation shall be solely responsible for the following work for the Shasta rewind project: 6.1 Prepare specifications of the work to be performed for tile Shasta rewind project. 6.2 Award and administer contract(s) for the work for the Shasta rewind project in accordance with Federal acquisition regulations. Said contract(s) shall require the entity to whom the contract(s) is awarded to perform at least the following requirements: 6.2.1 Submittal to Reclamation of drawings and technical data for all equipment to be furnished and installed; 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.2.2 Submittal to Reclamation of design data, test reports, calibration certificates, certified inspection reports, payment information, and labor standards data as required in the specifications; 6.2.3 Furnishing of all necessary material, equipment, and labor for the replacement of the stator core, stator winding, ring bus, protective relays and associated equipment, flow meters, excitation systems, main generator lead flexible connectors between the generator main leads and the existing segregated phase bus structure, and high-pressure type lubricated thrust bearings for generating units 3, 4, and 5; 6.2.4 Replacement of or reinsulating the generator main field windings; and 6.2.5 unit 1. Furnishing of a new thrust bearing for unit 2 and new core iron for Review and determine responsiveness of bids. Review all bids submitted for compliance with specifications. Inspect manufacturers facilities and monitor production and testing. Witness testing at manufacturers facilities as required. Review value engineering proposals, and approve as deemed appropriate. Inspect installation of equipment. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6.9 Witness acceptance testing of equipment. 6.10 Review acceptance test results and approve as necessary. 6.11 Witness inspections. 6.12 Disassemble the units in preparation for the removal of the existing stator winding, installation of a new stator winding, and other work needed on the units. 6.13 Reassemble the units after completion of the work on the units. 6.14 Prepare quarterly progress reports and other documentation required by this Contract and distribute to each Customer. 7. FUNDING FOR WORK AT SHASTA: The Customers have appointed the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) as the Project Treasurer and NCPA has accepted such appointment. 7.1 The Project Treasurer shall establish the Escrow Account, deposit each Customer's funds in the Escrow Account, and issue Cash Calls sufficient to maintain an adequate balance in the Escrow Account during the term of this Contract to fund the work generally described in Section 6 hereof. The estimated funding schedule, as developed by Reclamation, for deposits to, and withdrawals by Reclamation from, the Escrow Account is shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Reclamation shall not award the contract(s) associated with the work set forth in subsection 6.2 hereof without agreement of all Parties if the selected bid exceeds the value shown in the estimated funding schedule set forth in Exhibit A. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7.2 The Project Treasurer also shall establish on its books of accounts, subaccounts identified for each Customer that will show deposits to, and withdrawals from, each subaccount, and interest accrued on funds in each subaccount. The Project Treasurer shall issue Cash Calls when necessary to maintain an adequate balance in the Escrow Account as provided in this Section 7. 7.3 Reclamation, in its best efforts to minimize the time between the deposit of funds into and the withdrawal of those funds from the Escrow Account, will coordinate with the Project Treasurer the timing of the deposits and withdrawals from the Escrow Account. The Project Treasurer will coordinate such timing with the Customers. As soon as practicable after Reclamation awards the initial contract for the work to be performed under this Contract, Exhibit A will be revised to reflect the contract award. Unless otherwise agreed by all Parties, the maximum amount to be funded by the Customers under this Contract as shown in Exhibit A shall not be increased in subsequent revisions to Exhibit A, unless the contract(s) awarded by Reclamation for the work set forth in subsection 6.2 hereof is terminated by agreement of all Parties. 7.4 Funds advanced by the Customers shall only be used by Reclamation for the work generally described in Section 6 hereof. The Parties expect that the Customers' funding will be adequate to complete the work as generally set forth in this Contract. Any additional costs incurred by Reclamation that are in addition to those costs funded by advances from the Customers for the activities associated with the work performed under this Contract shall be funded through existing or new appropriations by Congress. 7.5 Upon agreement of all Customers, the Customers may request that Reclamation terminate the work remaining to be performed under this Contract for any reason. In the event the work is to be terminated, the Customers shall be responsible for the cost 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 of termination pursuant to Section 7 hereof. Reclamation shall furnish a list of activities in progress, activities outstanding, Costs associated with terminating the contracts with other contractors, and the estimate of time for finalizing the termination. Upon agreement by all Customers, Reclamation shall commence the termination process. 7.6 Reclamation will provide Western with the termination schedule and costs, and updates for revision of Exhibit A. Reclamation will use its best efforts to provide as much advance notice as possible of the funds needed to terminate work. Upon completion of all termination work and payment of all obligations for work performed under this Contract, any funds remaining in the Escrow Account will be returned to the Customers. 7.7 The Escrow Account shall be established by the Project Treasurer in a financial institution that is a commercial bank or trust company or national banking association doing business and having its principal office in New York, New York; Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, California; or San Francisco, California; and having capital stock and surplus aggregating at least fifty million dollars ($50,000,000), if such a commercial bank or trust company or national banking association is willing and able to accept the Escrow Account on reasonable and customary terms. 7.8 At least thirty (30) days, but not more than forty-five (45) days, prior to each Funding Date shown in Exhibit A hereof, the Project Treasurer shall issue a Cash Call to each Customer. The Cash Calls issued to each Customer shall equal the product of the Customer's percentage shown in Exhibit B and the amount of the funds required for such date as shown in Exhibit A, plus any costs associated with establishing and maintaining the Escrow Account as charged by the financial institution, plus accounting and money management costs of seven hundred twenty dollars ($720.00) per year and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 accounting costs of three hundred fifty dollars ($350.00) per Cash Call, minus any interest earned by each Customer since the last Cash Call. 7.9 Each Customer shall remit the amount of each Cash Call to the Project Treasurer within twenty (20) days of receipt of such Cash Call. 7.10 Any and all funds received by the Project Treasurer shall be accounted for in each Customer's subaccount, and shall be deposited into the Escrow Account as soon as possible, but in no event later than three (3) business days following receipt thereof. 7.11 Prior to October 1 of each year until the work generally described in Section 6 hereof is complete, Reclamation shall advise Western and the Project Treasurer of any necessary changes in the timing of funds needed through the end of the period required for the completion of the work, and shall submit such updated information to the Project Treasurer and Western. If accelerated funding is necessary during any year, a statement of the reasons prompting the accelerated funding and the amount and schedule of the funding needed shall be submitted by Reclamation to the Project Treasurer and Western. Western shall revise the funding schedule in Exhibit A as necessary and provide the Project Treasurer and each Customer, such revised Exhibit A. The Project Treasurer shall issue a Cash Call to each Customer as provided in subsection 7.8 hereof. 7.12 Any Customer not making the required payments when due pursuant to this Section 7 will be issued a late notice by the Project Treasurer. The Project Treasurer will also send a copy of such late notice to each other Party. Such Customer shall have ten (10) days from the issuance of the late notice in which to make the payment invoiced in the Cash Call for which payment is late. If the late payment is not made by the eleventh (1 lth) day, a notice of default declaring the termination of participation in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 this Contract shall be sent to the defaulting Customer by the Project Treasurer with copies to all Parties within forty-five (45) days, but no earlier than eleven (11) days, after the original due date of a payment that is not made. A revised customer percentage table shall be prepared by the Project Treasurer and sent to Western. A revised Exhibit B shall be prepared by Western and shall be sent to each Party. The defaulting Customer shall forfeit its right of first refusal to excess capacity pursuant to Section 9 hereof; Pr_o_vJded, That such Customer shall retain its right to repayment by Western of its contribution prior to default, with interest, pursuant to subsection 7.13 and 8 hereof. The Project Treasurer shall allocate the amount of the payment due to the remaining Customers based on their percentage share. The maximum increase of each Customer's payment for the term of this Contract shall not exceed twenty-five percent (25 %) of such customer's original percentage share. The Project Treasurer shall issue a supplemental Cash Call to each remaining Customer for the amount in arrears. Each Customer shall make the payment required by the supplemental Cash Call to the Project Treasurer within ten (10) days of receipt of the supplemental Cash Call. If the supplemental Cash Call does not provide the required funds due to the limitation on payment increases described herein, the Project Treasurer shall discuss the action to be taken with the Parties as soon as practicable after the insufficiency of the supplemental Cash Call is known. 7.13 Any defaulting Customer shall be held liable for ten percent (10 %) of its remaining obligation based on its original percentage share of the total cost as indicated in Exhibit B attached hereto, and adjustments for such amounts shall be reflected in revisions to Exhibit B. 7.14 Upon completion of all work generally described in Section 6, and payment by Reclamation of any outstanding obligations, Reclamation shall notify the Project Treasurer of such and request the Escrow Account be closed. The Project Treasurer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 shall then notify the financial institution that the Escrow Account is being closed and return to each Customer any funds remaining in that Customer's subaccount. 8. REPAYMENT AND ACCOUNTING FOR CONTRIBUTED FUNDS: Customers will be reimbursed for funds withdrawn from the Escrow Account by Reclamation pursuant to Section 7, with appropriate interest as provided for in subsection 8.3, through credits by Western on each Customer's CVP power bills. Reclamation will allocate the appropriate share of the total repayment cost, including the cost of funding, for any generator rewound pursuant to this Contract to the appropriate CVP water users for repayment in accordance with the CVP cost allocation methodology. 8.1 The Project Treasurer shall provide a copy of all Cash Calls to Western and Reclamation showing the total amount of the Cash Call, and the amounts invoiced to each Customer. The Project Treasurer shall also provide to Western the amount and date of any withdrawals by Reclamation from the Escrow Account and all costs incurred in establishing and maintaining the Escrow Account that are paid by the Customers. 8.2 Beginning the first full month following notification by the Project Treasurer of Reclamation's withdrawal from the Escrow Account, Western shall apply bill credits to each Customer's CVP power bill for the Customer's percentage share of the amount withdrawn plus interest and associated costs in the manner described as follows: 8.2.1 Western shall determine the appropriate amount of interest to be added to the amount of funds withdrawn by Reclamation pursuant to notification by the Project Treasurer as set forth in subsection 8.1 hereof. Interest shall be computed using the annual interest rate determined by Western in accordance with subsection 8.3 hereof. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 8.2.2 Western shall multiply the percentages from the then-current Exhibit B corresponding to each Customer to the sum of: i) each withdrawal by Reclamation from the Escrow Account, ii) interest calculated in Paragraph 8.2.1 hereof; and iii) all costs incurred in establishing and maintaining the Escrow Account. Such amount shall be applied as a bill credit to the respective Customers on their power bills; Proxided That, Western shall not pay any costs, including interest, to the Customers greater than those costs that would have been incurred for the work generally described herein if said sums had been specifically appropriated for said purposes. 8.2.3 Western shall apply the amounts calculated pursuant to Paragraph 8.2.2 as a credit on each Customer's power bill; P_ro_v_Med That, Western shall not apply a credit amount greater than the amount owed to Western in any month. If the amount owed Western is less than the credit due the customer in any month, Western shall carryover the credit due each month until any balance is reduced to zero. Interest shall be computed on the amount due the Customer using the annual interest rate determined by Western in accordance with subsection 8.3 hereof. 8.3 Interest on funds withdrawn from the Escrow Account shall be computed at a rate that shall be at the average rate for Treasury Securities of 15 years maturity or more, as used in Western's power repayment study, prorated for the number of days from the date of Reclamation's withdrawal from the Escrow Account to the date of the credit on the Customer's power bill. No interest shall be applied to the costs incurred in establishing and maintaining the Escrow Account. 8.4 As necessary, Western shall suspend all other bill crediting programs and amounts determined by Western to be owed to the Customers while the credits 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 hereunder are applied. Should Western owe a Customer multiple credits, the credit under this Contract shall be applied first until' such credit has been fully satisfied. Unless contractually provided, interest shall not accrue on any other bill crediting program balance. Western will resume other bill crediting programs as soon as practicable after the total amount advanced by the Customers and withdrawn from the Escrow Account by Reclamation has been credited on the appropriate Customers' CVP power bills. 9. RIGHT TO EXCERfl CAPACITY: Reclamation has determined that rewinding and increasing the nameplate ratings of Shasta units 3, 4, and 5 up to 125 MW each is expected to result in a total increase of approximately 47 MW in the capacity available at Shasta Powerplant when the storage in Shasta Lake exceeds 3.6 million acre feet (MAF). As requested by the Customers, Reclamation will increase the electrical capacity of the units to 142 MVA as part of the work generally described in Section 6 hereof. The additional electrical capacity above 125 MW is expected to be utilized when the turbines are replaced. Upon completion of the work generally described in Section 6 hereof, Reclamation shall notify Western of the amount of additional capacity available from Shasta. Reclamation shall provide Western with the revised Shasta Powerplant capacity available as a function of Shasta Lake water storage and reservoir elevations. Western shall use this information to update Exhibit C attached hereto which shows the incremental increase in Shasta capacity at certain Shasta Lake water storage and reservoir elevations. After completion of the work as generally provided under this Contract and for the term of this Contract, the Customers will be given a right of first refusal for purchase of excess capacity up to 47 MW from the CVP in accordance with this Section 9. 9.1 If and when Western determines excess capacity is available for sale from the CVP (system wide), Western shall issue a notice of availability of excess capacity to all CVP power customers. The determination of the availability of excess capacity and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 terms of the offer will be made by Western at the time of the offer and shall apply to all excess capacity sales. Western is under no obligation as a result of this Contract to declare excess capacity available. The Customers must meet the marketing criteria set forth by Western for the excess capacity sale, including any transmission requirements. Excess capacity sold to any Party pursuant to this Contract will be scheduled in accordance with the appropriate scheduling arrangements. 9.2 If Shasta Lake storage level is forecasted by Reclamation to exceed 3.0 MAF during the time of the availability of excess capacity, each Customer shall have the right of first refusal to purchase, on a seasonal basis, its pro rata share, as specified in Exhibit B, of the excess capacity up to the amount specified in Exhibit C. If the Customer does not exercise its right of first refusal for seasonal excess capacity within the time-frame and under the terms offered by Western, Western may sell the seasonal excess capacity to any eligible purchaser under the same terms and conditions. If Western does not market all of the available excess capacity on a seasonal basis, Western may offer excess capacity on a monthly basis. Each Customer shall have the right of first refusal to purchase its pro rata share of the monthly excess capacity corresponding to the water storage levels specified in Exhibit C. 10. RATE,q: The Customer shall pay for the excess capacity pumhased as a result of the right of first refusal pursuant to Section 9 hereof, in accordance with the rates, charges, and conditions set forth in Western's notice of availability for excess capacity. The rates and other terms under which such excess capacity will be offered shall be consistent with Western marketing plans and rate setting guidelines. 1 11. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AUDIT AND OVER`qlGHT RIGHT,q: 11.1 Prior to January 1 of each year until the work set forth herein is complete. Reclamation shall provide to the Parties an accounting of the funds expended for the work generally described in Section 6 hereof. If requested by the Project Treasurer, Reclamation will provide documentation showing the payments made to each contractor, a description of the work performed by each contractor, and any balance to complete the work for each contractor. Reclamation also shall give an accounting of funds expended for work done by Reclamation, a description of the work performed by Reclamation, and the balance to complete the work required to be performed by Reclamation. Copies of these accountings shall be distributed to each Customer by the Project Treasurer. 11.2 A Party, in its exercise of appropriate financial controls, may request the Project Treasurer to cause an audit to be conducted of the costs of the work set forth in Section 6 of this Contract. Such audits shall not be conducted more often than every two (2) years. Such audit may examine records which relate to work associated with this Contract including, but not limited to, the financial and contract records of the Project Treasurer, Western, and Reclamation. The costs, including reasonable costs incurred by the Project Treasurer, Western, and/or Reclamation in the performance of the audit, shall be paid by the Party(ies) requesting the audit. 11.3 A Party shall be afforded the opportunity to obtain information concerning work performed under this Contract through reasonable requests to Reclamation. If the amount of information desired becomes excessive, as determined by Reclamation, Reclamation shall inform the requesting Customer(s) of same, and shall make arrangements to provide the information requested at the sole expense of the requesting Party(les). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 12. SUCCE~SORS AND ASSIGNS: This Contract shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Parties hereto and their respective successors. No Party shall assign its interest in this Contract, in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the other Parties. In no event shall any Party assign this Contract to any Party that is not financially responsible or which cannot perform its obligations pursuant to this Contract, nor shall any Party assign this Contract on any terms at variance from those set forth in this Contract. No permitted assignment or transfer shall change the duties of the Parties, or impair the chances of obtaining performance under this Contract except to the extent set forth in such permitted assignment and approved in writing by the Parties. No Party shall assign its rights of first refusal to excess capacity under this Contract. 13. ENFORCEABILITY: It is not the intent of the Parties that this Contract convey any rights to third parties to enforce the provisions of the Contract. This Contract can only be enforced by the Parties or their successors. 14. PERFORMANCE OBLIGATIONS: Reclamation shall use its utmost efforts and shall diligently endeavor to complete the work described in Section 6 by the date(s) set forth in Exhibit A. Reclamation will not be obligated to complete such work if the maximum funding set forth in Exhibit A is not advanced by the Customers. 15. DEFAUI.T: The failure of any Party to perform any of its respective obligations under this Contract shall constitute a default under this Contract; P_xo3tided, That the Party against whom the default is asserted shall not be deemed in default if it cures the asserted default by rendering the 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 necessary performance within ten (10) days following written notice from any other Party.. which notice shall set forth the acts and omissions which constitute the asserted default. 16. SEVERABII.IT¥: If any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this Contract should for any reason be finally adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unconstitutional or invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair or invalidate the remainder of this Contract but shall be confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, or part thereof directly involved in the controversy in which the judgment is rendered. If such judgment modifies or holds invalid any material terms or conditions of this Contract in such a manner that any Party is required to incur new or different obligations not expressly provided herein or forego benefits which it was otherwise entitled to, the Parties shall in good faith renegotiate the terms and conditions affected by the judgment so as to restore the original balance of benefits and burdens contemplated by the Parties as of the effective date of this Contract. Such renegotiated terms and conditions shall be in the form of an amendment to this Contract which shall be effective upon execution by the Parties. The original Contract shall remain in full force and effect, as modified by said judgment, until the negotiation process for the amendment is complete. 17. GENERAI. POWER CONTRACT PROVISIONS: Articles 1, 28, 29, and 31 through 43 of the General Power Contract Provisions, effective January 3, 1989, attached hereto, are hereby made a part of this Contract, the same as if they had been expressly set forth herein. 18. ATTACHMENTS AND EXHIRIT~ MADE PART OF CONTRACT: Inasmuch as the Estimated Funding Schedule, the Repayment Schedule, and the Shasta Rewind Incremental Increase in Capacity under this Contract may change during the term hereof, they will be set forth in Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively. Each of said exhibits shall become a part of this Contract during the term fixed by its provisions. Exhibits A, B, and C are l? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 attached hereto, and each shall be in force and effect in accordance with its terms until respectively superseded by a subsequent exhibit. 19. REI.ATION~HIP OF PARTIES: The covenants, obligations, and liabilities of the parties are intended to be several and not joint or collective, and nothing herein contained shall ever be construed to create an association, joint venture, trust or partnership, or to impose a trust or partnership covenant, obligations and liabilities under this Contract. No Party shall be under the control of or shall be deemed to control any other Party. No Party shall be the agent of or have a right or power to bind any other Party without its express written consent, except as expressly provided in this Contract. 20. OWNER$HIP RIGHTS: The ownership of, the title to, and the operation and maintenance responsibility for any equipment furnished with funds advanced by the Customers under the terms of this Contract shall be in the name of the UNITED STATES. 21. CUSTOMER I.IABII.ITY: This Contract does not confer any liability upon the Customers for any claim, action or judgment against Reclamation, arising out of or in connection with the work generally described in Section 6. 22. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPART: This Contract may be executed in a number of counterparts and shall constitute a single document with the same force and effect as if each Party had signed all other counterparts. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Contract to be executed the day and year first above written. The signatories he~'eto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to enter into this Contract on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION By: Title: Area Manager Address: 1825 Bell Street: Suite 105 Sacramento: CA 95825 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION By: Title' Address: (Seal) CITY OF ALAMEDA Attest By' Title: By: Title: Address: (Seal) CITY OF BIGGS Attest By: Title: By: Title:. Address: 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By' Title: (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By' Title: (Seal) Attest By: Title: CITY OF GRIDLEY By: Title: Address: CITY OF HEALDSBURG By: Title' Address: CITY OF LODI By: Title: Address: CITY OF LOMPOC By: Title: Address: NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY By: Title' Address: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (Seal) Attest By' Title: (Seal) Attest By' Title: (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By' Title: (Seal) Attest By: Title: CITY OF PALO ALTO By: Title' Address: PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE By: Title' Address: CITY OF REDDING By: Title: Address: CITY OF ROSEVILLE By: Title: Address: CITY OF SANTA CLARA By: Title: Address:_ 1 (Seal) 2 3 Attest 4 By' 5 Title: 6 7 (Seal) 8 9 Attest 10 By: 11 Title: 12 (Seal) 13 14 Attest 15 By: 16 Title: 17 18 (Seal) 19 Attest 20 21 By' Title: 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT By: Title' Address: SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT By: Title: Address: TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT By: Title: Address: CITY OF UKIAH By: Title: Address: Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 RESOLUTION NO. BE IT RESOLVED BY' THE OF The is authorized, on behalf of to execute this Comract with the Western Area Power Administration titled Contract No. 94-SAO-00047. Adopted: Exhibit A to Contract No. 94-SAO430047 EXHIBLT~ (Estimated Funding and Project Work Schedule) 1. This Exhibit A, to be effective under and as a part of Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 (hereinafter called the Contract) shall become effective conincidentally with the Contract. and shall remain in effect until either superseded by another Exhibit A or upon termination of the Contract. 2. The anticipated schedule for the work generally set forth in Section 6 and the funding for such work is set forth as follows: ACTIVITY Initial Contribution Due Award Bid Disassemble Unit 4 Delivery of Materials Install Components - Unit 4 Reassemble Unit 4 Disassemble Unit 5 Delivery of Materials Install Components - Unit 5 Reassemble Unit 5 Disassemble Unit 3 Delivery of Materials Install Components - Unit 3 Reassemble Unit 3 Contingencies Total Cost COMPLETION DATE Jul 14, 1995 Oct 19 - Nov 17, 1995 Apr 1 - May 10, 1996 Nov 20, 1995 - Sep 25, 1996 Sep 26, 1996 - Mar 27, 1997 Mar 24 - May 16, 1997 Aug 13 - Sep 24, 1997 Apr 7, 1997 - Feb 12, 1998 Feb 13 - Aug 4, 1998 Aug 5 - Sep 30, 1998 Dec 30, 1998 - Feb 11, 1999 Aug 19, 1998 - Jun 28, 1999 Jun 29 - Dec 20, 1999 Dec 21, 1999 - Feb 17, 2000 FUNDING Jul 14, 1995 $18,000 1/ Funding Dates to be added upon award of contract(s) by Reclamation. Potential field winding replacement is included in the materials costs. $142,860 $5,117,330 $1,558,000 $190,480 $142,860 $3,965,330 $1,538,000 $190,480 $142,860 $3,935,330 $1,543,000 $190,470 $21,175,000 lof2 Extfibit A to Contract No. 94-SAO4)0(O7 are as follows: Contract Costs Non-Contract Regional Engineering Contract Administration Reclamation Technical Center Contract Inspection Local O&M Staff additional work Sub Total Contingencies (15 % of Contract amount) Total The estimated breakdown of the costs for the work generally set forth in this Contract $17,300,000 50,000 50,000 105,000 170,000 1 1,375,000 2,500:000 $21,175.000 2of2 Exhibit B to Contract No. 94-SAO--00047 (Repayment Schedule and Customers Percentages) 1. This Exhibit B, to be effective under and as a part of Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 (hereinafter called the Contract) shall become effective coincidentally with the Contract, and shall remain in effect until either superseded by another Exhibit B or upon termination of the Contract. 2. The following table shows each Customer's Percentage to be used as the basis for calculating amounts to be advanced by each Customer and the credits to be made on each Customer's CVP power bills. PARTICIPANTS PERCENTAGE SHARE CALCULATED DOLLAR AMOUNT BART 1.0 % 211,750 NCPA~ (5.3 %) Turlock 0.3 % 63,525 Alameda 1.4 % 296,450 0.2 % Biggs Gridley Healdsburg Lodi 42,350 0.4 % 84,700 0.2 % 42,350 0.8 % 169,400 0.4 % 84,700 Plumas Sierra 1.1% 232,925 Ukiah 0.5 % 105,875 Palo Alto~! 35.9 % 7,601,825 Redding 10.0 % 2.117,500 5.0 % 1,058,750 30.0 % 6,352,500 12.8 % 2,710,400 100.0 % TOTAL Roseville SMUD Santa Clara~ $21,175,000 1/ Subject to final participation by NCPA Members. lofl Exhibit C to Contract No. 94-SAO430047 (Shasta Rewind Incremental Increase in Capacity) 1. This Exhibit C, to be effective under and as a part of Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 (hereinafter called the Contract) shall become effective coincidentally with the Contract, and shall remain in effect until either superseded by another Exhibit C or upon termination of the Contract. 2. The following table shows the incremental increase in capacity after completion of the work generally set forth in Section 6 of the Contract. 1/ STORAGE 1,000 ACRE FEET CAPACITY MW 3600 3500 3400 3300 47 41 35 26 3200 24 3100 22 3000 20 Based on existing capacity of 118 MW for generating unit 3 and 105 MW for generating units 4 and 5. lofl Amendment No. 1 Contract No. 94~SAO-00047 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 'FOR FUNDING OF MAINTENANCE WORK AT SHASTA POWERPLANT WITH CITY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF BIGGS CITY OF GRIDLEY CITY OF HEALDSBURG CITY OF LODI CITY OF LOMPOC NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY CITY OF PALO ALTO PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. CITY OF REDDING CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITy OF SANTA CLARA SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH Amendment No. 1 Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 Section 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.' 7. 8. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFORNIA CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR FUNDING OF MAINTENANCE WORK AT SHASTA POWERPLANT WITH CITY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF BIGGS CITY OF GRIDLEY CITY OF HEALDSBURG CITY OF LODI CITY OF LOMPOC NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY CITY OF PALO ALTO PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. CITY OF REDDING CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY OF SANTA CLARA SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH Table of ContenB Page PREAMBLE ........................................ 1 EXPLANATORY RECITALS .......................... iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii'2 AGREEMENT ....... · ....................... 3 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM OF CONTRACT ~I~I~I~:F' iiiiiiiiiiiiii 3 PRIMARY CONTRACT TO REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT ......... 3 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 6 OF THE PRIMARY CONTRACT ............ 3 MODIFICATION OF SECTION 9 OF THE PRIMARY CONTRACT ............ 4 EXECUTION IN COUNTERPART ........................................ 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1-3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT AND UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT, CALIFGRNIA CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. I FOR FUNDING OF MAINTENANCE WORK AT SHASTA POWERPLANT WITH CITY OF ALAMEDA CITY OF BIGGS CITY OF GRIDLEY CITY OF HEALDSBURG CITY OF LODI CITY OF LOMPOC NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY CITY OF PALO ALTO PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. CITY OF REDDING CITY OF ROSEVILLE CITY OF SANTA CLARA SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT CITY OF UKIAH 1. PREAMBLE: This Contract Amendment is made thi day of 1998, as part of and pursuant to the same authorities as Contract No. 94-SAO-00047, as amended (Primary Contract), between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (United States), (i) acting by and through the Administrator, Westem Area Power Administration, Department of Energy, hereinafer called Western, represented by the officer executing this Contract, or a duly appointed successor, hereinafter called the Contracting Officer, and (ii) acting by and through the Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior, hereinafter called Reclamation, t:epresented by the Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region; and the CITIES OF ALAMEDA, BIGGS, GRIDLEY, HEALDSBURG, LODI, LOMPOC, PALO ALTO, REDDING, ROSEVILLE, SANTA CLARA, and UKIAH; the NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY; the SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (SMUD); the SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT (BART), a rapid transit 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 district established pursuant to Califomia Public Utility Code Section 28500 et. seq.; the TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT (TID); and the PLUMAS-SIERRA RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, all organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, hereinafter' called the Customers; and all collectively called the Parties. EXPLANATORY RECITALS: 2.1 Westem, Reclamation, and the Customers entered into Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 (Primary Contract) for funding of maintenance work at Shasta Powerplant. 2.2 The Parties desire to modify the Primary Contract by deleting the requirement to replace the core iron for unit 1 and adding the replacement of the turbine runners on generating units 3, 4, and 5 at Shasta Dam and Powerplant. 2.3 Replacement of the turbine runners is expected to increase the ultimate hydraulic capacity of Shasta Powerplant by an additional 51 megawatts (MW) over and above the 47 MW increase set forth in Section 9 of the Primary Contract. 2.4 The replacement of the turbine runners is not expected to increase the funding amount required above the original estimate of twenty-one million, one htmdred seventy- five thousand dollars ($21,175,000.00) the Customers agreed to pay under the Primary Contract. /// /// 2.5 This Contract Amendment revises Section 6 of the Primary Contract to include work associated with replacement of the turbine runners and revises Section 9 to increase the amount of excess capacity from 47 MW to 98 MW. ! 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2.6 The Parties expect that upon completion of the unit rewind wOrk, any resulting excess capacity will be made available to the CUstomers pursuant to the terms of the Primary Contract. Upon completion of the installation of each turbine runner, any resulting excess capacity will be made available to the Customers as set forth in this Amendment. 3. A~,_]~2~NT: The Parties agree to the terms and conditions set forth herein. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT: This Contract Amendment shall become effective upon execution by. all the Parties and remain in effect concurrently with the Primary Contract. 5. PRIMARY CONTRACT TO REMAIN IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT: Except as expressly modified by this Contract Amendment, the Primary Contract shall remain in full force and effect. 6. MODIFICATION OF SECTION 6 'OF THE PRIMARY CONTRACT: Section 6 of the Primary Contract entitled "Work to be Performed for the Shasta Rewind Project:" is hereby modified as follows: 6.1 Section 6.2.5 of the Primary Contract is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following substituted in lieu thereof: "6.2.5 Furnishing of a new thrust bearing for unit 2." /// 6.2 The following is hereby added to the Primary Contract as a new Section 6.2.6: "6.2.6 Furnishing of all necessary material, equipment, and labor for the replacement of the unit turbine runners and associated components for generating units. 3, 4, and 5." 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7. MODIFICATION OF SECTION 9 OF THE PRIMARY CONTRACT: The first paragraph in Section 9 of the Primary Contract is hereby deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted in lieu thereof: "9. RIGHT TO EXCESS CAPACITY: Reclamation has determined that rewinding and increasing the nameplate ratings of Shasta units 3, 4, and 5 up to 125 MW each is expected to result in a total increase of approximately 47 MW in the capacity available at Shasta Powerplant when the storage in Shasta Lake exceeds 3.6 million acre feet (MAF). As requested by the Customers, Reclamation will increase the generator nameplate ratings of each of these units to 142 MW, as part of the work generally described in Section 6.2.3 and 6.2.4 hereof. .Additional electrical capacity, above 125 MW, is expected to be available when the turbine runners are replaced as set forth in Section 6.2.6. With the replacement of each turbine runner, the full 142 MW of nameplate rating of each unit will be available depending upon hydraulic conditions. Upon completion of the rewind work generally described in Section 6 hereof, Reclamation shall notify Western of the. amount of additional capacity available at Shasta. Upon completion of each turbine runner replacement, as generally described in Section 6 hereof, Reclamation shall notify Western of the amount of additional capacity available at Shasta. Reclamation shall provide Western with the revised Shasta Powerplant capacity available as a function of Shasta Lake water storage and reservoir elevations. Western shall use this information to update Exhibit C'attached hereto which shows the incremental increase in Shasta capacity at certain Shasta Lake water storage and reservoir elevations. After completion of the rewind work as generally provided under Sections 6.2.3 and 6.2.4 of this Contract and for the term of this Contract, the Customers will be given a right of first refusal to purchase excess capacity up to 47 MW from the CVP in accordance with this Section 9. After completion of each turbine runner replacement,, as set forth in Section 6.2.6, and for the term of this Contract, the Customers will be given a right of first refusal to purchase excess capacity from the CVP up to 17 MW per unit 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 completed in accordance with this Section 9. It is expected that a~er all work described in Section 6 has been completed, a total of up to 98 MW of excess capacity from the CVP will be made available to the Customers for the term of this Contract." o EXECUTION IN COUNTERPART: This Contract Amendment may be executed in a number of counterparts and shall constitute a single document with the same fOrce and effect as if each Party had signed all other counterparts. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Contract Amendment to be executed the day and year first above written. The signatories hereto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to enter into this Contract on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. WES~ AREA ~O~DMINISTRATION By: xv~v.~4..q'/,t.J--.~~ / Title: (.l~egi _~ Manager ~ Address:114 P0rksh0re Drive F01som. CA 95630-4710 Title: Remona" * l Direct;or Address: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By ~~../~~'~, ~2 Title/~-~' r'~_~~ ff SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT By: Title: Address: SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT By: Title: Address': TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT By: Title: Address: Contract No. 94-SA0-00047 RESOLUTION NO. 99-17 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH The Ma yo r is authorized, on behalf of ~-.ho c'i ~-.y nf rTki ah tO execute this Contract Amendmen~ with the Western Area Power Administration and Bureau of'Reclamation titled Amendment No. 1 Contract No. 94-SA0-00047. Adopted: October 7, 1998 Revision 1, Exhibit A Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 ExkibikA (Estimated Funding and Project Work Schedule) 1. This Revision 1 to Exhibit A, to be effective under and as a part of Contract No. 94-SAO-00047, shall become effective on 13F~, 7 ,1998, and shall remain in effect until superseded by another revised Exhibit A or upon termination of the Contract. 2. The revised schedule for the work generally set forth in Section 6 and the funding for such work is set forth as follows: Award Bid Initial Contribution Date Disassembly of Unit 4 Delivery of Materials Install Components - Unit 4 Reassembly of Unit 4 Delivery of Materials Publish Turbine Spec Disassembly of Unit 5 Install Components - Unit 5 Award Turbine Contract 3/ Reassembly of Unit 5 COMPLETION DATE l/ Jun ' 95 Feb 97 Jun 97 Aug 97 Dec 97 Oct 98 Oct 98 Dec 98 Mar 99 Mar 99 Jun 99 FUNDING Jan 96 Jul 96 Aug 96 Nov 96 Dec 96 Jan 97 Mar 97 May 97 Jul 97 Aug 97 Oct 97 Nov 97 Feb 98 May 98 Aug 98 Oct 98 Dec 98 Feb 99 Apr 99 Jun 99 Aug 99 Oct 99 Dec 99 FUNDING $23,679 $150,314' $71,186 $55,0o0 $677,622 $738,000 $867,000 $749,500 $689,500 $541,149 $732,500 $774,577 $1,068,850 $395,538 $372,674 $265,126 $110,087 $483,798 $700,000 $320,317 $517,753 $87,000 $133,000 $236,674 1 of 6 Revision 1, Exhibit A Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 ACIIYlT35 Turbine Model Evaluation Disassembly of Unit 3 Delivery of Materials Install Components - Unit 3 Reassembly of Unit 3 Delivery of First Turbine Disassembly of Unit 4 Installation of First Turbine Reassembly of Unit 4 Disassembly of Unit 5 Delivery of Second Turbine Installation of Second Turbine Reassembly of Unit 5 Disassembly of Unit 3 Delivery of Third Turbine Installation of Third Turbine Reassembly of Unit 3 Contingencies Total Cost COMPLETION DATE 7/ Dec 99 Jan 00 Apr 00 May 00 Jul 00 Dec 00 Dec 00 Jan 01 May 01 Oct 01 Dec 01 Jan 02 May 02 Oct 02 Dec .02 Jan 03 May 03 FUNDING Feb 00 Apr 00 Jun 00 FUNDING ~iSEEDEIX $1,100,000 $266,126 $313,174 $162,000 $2,000 000 $150 ooo $1oo ooo $15o ooo $150 000 $2,000 000 $1oo ooo $15o,ooo $15o,ooo $2,ooo,ooo $1oo,ooo $150,000 $21,175,000 Completion dates may be revised upon award of contract(s) by Reclamation. Funding dates listed are for the rewind. Funding Dates for turbine runner installation to be inserted upon award of contract(s) by Reclamation. 3. EXECUTION IN COUNTERPART: This Contract Amendment may be executed in a number of counterparts and shall constitute a single document with the same force and effect as if each Party had signed all other counterparts. 2 of 6 Revision 1, Exhibit A Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Revision 1, Exhibit A, to be executed the day and year first above written. The signatories hereto represent that they have been appropriately authorized to enter into this Contract on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION Title: _ Manager Address: 114 Parkshore Drive Folsom; CA 95630-471 AP?~'~OVED AS TO LEqAL FORM AND OFF~OE OF ~Eglqr,~AL SOLICITOR / Title: Regional Director Address: 3 of 6 (Seal)' Attest By: Title: Revision 1, Exhibit A Contract No. 94-SAO-00047 SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT By: Title: Address: (Seal) Attest By:. Title: SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT By: Title: Address: (Seal) Attest By: Title: (Seal) Attest By~_~ .~~~ Title:~4 TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT By: Title: Address: Title:. Addre~ 6 of 6 ITEM NO.: 9c DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT REGARDING UKIAH RECYCLE SUMMARY: The recycling business known as Ukiah Recycle is currently operating under a Temporary Use Permit (#01-34) approved by the City Council on October 17, 2002, that allowed it to stay open after the building that housed its primary offices and internal storage collapsed. Unfortunately, the owner of the property has not yet submitted any plans to construct a building to replace the one that was demolished earlier this year, and the applicant has contacted Planning Department staff to review options that would allow the business to continue in its outdoor location after the Temporary Use Permit expires on April 17, 2002. In the six months since the Temporary Use Permit was approved, Ukiah Recycle has operated outdoors in a manner that is generally consistent with the site plan approved as part of this permit. These changes include the construction of a screening fence, as well as the establishment of an on-site access lane and unpaved parking for persons dropping off recylcable materials. The storage of materials is also better organized than before, although it is staff's opinion that additional clean-up and organization may be required if the outdoor recycling operations are to continue. In reviewing the different Municipal Code sections that pertain to the recycling operation, Planning staff advised the business owner, Mr. Wayne Reynolds, that applying for another Temporary Use Permit was not a preferred option since there is no firm timeline for the construction of a building to replace the one that was recently demolished. In fact, staff has determined that the most appropriate action would be the submittal of an application to amend the site plan and operational aspects required as part of Major Use Permit #96-56, which was approved by the Planning Commission in 1997 to allow the recycling business. Specifically, the permit would be amended to allow the continued operation of the business as an outdoor operation only. This action would then be reviewed and acted on by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. (continued on Page 2 ) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Receive the Status Report regarding the Ukiah Recycle Center. Citizen Advised: Ukiah Recycle and courtesy notice to adjacent property owners Requested by: Ukiah Planning Department Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. October 17, 2002, City Council Minutes 2. Agenda Summary Report for Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34 (minus attachments) 3. Staff Report for Major Use Permit No. 96-54 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, Ci~y Manager Background: In January of 1997, the Ukiah Planning Commission approved Major Use Permit #96-54 to allow the establishment of a recycling operation on an .8-acre parcel located at 1080 Cunningham Street. This operation included the use of an existing 3,300 square foot storage building on the east side of the lot, with the remaining areas reserved for outdoor storage of recyclables. The development of a parking area for six stalls was also required for the area east of the building. Attachment 1 includes a copy of the Staff Report and Site Plan for this project. In late summer of 2001, the roof and one wall of the building collapsed without warning and the Ukiah Building Inspector condemned the structure due to the potential for injury or loss of life. As a result of this action, the bulk of the recycling center was shifted to the yard area, with customer exchanges occurring in an open area south of the hazardous structure. Planning and Building staff determined that this situation presented its own hazards, and Mr. Reynolds was advised that all operations must be shifted to the open areas at least 50 feet from the building. Mr. Reynolds was further advised that the continued operation of the business in an outdoor setting would also require the amendment of the original Use Permit or the approval of a Temporary Use Permit. In anticipation of a new building being constructed or the moving of the business, the applicant chose to submit a Temporary Use Permit (TUP #01-34) application, which was considered and denied by the Ukiah Planning Commission by a vote of 3-2 in August of last year. On October 17, 2001, the City Council heard the project on appeal and voted 3-2 to approve it for a six-month operational period that ends on April 17, 2002. In the interim period, the recycling operation has attained a suitable level of compliance with the site layout approved for the Temporary Use Permit. Unfortunately, no plans for the replacement of the building have been submitted to Planning or Building Department staff and it is doubtful that any substantial structure could be constructed within a six-month period if the operational period of the Temporary Use Permit were extended. Therefore, Planning staff concludes that the applicant should be required to amend the original Use Permit to reflect the changes that have occurred since the building housing the original recycling center operation collapsed and to comply with any additional requirements that the Planning Commission imposes on the outdoor recycling operation. estimated increase to the Planning, Building, and Engineering budgets of approximately $7,300 each ($21,914 total through the end of the current fiscal year). M/S Smith/Baldwin Approving "Development Permit Coordinator" job description and salary classification. Discussion followed related to how the position would benefit the public with quicker permit processing. It was noted by staff that it would be a full time position. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 6:48 p.m. Recessed. 7:00 p.m. Reconvened. 8. PUBLIC HEARING 8a. Public Hearin_cl Re~ardin.q Notification of Award of Federal Law Enforcement Block Grant, Determination of Fund Allocation, and Approval of Budget Amendment Police Chief Williams explained that the City of Ukiah's application for grant funding, FY 2001/02, from the Federal Bureau of Justice Assistance was approved in the amount of $32,045 with a local City match of $3,561, for a total project award of $35,606. The Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) would be used for the Officer Transcription Project at a cost of $20,000 and the remaining funds of $15,606 for the on-going Radio Communications Improvement Project. Public Hearing Opened: 7:02 p.m. No comments received Public Hearing Closed: 7:02 p.m. M/S Smith/Larson approving the Officer Transcription Project ($20,000) and Radio Communications Improvement Project ($15,606) at a total cost of $35,606 as an expenditure program for the 2001/02 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant, and approving amendment to the 2001/902 budget increasing revenue in account 207.0900.488.002 (2001/02 grant revenue) to $32,045, increasing revenue in account 207.0900.905.000 (miscellaneous revenue) by $1,061, decreasing expenditures in accounts 207.2001.250.000 and 207.2001.690.000 by $3,000 and $2,000 respectively, increasing expenditures in account 207.2001.711.000 to $15,606, and increasing revenue in account 698.0900.905.201 to $15,606 for Transcription Activities and Radio Communication Improvements; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. PUBLIC HEARING Appeal of Plannin_~ Commission Denial of Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34: Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page 3 of 31 I-I Ukiah Recycle, 1080 Cunningham Street Associate Planner Lohse advised the Planning Commission considered Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34 on September 12, 2001, to allow the establishment and operation of an outdoor recycling center designed to serve as a temporary replacement facility for the recycling center housed in a recently damaged structure on the eastern half of the subject property. The proposed temporary outdoor facility would allow the recycling business to continue operation until a determination could be made regarding the damaged structure. The Planning Commission denied the Use Permit on a 3-2 vote, based upon the four findings made by the Commission referenced on Page 5 of the September 12, 2001 Planning Commission minutes. The applicant timely appealed the Planning Commission's decision to deny the project on September 21,2001. The proposed site plan has been modified to include a chain link fence creating a barrier between the dilapidated building and the outdoor operation and additional bins would be added for glass collection. The outdoor recycling operation would be utilized for aluminum cans, glass, plastic, metals, and larger recyclable items would not be collected at this facility. Staff concluded prior to the Planning Commission hearing, that a workable plan had been prepared whereby staff recommended approval of the proposed project subject to various Findings and Conditions of Approval designed to address concerns relevant to the temporary operation as well as the problems existing with the original recycling center operation. He noted neighborhood property owners expressed concern the temporary operation would exacerbate the existing problems including such impacts as noise, trash and debris not appropriately maintained, fence screening, and the lack of landscaping maintenance which was originally required in 1997 when the Use Permit establishing the recycling operation was approved. He noted regarding the appeal consideration, the Planning Department has changed its recommendation to support denial of the temporary Use Permit based on the concurrent Planning Commission Findings and the fact that the site has not been properly maintained since the application was submitted. He emphasized the importance of the applicant cleaning and maintaining the site. He addressed the modified Site Plan and noted no major changes have been proposed. However, installation of a chain fence and increasing the number of bins would be advantageous. The applicant is requesting a 45-day extension on the Use Permit application and staff has provided alterative actions in the Staff Report, dated October 17, 2001. He reported staff received several letters supporting reinstatement of the project. The applicant is working with the owner of the building to determine whether the permanent building would be renovated or rebuilt. Staff reaffirmed there has been project modifications proposed that would be beneficial to maintaining the site once it is cleaned, such as construction of the fence, placement of portable restroom facilities and recycling bins, and sufficient visual screening. Public Hearing Opened: 7:15 p.m. Wayne Reynolds, Ukiah, applicant, clarified he is requesting a 45-day extension to continue his operation to allow time to improve the property to include construction of a Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page 4 of 31 wooden or slat fence around the parameters of the operation and placement of recycling bins to keep material off the ground. He explained that the property owner has agreed to renovate the building. Councilmember Baldwin inquired regarding the applicant's original letter and what items the recycling center would no longer accept. Mr. Reynolds explained the operation would no longer accept cardboard, iron, tin and/or other similar materials. The recycling center would accept aluminum cans as well as aluminum siding if appropriately bundled for shipping. Mr. Lohse noted the neighbors located to the north of the site are not supportive of the project. Councilmember Libby stated the Conditions of Approval relate to maintaining "good neighbor" standards and site improvements to ensure a quality operation. She inquired whether the applicant would be capable of completing the proposed project modifications within 45 days. Mr. Reynolds replied affirmatively. He briefly elaborated on the list of improvements according to priority. A brief discussion followed regarding the type of material and height requirements relevant to the proposed new fence. City Manager Horsley questioned whether the applicant would continue to operate for a prolonged period of time within the fenced parameters should the property owner elect not to renovate the existing building. Mr. Reynolds replied the business could operate from cargo containers but he was not supportive of this approach. If the owner elects not to repair the building he would make plans to relocate his operation. Councilmember Libby inquired from a public safety standpoint what legal measures would be imposed on the owner to demolish and potentially reconstruct the building. Planning Director Stump noted the property owner is aware of the pending building condemnation procedures and this issue would be tentatively agendized as a nuisance item for action at a regular City Council meeting. He also noted the property owner is experiencing insurance problems in connection with the building. He clarified that the applicant is seeking approval for the six month original Temporary Use Permit in addition to the 45-day extension request. It would be beneficial if the applicant were to clean the site within 45 days and noted, should the Temporary Use Permit be granted, the operation would be allowed to continue for six months. It was noted the nuisance abatement process could encompass many months and, therefore, reconstruction of the existing Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page 5 of 31 building could be delayed for a year. There was a brief discussion relevant to the actual operation of the recycling business specifically identifying what materials would be accepted and/or processed. Public Hearing Opened: 7:15 p.m. John McCowen, Ukiah, was supportive of the project and stated the buSiness provides a necessary service to the community. In his opinion, the recycling business was in character with the existing neighborhood and was not aesthetically and/or visually displeasing. Bill Evans, Ukiah, stated it appears the business has not been operating within the confines of the property when other businesses in the area are properly maintained and professionally operated. Michael Dunn, Ukiah, owns a business located behind the project and referred to the recycling business from an aesthetic point of view as a "junkyard." Lisa Dunn, Ukiah, did not favor the initial project when it was presented to the Planning Commission on September 12, 2001, and stated the business does not comply aesthetically with the standards of the neighborhood. It was noted the project also encompasses public parking and traffic congestion problems. John McCowen stated he has never observed parking and/or circulation problems with the recycling business. Chris Ruddick, Ukiah, owner of property in the vicinity, was not supportive of the project as the business is not appropriately maintained and/or managed allowing the market value of the existing properties to decline. Public Hearing Closed: 7:41 p.m. Councilmember Smith was not optimistic the property owner would accomplish the necessary site improvements in compliance with the Conditions of Approval and Ukiah Municipal Code within the six month period. He favored approval of the six month Temporary Use Permit application to allow for continued operation, but encouraged the applicant to begin looking for an alternative site as soon as possible. City Manager Horsley advised staff would closely monitor the recycling operations to ensure conformity with the provisions of the Conditions of Approval and the Code requirements should the Council approve the Temporary Use Permit application. There was a brief discussion regarding appropriate parking accommodations. Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page {5 of 3] Councilmember Baldwin inquired regarding the provisions outlined in Condition of Approval No. 5 and whether the applicant was already in operation. Mr. Lohse reported the applicant's business is still in operation and it is the customary procedure for the applicant to be allowed to continue operation while going through the Use Permit process. Councilmember Baldwin inquired as to how and when approval would be obtained regarding the outdoor operation. Mr. Lohse replied that the original Condition as submitted, would have allowed the Planning Department the opportunity to inspect the site when the applicant was ready. Staff changed its recommendation on the premise that appropriate changes were not adhered to in accordance with the proposed Site Plan standards submitted. Councilmember Baldwin questioned regarding Condition No. 5 as to whether the applicant would be allowed to operate until the Planning and Public Works Departments inspect and approve the site. Mr. Lohse noted it could continue to operate if the project site corresponds with the Use Permit application and the accompanying site plans. Staff would consider changing the wording relevant to Condition No. 5 provided a specific time period was established for the applicant to be in compliance with the Site Plan. Councilmember Smith inquired about the written interpretation of Condition No. 5 and whether the Use Permit could be issued effective immediately whereby the six-month time period would also begin. He further inquired if the applicant chose to shut down the operation while implementing the project modifications to comply with the 17 Conditions of Approval, if the six-month period would begin upon staff's property inspection? Mr. Lohse replied affirmatively, as worded in the Condition with the exclusion of a specific date. It was noted the applicant has not been operating in compliance to the Site Plans as originally submitted. The business has never ceased to operate. Councilmember Baldwin inquired whether a reasonable time frame could be incorporated into Condition No. 5 for the applicant to be inspected and approved. Mr. Stump stated regarding Condition No. 5, the City Council possesses the option to approve the Temporary Use Permit for six months by specifying an action date or advising the applicant he is not operating in an outdoor fashion according to the standards provided for in the Site Plans and that if the Temporary Use Permit were approved, there would be a six month period to fully comply with the Code and Conditions of Approval for the temporary operation. Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page 7 of 3! Mayor Ashiku proposed Council approve the Temporary Use Permit for six months to operate the recycling business temporarily to include compliance with the project Conditions allowing staff the opportunity to make the appropriate assessment relevant to determining whether a permanent Use Permit is justified in the future as well as to allow time to determine the fate of the existing building. Councilmember Libby expressed concern that the applicant would be unable to meet the required project conditions within 45 days. M/S Libby/Smith approving Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34, that the 17 Conditions of Approval be met within a 45 day time period to begin immediately, including the findings to support the approval of the Use Permit as indicated in the Planning Commission Staff report, and that staff will regularly inspect the site and ensure compliance of the 17 Conditions of Approval. Mr. Reynolds stated he understands that all 17 Conditions of Approval must be met within 45 days and he would be able to construct the fence, implement the new recycling bins, and clean the site during that time. Mr. Stump noted noncompliance of the above-referenced conditions within the 45-day period would constitute grounds for revocation and, therefore, the revocation process would begin as outlined in the Ukiah Municipal Code. Councilmember Larson commented on the motion and inquired whether approval of a Temporary Use Permit for the outdoor establishment would preclude the existing Major Use Permit. Mr. Stump replied negatively and noted the existing Major Use Permit is still valid. Councilmember Larson noted the Planning Commission possesses the authority, when necessary, to proceed with revocation of a Major Use Permit and inquired whether revocation proceedings would have any effect or bearing on the operation under the Temporary Use Permit. Mr. Stump replied negatively and noted once the six months has lapsed the Temporary Use Permit is no longer valid. There was a brief discussion relevant to a good neighbor policy and staff noted the City does not have an official policy. Councilmember Larson addressed the negative visual impacts the business has imposed on the neighborhood, but noted the nature of the business provides an untidy appearance. He stated the business provides a vital service to the community and its operation should continue. Compliance with the Conditions of Approval is important with visual screening a priority. He stated part of the problem associated with the business is the unwillingness of Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page 8 of 3! the property owner to assist the tenant in making improvements to the existing structure and other business related necessities. He suggested utilizing the 45-day period by cleaning the area to meet the prioritized Conditions of Approval and to develop a plan whereby a written commitment would be made by the property owner to redevelop the property for the tenant or alternatively, create a plan assisting the tenant with relocating his business. He recommended the Planning Commission or City Council review this project in 45 days relevant to a progress report and development plan. There was discussion relative to potential liability issues in conjunction with the existing condemned building and it was determined the new fence, as referenced on the revised Site Plan, would created a buffer between the business and the building. Although not conditioned, the buffer exists on the Site Plan and, therefore, is part of the project. The City Building Inspector requires a buffer between 20 and 25 feet be implemented. Mayor Ashiku stated the buffer should be implemented immediately to avoid potential safety hazards. It was not known whether the subject building possesses electrical power and staff would verify this issue. Councilmember Baldwin commented on the importance of supporting private enterprises. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Larson, Smith, Libby, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 9. NEW BUSINESS 9a. Discussion and Possible Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the HulI-Piffero Subdivision and Use Permit Project Planning Director Stump advised the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for the Hull/Piffero five-parcel Subdivision and Use Permit project on a 40-acre parcel in the western hillside area. The project involves the construction of a single-family home on one of the parcels and a Use Permit for the legalization of unauthorized grading and construction activities that have occurred on the property. The Public Hearing focuses on the appropriateness of the Mitigated Negative Declaration; whether it adequately identifies potential significant environmental effects and whether such effects can be mitigated. The merits of the Subdivision and Use Permit would be noticed separately for a future discretionary hearing. The City Council must discuss the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and determine if it adequately identifies potentially significant adverse environmental impacts and decide if the proposed mitigation program adequately eliminated the impacts or reduces them to a point whereby no significant effects would occur. If the Council is unable to make this finding based upon the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, comment letters, Response to Comments and other project related documentations/records; it must require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Regular Meeting October 17, 2001 Page 9 of $1 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO.: 8.b DATE: Oc.,1o6 r 17, 2001 REPORT SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF TEMPORARY USE PERMIT NO. 01-34: UKIAH RECYCLE, 1080 CUNNINGHAM STREET SUMMARY: On September 12, 2001, the Ukiah Planning Commission considered Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34 to allow the allow the establishment and operation of an outdoor recycling designed to serve as a temporary replacement facility for the recycling center housed in a recently damaged structure on the eastern half of the subject property. After conducting a public hearing, the Planning Commission denied the Use Permit on a 3-2 vote, based on the four findings made by the Commission at the hearing (see Page 2 of this summary). On September 21st of this year, Mr. Wayne Reynolds filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny the project. (continued on Paqe 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Deny the appeal and sustain the Planning Commission's denial of Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: 1. Conduct a Public Hearing regarding the appeal of Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34, and Uphold the appeal filed by Mr. Wayne Reynolds, and approve Temporary Use Permit No. 01-34, based on the findings and Conditions of Approval contained in Attachment #4. Citizen Advised: Legal notice published in the Ukiah Daily Journal Requested by: Ukiah Planning Department Prepared by: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: 1. Appeal Letter from Wayne Reynolds 2. Minutes from the Planning Commission hearing held on September 12, 2001 (Pages 1-5) 3. Letters of Opposition presented at the Planning Commission hearing 4. Planning Commission Staff Report for Major Use Permit No. 01-34 (dated September 12, 2001) 5. Memo to the Planning Commission with attached reference materials for Use Permit No. 01-34 6. Letter of Support from James Eddie (received 10110/01) 7. Letter of Support from Mary Buckley, Executive Director, Plowshares (received 9/23/01) 8. Letters of Opposition (received 10/11/01) APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager 1=1 BACKGROUND: In January of 1997, the Planning Commission approved a Major Use Permit (#96-54) to allow a recycling center at 1080 Cunningham Street. This facility was housed in a 3,300 square foot building and the abutting yard area for the processing and storage of recyclable materials. Unfortunately, in July of this year the roof of the building collapsed and the City Building Inspector prohibited its use due to the potential hazards to life, health, and safety. This building remains closed and the applicant has requested the approval of a Temporary Use Permit that would allow him to shift the recycling operation to the outdoor storage areas for a period of six months. This outdoor center would be used for the collection and recycling of much smaller amounts of aluminum cans, glass, plastic, and other metals. The outdoor recycling center would be located in the yard area on the westem portion of the site, as shown on the site plan contained in the attached Staff Report to the Planning Commission (Attachment #4). This center would be accessed through two 20-foot wide gates on the Rupe Street frontage, with internal circulation over a circular driveway to be covered with 12 inches of gravel or rock base for dust control. Three parking stalls with gravel or rock base surfacing would be developed between this driveway and the southern property line. Loose recyclables would be stored in three 8-feet by 28-feet storage containers on the north side of the driveway or in an 8-feet by 40-feet cargo container in the northeast corner of the site. Recyclable materials that could be baled or stored on pallets would be placed in open areas on the northwest portion of the yard where they would be partially screened by the storage containers. The entire storage yard would be partially screened by the existing chain-link fence, which would be fitted with slats, and the oleanders that were planted next to it several years ago. ANALYSIS: In the Staff Report for the Planning Commission (Attachment #4), Planning Department staff concluded that the proposed temporary recycling center could operate on the site provided the outdoor areas were better organized and the materials accepted at the center were limited to paper and cardboard, glass, aluminum cans, and other materials that do not require large storage areas. Staff's recommendation was also predicated on a number of approval conditions designed to address problems caused by the existing recycling operation. These conditions include regular staff inspections of the property and a six-month time limit on the duration of the operation. During the Planning Commission headng, members of the public and several Commissioners expressed concern with the poor maintenance of the existing recycling facility and the adverse effects it had on the surrounding neighborhood. Individual commissioners also cited the applicant's lack of effort in complying with the conditions and standards required for the original recycling facility. Based on these concerns, a motion to deny Major Use Permit No. 01-34 was passed by a 3-2 majority, subject to the findings: The driving and parking areas required for the proposed temporary outdoor recycling center have created a hazardous or inconvenient condition to the adjacent and surrounding area during the conduct of the past recycling center, and are not adequate; The proposed recycling center would cause a detrimental effect on the character of nearby businesses and residences because it would continue and worsen the existing aesthetic blight and hazardous conditions on the site; The proposed recycling center is detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the community because it violates the good neighbor policy that the applicant premised on the original Use Permit by causing economic blight, litter, and trash problems, as well as violations to the odginal Use Permit in several categories; and The site contains no gutters or cap system to contain potential pollutants and the site possesses improper grading 'features. 2 In addition to this action, the Planning Commission also discussed the option of revoking Use Permit No. 96-54 based on the operator's failure to comply with required Conditions of Approval and improper maintenance of the existing facility. This discussion was curtailed, however, once Planning staff advised the Commission that the revocation action would require a public hearing that had been properly noticed. The Commission subsequently deferred this action until the City Council had acted on the expected appeal. In preparing its recommendation on the appeal, Planning Department staff retains its opinion that the project site is ideally situated for the operation of a recycling center due to the surrounding industrial uses, the relatively Iow numbers of persons who travel to it, and its proximity to the residential and commercial users it serves. However, staff is convinced by the information presented at the Planning Commission hearing and the response to this decision that the applicant does not fully comprehend how important the efficient operation and maintenance of the recycling center is to its neighbors and those persons that use it regularly. This has created a difficult and unfortunate situation since the recycling center is a small local business that provides a valuable service to the community, as well as employment for approximately six persons and a small means of income for people who collect recyclable materials. Therefore, while the Planning Department now supports the Planning Commission decision to deny the temporary Use Permit, staff urges the Council to have a meaningful and comprehensive discussion on any alternatives to the closure of the business. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: The City Council could choose to support the appeal and approve the project. Should the Council take this action, Planning staff recommends that the approval include all the Conditions of Approval listed in the Staff Report for the Planning Commission (Attachment #4). These include Condition No. 5, which restricts the operation of the temporary recycling center to a six-month timeframe that would end on April 1st of next year, and staff suggests that the City Council specify which alternatives to this date and timeframe might be acceptable. Staff further recommends that the Council provide strong direction to the applicant regarding its expectations for the cleanup of the existing site and the need for full compliance with all required Conditions of Approval. 3 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING REPORT AGENDA ITEM: 7B. J DATE: 0 -~-97 DATE: January 22,1997 TO: City of Ukiah Planning Commission FROM: City of Ukiah Planning Department SUBJECT: Use Permit (#96-54) APPLICANT: Ukiah Recycle PROJECT SUMMARY: Approval o{ the proposed Use Permit would allow a recycling center to be operated from an existing 3,300 square foot building and storage yard on a 0.8 acre parcel located in the M (Manufacturing) Zoning District. The discretionary action associated with this project is quasi-judicial in nature; therefore each decision-maker must physically and personally visit the site prior to participating in the vote to approve, disapprove, or modify the proposed project. PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed site is located at 1080 Cunningham Street, at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cunningham Street and Rupe Street (Assessor Parcel No. 003-084-05). DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration prepared for the project and the APPROVAL of Use Permit No. 96-54 on the grounds that the project, as conditioned, is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and with the applicable use and development standards for the M Zoning District. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: The City of Ukiah as Lead Agency has determined that the project is not categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, and has prepared an Initial Study that identified potentially significant impacts to ground waters and visual impacts. Planning staff has, however, determined that these impacts would be reduced to levels that are less than significant if the Mitigation Measures recommended in the Initial Study are adopted, and a Negative Declaration for the project has been prepared. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Industrial ZONING DISTRICT: M (Manufacturing) 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a Use Permit to allow a recycling center to be operated on a parcel located in an industrial area of the community. The project site consists of a 0.8 acre parcel located on the west side of Cunningham Street and the north side of Rupe Street. This lot has been developed with a 3,300 square foot building that is located on the easterly half of the lot, and the remainder of the site consists of a large open storage area. A four to six-foot high chain link fence has been erected along the majority of the site's perimeters, with gated entrances along the eastern and southern sides. The existing building is fifty-five feet by sixty feet wide, and approximately twenty-four feet high. The structure contains a public entrance along its eastern elevation, which also contains large paned windows; the remaining elevations contain smaller windows and there are sliding doors (9-12 feet wide) located on the west and south elevations. The exterior of the structure is covered with cream colored stucco material, and the pitched roof consists of gray asphaltic shingles. The primary access to the site would be along the Cunningham Street frontage, which contains six parking spaces and a twelve-foot wide gated entrance located between the east elevation of the building and the street right-of-way, which is approximately 18 to 30 feet wide. The building is located in the center of the site and there are wide areas along the north, south and west sides of the side to allow internal circulation. The applicant for the project has indicated that the proposed recycling operation would be similar to the existing recycling operation run by the applicant at a smaller location in the City of Ukiah. The existing recycling center accepts only metal and scrap materials; it does not accept recyclable materials that require processing or special storage, including antifreeze, auto batteries or other potentially hazardous materials. Surrounding uses consist of a door manufacturing/installation business and a natural gas dispensing business in M (Manufacturing) zoning on the parcels to the south; vacant lands and storage buildings in M zoning on the parcels to the east; and an irrigation installation business in M zoning to west. The adjacent parcels on the north side of the project site are also located in the M zone and contain an auto repair business, a machine shop and a single family residence. STAFF ANALYSIS: Staff reviewed the project and determined that the proposed operation of the recycling center would be conducted within a structure and yard area that comply with the applicable use and development standards for the M Zoning District. These standards include those for building height, front setback lines, and yard areas. Planning staff also determined that the six parking spaces shown on project plans are an adequate number to comply with parking requirements for salvage yards and similar uses. However, the location of the parking spaces does not comply with Zoning Code requirements for aisle widths, which would require a minimum of eighteen feet behind each of the stalls for safe and efficient ingress and egress. The proposed parking stalls would require vehicles to back out into traffic on Cunningham Street, and is not 2 considered to be a safe method of egress. Therefore, approval of the project would require the relocation of all six off-street parking spaces onto an area of the lot that would provide sufficient area to comply with parking standards. Specifically, it is recommended that these spaces be installed near the southeast corner of the existing building since this location would provide access to the building and would not interfere with on-site circulation. Staff also reviewed internal circulation patterns, noting that the location of the existing structure and gates is highly conducive to vehicle drop-off of recyclable materials. Staff recommends that specific loading/unloading areas be developed and clearly marked to facilitate the efficient movement of vehicles onto and off the site. The Planning Department's analysis of this project also included the preparation of an Initial Study which determined that potentially significant impacts to ground water supplies could occur if oils stored on the site were allowed to leak into the ground. It is staff's opinion, however, that this impact would be mitigated adequately by the adoption of the measures recommended by staff; these measures have been included as Conditions 23-25 in this report. Staff's environmental analysis also identified potential visual impacts associated with the project, particularly as the result of storage of materials outside the structure. Staff has recommended that fencing and visual screening be required to mitigate these impacts, and included them as Condition No. 26 in this report. The initial study also notes that the location of the proposed parking spaces could significantly increase traffic congestion and the occurrence of accidents at the site. Staff recommended that these spaces be relocated onto a more efficient area of the site to eliminate the significant impacts, but has not included this measure as a Condition of Approval since the required compliance with Zoning Code standards would be adequate to provide mitigation of impacts. The Planning Department has also been informed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board-North Coast Region that Iow levels of groundwater contamination exist on the site, and that four monitoring wells required to monitor any movement or increase in contaminated groundwaters do exist on the site. RWQCB staff have also requested that provisions be made to protect these monitoring wells if construction or other development could impact them, and that access for monthly and quarterly monitoring activity be assured. Planning Department staff has recommended that Conditions 27 and 28 be adopted to ensure that continued monitoring of groundwater can be effectively continued. CONCLUSIONS: Planning Department staff concludes that the proposed recycling center use, as conditioned, would be consistent with the goals and policies of the Ukiah Valley General Plan and with the use and development standards for the M District. 3 Department staff further concludes that potentially significant adverse impacts could be caused by the development and operation of the project, but that these impacts would be reduced to levels that are less than significant with the adoption of the Negative Declaration prepared by staff. FINDINGS: The Planning Department's recommendation for the approval of this project is based, in part, on the following findings: The proposed recycling center use, as conditioned, conforms to all General Plan goals and policies, and with the use and development standards established in the Zoning Code for the M Zoning District that are applicable to the project site, including permitted uses, building height limits, building site areas, yard areas, setbacks and parking; The project causes no significant adverse environmental impacts that could not be reduced to levels of insignificance if the mitigation measures required in the Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and included as Conditions of Approval, are adopted; and o The granting of the proposed Use Permit will not, as conditioned, materially affect the health, safety, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or be detrimental to property or improvements on or around the site, or be harmful to the general welfare of the City since the development and operation of the recycling center would be located in an industrial area of the City and would be in conformance with all applicable Municipal Code standards for industrial development, and the use of the existing building limits the need for additional physical improvements on the site. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of Use Permit #96-47, shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid. All use, construction, or occupancy shall conform to the application and to any supporting documents submitted therewith. (SC) Any construction, and the location thereof, shall conform to any maps, sketches, or plot plans accompanying the application or submitted by applicant in support thereof. (SC) o 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 Planning Commission such standards shall be met. (SC) 4 o o 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. In addition to any particular condition which might be imposed; any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, rules, regulations, and ordinances. (SC) Applicant shall be required to obtain any approval which is required by law, regulation, or ordinance. (SC) Building permits shall be issued within two year after the effective date of the use permit, variance, or site development permit or same shall be null and void. 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 impact the project. (SC) If any use permitted shall cease for six (6) consecutive months, then the right to any variance or use permit pei'mitting such use shall terminate and such variance. or use permit shall be revocable by the granting body. (SC) If any condition, special or standard, is violated or if any required approval is not obtained, then the use permit granted shall be null and void; otherwise to continue in full force and effect indefinitely until otherwise terminated and shall run with the land. (SC) Except as otherwise specifically noted, any use permit shall be granted only for the specific purposes stated in the action approving such variance, use permit, or site development permit and shall not be construed as eliminating or modifying any building, use, or zone requirements except as to such specific purposes. (SC) All curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street paving which are broken or damaged or driveways which will not be used are to be removed and replaced as required by the City Engineer. (SC) All on-site paving shall be a minimum of 2" of asphalt concrete with a 6" aggregate base, or an approved option. (SC) On-site drainage shall be to the approval of the City Engineer. (SC) All work within the City right-of-way shall be performed by a properly licensed Contractor with a current City of Ukiah Business License. Contractor must submit copies of proper insurance coverage (Public Liability, $1,000,000; Property Damage, $1,000,000) and current Workman's Compensation Certificate. (SC) An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department is required to perform all work within the street right-of-way. (SC) 15. Stockpiled soil shall be protected from erosion, and drainage from all disturbed and stockpiled soils shall be directed on site to a disposal location approved by the City Engineer. (SC) 16. Sewer, water, and electric service shall conform to the specifications of the City Department of Public Utility. (SC) 17. Street improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street trees shall be as per the City Engineer's recommendations. (SC) 18. All signing to conform to the City of Ukiah Sign Code. (SC) 19. Any roof-mounted air conditioning, heating, and ventilation apparatus be aesthetically screened from vJew consistent with the architecture of the building on which it is located. (SC) 20. Any outdoor refuse/recycle containers be aesthetically screened from view. Garbage shall not be visible outside the enclosure. (SC) 21. Landscaping plan be approved by the Director of Planning prior to placement. (SC) 22. Landscaping be irrigated by an automated irrigation system and maintained in a neat, weed-free manner. (SC) 23. All oil storage containers shall be located on impermeable surfaces, and shall contain funneled opening or other devices designed to prevent the spilling of oils during the transfer of these oils into or from the storage container. (MM) 24. All oil storage containers shall be maintained and monitored by recycling center staff on a regular basis to ensure that the tanks do not leak. (MM) 25. The transfer of oil to or from storage containers shall be conducted only by employees of the recycling center. (MM) 26. Any future storage of potentially hazardous materials, including anti-freeze and auto batteries, on the site shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to such use to ensure that these materials are handled, stored and transferred in compliance with State and Federal guidelines. 27. The location of existing groundwater monitoring wells on the project site shall be clearly marked to ensure that none of these wells is covered by stored materials, structures or other surfacing materials. 28. Regional Water Quality Control Board staff and the City Planning Director shall be notified immediately if any groundwater monitoring wells are damaged, destroyed or otherwise rendered inoperable, and these wells shall be replaced in accordance with Control Board requirements. 29. Access to existing groundwater monitoring wells shall be permitted to Regional Water Quality Control Board staff or monitoring contractors; the frequency of access shall be determined by RWQCB staff. 30. All storage yard areas shall be fenced with chain link fencing or solid wood or masonry walls that shall be a minimum of six feet in height. Chain link fences shall be screened from public view by bushes, trees or other landscaping treatments that shall be approved by the Planning Director as part of a landscape plan for the site. (MM) 31. All conditions be completed prior to release of final inspection and issuance of use and occupancy permit. (MM) ATTACHMENTS: 2. 3. 4. Location Map Site Plan Building Elevations Negative Declaration/Initial Study for Use Permit No. 96-54 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The following personnel prepared and reviewed this Planning Report, respectively: Dave Lohse, Associate Planner ; Bob Sa~ LOCATION MAP USE PERMIT NO. 96-54: UKIAH RECYCLE 1080 Cunningham Street (Assessor Parcel Nos. 003-084-05) I I I I I I I 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 FT. SCALE: 1 inch = 500 feet AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 9d MEETING DATE: April 17, 2002 REPORT SUB.]ECT: Consideration of Ballot IVleasures for November 2002 Election, including Room Occupancy Tax The City Council requested staff to return to the Council with information regarding the transit/room occupancy tax as a possible ballot measure for the November election. Currently, within the City of Ukiah limits, there is an 8% room occupancy tax on motel rooms. However, just outside of our borders in the county area, the room occupancy tax is at 10%. A proposed ballot measure would request the voters to approve a 2% increase from 8% to 10% within the city limits. The current room occupancy tax revenue within the City of Ukiah, at 8%, is estimated to be $260,000 for fiscal year 2001-2002. If a :[0% rate had been applied, the City would have received $325,000 in revenue, a difference of $65,000. Though this is not a large increase in revenue to the City, we continue to attract new hotel developments within the City limits and expect additional income from this source in the future. Currently, two new motels were built in the last 12 months. As we have not yet received the sales tax dollars for these facilities, it is a conservative estimate that we would exact an additional $50,000 in revenue per year. ~[n addition, as the State continues to pull long term funding from the City and seeks other methods of acquiring new money from cities, any additional revenue is an important source for continuance of City programs and capital improvement projects. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss and provide direction regarding the increase of the Room Occupancy Tax from 8% to 10% in the City of Ukiah, as well as another ballot measures Council would consider for the November election. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachment: N/A City Council Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A None Approved: ,-~=.J ""¥~CI M Candace Horsley, anager 1 The City previously placed this ballot measure on the November 2000 election and, even though it was a tax for visitors versus residents, it did not pass. An important factor this year, if the Council determines to place this measure on the ballot, is a well-coordinated education program for the citizens so they fully understand the significance of this measure. Jim Hulhern of the Chamber of Commerce stated at the last Council meeting that the Chamber of Commerce would support this measure and will assist in educating the public as to its benefits. The City Attorney has opined that increasing the Room Occupancy Tax would require a majority vote, as long as the measure did not specify how the tax revenues would be used. If the tax measure specifies use of the revenues, it becomes a special tax and requires a two-thirds favorable vote to pass. These requirements are contained in Article :L3C, Section 2B, of the State Constitution that was enacted by Proposition 218. Staff is requesting Council's discussion and determination as to whether it desires to present the Room Occupancy Tax increase from 8% to :L0% on the November 2002 Ballot. If the Council desires such action, staff will return to the Council with the appropriate ballot measures, arguments, and Resolution for presenting such a ballot measure on the November election. Council may also choose to discuss other possible ballot measures and provide direction to staff. 4:Can:ASR.totballot.402 ITEM NO. 9e DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST BY THE AMERICAN RED CROSS FOR WAIVER OF RENT AND UTILITIES AT 1800 NORTH STATE STREET AND RECEIVE REPORT FROM AMERICAN RED CROSS REGARDING ASSISTANCE FROM OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES At the March 20 meeting the City Council approved the extension of the lease with the American Red Cross for 1800 North State Street (North Fire Station). Red Cross had also requested a waiver of several months' rent and utilities, which is in arrears. Red Cross representative Mark Friedman indicated that the Mendocino County Chapter of the American Red Cross will continue to operate part time with volunteers and be administered through the Lake County Chapter by Executive Director Ms. Georgina Lehne. In approving the month-to-month lease extension, the Council determined to continue the rent and utility waiver until the April 17 meeting in order to allow Red Cross to seek financial participation from other public agencies within Mendocino County. The Council requested Red Cross prepare and present a status report as to any assistance it has received and the steps which have been taken to resolve the agency's long term financial and occupancy issues. (Continued on Pa,qe 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Continue consideration of request by the Mendocino County Chapter of the American Red Cross for waiver of rent and utilities at 1800 North State Street and receipt of status report by Red Cross to the May 15 meeting. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine continuation to May 15 meeting is unacceptable and direct staff to agendize item for a date other than May 15. 2. Determine continuation of item is inappropriate and do not move to continue. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mendocino County Chapter of American Red Cross City Council Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director~ Candace Horsley, City Manager None APPROVED: L.~_ ?-~:~ !~ RedLD/ZIP1cross2.asr Candace Horsley, C~ Manager Since that meeting staff has been in contact with Ms. Lehne to provide updated financial information and contacts at the County as well as the various cities. Unfortunately, Ms. Lehne experienced a severe medical emergency resulting in major surgery and has been hospitalized and with in-home care for the past three weeks. Due to this emergency it has not been possible to contact the other agencies or prepare a presentation to the Board of Supervisors and other City Councils to seek their participation. Ms. Lehne has indicated she will be returning to work, at least part time, within the next week and this issue is the top priority. Due to the circumstances, Red Cross has requested a continuation of this item. Based upon our discussions with Mr. Friedman and Ms. Lehne, staff believes Red Cross is attempting in earnest to comply with the Council's request and has experienced an unfortunate setback in their effort. As such staff is recommending the Council continue the consideration of the request by Red Cross for a waiver of utilities and rent and receipt of their report to the May 15, 2002 meeting. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. .., 10a MEETING DATE: April 17, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT CONCERNING GANG ACT[VTI'IES--LIBBY Councilmember Libby requested an update regarding the Police Department's response to gang activities within the City of Ukiah. Police Chief Williams and his staff will be presenting an oral report to the Council regarding the coordinated efforts of local agencies in this regard. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report concerning gang activities ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Presentation by: Coordinated with: Attachment: N/A Councilmember Libby John Williams, Police Chief N/A None Approved: , ~' -c~lnd~c_~ Hotel{[y, ~ty Manager 4:Can:ASRGang.041702 300 SEMII~R¥ AVE., UKIAH, CA 95482-5400 ADMIN 707/463-6200 · PUBLIC SAFETY 463-6242/6274 · FAX # 707/463-6204 EMAIL: ukiahcty®jps net · 4/10/2002 From Councilwoman Kathy Libby My fellow councilmembers are aware "gang activity" in Ukiah is at a higher level than ever before. Several news articles have appeared recently of "gang activity" in our schools and on the streets of Ukiah. In addition to fights, stabbing, shootings and drug arrests, there has been bold criminal behavior directed toward our Police Department and families. I have great faith in our City Police Chief John Williams and the Ukiah Police Department. I have asked Chief Williams if he would update the council on the "Gang Situation". My feelings are it will be in the interest of the Council and the citizens of Ukiah to have a more in depth view of what is happening on the streets of Ukiah and the reasons for this new breed of"gang activity" in Ukiah. It would be beneficial to know steps the Police Department is taking to identify and deal with this problem and what the future holds. It would be helpful for citizens to know what to watch for, what to avoid, and advice parents may want to consider giving there children who are in the school system and often on the streets. I look forward to an informative session. Thank You. Councilwoman Kathy Libby Are Here To Serve" AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10 b DATE: April 17, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: STATUS OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO BE IMPLEMENTED BYTHE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT The City Manager has requested an update regarding projects underway or planned, to be implemented in whole or part by the Public Works Department, be provided for the Council's information and discussion. Staff will be making a verbal presentation of this subject at the regularly scheduled meeting. Public Works staff and the City Manager are in the process of revisiting and validating current project priorities. Recent State funding shortfalls have caused significant deferrals of some previously planned projects. Projects will also entail additional administrative efforts if they are converted from State funding to Federal funding. Changes in regulatory requirements, especially as they relate to environmental issues, are causing projects to take longer to implement than in the past. Resource constraints due to staffing levels, as well as increased development activity, also impact the ability to deliver projects as quickly as desired. Staff time is being dedicated to improve technology and fine tune work processes within the City of Ukiah. Staff from Community Planning and Building Services, and from Public Works and Engineering Departments are working closely together to improve project delivery, and to increase public satisfaction. Attached for the Council's information is a listing of the projects planned or pending in the Public Works Department. Further information and discussion of the projects will be presented at the Council Meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: APPROVED; Candace Horsley, City Manager Diana Steele, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Public Works Projects with Public Works/Engineering Staff Participation 2. STIP 2000 and 2002 Projects List ~ce H~rsley, City M~nager om 0 0 C '~ C~ C C ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 o ~ o o o v v v V ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ._ c m'~° ~: ~ ~~ ~ E 0 ~EE ~ o~ ~ E ~ ~ ~.~ o~o . ~ = ~= = ~~~ '- ~ ~ o .... ~ 0 0 ~ 8~~ o= o=~oo =o ~ 8~ ~ · '-- ~ ~ o ~ o · ~ ~0 '-.- -- ~E ~- o ~ o~ 8~ ~ ~o o.~88~o~ -~ 0 0 0 C 0 0 City of Ukiah 2000 STIP Local Street Rehabilitation PPNO: 4075P List of Streets September 28, 2000 Airport Road Alice Ave, Banker Barnes, South Baywood Ct. Beacon Lane Betty St. Bush St. Calvert Ct. Canyon View Ct. Carrigan Lane Cindee Clara Ave. Clay, West 'Clubhouse Cochrane Cresta Crystal Bay Donner Court Donner Lane Dora St. El Rio St. Freitas · Gardens Ave. Garrett Dr. Gobbi, East Gobbi, West Hamilton Hastings Helen Ave. Helen Ave. Henry Homewood Incline Drive Jones St. Leslie Live Oak Lorraine Low Gap Road Magnolia Main St. Main St. Marshall Hastings Observatory Helen' Betty Laurel Dora 34 Betty Grove McPeak Laurel Capp$ Ln. Orchard Orchard Highland Park Blvd Banker Wabash Capps Ln. Homewood Incline Grove El Rio Ct. Oak Mendocino Lockwood Dora Hospital state Redwood Luce Dora Capps Ln. Capps Mc Peak Perkins Maple 44. Lorraine West City Limit Pine Smith Mill Gobbi To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To ' To To To To To To To To To To To To P~e4 South end Luce Cochrane Clay End of Ct- State 55 Betty Walnut McPeak End of Ct North City Limit Orchard Railroad McPeak Live Oak 460 Cochrane 160 Cresta End of Ct. End of Ct. Homewood Observatory Oak,Manor Dr. State Mendocino Elm Oak Manor State Clara Commerce South End 855 Helen Oak Empire Empire Oak Gobbi North End 50 Lorraine Despina State Perkins Gobbi Main Marwen M~Peak Mill Court Myron St. Myszka Place Oak Manor Court Oak Manor Drive Oak St., South Oak St., South ' Orchard Park Blvd. Perkins, East Pome Drive San Jacinta Dr. Standley, West Stella Tahoe Ct. Talmage Warren Dr. Washington Ave. Washo Dr. Wiatt Dr, Willow Yosemite Dr. zephyr Cove ct. Washington Clay Mill St. 'Clara Highland Oak Manor Oak Manor School 'Mill Freitas Gobbi Clubhouse State Maya/Wiatt Helen Gibson Creek · Warren Carrigan Railroad Perkins Helen Gobbi pome Dr. Dora Oak Manor Capps Ln. To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To To 1225 Marwen Dr. Mill Mill St. Ford End End of Ct. Perkins Gobbi S. End Martene 15ark West Main Yosemite End West End South Elbow End of Ct. Airport Park Blvd. Peach Dora 365 Washo Washo Spring Washo End of Ct. City of Ukiah 2000 STIP Arterial I Collector Rehabilitation PPNO: 4075P List of Streets September 28, 2000 Church, East Gobbi, East Grove Mason Oak St., North Perkins, East Perkins, West Pine St. Smith, West Spring Standley, West Stephenson, East State Orchard Bush Smith Ruddock Hwy 101 School Grove Oak Church Barnes State To To To To To To To To To To To To Main US Hwy 101 Pine Perkins Scott East City Limit State Walnut School Clay Dora Main Page 4 List of Streets City of Ukiah 2002 STIP Local Street Rehabilitation Project Street Name CAPPS LANE GARRETT DRIVE JACKSON AVENUE MAPLE AVENUE MILL STREET (WEST) OAK STREET SIDNIE COURT SNUFFIN STREET SOUTH AVENUE ST. FRANCIS WAY WAUGH LANE Beginning Location E/SIDE HOMEWOOD W/SIDE ELM ST. LIVE OAK AVE. W/SIDE FAIRWAY E/SIDE HIGHLAND S/SIDE GOBBI ST. N/SIDE FORD ST. N. PINE ST. OBSERVATORY AVE. N/SIDE MAPLE AVE. 824 WAUGH LN. Ending Location W/SIDE BUSH ST. W/SIDE STATE EAST END W END W/SIDE MCPEAK S/SIDE FREITAS ST. END N. OAK ST. · CREEK N/SIDE LUCE END E. GOBBI ST. List of Streets City of Ukiah 2002 STIP Artedal / Collector Rehabilitation Project Street Name BUSH STREET EMPIRE DRIVE N. HIGHLAND AVENUE PINE STREET SCHOOL STREET SCHOOL STREET SCOTT STREET SPRING STREET CLAY STREET (WEST) MILL STREET (WEST) PERKINS STREET (WEST) STANDLEY STREET (WEST) Beginning Location S/SIDE LOW GAP DESPINA DR S/SIDE PERKINS ST. ARLINGTON ST. N/SIDE CLAY ST. S/SIDE SCOTT ST. PINE ST. GROVE W/SIDE MCPEAK ST. W/SIDE DORA ST. HIGHLAND DR. E/SIDE DORA ST. Ending Location N/SIDE GROVE AVE. 162 FT E/O HOMEWOOD N/SIDE CLAY ST. S/SIDE MAGNOLIA MILL ST. N/SIDE HENRY ST. STATE ST. N.SIDE WALNUT W/SIDE OAK ST. STATE ST. W/SIDE OAK ST, W/SIDE OAK ST. ITEM NO. MEETING DATE: 10c April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: APPROVAL OF MODIFICATIONS TO TAYLOR DRIVE TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT RECYCLING PROVISIONS Solid Waste Systems recently brought to the City's attention that they are having an unexpected response at the transfer station for recycled scrap metal. Though the City had charged $12.65 per cubic yard for scrap metal at the landfill, Solid Waste Systems (SWS) agreed to accept metal for free at the transfer station to encourage residential scrap metal recycling. However, the transfer station is experiencing an influx of large commercial scrap metal haulers coming from all areas of the County, including areas as far away as Fort Bragg, to deposit dump truck loads of scrap metal at the Taylor Drive site. This phenomenon is occurring due to the fact that there is no other facility within Mendocino or Lake County that accepts scrap metal for free. Since SWS had originally calculated its scrap metal volumes based on the Ukiah Valley Area, this has caused an overabundance of scrap metal which it must pay to transport and dispose of for recycling. In response, Solid Waste Systems is now requesting that it be allowed to charge for any scrap metal received at the transfer station greater than one cubic yard, the equivalent of six 33 gallon garbage cans. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve modification to the scrap metal recycling component of the transfer station contract ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine modification is inappropriate and provide direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager David Rapport, City Attorney Letter from Solid Waste Systems Modifications to the contract Approved: L~' ~'~ Candace Horsley, (~ty Manager Staff performed a survey of other facilities within and near the County and found that Laytonville, Willits, and Sonoma County Transfer Stations all charge at least $10 per cubic yard for scrap metal, even for residential customers. Solid Waste Systems is very desirous of promoting scrap metal recycling by our citizens, and is therefore requesting that it remain free for small residential loads and there only be a $7.19 per cubic yard charge for loads greater than one cubic yard. This should stop the excessive and out-of- area haulers from coming to the Taylor Drive Transfer Station to receive free scrap metal service. Staff is recommending approval of this charge for scrap metal. The City Attorney has revised the two sections of the Agreement between the City of Ukiah and Solid Waste Systems for the operation of the transfer station. Revisions consist of removing scrap metal from Section 2:L2 of the agreement, which delineates the recycling that will be accepted for free, and adding metal to Section 4.11, which states the contractor may charge and collect fees for certain recycle materials. Solid Waste Systems has calculated its actual costs for recycling of scrap metal to be $7.19 per cubic yard and therefore is not requesting the $10 per cubic yard that is currently acceptable within the County. Staff would also like to inform the Council that Solid Waste Systems was recently charging $2 for accepting electronics at the transfer station, which was their actual cost for administration of the electronics items. However, upon request by IVlendocino County Solid Waste Authority (MSWA) and City Staff, they have removed the $2 charge and are only charging the amount that MSWA requires for the handling of the electronic materials, as this is the standard rate throughout the County. Staff believes that SWS has been very flexible with other City requests for increased service to our customers and feels that the request for scrap metal fees by SWS is reasonable and acceptable. We recommend approval of the contract modifications. 4:Can~,SRscrapmetal,041702 2 Apr-12-02 09:33A Disposal Service II 707 765 9998 P.02 Solid Wastes Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 60 · Ukiah, GA 95482 Tel: (707) 462.8621 · Fax: (707) 462-0112 Candace Horsley, City Manager City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 4/11/02 This letter is a follow-up to our discussion on the telephone yesterday regarding Solid Wastes Systems cost for accepting junk metal a~ the Ukiah Valley Transfer Station, and setfin8 a rate to charge for it, We t~ke in approximately 1,548 cubic yards of junk metal monthly. It takes approxim&tely 6 load~ per week of 60 cubic yards each to get the metal to Sinuns Metal in Richmond, It t~ke, about 6 hour~ per trip from Ukiah, round trip, including unloading The market price vm'ies, but we receive approximately $2.17 per cubic yard for the junk metal. Employe~ spend ~out ten hours per week loading the metal, numaging the metal pile, and cleaning up around the pile. Resional Waler Quality Control and the LEA are going to r~luire that we put a roof over the metal rocycling area and a berm around that. This h~ be~n estimated to cost $125,000. l) Trucking per month 2) Loading/cleanup per month 3) Roof/Berm monthly pa.vment Monthly total Paid at scrap yard Plus 1.0°,4 ~ contract $10,836 $645 $2,000 $13,481 -$3.359 $10,122 SWS cost per month ,+,$1.017 $11,114 $11,134/1,548 = $7.19 per cubic yard Based on my calculations $7.19 per cubic yard would be the necessary charge at the Ukiah Vall~/Transfer Station for junk metal to recover our costs plus ten percent. If you have questions please ~ive me a call. Very Truly yours, AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY OF UKIAH AND SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. This agreement is made and entered in Ukiah, California, on ., 2002, by and between the CITY OF UKIAH ("City"), a general law municipal corporation, and SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation (" Contractor"). This agreement amends the REVISED TRANSFER STATION AGREEMENT between the parties, dated August 17, 2000 ("Contract"). Except as expressly amended by this agreement, all other terms and conditions of the Contract remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Section 2.12 of the Contract is amended to read as follows: 2.12. Drop Off Recycling. Contractor will provide and service separate bins to receive the following segregated recyclable items from the public: aluminum cans, tin cans, glass bottles and jars, newspaper, corrugated cardboard, magazines, office paper, box board, plastic containers, milk and juice cartons, foam padding, appliances, tires and scrap metals, when scrap metals are contained in loads of one (1) cubic yard or less. No charge will be made to the public for drop-off recycling of the specified recyclables, except for appliances and tires as stated herein. Contractor will accept additional recyclable items when a Viable Market is available. Contractor may cease accepting a recyclable item upon written agreement by the City that a satisfactory recycling market no longer exists. Contractor will ensure that ali recyclables received will be sold or donated to bona fide recyclers who will divert the materials from disposal. Contractor will retain all revenues from sale ofrecyclable materials. MSWMA or another entity designated by City shall have the option to provide refrigerant removal from appliances received at the Transfer Station at no cost to the Contractor. Section 4.11 of the Contract is amended to read as follows: 4. I i. Recycling Fees. Contractor may charge and collect fees approved by the City per item of appliances, tires, used oil filters, antifreeze, and scrap metals, when scrap metals are delivered in loads of greater than one (1) cubic yard, respectively, delivered to the Transfer Station, in amounts equal to Contractor's Direct Costs of transporting such materials to processing or recycling facilities and paying processing or recycling fees thereof, plus ten percent (10%) to compensate Contractor for handling such recyclables; provided, however, if three of the four current members of MSWMA executed ten (l 0)-year agreements with Contractor which obligate the agencies to direct their waste stream to the Transfer Station, the ten percent (10%) additional charge to the Recycling Fee shall not be charged during the term of such contracts. WHEREFORE, this agreement is entered on the date first written above. SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. CITY OF UKIAH By: By: Phil Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: By: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ITEM NO. MEETING DATE: lOc April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: APPROVAL OF MODIFICATIONS TO TAYLOR DRIVE TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT RECYCLING PROVISIONS Solid Waste Systems recently brought to the City's attention that they are having an unexpected response at the transfer station for recycled scrap metal. Though the City had charged $12.65 per cubic yard for scrap metal at the landfill, Solid Waste Systems (SWS) agreed to accept metal for free at the transfer station to encourage residential scrap metal recycling. However, the transfer station is experiencing an influx of large commercial scrap metal haulers coming from all areas of the County, including areas as far away as Fort Bragg, to deposit dump truck loads of scrap metal at the Taylor Drive site. This phenomenon is occurring due to the fact that there is no other facility within Mendocino or Lake County that accepts scrap metal for flee. Since SWS had originally calculated its scrap metal volumes based on the Ukiah Valley Area, this has caused an overabundance of scrap metal which it must pay to transport and dispose of for recycling. In response, Solid Waste Systems is now requesting that it be allowed to charge for any scrap metal received at the transfer station greater than one cubic yard, the equivalent of six 33 gallon garbage cans. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve modification to the scrap metal recycling component of the transfer station contract ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine modification is inappropriate and provide direction to staff. Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager David Rapport, City Attorney Letter from Solid Waste Systems Modifications to the contract Approved: Candace Horsley, ~ty Manager Staff performed a survey of other facilities within and near the County and found that Laytonville, Willits, and Sonoma County Transfer Stations all charge at least $10 per cubic yard for scrap metal, even for residential customers. Solid Waste Systems is very desirous of promoting scrap metal recycling by our citizens, and is therefore requesting that it remain free for small residential loads and there only be a $7.19 per cubic yard charge for loads greater than one cubic yard. This should stop the excessive and out-of- area haulers from coming to the Taylor Drive Transfer Station to receive free scrap metal service. Staff is recommending approval of this charge for scrap metal. The City Attorney has revised the two sections of the Agreement between the City of Ukiah and Solid Waste Systems for the operation of the transfer station. Revisions consist of removing scrap metal from Section 212 of the agreement, which delineates the recycling that will be accepted for free, and adding metal to Section 4.11, which states the contractor may charge and collect fees for certain recycle materials. Solid Waste Systems has calculated its actual costs for recycling of scrap metal to be $7.19 per cubic yard and therefore is not requesting the $10 per cubic yard that is currently acceptable within the County. Staff would also like to inform the Council that Solid Waste Systems was recently charging $2 for accepting electronics at the transfer station, which was their actual cost for administration of the electronics items. However, upon request by Mendocino County Solid Waste Authority (MSWA) and City Staff, they have removed the $2 charge and are only charging the amount that MSWA requires for the handling of the electronic materials, as this is the standard rate throughout the County. Staff believes that SWS has been very flexible with other City requests for increased service to our customers and feels that the request for scrap metal fees by SWS is reasonable and acceptable. We recommend approval of the contract modifications. 4:Can~ASRscrapmetal.041702 2 A?r-12-02 09:33A Disposal Service II 707 765 9998 P-02 Solid Wastes Systems, Inc. P.O. Box 60 · Uki~, CA 95482 Tel: (707) 462-8621 - Fax: (707) 462-0112 C~;lace Hor~ley, City Manager City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482-5400 This letter is a follow-up to our discussion on the telephone yesterday regarding Solid Wastes Systems cost for accepting junk metal at the Ukiah Valley Transfer Station, and setting a rate to charge for it. We take in approximately 1,548 cubic yards ofjunk metal monthly. It takes approximately 6 loads per week of 60 cubic yards each to get the metal to Simms Metal in Richmond. It takes about 6 hours per trip ~om Ukiah, round trip, including unloading. The market price varies, but we receive approximately $2.17 per cubic yard for the junk metal. Employees spe~xl about ten hours per week loading the metal, mamging the metal pile, nnd cleaning up around the pile. Regional Water Quality Control nmi the LEA are going to require that we put a roof over the metal recycling area and a berm around that. This has been estimated to cost $125,000. 1) Trucking per month 2) Loadinl~cleanup per month 3) Root?Berm monthly payment Monthly total Paid at scrap yar~! Plus 10% per Conlgrag't $10,836 $645 $2.000 $13,481 -$3,359 $10,122 SWS cost per month +$1.017 $11,134 $11,134/1,548 = $7.19 per cubic yard Based on my calculations $7.19 per cubic yard would be the necessary chargc at the Ulfiah Valley Transfer Station for junk metal to recover our costs plus ten percent. If you have questions please give me a call. Truly Y°ur~ AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER STATION CONTRACT BETWEEN CITY OF UKIAH AND SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. This agreement is made and entered in Ukiah, California, on ,2002, by and between the CITY OF UKIAH ("City"), a general law municipal corporation, and SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation C Contractor"). This agreement amends the REVISED TRANSFER STATION AGREEMENT between the parties, dated August 17, 2000 ("Contract"). Except as expressly amended by this agreement, all other terms and conditions of the Contract remain unchanged and in full force and effect. Section 2.12 of the Contract is amended to read as follows: 2.12. Drop Off Recycling. Contractor will provide and service separate bins to receive the following segregated recyclable items from the public: aluminum cans, tin cans, glass bottles and jars, newspaper, corrugated cardboard, magazines, office paper, box board, plastic containers, milk and juice cartons, foam padding, appliances, tires and scrap metals, when scrap metals are contained in loads of one (1) cubic yard or less. No charge will be made to the public for drop-off recycling of the specified recyclables, except for appliances and tires as stated herein. Contractor will accept additional recyclable items when a Viable Market is available. Contractor may cease accepting a recyclable item upon written agreement by the City that a satisfactory recycling market no longer exists. Contractor will ensure that all recyclables received will be sold or donated to bona fide recyclers who will divert the materials from disposal. Contractor will retain all revenues from sale of recyclable materials. MSWMA or another entity designated by City shall have the option to provide refrigerant removal from appliances received at the Transfer Station at no cost to the Contractor. Section 4.11 of the Contract is amended to read as follows: 4. I i. Recycling Fees. Contractor may charge and collect fees approved by the City per item of appliances, tires, used oil filters, antifreeze, and scrap metals, when scrap metals are delivered in loads of greater than one (1) cubic yard, respectively, delivered to the Transfer Station, in amounts equal to Contractor's Direct Costs of transporting such materials to processing or recycling facilities and paying processing or recycling fees thereof, plus ten percent (10%) to compensate Contractor for handling such recyclables; provided, however, if three of the four current members of MSWMA executed ten (10)-year agreements with Contractor which obligate the agencies to direct their waste stream to the Transfer Station, the ten percent (10%) additional charge to the Recycling Fee shall not be charged during the term of such contracts. WHEREFORE, this agreement is entered on the date first written above. SOLID WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. CITY OF UKIAH By: By: Phil Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: By: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10 d DATE: APRIL 17, 2002 REPORT SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF AMENDING RESOLUTION 94-34 ESTABLISHING THE DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMITTEE AND SOLICITING CANDIDATES TO FILL VACANCIES ON THE COMMITTEE SUMMARY: On March 3, 1993, the City Council passed and adopted Resolution 93-55 establishing a four-member Ukiah Demolition Permit Review Committee (Attachment No. 2). The Committee was established to perform research and provide recommendations to the Council concerning proposed Demolition Permits, and the feasibility of rehabilitating or relocating structures proposed for demolition. In January 1994, the Resolution was amended to add two additional members to the Committee. Both the 1993 and 1994 Resolutions contained language limiting the terms of the Committee members to two years, and apparently these terms have technically expired. This Agenda Item is intended to re-visit the composition of the Committee, amend the Resolution, and seek authorization to solicit candidates to fill the vacancies on the Committee. DISCUSSION: The Committee is currently comprised of the City Director of Community Development, City Building Official, City Public Works Director/City Engineer, a representative from the Mendocino Historical Society, the chairman of the City Design Review Committee, and a City resident. It is assumed that the terms of the Staff members of the Committee were not intended to expire after two years, but the Resolution is vague on this point. Additionally, the Resolution states that the Committee is comprised of "five" members, and then proceeds to list six. Staff is recommending new language to clarify these issues, and to adjust the composition of the Committee. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Adopt an amended Resolution clearly establishing the membership of the Ukiah Demolition Permit Review Committee; and 2) direct Staff to solicit candidates to fill the vacancies on the Committee. ALTERNATIVE ACTION: Do not adopt the Resolution and provide direction to Staff. Requested by: Planning and Community Development Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Attachments: 1. Resolution for adoption 2. Resolutions 94-34 and 93-55 APPROVED:' (~'~. _'~4y~-~(~ Candace Horsley, CityX~anager RECOMMENDED LANGUAGE MODIFICATIONS: Staff is suggesting the following amendments to Resolution 94-34: Section 2: The Committee shall consist of five (5) members who shall be appointed by the City Council as follows: a. The Director of Planning and Community Development or assigned designee b. The City Building Inspector c. The City Public Works Director/City Engineer or assigned designee d. A representative of the Mendocino County Historical Society or other group/organization involved with local history, or a local historian e. A City of Ukiah resident with expertise in architecture, building, or closely related field Section 3: The appointments of Staff do not expire, but the public members' terms expire after fours years of service. Reappointments to the Committee shall be made in accordance with Section 1200 of the Ukiah City Code. Section 5: The Committee shall elect a chairperson from among its members, may elect such other officers as it may deem appropriate, and shall meet at the Ukiah Civic Center- 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, to conduct business as needed. Section 6: The duties of the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall include: a. Research of historical, cultural, and architectural significance of the subject structure. Evaluation of the feasibility of rehabilitating or relocating the structure if it is deemed historical. Co In the event that the structure is found to have historic or architectural significance, determine if the salvaging of historic materials is feasible. do Recommendation to the City Council regarding whether any of the criteria listed in Ukiah City Code Section 3016(E) apply to the subject structure, and whether or not the Demolition Permit should be issued, issued with conditions, or denied. Staff believes that these modifications will clarify the identified issues, and therefore recommends adoption of the Resolution. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 RESOLUTION NO. 02 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 94-34 ESTABLISHING A DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Ukiah City Code prescribes that Demolition Permits for buildings in excess of 50 years old must be authorized by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires research and recommendations regarding these Demolition Permits, particularly the feasibility of rehabilitation or relocation of the structure, and salvage of archaic materials; and WHEREAS, an advisory committee will assist the City Council in its evaluation of these Demolition Permit requests; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Resolutions 93-55 and 94-34 are superceded by the adoption of this Resolution. 2. There is hereby created a Demolition Permit Review Committee. This advisory body shall report to the City Council. 3. The Committee shall consist of five (5) members who shall be appointed by the City Council as follows: a. Director of Planning and Community Development or assigned designee. b. Director of Public Works/City Engineer or assigned designee c. Building Inspector or assigned designee. d. A representative of the Mendocino County Historical Society or other group/organization involved with local history, or a local historian. e. A City of Ukiah resident with expertise in architecture, building, or closely related field. RESOLUTION NO. 02 - Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4. The appointments of Staff do not expire, but the remaining members terms expire after fours years of service. Reappointments to the Committee shall be made in accordance with Ukiah Municipal Code Section 1200. 5. The members of the Committee shall receive no compensation, except such actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties as shall be approved in advance by the City Council. 6. The Committee shall elect a chairperson from among its members, may elect such other officers as it may deem appropriate, and shall meet at the Ukiah Civic Center - 300 Seminary Ave., Ukiah, to conduct business as needed. 7. The duties of the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall include: Research of historical, cultural, and architectural significance of the subject structure. b. Evaluation of the feasibility of rehabilitating or relocating the structure if it is deemed historical. c. In the event that the structure is found to have historic or architectural significance, determine if the salvaging of historic materials is feasible. d. Recommendation to the City Council regarding whether any of the criteria listed in Ukiah City Code Section 3016(E) apply to the subject structure, and whether or not the Demolition Permit should be issued, issued with conditions, or denied. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of April 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAN: Philip Ashiku, Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 02 - Page 2 OF 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 02 - Page 3 OF 3 3 4 5 6 8 oll 12 14 15 16 19 20 21 24 26 28 RESOLUTION NO. 94-34 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 93-55 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH ESTABUSHING DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMITTEE WHEREAS, the Ukiah City Code prescribes that Demolition Permits for buildings in excess of 50 years old must be authorized by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires research and recommendations i'egarding these Demolition Permits, particularly the feasibility of rehabilitation or relocation of the structure, and salvage of archaic materials; WHEREAS, an advisory committee will assist the City Council in its evaluation of these Demolition Permit requests; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. There is hereby created a Demolition Permit Review Committee. This advisory body shall report to the City Council. 2. The Committee shall consist of five (5) members who shall be appointed by the City Council as follows: a. Director of Community Development.~ b. City Building Official. Mendocino County Historical Society representative - Marge Giuntoli - by Council Minute Order 3/17/93. d. City of Ukiah Resident - Judy Pruden. e. Director of Public Works/City Engineer. f. Chair of Design Review Committee. 3. All appointments to this Committee shall be for a term of two years. Reappointments to the Committee shall be-made in accordance with Ukiah City Code Section 1200. 4. The members.of the Committee shall receive no compensation, except such actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties as shall be approved in advance by the City Council. 5. The Committee shall elect a Chairperson from among its members, may elect such other officers as it may deem appropriate, and shall establish a regular meeting time and place, and such rules of procedure as may be necessary for the conduct of its meetings and business. 6. The duties of the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall include: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 '22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a. Research of the historical, cultural, and architectural significance of the subject structure. b. Evaluation of the feasibility of rehabilitating the structure, moving it to another location, or salvaging the archaic materials. c. Recommendation to the City Council regarding whether a Demolition Permit should be granted, granted with conditions, or denied. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of January 1994, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Mastin, Malone, Wattenburger, Shoemaker, and Mayor Schneiter. 'None. None. ABSTAIN: None. ed Schn~ A'I-I'EST:/1 . MU:MI~ESDEMO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 25 ~6 '27 RESOLUTION NO. 93-55 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UK]AH ESTABLISHING DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMi'i'rEE WHEREAS, the Ukiah City Code prescribes that Demolition Permits for buildings in excess of 50 years old must be authorized by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires research and recommendations regarding these Demolition Permits, particularly the feasibility of rehabilitation or relocation of the structure, and salvage of archaic materials; and WHEREAS, an adviso/7 committee will assist the City Council in its evaluation of these Demolition Permit requests; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. There is hereby created a Demolition permit Review Committee. This advisory body shall report to the City Council. 2. The Committee shall consist of four (4) members who shall be appointed by the City Council as follows: a. Chairman of the Planning Commission - Mr. Robert Burke. b. Building Official- Mr. Clif Shepard. c. Mendocino County Historical Society' representative - Marge Giuntoli - by Co.uncil Minute Order 3/17/9.~ d. City of Ukiah Resident - Judy Pruden. 3. All appointments to this Committee shall be for a term of two years. Reappointments to the Committee Shall be made in accordance with Ukiah City Code Section 1200. 4. The members of the Committee shall receive no compensation, except such actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties as shall be approved in advance by the City Council. 5. The Committee shall elect a Chairperson from among its members, may elect such other officers as it may deem appropriate, and shall establish a regular meeting time and place, and such rules of procedure as may be necessary for the conduct of its meetings and business. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O '21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. The duties of the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall include: a. Research of the historical, cultural, and architectural significance of the subject structure. b. Evaluation of the feasibility of rehabilitating the structure, moving it to another location, or salvaging the archaic materials. c. Recommendation to the City Council regarding whether a Demolition Permit should be granted, granted with conditions, or denied. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 1993, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Councilmembers Mastin, Malone, Shoemaker, and Mayor Schneiter Councilmember Wattenburger None ABSTAIN: None ~-ath~"M (-ay,-O~~lerk 2:MISO~ESDEMO Fred Schne~r, Mayor ITEM NO. toe DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL Of PARTICIPATION With MENDOCINO COUNTY, WILLITS, AND FORT BRAGG FOR CITY OF UKIAH'S SHARE OF COST FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES FOR CABLE FRANCHISE RENEWAL NEGOTIATIONS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $11,500 Over the past several months City staff, along with representatives of the cities of Willits, Fort Bragg and the County of Mendocino have been meeting and corresponding with Adelphia Communications in an effort to secure funds from Adelphia for consultant services to advise staff during renewal negotiations. Staff has been assisted in this effort by the consulting firm of Communications Support Group (CSG) and its principal Mr. John Risk. CSG was selected by the County of Mendocino, who has been acting as lead agency for negotiations, after a formal Request For Proposals process and a series of interviews, in which the City of Ukiah participated. As the negotiating team has been unsuccessful in securing up front funds from Adelphia, a contract, with CSG has not been completed. Mr. Risk has provided advice and direction to the negotiating team from time to time, however, Adelphia steadfastly refuses to participate in the up front funding and negotiations have been stalled around this issue. County Counsel has given the opinion that Adelphia has a reasonable legal basis to deny the request for up front funding and any legal challenge to Adelphia on this issue could result in a lengthy and costly litigation with uncertain results. The City Attorney has reviewed the County Counsel's opinion and indicated he can find no reason to disagree. (Continued on Paqe 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve participation with Mendocino County, Willits, and Fort Bragg for City of Ukiah's share of consultant services for cable franchise renewal negotiations in an amount not to exceed $11,500. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: 1. 2. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine participation requires further consideration and remand to staff with direction. 2. Determine participation is inappropriate at this time and do not move to approve. N/A County of Mendocino Larry W. DeKnoblough, Community Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager Proposal by Communications Support Group Subscriber base and contractual cost breakdown summary sheet APPROVED:, ~ i.~/,L LD/ZIP1 Candace Horsley,'"-Cit~Manager Cablefranchise.asr Excluding funds from Adelphia, staff has requested that CSG revise the level of services provided in its original proposal to reduce costs and more appropriately fit the budget of the four negotiating agencies. The proposal submitted by CSG for a total of $45,000, which is revised from the original proposal of $107,000, is provided for the Council's review as Attachment #1. The cost of the proposal is to be shared, based upon the number of subscribers in each jurisdiction, by all four public agencies. A summary of the number of subscribers in each jurisdiction, as provided by Adelphia, and each agency's related cost for the contract is provided in Attachment #2. The City of Ukiah currently has 7,496 subscribers or 25.22% of the subscriber base which equates to $11,349.05 of the total $45,000 contract. The proposed cost sharing agreement with Mendocino County has been approved by the Board of Supervisors and the respective City Councils of Willits and Fort Bragg. Regardless of funding from Adelphia, staff believes the retention of expert consultant services is essential to successful negotiations because of the complexity of the issues to be resolved relative to the telecommunications industry. Staff has no expertise in this area, and many issues and rights, which could significantly benefit our citizens, the City, and our educational system, could be unknowingly excluded or waived without expert representation and advice. In such instances valuable dollars could be lost for such items as enhanced public and government access broadcasting and potential new revenue sources from items such as data transmission and fiber optics could be unknowingly excluded from the agreement. In addition, renewal negotiations will be time intensive and require a singular focus which will be difficult for staff to accomplish. For these reasons staff is recommending approval of the City of Ukiah's participation with Mendocino County, Willits, and Fort Bragg in an amount not to exceed $11,500, for the payment of cable franchise renewal consultant services with Communications Support Group. COMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT GROUPs INC. P.O. BOX 75-0457 PETALUMA, CA 94975~0457 VOICE: {707) 763-6600 FAX: {707) 773-1175 EMAIL: jrisk~concentric.net February 20, 2002 Mr. Bruce Mordhorst Deputy County Administrator County of Mendocino 510 Low Gap Road, Room 1010 Ukiah, CA 95482 RFCi-tlVFD :~y ADMINtSIRAfION SUBJECT: Revised Request for Proposal - Mendocino Telecommunications Coordinators Group (MTCG)/Adelphia Franchise Renewal Dear Mr. Mordhorst, In response to your email, I am providing you estimates in three price ranges for services CSG and Richard Watson and Gershon (RGW) can perform related to renewing Adelphia's franchises. This letter should be considered an addendum to our previous proposal submitted to you on May 9, 2000. The three options are priced as you requested at: 1) $25,000; 2) $35,000; and 3) $45,000. I am also providing you two additional tasks to consider on an "a la carte" basis. All of our work is performed on an hourly, time-and-materials basis. OPTION 1 - $25,000.00 In general, this option provides a very limited and bare boned service. It provides the participating MTCG jurisdictions useful strategic planning exercises, limited fact-finding, a draft governing ordinance, a draft franchise agreement, and a clear set of recommendations for the jurisdictions to negotiate directly or as a group with Adelphia. Under this option, each jurisdiction would need to perform its own needs assessments and financial reviews. We will include comparative data of recent negotiations with Adelphia and/or AT&T in other CSG or Richard Watson and Gershon client cities. This proposal does not include meetings with access producers, meetings with Adelphia, or rneetings with respective elected officials related to ordinance adoptions. Specifically this task will offer the following TASK IA - PLANNING, FACT-FINDING, STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT Task lA. 1 Hold telephone conference (Meeting No. 1) with MTCG staff, Consultant and Consultant's Special Counsel to discuss project goals, project timelines, identification of resources, division of duties, reporting protocol, and relationships between components of the process. Comrnunications Support Group, Inc. Page Mr. Bruce Mordhorst Mendocino County Revised Proposal Task 1A.2 Propose up to 28 hours to conduct research and provide comparative analysis with some supporting information on the trends analysis of franchise renewals involving cities in CSG's database. This task includes phone conferences with staff, preparing request letters, analyzing data, and writing a summary of franchise deal points. Task 1A.3 Propose up to 6. hours for each jurisdiction for limited fact-finding of Adelphia Communication's compliance to franchise provisions including customer service, franchise fee payments, and rate setting. This task includes a cursory review of MTCG reports. A more detailed description of optional compliance and franchise fee auditing is offered later in this proposal. Task 1A.4 Propose up to 8 hours to outline methods for obtaining Communications related to future services and technologies. information from Adelphia Task 1A.5 Propose up to 6 hours to draft sample letters for MTCG to use in corresponding to Adelphia Communications regarding issues related renewal. Issues to discuss include scheduling, special needs of each jurisdiction in the process, notices, public hearing, and other regulatory matters. Task 1A.6 Propose up to 6 hours for Consultant to review MTCG's draft franchise,agreement and make comments and suggestions for improvements. Task 1A.7 Conduct teleconference (Meeting No. 2) with City staff, the Consultant and the Consultant's Special Counsel to review comparisons to commitments to other cities, review listing of initial deal points, identify all known issues of compliance, and draft language related to positions, general matters concerning generic public, educational, and governmental access. In summary, Option I subtasks 1A.1 through 1A.7, we will provide up to 75 hours of specialized strategic consulting services and two teleconference meetings resulting in the development of an administrative plan, time line related to MTCG's renewal, and discussion for substantive issues which may affect the drafting of language for MTCG and recommending strategies for franchise language and negotiation. Estimated fee $13,000 (Thirteen Thousand Dollars). Communications Support Group, Inc. Page 2 Mr. Bruce Mordhorst Mendocino County Revised Proposal TASK1B DRAFT MODEL ORDINANCE AND AGREEMENT Task 1 B.1 - Draft Telecommunications Requlato_ry Ordinance CSG and Richards, Watson & Gershon will jointly prepare a comprehensive telecommunications regulatory ordinance. This ordinance will address the franchising of incumbent cable systems, OVS franchises, and competitive cable providers and other video programmers to the extent permitted by federal law. It will include stringent customer service standards matters pertaining to California's "level playing field" laws. This ordinance will be submitted in a "generic model" fashion. We will not include individual ordinances specifically tailored for adoption by each jurisdiction. Estimated fee $6,500 (Sixty-five Hundred Dollars). Task 1 B.2 - Draft Franchise Aqreement CSG and Richards, Watson & Gershon will jointly prepare a single model franchise agreement for use by respective jurisdictions reflecting ordinance requirements and generic community needs. The model agreement will provide blank spaces for respective jurisdictions to insert franchise specific requirements. This proposal will include sample language used by other CSG or RWG clients in describing matters related to insurance, bonding, PEG, I-Net, drops to public buildings, etc., but will expressly exclude language specially written-to describe the actual needs of respective MTCG jurisdictions. This proposal also excludes time for telephone conferences with respective City Attorneys, City Clerks and County equivalents related to document preparation. It also exludes time or services related to negotiations associated with franchise agreements or governing ordinances. Finally, the proposal also excludes any attendance at meetings to adopt ordinances or governing ordinances. Estimated fee $5,500 (fifty-five hundred dollars). All tasks in Option 1 total $25,000.00 (Twenty-five Thousand Dollars). OPTION II - ,,$35,000.00 This option proposes everything in Option I, plus the following specially tailored services: Task 2A. 1 - One-Year Franchise Fee Review CSG proposes to provide up to 40 hours to assist staff accountants of respective jurisdictions perform an abbreviated procedures audit of Adelphia Communication's franchise fees payments for the past four quarterly payments. Task 2B.1 - Community Needs Assessment (Public Access) Provide up to 24 hours of assistance to staff of respective jurisdictions related to the assessment of cable related community and educational communications needs. We will assist staff in the preparation of survey tools and may attend one public hearing for the purpose of soliciting comments from community members, residential and business, and City officials regarding both the current and future needs concerning Adelphia Communications Support Group, Inc. Page 3 Mr. Bruce Mordhorst Mendocino County Revised Proposal Communication's franchise performance as it pertains to public, educational, and governmental access. OPTION 3 - $45,000.00 This option proposes everything in Option I and Option II plus the following services: Task 3A.1 - Participate In And Offer Expert Advice on Renewal Ne.qotiations CSG will provide up to 50 hours of direct participation and teleconference time during the franchise renewal negotiations. This includes time necessary to address questions of the respective City or County Attorney's City or County Clerks, advise on specific legal and negotiation matters as they become needed, and/or participate directly in negotiations with Adelphia negotiators. We propose an estimated allocation of 25 hours of consultant time and 25 hours of Greg Stepanicich's time. ,EXTRA OPTIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION ' Task 4.1 - Drafting of Specifically Tailored Language ~ CSG and RWG wiil provide up to sixty hours of iime' related to drafting specific 'N,, language necessary to tailor the generic ordinance and the single model {~ ~-- franchise agreement (proposed under Tasks 1B1 and 1B2 to address unique ~ ~'J',~,~,, .,,;' process and community needs associated with respective jurisdictions. This "'v~ ''~' ¢ t.? ,~J allocation could be divided in any manner between the participating jurisdictions. ~.~,~,~' Estimated fee $10,000.00 Task 4.2 - General Equipment and Policy Considerations (Optional) CSG will offer up to 40 hours provide MTCG with assistance in understanding and projecting a program for allocating resources to meet the eventual short and long-term capital improvement needs of Mendocino County's future p~ municipal access operations. Estimated fee $6,000.00 ask 4.3 - Financial Analysis .... SG proposes up to 30 hours of financial analysis to weigh franchise requirement within future revenue assumptions using return on investment (ROI) and rate setting methodology based on FCC rules in order to determine approximate costs per subscriber of the various community needs which are articulated during negotiations. Estimated fee of approximately $4,500.00. PAYMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS If any of the tasks discussed above are selected to be purchased by the County or participating MTCG cities, CSG requires a retainer fee of $5,000.00. Fees are credited against this retainer on a monthly "work-in-progress" basis. Once the retainer is exhausted, CSG bills on a monthly basis until project completion. Retainer invoice payment wilt be due within 14 days following receipt. After the formalization of a purchase order between the County or MTCG and CSG, subsequent payments will be due every 30th (thidieth) day thereafter. CSG's final invoice will be submitted upon Communications Support Group, Inc. Page 4 Mr. Bruce Mordhorst Mendocino County Revised Proposal completion of the project. CSG invoices shall be due and payable upon presentation, and shall be considered past due 30 days after submission. Balances owed to us for more than 30 days after invoice date may, at our option, accrue compound interest at 1.5% per month (18.0% per year) from the 30th day after the invoice date. Directly related project expenses (i.e., travel, lodging, rental car, meals, etc. are billed at cost plus ten percent (10%). Travel time for local staff is billed at straight time. CSG relies on City staff assistance to gather certain documents. Insufficient planning and assistance related to the work of City staff will add time and costs to the project, not factored into the estimate of expenses described above. LIFE OF PROPOSAL This letter constitutes a general proposal containing estimated costs and is not a binding contract. In order for CSG and the City to enter into a binding contract, each party must agree to specific terms and sign a contract. Acceptance of this proposal does not constitute a binding contract for services. This proposal and statement of qualifications shall remain valid, firm, and in force until 11:59 P.M. Pacific Time on March 31,2002, at which time it shall automatically be withdrawn. I am available to discuss this proposal in greater detail when you return next week. Please give me a call at your convenience. Sincerely, ( Jo~ Risk "--~P'res ident Cc: Greg Stepanicich, RWG Communications Support Group, Inc. Page 5 ILlkiah System 7,496 IWillits System 2,245 IFort Bragg System 4,910 Cit of Ulciah I 3,695 CountT/Ukiah 3,801 I Cit of Willits I 1,170 County/Willits 1,075 [City of Fort Bragg [ 2,048 [CountT/Fort Bragg I 2,862 Percent of Total 25.22% Share of Consultant $11,349.05 7.99% $3,593.61 13.98% $6,290.36 Adelph/a Mendocino 14,651 Total County 7,738 52.82% $23,766.98 $45,000.00 ITEM NO. 1of MEETING DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION CONCERNING VOTING PROCEDURES FOR C1TY COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS--COUNCILMEMBER LIBBY Councilmember Libby requested an item be placed on this agenda for discussion regarding the voting procedures for City Commissions and Boards. Councilmember Libby will submit information before the meeting for Council's discussion and possible action. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discussion and possible action regarding Commission and Board voting procedures ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachment: N/A Councilmember Libby Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A None Approved: {~ Candace Horsley, ity Manager ITEM NO. tog MEETING DATE: April 17, 2002 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF $1,000 FOR INLAND WATER AND POWER COMMISSION EDUCATIONAL VIDEO The Inland Water and Power Commission (IWPC) Board requested that each agency representative on the Board return to their respective agencies to request $1,000 per agency for the development of the IWPC educational video. This video has been discussed for the last year and a half and is now near the point of becoming a reality. Once each agency has approved its portion of funding, the Chairperson of IWPC, Janet Pauli, will approach other businesses and associations to participate in the complete funding of the video. Funds are available in the miscellaneous general government department. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve $1,000 for IWPC education video ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachment: N/A Candace Horsley, City Manager Candace Horsley, City Manager N/A None Approved: ~ ,~,_ Candace Horsley, (~ty 4:Can:ASRIWPCvideo.041702 Manager