(2) Entry or demands for entry at times outside normal business hours except as requested by the tenant or otherwise permitted by California Civil Code Section 1954; (3) Entry contrary to a tenant's reasonable request to change the date or time of entry, provided, however the tenant shall make such request 12 hours from delivery of the notice of entry if the owner has hired a third-party to perform necessary repairs or services; (4) Entry to show the residential real property to a prospective or actual purchaser (if the landlord has not notified the tenant in writing within 120 days of the oral notice that the property is for sale and the tenant was informed they may be contacted to allow for an inspection);
(5) Photographing or otherwise recording portions of residential real property that are beyond the scope of a lawful entry or inspection as stated on the notice of entry; (6) Misrepresenting the reasons for accessing residential real property as stated on the notice of entry, such as using the right of access to collect evidence against the tenant; (7) Entry that fails to provide the approximate time window for the entry or provides a time window that is unreasonably excessive in time;
(8) Failing to timely notify the tenant that entry into the residential real property for which the tenant was previously given notice has been cancelled; or (9) Entries that are excessive in number with respect to the reason stated on the notice of entry.
(d) Forced Vacation.
(1) Influence or attempt to influence a tenant to vacate residential real property through fraud, misrepresentation, intimidation or coercion, including, without limitation, threaten to report a tenant or other person known to be associated with the tenant to the United States Department of Homeland Security, or otherwise violate Civil Code Sections 1940.2 or 1940.35.
(2) Remove a housing service for the purpose of causing the tenant to vacate the rental unit. (e) Discrimination. Discriminate against a tenant: based on race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, or genetic information in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA, Government Code Sections 12900 et seq.); based on sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code Section 51, et seq.); in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA, 42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.); or otherwise in violation of applicable State or Federal law. (f) Misrepresentation.
(1) Misrepresent to a tenant that they are required to vacate a rental unit or otherwise entice a tenant to vacate a rental unit through misrepresentations or concealment of material facts; (2) Provide materially false written or verbal information regarding applicable Federal, State, County or local tenant protections, including deliberate mischaracterization of the nature or effect of a notice to quit or other eviction notice. False information includes, without limitation, violating Civil Code Section 1632, which requires certain rental agreements to be translated; or demanding that a tenant enter into a rent repayment plan to take advantage of tenant protection
laws that do not require such plans; or
(3) Take action to terminate any tenancy including service of any notice to quit or other eviction notice or bring any action to recover possession of a rental unit based upon facts which the landlord has no reasonable cause to believe to be true or upon a legal theory which is untenable under the facts known to the landlord. No landlord shall be liable under this subsection for bringing an action to recover possession unless and until the tenant has obtained a favorable termination of that action.
(g) Rent Payments.
(1) Refuse to acknowledge or accept receipt of a tenant's lawful rent payment as set forth in a rental agreement, by usual practice of the parties, in a notice to pay rent or quit, or otherwise in violation of Civil Code Section 1499;
(2) Refuse to cash or process a full payment rent check or other form of acceptable full rent payment, as provided for in the rental agreement, for over thirty (30) days after it is tendered; (3) Fail to maintain a current address for delivery of rent payments; (4) Fail to provide a receipt to a tenant for rent or other payments tendered in violation of Civil Code Section 1499 and Code of Civil Procedure Section 2075; (5) Fail to allow a tenant to pay rent and deposit of security by at least one form of payment that is neither cash nor electronic funds transfer, except where otherwise permitted by Civil Code Section 1947.3(a)(2); or
(6) This section does not apply to payments from third parties except as required under Civil Code Section 1947.3, partial rent payments, or when accepting payment would waive or could be construed to waive a breach of the rental agreement, invalidate a tenant’s 30-day notice of intent to vacate, or invalidate a three-day notice to pay or quit. For such cases to be excluded from this subsection, the landlord must notify the tenant in writing of the reason for the failure to accept, cash, or process payment.
(h) Privacy. Violate a tenant's right to privacy, such as:
(1) Requesting information regarding residence or citizenship status, protected class status, or Social Security number (except for, in the case of a Social Security number, for purposes of obtaining information for the qualifications for a tenancy), or refusing to accept equivalent alternatives to such information or documentation that does not concern immigration or citizenship status, e.g. an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN); (2) Releasing such information except as required or authorized by law or in violation of applicable State and/or Federal law; or
(3) Requesting information regarding a tenant's relationship status in violation of state or Federal law.
(i) Tenant Unions. Interfere with the right of tenants to:
(1) Organize as tenants and engage in concerted activities with other tenants for the purpose of mutual aid and protection including concerns regarding repairs and maintenance, rent amounts or rent increases, evictions, discrimination, or harassment, regardless of whether the tenants share the same landlord or management company.
(2) Convene tenant or tenant organization meetings in an appropriate space accessible to tenants under the terms of their rental agreement(s).
(3) Contact other tenants and offer such tenants literature informing them of their rights and of opportunities to involve themselves in tenant organizing/tenant union activities. (4) Distribute and post such literature on bulletin boards or other areas that the owner has designated for tenant use or free speech activities.
(5) Exercise their rights under Civil Code Section 1942.6, which, for convenience, provides as follows:
Any person entering onto residential real property, upon the invitation of an occupant, during reasonable hours or because of emergency circumstances, for the purpose of providing information regarding tenants’ rights or to participate in a lessees’ association or association of tenants or an association that advocates tenants’ rights shall not be liable in any criminal or civil action for trespass.
The Legislature finds and declares that this section is declaratory of existing law. Nothing in this section shall be construed to enlarge or diminish the rights of any person under existing law.
(6) Nothing in this section is intended to require that any owner allow tenant organizers, advocates, or representatives working with or on behalf of tenants living at the residential real property access to such residential real property (e.g. pursuant to Cedar Point Nursery v.
Hassid, 141 S.Ct. 2063 (2021) and progeny) except as expressly provided in Civil Code Section 1942.6 or to the extent such access constitutes a regulatory taking. (j) Other Acts.
(1) Communicate with a tenant in a language other than English or the tenant's primary language for the purpose of intimidating, confusing, deceiving ,annoying, seriously alarming, or harassing the tenant;
(2) Communicate with a tenant via text message after the tenant has informed the landlord in writing (i.e. not via text message) that the tenant objects to communications via text message; (3) Engage in other repeated acts or omissions of such significance as to substantially interfere with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of such rental unit and that cause, are likely to cause, or are intended to cause any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of a rental unit to vacate such rental unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such occupancy; or
(4) Secure any modification or waiver, whether oral or written, of any provision of this Chapter. Any such waiver or modification is hereby declared to be against public policy and is void and unenforceable.
19.50.030 Landlord Retaliation Prohibited.
Under Civil Code Section 1942.5, it is illegal for a landlord to retaliate against a tenant for lawfully and peaceably exercising their legal rights. No landlord may take any action increasing any rental amount, reducing any housing service, causing the tenant to involuntarily quit the premises, or discriminating against the tenant because of the tenant’s use of assertion of any rights or use of any remedy provided by this chapter.
19.50.040 Remedies and Penalties.
(a) If an owner violates the terms of this Chapter, an aggrieved tenant may institute a civil action for injunctive relief, actual, statutory, or direct money damages, and any other relief that the court deems appropriate, which shall include a civil penalty of no less than Two Thousand Dollars ($2,000), and no more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000), per violation, at the discretion of the court. If the aggrieved
tenant is older than sixty-five (65) or disabled, the court may award an additional civil penalty of up to Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) per violation, at the discretion of the court. (b) Any person who violates, aids, abets, or incites another person to violate this chapter is liable in a court action for each and every such offense for money damages of not less than three (3) times actual damages suffered by an aggrieved tenant (including damages for mental or emotional distress), or for minimum damages in the sum of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), whichever is greater, and whatever other relief the court deems appropriate. In the case of an award of damages for mental or emotional distress, said award shall only be tripled if the trier of fact finds that the defendant acted in knowing violation of or in reckless disregard of this Chapter.
(c) The court may award punitive damages in a proper case as set out in Civil Code Section 3294 and pursuant to the standards set forth in that Code Section or any successor thereto, but may not award both punitive damages and triple damages.
(d) The court shall award reasonable attorneys' fees and costs to a tenant who prevails in any such action. The court shall award reasonable attorneys' fees and costs to an owner who prevails in any such action if the court determines that the tenant's action was frivolous. (e) The remedies available under this Section shall be in addition to any other existing remedies which may be available to the residential tenant under applicable Federal, State, County, or local law.
19.50.050 Lawful Evictions.
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as to prevent an owner from lawfully evicting a tenant pursuant to applicable Federal, State, County, or local law.
19.50.060 Severability.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is for any reason held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this chapter. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase be declared invalid.
From: Michele DeMartini <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 2:12 PM
To: Concord City Council <[email protected]> Subject: Anti-Harassment Ordinance
Dear Mayor Aliano and Concord City Council...
I strongly urge you to vote NO on the proposed Anti-Harassment ordinance. We already have a robust set of existing laws that protect renters from discrimination, rent gouging, eviction, and habitability issues. All of these, including threats to violate a renter’s covenant of quiet enjoyment, are codified under State laws.
The Anti-Harassment ordinance is a one-sided proposal that only seeks to turn Concord into litigious environment for rental housing providers. This ordinance is nothing more than a legalized shakedown, aimed at making it easier for lawyers to sue rental housing providers for providing basic services such as communicating to renters electronically and updating rental units.
Protection from harassment goes both ways. Where is the protection for rental housing providers from a renter behaving badly?
The punishment outlined in this proposal does not fit the crime. Under your proposal, I could be fined a minimum of $10,000 plus legal fees if I inadvertently send a text message to a renter who's opted out -- even during an emergency. How is this fair? Don’t make providing housing for Concord renters a legal and financial liability. Please vote NO on the Anti-Harassment ordinance.
Sincerely,
Michele DeMartini
Michele DeMartini, REALTOR®
Keller Williams Realty - East Bay
201 N. Civic Drive | Suite 130 | Walnut Creek, CA 94596 925-890-1487
www.DeMartiniHomes.com
DRE# 01870859
Staff Report
Date: June 28, 2022
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Bruce Davis, PE, Interim City Engineer
Bernard Enrile, PE, CIP Manager
Prepared by: Aldrich Bautista, PE, Associate Civil Engineer [email protected]
(925) 671-3028
Subject: Considering the following for the Pothole and Base Repair #2, Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556):
1. Award a construction contract in the amount $1,588,818 to Ghilotti Brothers, Inc., and authorize Staff to utilize the available project contingency for contract change
orders that become necessary up to 20% of the contract
amount; and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
2. Approve Task Order #2 for MNS Engineers, Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $200,816 (base agreement of
$182,560 plus staff authority to spend up to a 10%
contingency of $18,256) for construction management,
inspection, and materials testing services; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney.
CEQA: Not a project/exempt per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(2), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15282(j), 15378, 15301, 15302, 15303, 15304, 15305, Public Resources Code Section 21065, and/or 21080.19.
8.d
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.d
June 28, 2022
Report in Brief
The Pothole and Base Repair #2: Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556) will provide pothole and base repairs on Bates Avenue and Port Chicago Highway. Work will include installation of video detection cameras, adjusting utilities to grade, and striping and signage. See attached location map (Attachment 1).
The project has been designed and competitively bid and is at the point of construction contract award. If award is approved by the City Council, project construction in the field is expected to begin in August 2022 and be completed by November 2022, weather permitting.
Construction management, inspection, and materials testing services are needed to ensure work during construction by the contractor is performed and completed in a manner satisfactory to the project contract documents and the City of Concord (City).
Recommended Action
1. Award a construction contract in the amount $1,588,818 to Ghilotti Brothers, Inc. for the Pothole and Base Repair #2 Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556); authorize Staff to utilize the available project contingency for contract change orders that become necessary up to 20% of the contract amount; and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
2. Approve Task Order #2 for MNS Engineers, Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $200,816 (base agreement of $182,560 plus staff authority to spend up to a 10% contingency of $18,256) for construction management, inspection, and materials testing services for Pothole and Base Repair #2: Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556), and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
Background
On June 1, 2021, City Council approved an updated Five-Year Pavement Expenditure Plan which identified this project as part of Year 1 of the Plan. The Plan specified Bates Avenue (from Nelson Ave. to Port Chicago Highway) and Port Chicago Highway (from Panoramic Drive to the city limits at Kinne Boulevard) to receive pothole and base repairs. The vicinity map for the project is shown as Attachment 1. Work will include adjustment of utilities and limited pavement striping restoration.
On June 2, 2020, City Council adopted the CIP Budget for Fiscal Years 2020-21 and 2021-22, which included funding the design of Pothole and Base Repair #2: Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556).
On September 13, 2016, the City Council approved a Citywide Project Stabilization Agreement with the Contra Costa Building & Construction Trades Council for projects
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.d
June 28, 2022
with a construction contract valued at over $750,000. This project includes this provision.
Analysis / Procurement Process
Construction Contract
The project was advertised for construction bids as required by State law and City policy. The Engineer’s Estimate for the Total Bid is $1,700,000. Bids were opened on May 19, 2022. Two (2) bids were received in the amount ranging from $1,387,499.00 to $1,588,818.00, see Attachment 2. The basis of award for this project is the Total Bid (Base Bid + Additive Bid 1 + Additive Bid 2). The lowest bid was received from QA Constructors Inc. of San Francisco, CA. A summary of the two bids is as follows:
BID SCHEDULE Engineer's
Estimate
QA Constructors
Inc.
Ghilotti Brothers,
Inc.
Base Bid $ 1,407,000 $ 1,118,205.25 $ 1,297,924.25
Additive Bid 1 $ 260,000 $ 228,868.75 $ 263,393.75
Additive Bid 2 $ 33,000 $ 40,425.00 $ 27,500.00
Total Bid $ 1,700,000 $ 1,387,499.00 $ 1,588,818.00
The apparent lowest bidder, QA Constructors Inc. submitted an incomplete bid package and was deemed a non-responsive bidder.
Ghilotti Brothers Inc. (Ghilotti) of San Rafael, CA was the second lowest bidder and submitted a responsive and responsible bid. Ghilotti has an appropriate and valid contractor’s license and has successfully completed CIP projects before for the City of Concord including Measure Q Pavement Repair Projects #5 and #6, Project Nos. 2332 and 2333.
Staff completed analysis of Ghilotti’s bid, determining that this contractor along with its subcontractors possess appropriate and valid licenses, are not on any debarred lists, and agreed to be bound by the Citywide Project Stabilization Agreement. Ghilotti is registered with the Department of Industrial Relations as required by SB 854.
The City reserved the right to include any combination of the additive bids to the project at its own discretion. Staff has determined there are sufficient funds to award the Base Bid, Additive Bid 1, and Additive Bid 2.
Construction Management
On April 12, 2022, staff contacted and issued an informal Request for Proposals (RFP) for Consultants under the Master Service Agreement (MSA) for project and construction management to provide construction management, inspection, and materials testing services for Pothole and Base Repair #2: Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556). The proposals were received and reviewed by City staff.
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.d
June 28, 2022
Based on analysis of the proposals, MNS Engineers Inc. (MNS) was selected as the most qualified firm to provide design and related services for the Pothole and Base Repair #2: Port Chicago and Bates (Project No. 2556). City Staff and MNS negotiated the scope of work and cost for the services and agreed upon $182,560 as a fair and reasonable compensation for the services needed to complete the construction phase of this project. City staff has included a 10% contingency of $18,256 bringing the total potential contact amount to $200,816 should the full contingency be necessary. As the Task Order is over $75,000, Council approval is required.
Financial Impact
The current total budget for this project is $2,520,000 and is funded by Measure V (Fund 407). There are sufficient funds to award the construction contract, provide for construction management, inspection and materials testing services, staff oversight, and an approximate construction contingency of 20 percent.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(2), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15282(j), 15378, Public Resources Code Sections 21065 and/or 21080.19, award of this contract is not subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, as it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. In the alternative, award of this contract is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 – Existing Facilities, 15302 – Replacement and Reconstruction, 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, 15304 – Minor Alterations to Land, and/or 15305 – Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitation as it involves maintenance on existing streets including pavement work, traffic signal modifications, signage, striping, and adjusting utilities to grade. No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis. The Notice of Exemption will be filed with the County Clerk’s office following the Council award of the construction contract.
Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Bid Summary
Attachment 1
Project Location Map
Pothole and Base Repair #2:
Port Chicago Highway and Bates Avenue
Project No. 2556
Attachment 2
City of Concord
Bid Sheet
PROJECT #2556 Bid Opening:
Pothole and Base Repair #2: Port Chicago
and Bates Avenue
Thursday,
May 19, 2022
2:00 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
Engineer’s Estimate: $1.7 million To be awarded:
COMPANY TOTAL BID
QA Contractors Inc.
850 S. Van Ness Ave., Ste. 35
San Francisco, CA 94110
$1,387,499.00
(Non-responsive bidder)
Ghilotti Bros., Inc.
525 Jacoby Street
San Rafael, CA 94901
$1,588,818.00
Contact: Aldrich Bautista x3028
Staff Report
Date: June 28, 2022
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Bruce Davis, PE, Interim City Engineer
Bernard Enrile, PE, CIP Manager
Prepared by: Tianjun Cao, PE, Associate Civil Engineer
[email protected]
(925) 671-3243
Subject: Considering the following:
1. Award of a Construction Contract in the amount of
$180,390 to Ray’s Electric for Traffic Safety Around Schools [Project No. 2576], and authorizing Staff to utilize the available project contingency for contract change orders up to 10% of the contract amount; and authorizing the
Mayor to execute the contract in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
2. Approving a related budget transfer of $50,000 from the School Safety Assessment Program [Project No. 2539]
(State HSIP Funds and Measure J)
CEQA: Not a project/exempt per CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 (c), 15061 (b)(2), 15061 (b)(3), 15273, 15282 (j), 15378, 15301, Public Resources Code Section 21065 and/or 21080.19.
Report in Brief
The Traffic Safety Around Schools project (Project No. 2576) proposes to construct crossing improvements at four locations around the City of Concord. The locations are as follows: Salvio Street at Date Street, Concord Boulevard at West Street, Ronald Way at Holbrook Elementary School, and East Olivera Road at Trail Crossing. See attached location map (Attachment 1). The Federal project number is HSIPL-5135(062).
8.e
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.e
June 28, 2022
The project has been designed and competitively bid; and is at the point of construction contract award. If award is approved by the City Council, project construction in the field is expected to begin in August 2022 and be completed by October 2022, weather permitting.
Recommended Action
1. Award the construction contract in the amount $180,390 to Ray’s Electric for Traffic Safety Around Schools (Project No. 2576); and authorize Staff to utilize the available project contingency for contract change orders that become necessary up to 10% of the contract amount; and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
2. Approve a related budget transfer in the amount of $50,000 from the School Safety Assessment Program (Project No. 2539) to Traffic Safety Around Schools (Project No. 2576) to provide for additional construction costs and the staff authorized 10% construction contingency.
Background
On November 2, 2020, the City of Concord (City) applied for Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding for Fiscal Years 2021-2024 for the three projects, one of which was for Project No. 2576. On May 11 and 12, 2021, Caltrans notified the City that the HSIP grant applications were approved and funds were allocated for the Preliminary Engineering Phase (Safety Analysis) for the three projects.
City Council accepted the grant funds and appropriated funding for the Preliminary Engineering (PE) phase of the project on June 22, 2021.
On April 25, 2022, Caltrans approved the authorization of the use of state funding for the construction (CON) phase of the project in the amount of $209,100. City Council appropriated the funding for the CON phase on June 7, 2022.
Procurement Process
The project was advertised for construction bids as required by State law and City policy. The Engineer’s Estimate for the Total Bid is $133,250. Bids were opened on June 2, 2022. Four bids were received in the amount ranging from $180,390 to $257,665 (Attachment 2). The basis of award for this project is the Total Bid. The lowest bid was received from Ray’s Electric (Ray’s) of Oakland, CA. A summary of the bids is as follows:
BID
SCHEDU
LE
Engineer's
Estimate
Ray’s
Electric
St. Francis
Electric
W. Bradley
Electric
Tennyson
Electric Inc.
Total Bid $ 133,250 $180,390 $192,100 $245,610 $257,665
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.e
June 28, 2022
Ray’s was the low bidder and submitted a responsive and responsible bid. Ray’s has an appropriate and valid contractor’s license and satisfactory work references.
Staff completed analysis of Ray’s bid, determining that this firm along with its subcontractors possess appropriate and valid licenses, and are not on any debarred lists. Ray’s is registered with the Department of Industrial Relations as required by SB 854.
Financial Impact
The current total budget for this project is $246,600 and is funded by state Highway Safety Improvements Program (HSIP) funds (Fund 402). There are sufficient funds to award the construction contract and provide for construction management and inspection services. However, a budget transfer in the amount of $50,000 is needed to account for staff oversight, construction management services, and the staff authorized 10% construction contingency. The budget transfer will occur from the School Safety Assessment Program, Project 2539 (Fund 475).
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 (c), 15601 (b)(2), 15061 (b)(3), 15273, 15282 (j), 15378, and Public Resources Code Section 21065 and/or 21080.19, award of this contract is not subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, as it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. In the alternative, award of this contract is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 – Existing Facilities, as it involves constructing minor concrete traffic signal equipment, and striping. No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgement and analysis. The Notice of Exemption was filed with the County Clerk’s office on June 23, 2021 (Attachment 3).
Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Bid Summary
3. Filed Notice of Exemption
Project 2576 – Traffic Safety Around Schools
Attachment 1
City of Concord
Bid Sheet
PROJECT #2576 Bid Opening:
Traffic Safety Around Schools Thursday,
June 2, 2022
2:00 p.m.
City Manager's Conference Room
Engineer’s Estimate: $133,250 To be awarded:
COMPANY TOTAL BID
Ray’s Electric
411 Pendleton Way, Suite B
Oakland, CA 94621-2115
$180,390.00
St. Francis Electric, LLC
975 Carden Street
San Leandro, CA 94577
$192,100.00
WBE
90 Hill Road
Novato, CA 94945
$245,610.00
Tennyson Electric Inc.
7275 National Drive, Ste A2
Livermore, CA 94550
$257,665.00
Contact: Tianjun Cao x3243
Attachment 2
Staff Report
Date: June 28, 2022
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Bruce Davis, PE, Interim City Engineer
Bernard Enrile, PE, CIP Manager
Prepared by: Tianjun Cao, PE, Associate Civil Engineer
[email protected]
(925) 671-3243
Subject: Considering acceptance of improvements for the Citywide Accessibility Improvements No. 8 [Project No. 2519] located at various locations on Argyll Avenue, Broadmoor Avenue,
Mayfair Avenue, Richard Avenue, Eastgate Avenue, Courtland Drive, Westgate Avenue, Kay Avenue, and Edward Avenue;
and directing the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.
Report in Brief
TNB Contractors Inc. of Antioch, CA has completed all work associated with Citywide Accessibility Improvements No. 8, Project No. 2519, and has provided the required oneyear construction warranty bond.
The project improvements included thirty-two (32) ADA compliant curb ramps, striping, and minimal paving work. The work took place on Argyll Avenue, Broadmoor Avenue, Mayfair Avenue, Richard Avenue, Eastgate Avenue, Courtland Drive, Westgate Avenue, Kay Avenue, and Edward Avenue, see Location map (Attachment 1).
Recommended Action
Accept the improvements for Citywide Accessibly Improvements No. 8, Project No. 2519, constructed by TNB Contractors Inc. of Antioch, CA; and direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion (Attachment 2).
8.f
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.f
June 28, 2022
Background
On December 14, 2021, the City Council awarded the Citywide Accessibility Improvements No. 8, Project No. 2519, construction contract to TNB Contractors Inc. of Antioch (TNB) in the amount of $296,804.50. Construction for Project No. 2519 began on February 7, 2022.
The scope of the project included constructing thirty-two (32) ADA compliant curb ramps, striping, and minimal paving work. The project is located within the Concord Estates neighborhood on Argyll Avenue, Broadmoor Avenue, Mayfair Avenue, Richard Avenue, Eastgate Avenue, Courtland Drive, Westgate Avenue, Kay Avenue, and Edward Avenue.
Construction for Project No. 2519 was completed within the budget but the contractor exceeded the allotted working days. Per the construction documents, there is a penalty for exceeding the allotted working days which is assessed at a rate of $1,900 per day, referred to as liquidated damages. For the twenty-one (21) days of liquidated damages assessed to the contractor, the amount of $39,900 was deducted from the contract total.
Analysis
TNB has completed all improvements for Citywide Accessibility Improvements No. 8, Project No. 2519, and staff has inspected the work, which is in compliance with the project plans and specifications. TNB has provided the required 10% warranty bond, which guarantees the work from material and workmanship defects for one (1) year.
Financial Impact
The construction contract was completed in the total amount of $259,112.50, which is well under the original construction amount of $296,804.50 due to liquidated damages being assessed to the contractor. There was a 10% contingency in the amount of $29,680.45 that was not used.
The project was funded by Measure V (Fund 407), Local Gas Tax Funds (Fund 260), and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds (Fund 254).
Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Notice of Completion
Attachment 1
Location Map
Citywide Accessibility Improvements No. 8 (Project 2519) Legend: Base Bid Additive Bid #1 Additive Bid #2 Additive Bid #3
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN
RECORDED MAIL TO:
City Clerk
City of Concord
1950 Parkside Drive MS/03
Concord, CA 94519
APN(s): __ _n/a
(Space Above This Line for Recorder’s Use Only)
[Exempt from recording fee per Gov. Code § 27383]
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
(Cal. Civ. Code §§ 8180-8190, 8100-8118, 9200-9208)
A. The City of Concord, a California municipal corporation, entered into a written contract with TNB Contractors Inc. (Contractor) dated December 14, 2021. The surety on said contract is held by Merchants Bonding Company, 6700 Westown Parkway, West Des Moines, IA, 50266.
B. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
(1) The name and address of the owner or reputed owner are:
City of Concord, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519-2578 (2) The name and address of the direct contractor are:
TNB Contractors Inc., 2620 E. 18th Street, Antioch, CA 94509, (3) The name and address of the construction lender, if any, are:
Not applicable
(4) A description of the site sufficient for identification, including the street address of the site, if any, follows:
The real property herein referred to is situated in the City of Concord, County of Contra Costa, State of California, and is described as follows: Argyll Avenue, Broadmoor Avenue, Eastgate Avenue, Richard Avenue, Westgate Avenue, Mayfair Avenue, Edward Avenue, Kay Avenue, and Courtland Drive. (5) The name, address, and relationship to the parties of the person giving the notice:
City of Concord, a California Municipal Corporation, 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519; person giving notice and owner.
(6) The person giving this notice is not a claimant
(7) This notice is given for (check one):
X Completion of the work of improvement as a whole.
___ Completion of a contract for a particular portion of the work of improvement. If the notice is given only of completion of a contract for a particular portion of the work of improvement as provided in California Civil Code Section 8186, provide the following information:
(a) The name and address of the direct contractor under that contract: See item B(2), above. (b) A general statement of the work provided pursuant to the contract: See item A above. (8) If signed by the owner’s successor in interest, the name and address of the successor’s transferor:
Not applicable
(9) The nature of the interest or estate of the owner: Easement (10) The date of completion: June 28, 2022
I, Bruce Davis, PE, say I am the Interim City Engineer for the City of Concord, owner of the aforesaid interest or estate in the property described in the above Notice of Completion, and as such, make this verification on behalf of City of Concord; and that I have read the above Notice of Completion and know the contents thereof and that the facts stated therein are true of my own knowledge. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on ___________________________, 20____, at
Concord, California
______________________________________
Bruce Davis, PE, Interim City Engineer (Signature)
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Joelle Fockler, MMC
City of Concord City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 2
Staff Report
Date: June 28, 2022
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Reviewed by: Kevin Marstall, PE, Director of Community Development Prepared by: Bruce Davis, PE, Interim City Engineer
[email protected]
(925) 671-3470
Subject: Considering design approval of the Galindo Creek Restoration Project and authorizing the City Manager to execute a Park Maintenance Agreement with Macerich HHF Broadway Plaza, LLC.
CEQA: Not a project/exempt per CEQA Guidelines Section
15333.
Report in Brief
As a way to mitigate impacts to San Ramon Creek in the City of Walnut Creek resulting from a development project, Macerich HHF Broadway Plaza, LLC proposes off-site mitigation in Concord via restoration of Galindo Creek in Newhall Park. The proposed restoration consists of 1,000 linear feet of stream enhancements through bioengineering bank stabilization, reconnection of the creek to its floodplain, riparian plantings, and removal of invasive vegetation. In addition, stormwater green infrastructure will be installed to treat the parking lot stormwater runoff prior to it discharging into the creek.
A maintenance agreement with the applicant is proposed to define maintenance and monitoring responsibilities after the restoration work is complete. For a period of 10 years, the applicant will maintain and perform creek monitoring activities, after which, the City will maintain the area as part of its ongoing Newhall Park maintenance program. To offset the additional ongoing maintenance costs, the applicant will make a lump sum payment to the City at the time of project completion.
8.g
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.g
June 28, 2022
Recommended Action
Approve the design of the Galindo Creek Restoration Project and authorize the City Manager to execute a Park Maintenance Agreement with Macerich HHF Broadway Plaza, LLC, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
Background
The Broadway Plaza / Macy’s expansion project in the City of Walnut Creek resulted in impacts to San Ramon Creek. After consulting with various regulatory agencies including United States Army Corps of Engineers, the State Water Resources Control Board, the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, as well as local agencies and project stakeholders, Galindo Creek within Newhall Park was identified as an appropriate location for in-lieu restoration to mitigate the impacts to San Ramon Creek.
Analysis
The project scope in Galindo Creek was identified to include creek bank stabilization, the creation of inset floodplains, boulder grade control, removal of invasive vegetation, and native riparian plantings. In addition, a bioretention area will be added to treat stormwater runoff from the parking lot, and interpretive signage will be included to inform public. The project design included hydrologic and hydraulic modeling to determine the flows anticipated in the creek and ensure that the 100-year flows were not affected.
Once construction of the project is complete, ongoing maintenance of the plantings and construction components will be required, as well as 10 years of creek monitoring to comply with the various regulatory agencies’ requirements. Due to these additional maintenance and monitoring efforts, a park maintenance agreement will be created. As described in the agreement, the applicant will be responsible for maintaining the project and monitoring the creek area for 10 years after the restoration project is complete.
After that time, the City will maintain the project area. To offset the additional maintenance scope in the project area, the applicant will compensate the city with a lump sum payment equivalent to 20 years of maintenance activities. Accounting for habitat and general maintenance, travel costs, and annual escalation, the total 20-year maintenance cost to be paid to the city was calculated to be $77,661.
Financial Impact
There will be no net financial impact due to the initial project construction. The applicant has paid permit and inspection fees related to the city’s oversight of the restoration project, including plan review, construction inspection, and permit processing. Initial maintenance and creek monitoring will be completed by the applicant for the first 10 years after completion. Maintenance for the following 20 years will be completed by the city. A lump sum compensation at the time of project completion will be paid to the city for the 20-year maintenance period. Staff reviewed the total calculated amount of
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.g
June 28, 2022
$77,661 and determined that it is a fair and reasonable compensation for the required maintenance.
Environmental Determination
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, this project is exempt under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15333 – Small Habitat Restoration Projects. The project will not exceed five acres, there will be no significant adverse impact on endangered, rare or threatened species or their habitat, the project will not disturb or remove hazardous materials and the project will not result in cumulatively considerable contributions to significant cumulative impacts.
The Notice of Exemption has been filed with the County Clerk’s office.
Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.
Attachments
1. Location Map
2. Park Maintenance Agreement
VICINITY MAP
Newhall Community Park APN 133-100-016
PROJECT
AREA
Attachment 1
PARK MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CONCORD, CALIFORNIA
AND
MACERICH HHF BROADWAY PLAZA, LLC
GALINDO CREEK IMPROVEMENTS
This Park Maintenance Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into this _____ day of ____________, 20__ (“Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF CONCORD, CALIFORNIA, a California municipal corporation (“City”) and Macerich HHF Broadway Plaza, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, (“Macerich”). City and Macerich may be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
City and Macerich enter into this Agreement on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions, and the following recitals are substantive part of this Agreement:
A. Macerich is the master developer of the Broadway Plaza Project in Walnut Creek, California (“Broadway Plaza”). In its capacity as the master developer for Broadway Plaza, Macerich obtained certain regulatory authorizations from the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the State Water Resources Control Board, the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife relating to impacts to wetland resources within the jurisdiction of the aforementioned agencies (collectively, the “Regulatory Agencies”). These authorizations, which are listed in Exhibit A hereto, are referred to hereafter collectively as the “Regulatory Authorizations.” B. Macerich is required under the Regulatory Authorizations to restore stream and riparian habitat as compensatory mitigation for impacts to San Ramon Creek as part of the development of Broadway Plaza.
C. The Regulatory Agencies have determined that Macerich can satisfy its mitigation obligations under the Regulatory Authorizations by constructing stream enhancement improvements along a portion of Galindo Creek within Newhall Community Park (the “Park”). The Park is an approximately 126-acre facility owned in fee by the City and dedicated to the public as a community park.
D. The proposed stream enhancement improvements, which are described in detail in the Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set attached hereto as Exhibit B, include bioengineering bank stabilization, reconnection of Galindo Creek to its floodplain, riparian plantings installation of a stormwater swale and the removal of invasive vegetation (collectively, the “Creek Enhancement Project”).
E. The Creek Enhancement Project will benefit the City and the greater community by enhancing park features, providing for greater public access and improving stormwater treatment. Macerich will provide these benefits at no cost to the City.
Attachment 2
F. The Parties are entering into this Agreement to authorize Macerich to complete and then maintain the Creek Enhancement Project consistent with the Regulatory Authorizations and to provide for funding to cover any City costs associated with Creek Enhancement Project improvements after such time as Macerich completes its maintenance and monitoring obligations of those improvements per the Regulatory Authorizations.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for such other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Recitals Incorporated. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are part of this Agreement for all purposes.
2. Construction of the Creek Enhancement Project.
(a) Construction Consistent with Approved Plans. Macerich agrees to perform all construction contemplated for the Creek Restoration Project (hereafter “Construction”) in conformance with the Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set and at its sole cost and expense. Macerich shall request any modifications to the Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set in writing subject to the approval of the Public Works Director in his or her reasonable discretion. In evaluating any such request for modifications to the Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set, Macerich shall demonstrate to the Public Works Director’s satisfaction that the proposed modification is consistent with the Regulatory Authorizations or is otherwise acceptable to any affected Regulatory Agency. (b) Construction Standards. Macerich shall perform all Construction in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code and in accordance with the current edition of the City Standard Specifications and City Standard Plans, both of which are on file in the City Department of Community and Economic Development, 1950 Parkside Drive MS/53, Concord CA 94619 and are incorporated herein by reference, to the extent applicable. In the event of any conflict between a design standard required by a Regulatory Authorization and the Municipal Code or the City Standard Specifications and City Standard Plans, the Regulatory Authorizations shall control. All Construction shall be completed in a good workmanlike manner in accordance with accepted construction practices and Macerich shall comply with all aspects of the City’s General Conditions attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C.
(c) Inspection and Acceptance. Construction shall be subject to inspection by the Public Works Director and the Regulatory Agencies. Macerich will notify the Public Works Director in writing upon the completion of Construction to request a final inspection.
The Public Works Director will promptly inspect the Construction upon receipt of a conforming request. Provided that the Public Works Director finds that the Construction and all associated plant materials installed by Macerich (hereafter individually a “Project
Plant” and collectively the “Project Planting”) have been completed in substantial conformance with the Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set, the Public Works Director will issue a written determination to Macerich that the Construction is complete. Alternatively, if the Public Works Director finds that the Construction is not complete, he or she will provide a written notice to Macerich describing any proposed deficiencies with a reasonable level of detail. The City will be deemed to have accepted any related improvements upon the Public Works determination that Construction is complete.
3. Maintenance of the Project Planting
(a) Macerich’s Maintenance Obligation. During the Maintenance Term (as hereinafter defined) and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Macerich shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide labor, supervision, supplies, materials, equipment, and any and all other tools and manpower necessary to maintain, repair and replace the Project Planting and the management of vegetation within the stormwater swale included as part of the Construction (the “Maintenance Services”). In performing the Maintenance Services, Macerich shall comply with the maintenance specifications set forth in the Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan attached hereto as Exhibit D. As used herein, “Maintenance Term” shall mean the period of time commencing upon the date of the Public Works Director’s written determination that Construction is complete under Section 2(c) and expiring upon the date that is ten (10) years thereafter or upon any sooner termination of this Agreement as provided herein. (b) Right of Entry. At all times during the Maintenance Term, Macerich and its employees, agents, representatives, contractors, and subcontractors shall have a nonexclusive license and right of entry for pedestrians, vehicles, machinery and equipment into, over, across, and upon the Park as is reasonably necessary for access, ingress, egress, and all activities related to the Maintenance Services. Macerich shall comply with all those General Conditions set forth in Exhibit C.
(c) Alterations. In performing the Maintenance Services, and except as otherwise subsequently agreed upon in writing by the Parties, Macerich shall not make, and shall not be obligated to make, any improvements, alterations, additions, or changes to the Project Planting, except as required by any Regulatory Agency and with approval by the Public Works Director. Any such alterations shall be subject to the review and approval of any affected Regulatory Agency as otherwise required by the Regulatory Authorizations.
(d) Periodic Review. During the Maintenance Term, upon City’s request and not more frequently than once each calendar year, Macerich’s maintenance contractor other designated representative(s) of Macerich and City’s Director of Parks & Recreation (“Parks Director”) or other designated representative(s) of City shall meet at the Park to inspect the Project Planting and review the adequacy of the Maintenance Services provided herein by Macerich.
(e) Funding for City Costs Subsequent to Maintenance Term. The Parties agree that City shall be responsible for maintaining the Project Planting as a component
of the Park after the termination of the Maintenance Term. To offset the cost of City maintenance of the Project Planting, Macerich shall remit a lump-sum payment in the amount of Seventy-Seven Thousand Six Hundred Sixty-One Dollars ($77,661.00) to City (the “Maintenance Offset Payment”) within thirty (30) days of the Public Works Director’s determination that Construction is complete under Section 2(c) of this Agreement.
4. Park Operation. The Parties acknowledge and agree that, at all times during the term of this Agreement, the Park will be and remain a public park operated, controlled, supervised, and policed (including all emergency response services) solely by City, and open to the public during the hours set by City and otherwise subject to the Municipal Code. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, nothing in this Agreement shall create, or be deemed to create, any responsibility or liability on the part of Macerich or any of its affiliates, successors or assigns, with respect to the operation, control, supervision, or policing of the Park. Nothing herein gives Macerich the right to restrict or to exclude any person or entity from the Park during the term of this Agreement. If Macerich believes that any area of the Park needs to be restricted or closed temporarily for public safety purposes to perform Construction or Maintenance Services, Macerich may, upon not less than five (5) days’ prior written notice to City (except in emergency situations), request to restrict or close such areas of the Park for a reasonable amount of time to allow the safety issues to be addressed, which shall not be unreasonably denied by the Parks Director. Macerich and its employees, agents, representatives, contractors, or subcontractors shall not store any equipment, materials, or supplies in, on, or upon the Park beyond such time reasonably necessary to perform any particular Construction work or Maintenance Services for which they are needed, and shall take appropriate measures to secure the same and prevent any public access thereto.
5. Independent Contractor. The Parties understand and acknowledge that Macerich, its agents, employees, consultants, subconsultants, experts, contractors, and subcontractors are and at all times remain wholly independent contractors as to the City.
Except for requiring compliance with the General Conditions in Exhibit C and all City laws and permits, neither the City nor any of its officers or employees shall have any control over the manner by which Macerich performs this Agreement and shall only dictate the results of the performance. Macerich shall not represent that Macerich or its agents, employees, consultants, subconsultants, experts, contractors or subcontractors are agents or employees of the City, and Macerich shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of the City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent, and shall have no authority, express or implied, to bind the City to any obligation whatsoever, unless otherwise permitted in this Agreement.
6. No Compensation or In-Lieu Credits. Macerich agrees and acknowledges that the City is entering into this Agreement for the sole purpose of accommodating Macerich’s need to implement mitigation obligations under the Regulatory Authorizations, which will in turn provide benefits to the City and its residents as otherwise described herein.
Macerich shall have no right to compensation from the City for completion of Construction or for performance of Maintenance Services nor to any in-lieu fee credits for parkland improvements.
7. Indemnification. To the extent permitted by law, Macerich shall hold harmless and indemnify and defend the City and its elective and appointive boards, commissions, offices, agents, and employees (collectively “Indemnitees”) from the liabilities defined in this Section. The obligation to indemnify shall not apply to the proportionate extent such liability is ultimately adjudicated to have arisen in whole or in part from the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. This indemnification shall survive the City’s acceptance of the improvements contemplated herein. (a) Covered Liabilities. The liabilities protected against are any liability for a claim for damages of any kind actually or allegedly suffered, incurred, or threatened because of actions defined below, and including personal injury, death, property damage, inverse condemnation, or any combination of these, and regardless of whether or not such liability, claim, or damage was unforeseeable at any time before City approved the Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set or accepted the improvements, and including the defense of any suit(s), action(s), or other proceeding(s) concerning these. (b) Actions Causing Liabilities. The actions causing liability are any act or omission (negligent or non-negligent) in connection with the matters covered by this Agreement and attributable to Macerich or its contactors, subcontractors, or any officer, agent, or employee of one (1) or more of them, any and all present and future liabilities, obligations, orders, claims, damages, fines, penalties, and expenses (including attorney’s fees and costs) arising out of or in any way connected with the Creek Enhancement Project or Macerich’s performance under this Agreement.
8. Insurance. Macerich shall, at its own expense, procure and maintain in full force at all times during the term of this Agreement the following insurance:
(a) Commercial General Liability Insurance. Macerich shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with limits of no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence or two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate limit for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. (b) Automobile Liability Coverage. Macerich shall maintain automobile liability insurance covering all vehicles used in the performance of this Agreement providing a one million dollar ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage.
(c) Compliance with State Workers’ Compensation Requirements. Macerich covenants that it will insure itself against liability for workers’ compensation pursuant to the provisions of California Labor Code Section 3700 et seq. Macerich shall, upon demand from the City (but not more than once annually), furnish proof that it is maintaining workers’ compensation insurance in accordance with the California Labor Code. The insurer shall also agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by Subdivider for City. This provision shall not apply upon written verification by Macerich that Macerich has no employees.
(d) Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
(1) Additional Insured. City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers are to be covered as an additional insured regarding liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of Macerich and operations of Macerich or premises occupied or used by Macerich. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope or protection afforded to City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. Except for workers’ compensation and professional liability insurance, the policies mentioned in this Section shall name the City as an additional insured and provide for notice of cancellation to City. Macerich shall also provide timely notice to City if Macerich receives any notice or cancellation or nonrenewal from its insurer. (2) Primary Coverage. Macerich’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers.
Any insurance, risk pooling arrangement, or self-insurance maintained by City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be in excess of Subdivider’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
(3) Reporting Provisions. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect the coverage provided to the City, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers.
(4) Verification of Coverage. Macerich shall furnish City with certificates of insurance and the endorsements effecting coverage required by this Agreement. The endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The aforementioned policies shall be issued by an insurance carrier having a rating of Best A-7 or better and certificates shall be delivered to City at the time of execution of this Agreement or before Construction commences.
9. Compliance with Laws. Macerich shall perform the Construction and Maintenance Services in conformity with all applicable laws, including without limitation, all applicable State labor laws and standards, City development standards, applicable building standards, and the Municipal Code. Macerich shall obtain, at its sole cost and expense, any encroachment permits, and other permits required by City or other governmental agencies in order to perform the Construction or the Maintenance Services.
10. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, and assigns of the Parties hereto. Macerich may not assign this Agreement unless the City consents in writing, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Macerich may assign this Agreement to a party that is also the assignee of the Regulatory Authorizations without the City’s prior consent, provided, however, that Macerich shall provide written notice of any such assignment within thirty (30) days of the assignment. The City acknowledges and agrees that Macerich is authorized to hire, and to delegate to, appropriately qualified contractors or subcontractors to perform the Maintenance Services under this Agreement.
11. Default; Remedies. If Macerich fails to perform any of the material terms, conditions, or obligations required to be performed by Macerich under this Agreement, and such failure continues uncured for a period of thirty (30) days following Macerich’s receipt of written notice from City specifying Macerich’s breach (or such longer cure period in those instances where the specified breach cannot reasonably be cured within such 30-day period, provided Macerich commences to cure the specified breach within such 30-day period and thereafter diligently pursues such cure to completion), Macerich shall be deemed to be in default under this Agreement (a “Default”). In the event of a Default, City, as its sole and exclusive remedy, may either take all reasonable steps to cure such Default and recover damages from Macerich for the direct costs and expenses incurred by City in such cure of the Default.
12. Termination.
(a) Macerich’s Limited Right to Terminate. Macerich shall have a right to terminate this Agreement by providing thirty (30) days’ written notice to City, provided that such termination occurs prior to Macerich’s commencement of Construction. (b) Expiration of the Maintenance Term. This Agreement will terminate automatically upon the expiration of the Maintenance Term, subject to the Parties agreement to extent the Agreement, each in their sole and independent discretion, as evidenced by a writing signed by the Parties.
13. Miscellaneous Provisions.
(a) Governing Law, Interpretation; Severability. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action at law or equity brought by either Party for the purpose of enforcing a right or rights provided for herein shall be held exclusively in a State court in Contra Costa County, California, and the Parties waive all provisions of law providing for a change in venue in these proceedings to any other county. Headings are for convenience only. The words “include” and “including shall be interpreted as though followed by the words “without limitation.” This Agreement shall be interpreted as though it was a joint drafting effort and no provisions shall be interpreted against a Party on the ground that said Party was solely or primarily responsible for drafting the language to be interpreted. Waiver by either Party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained in this Agreement, or any default in their performance of any obligations under this Agreement shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other breach or default of the same or any other term, covenant, condition or obligation, nor shall any waiver of any incident or breach or default constitute a waiver of same. The provisions of this Agreement shall be severable and if any phrase, clause, section, subsection, paragraph, subdivision, sentence or provision is adjusted invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, or the applicability to any Party is held invalid, this shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any clause, section, subsection, paragraph, subdivision, sentence, or provision of this Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the Construction and the Maintenance Services. No modification to this Agreement shall be
effective unless it is in writing signed by the parties and approved as to form by the City Attorney.
(b) Notices. All notices, demands, consents, requests, approvals, disapprovals, designations or other communications (all of the foregoing hereinafter referred to as “notice”) pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person, by commercial courier or by first-class certified mail, postage prepaid. Notices shall be deemed to have been properly given if (a) served personally, or (b) mailed, when deposited with the United States Postal Service within the boundaries of the continental United States for registered or certified delivery, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, or (c) sent by receipted overnight courier, postage prepaid:
To City:
City of Concord
Attn: Public Works Director
1455 Gasoline Alley
Concord, CA 94519
City of Concord
Attn: City Engineer
1950 Parkside Drive
Concord, CA 94519
To Macerich:
Macerich
Attn: James Mahrer
401 Wilshire Drive, Suite 700
Santa Monica, CA 90401
With a copy to
Perkins Coie LLP
Attn: Cecily Barclay
505 Howard Street, Suite 1000
San Francisco, CA 94105
Any Party may change its address for notices by giving written notice to the other Party in the manner set forth above.
(c) Actions by City. Where this Agreement requires or permits City to act and no officer of the City is specified, the Public Works Director or the designated representative of the Public Works Director has the authority to act on City’s behalf. (d) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but both of which shall constitute one and the
same instrument; and the Parties agree that the signatures on this Agreement, including those transmitted by electronic mail, shall be sufficient to bind the Parties.
The Parties acknowledge and accept the terms and conditions of this Agreement as evidenced by the following signatures of their duly authorized representatives. The Effective Date is the date that the final signatory executes the Agreement. It is the intent of the Parties that this Agreement shall become operative on the Effective Date.
MACERICH: CITY:
MACERICH HHF BROADWAY PLAZA,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company CITY OF CONCORD, a California municipal corporation
By: By:
Name: Garrett Newland Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Its: Senior Vice President -
Development
ATTEST:
By:
Joelle Fockler, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Susanne Meyer Brown, City Attorney
Exhibit A
(List of the Regulatory Authorizations)
1. Nation Wide Permit 27: Aquatic Habitat Restoration, PCN (US Army Corps of Engineers)
2. Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification (San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board)
3. Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (Department of Fish and Wildlife)
Exhibit B
(Galindo Creek Restoration Plan Set)
Exhibit C
(City’s General Conditions)
1. Limitations: This Agreement does not constitute a lease, deed or grant of an easement, or a fee interest by the City. The rights granted under this Agreement are limited solely to the purposes set forth herein and, except as expressly herein provided. Construction, excavation or installation of structures without specific written City approvals is not authorized.
2. Responsible Party: No party other than the named Macerich or their agent (which shall include Macerich’s affiliates, employees, consultants, contractors and subcontractors) is authorized to work under any permit.
3. Keep Permit on the Work Site: This Agreement or a copy thereof along with any required City permits shall be kept at the site of the work and must be shown to any representative of the City or any law enforcement officer on demand. WORK MAY BE SUSPENDED IF THESE MATERIALS ARE NOT AT JOB SITE.
4. Excavation: All excavation requires prior notification of such activity. Macerich must contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 811 or (800) 227-2600 to verify underground utility locations. Failure to do so will result in revocation of this permit. A copy of the USA ticket is to be kept at the job site with the permit. Contacting USA does not relieve the contractor from his responsibility to determine location and depth of buried utilities or repair of buried utilities damaged by his operation.
5. Inspection and Approval by the Department: All work shall be subject to monitoring inspection and approval by the City. WORK DONE WITHOUT INSPECTION MAY HAVE TO BE REMOVED AND BE RECONSTRUCTED AT MACERICH’s SOLE COST AND EXPENSE. Macerich shall request a final inspection and acceptance of the work.
Macerich shall not accept and release his Contractor for the work authorized or required by this permit before securing the approval of the City.
6. Notice Prior to Starting Work: Before starting work under the Agreement, Macerich shall notify the Engineering Inspection Section representative two (2) working days prior to initial start of work. When work has been interrupted for more than five (5) days, an additional two (2) working days of the notification is required before restarting work. Unless otherwise specified, all work shall be performed on weekdays and during normal working hours of the Department's representative.
7. Protection of the City's Structures or Property: Macerich shall be responsible and liable for any and all damages to City's structures or property, due directly or indirectly to Macerich's occupation and use of City lands pursuant to this permit, and shall promptly pay any just claim therefor. Macerich shall assume the defense of and indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, and employees from all claims, loss liens, damage, injury and liability of every kind, nature and description, directly or indirectly arising from Macerich 's occupation and use of City lands pursuant to this Agreement.
8. As-Built Records: Macerich shall provide City with As-Built drawings within fifteen (15) days after the work completion and before refundable deposit is released.
9. Work Hours: Hours of operation shall be 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Mondays through Fridays only.
There shall be no start-up of machines or equipment before 7:30 a.m., nor shall there be any cleaning or servicing of machines or equipment past 6 p.m., Mondays through Fridays.
There shall be no noise generating activity between 5:30 p.m. and 7:30 a.m. each day and on Saturdays and Sundays. Exceptions to these restrictions may be granted by the City Engineer for one of the following reasons:
a) Emergency work.
b) Work during inclement weather.
10. Provisions for Pedestrians: Where facilities exist, a minimum sidewalk and bike path width of four feet (4') shall be maintained at all times for safe passage through the work
area. At no time shall pedestrians be diverted onto a portion of the street used for vehicular traffic. At locations where adjacent alternate walkways cannot be provided, appropriate signs and barricades shall be installed at the limits of construction and in advance of the closure at the nearest crosswalk or intersection to divert pedestrians across the street.
11. Protection of the Public: Adequate provisions shall be made for the protection of the public. Warning signs, lights and safety devices and other measures required for the public safety, shall be utilized and Macerich shall comply with any reasonable requests of the City Engineer related to public safety and appropriate precautions. Nothing in the Agreement is intended, as to third parties, to impose on Macerich any duty, standard of care, greater than or different than the duty or standard of care imposed by law.
12. Erosion and Sediment Control: Macerich shall comply with the requirements and best management practices as required by the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the City’s Stormwater (NPDES) Permit. This includes protection of all catch basins and drainage facilities in the vicinity of construction, maintenance of existing flow lines and curb drainage.
13. Clean Up: Macerich shall, at all times, keep City's lands in good and slightly condition, so far as the same may be affected by Macerich's operation hereunder. Upon completion of the work, all brush, timber, scraps, material, etc. shall be entirely removed and the City’s property shall be left in as presentable a condition as existed before work started.
14. Cost of Work: Unless otherwise stated on the Agreement, all costs incurred for work shall be borne by the Macerich, and Macerich hereby waives all claims for indemnification or contribution from the City for such work.
15. Hazardous Materials: Macerich, at its sole cost and expense, shall be responsible for proper containment, handling, and disposal of any hazardous material found and/or released by Macerich 's operation, even if due to unforeseen conditions. Macerich shall notify the City and the County Department of Public Health immediately upon discovery of any suspected hazardous material and shall undertake necessary protective work to safeguard public health and welfare.
16. Trenching Footage: Maximum length of trench shall be limited to 200 feet. Up to 500 feet of lane closure to set up traffic control devices will be allowed. Additional trenching will be allowed only after the previous trench area is properly backfilled and paved.
17. Trench Plates: All trench plates proposed to be in place longer than 24 hours shall be reviewed and approved prior to placement. Trench plates shall be tack-welded to prevent movement and shall be recessed to match the existing roadway surface, as required by the Inspector. If rain is forecast, plates shall have non-skid surface.
18. Additional Requirements:
a. No storage of equipment or construction material shall be permitted except on those areas authorized in writing by the City Engineer. b. If the subject project conflicts with other City work in the area, the City's contractor shall have the right to the site in case of a conflict. c. Effective dust and sediment control measures approved by the City Engineer shall be used 24 hours a day. Parking areas and pavement shall be swept clear of dirt and debris at the end of each working day.
- END DOCUMENT -
Exhibit D
(Habitat Mitigation and Monitoring Plan)
© 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS N
SCALE: 1 " = 150'
0 150
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
Path:L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\DWG\60p\C-1.0 Cover.dwg
COVER SHEET
C-1.0
SCALE: AS INDICATED
GALINDO CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONCORD, CALIFORNIA
9ICINIT< 0AP
NOT TO SCALE
SITE PLAN
LOCATION DESCRIPTION
THE PROPERT< IS LOCATED AT NEWHALL CO008NIT< PARK IN CONCORD, CALIFORNIA
SHEET INDEX
C-1.0 COVER
C-1.1 SITE PREPARATION PLAN AND NOTES
C-2.1 GRADING PLAN
C-2.2 GRADING PLAN
C-2.3 GRADING DETAILS
C-2.4 GRADING DETAILS
C-3.0 DETAILS
C-4.0 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN
L-1.1 PLANTING DETAILS, LEGENDS, AND NOTES
L-2.1 PLANTING PLAN
L-2.2 PLANTING PLAN
PROPERT< %O8NDAR< NOT TO SCALE
DESIGNED FOR
0ACERICH
N TAT80 %L9D
PHOENI;, A=
CONTACT
GARRETT NEWLAND
LEAD CONS8LTANT
WRA, INC
G E FRANCISCO %L9D
SAN RAFAEL, CA
CONTACT
%RIAN %ARTELL
%ARTELL#WRACACO0
SITE 1: BANK STABILIZATION, SOIL LIFTS,
RIPARIAN PLANTING
SITE 2: BANK STABILIZATION, INSET
FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN
PLANTING
SITE 3: BIOENGINEERING
AT OUTFALL
SITE 4: BANK STABILIZATION, INSET
FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN PLANTING
SITE 5: RIPARIAN PLANTING
AND BURIED BOULDER
GRADE CONTROL
SITE 6: RIPARIAN INVASIVE SPECIES
REMOVAL, RIPARIAN PLANTING
SITE 7: BANK STABILIZATION, INSET
FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN INVASIVE
SPECIES REMOVAL, RIPARIAN PLANTING
SITE 8: RIPARIAN PLANTING
SPOIL MOUND
SITE 9: RIPARIAN PLANTING
TURTLE CREEK ROAD STAGING AND
STOCKPILE AREA
INTERPETIVE AREA,
BIOSWALE
AYERS ROAD
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
THIS PROJECT WILL PROVIDE 1,000 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM ENHANCMENT ALONG
GALINDO CREEK THROUGH BIOENGINEERING BANK STABILIZATION,
RECONNECTION OF THE CREEK TO ITS FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN PLANTINGS, AND REMOVAL OF INVASIVE VEGETATION. IT WILL BENEFIT THE PARK WITH IMPROVED
PUBLIC ACCESS, TREATMENT OF STORMWATER RUNOFF, AND INTERPRETIVE AMENITIES.
REGULATORY CONTEXT
PROJECT GOALS AND THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED UNDER THE GUIDANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING REGULATORY AGENCIES:
· US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
· US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
· ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
· CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
· CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
AS SUCH THE PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND
RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT SENSITIVE HABITAT TYPES AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES.
THE PROJECT WILL BE PERFORMED WITH PERMITS AND/OR CONSULTATIONS FROM THE FOLLOWING AGENCIES:
· US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
· US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
· CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
· CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
· THE CITY OF CONCORD IS THE LEAD AGENCY AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE PROJECT.
CHARACTERIZATION OF THE PROJECT
1. BANK STABILIZATION - CHANNEL BANKS IDENTIFIED AS FAILING OR UNSTABLE WILL BE GRADED TO A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 2:1 (H:V) AND PROTECTED BY VEGETATED SOIL LIFTS. A MIXTURE OF COARSE ALLUVIUM (GRAVEL TO SMALL BOULDER SIZED MATERIAL) WILL BE PLACED AT THE TOES OF THE BANK SLOPES.
2. INSET FLOODPLAINS - FLOOPLAIN SURFACES WILL BE LOWERED IN CERTAIN
AREAS TO ALLOW FOR RECONNECTION OF THE CREEK TO ITS
FLOODPLAIN AND PROVIDE A LOCATION FOR RIPARIAN PLANTINGS. THESE FEATURES WILL BE GRADED AT A 2% SLOPE TOWARD THE CHANNEL TO PREVENT STRANDING OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS.
3. BIOSWALE DEMONSTRATION SITE - STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM A
PARKING LOT NEAR THE NEWHALL PARKWAY ENTRANCE WILL BE
COLLECTED AND ROUTED INTO A SWALE PLANTED WITH NATIVE GRASSES
AND LINED WITH SAND AND GRAVEL TO ALLOW FOR POLLUTANTS TO BE
FILTERED AND SETTLE OUT OF SUSPENSION BEFORE FLOWING INTO GALINDO CREEK.
4. BURIED BOULDER GRADE CONTROL - MIGRATION OF A HEADCUT IN
GALINDO CREEK HAS BEEN IMPEDED BY THE PRESENCE OF DENSE TREE ROOTS IN THE CHANNEL BED. A STEP FEATURE COMPOSED OF COARSE ALLUVIUM WILL BE TRENCHED INTO THE CREEK BED 150 FEET UPSTREAM
OF THE HEADCUT AND ROOT MASS TO REDUCE LIKELIHOOD OF FUTURE CHANNEL INCISION AND UNDERMINING OF CHANNEL BANKS.
EARTHWORK QUANTITIES
THE PROJECT INVOLVES THE EXCAVATION AND RE-USE OF APPROXIMATELY 700 CU.
YDS. OF TOPSOIL INSIDE THE LIMIT OF GRADE THAT WILL BE STOCKPILED WHILE THE SITE IS BEING GRADED. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF SOIL EXCAVATED WILL BALANCE ON-SITE.
· CUT = 700 CU. YDS.
· FILL = 700 CU. YDS.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
THE PROJECT IS SCHEDULED TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING THE 2022 SUMMER CONSTRUCTION SEASON (MAY 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 15TH). CONTOUR INTERVAL AND DETAILED GRADING THE PROJECT INVOLVES DETAILED GRADING. AS A RESULT, THE CONTOUR INTERVAL FOR THE GRADING PLANS IS 1'.
UTILITIES
THERE ARE KNOWN UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL AND WATER LINES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY. THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY. THE CONTRACTOR WILL CONTACT A UTILITY COMPANY TO MARK
UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND/OR CONFIRM THAT THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.
FEMA FLOODPLAIN NOTES
· THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A FEMA DESIGNATED FLOODWAY. · NO NET FILL WILL BE PLACED WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN AT THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL THAT IS GENERATED WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN WILL EITHER BE MOVED AND PERMANENTLY
PLACED OUTSIDE OF THIS BOUNDARY OR GRADED SO AS TO NOT AFFECT FLOOD RISK.
· WORK WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN WILL NOT INCREASE RISK OF FLOODING.
ACS
BSS
Exhibit B to Attachment 2
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
Path:L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\DWG\60p\C-1.0 Cover.dwg
SITE PREPARATION
PLAN AND NOTES
C-1.1
SITE PREPARATION NOTES
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STORE SALVAGED TOPSOIL WITHIN THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING ALL OF THE WETLANDS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS AND INDICATED IN THE REGULATORY PERMITS. THESE AREAS ARE OFF LIMITS FROM ANY DISTURBANCE.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT THE NUMBER AND EXTENT OF INTERNAL HAUL ROADS AND STOCKPILES WITHIN THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION ON SITE.
4. FOUR FOOT HIGH ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING SHALL BE PLACED ALONG THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE IN LOCATIONS WHERE THE WORK AREA IS WITHIN 10' OF (E) SEASONAL WETLANDS AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN. REFER TO EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR LOCATIONS WHERE SILT FENCE WILL MARK LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE. IN ALL OTHER AREAS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE AND HAUL RODS WITH 60" METAL T-POSTS WITH ORANGE FLAGGING SPACED EVERY 50 FEET. DO NOT INSTALL T-POSTS WITH FLAGGING IN LOCATIONS WITH SILT FENCE OR ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING TREE PROTECTION MEASURES FOR ALL TREES TO REMAIN WITHIN 15 FEET OF LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY OUT CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT, HAUL ROUTES, STAGING AREAS, CONSTRUCTION FENCE, AND STAKES BASED UPON THE DRAWINGS. STAKED AND FENCED OFF LOCATIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE THE CONTRACTOR MOBILIZES HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE FENCING AND STAKES THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION WORK.
8. NO VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL BE PERMITTED IN AREAS OF FINISHED GRADING.
9. SEE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR DETAILED INFORMATION ON FENCING AND BOUNDARY MARKINGS.
STAGING AREA AND HAUL ROUTES PLAN
1 SCALE: AS SHOWN
SCALE: 1 " = 200 '
0 200
GENERAL NOTES
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL LAYOUTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT USA (UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT) AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF WORK.
3. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS CONTAINED HEREIN AND THE SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED.
4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING A COPY OF THE APPROVED GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS AND ALL APPLICABLE REGULATORY PERMITS ON SITE AT ALL TIMES.
5. ALL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE, STAGING, AND DISPENSING OF FUEL, OIL, COOLANT, OR OTHER SUCH ACTIVITIES SHALL OCCUR WITHIN THE DESIGNATED STAGING AREA ON THE PLANS. IN ADDITION, THESE ACTIVITIES SHALL OCCUR GREATER THAN 100 FEET FROM EXISTING WETLANDS, CREEKS, AND SWALES.
CONTRACTOR EQUIPMENT SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS PRIOR TO OPERATION AND REPAIRED AS NECESSARY. ALL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SHALL BE STORED OVERNIGHT WITHIN THE STAGING AREA.
SEE PROJECT SWPPP FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
6. ANY PROJECT-RELATED SPILLS OR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SHALL BE REPORTED TO APPROPRIATE ENTITIES
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE MARIN COUNTY, USFWS, CDFW, AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
CONTROL BOARD (RWQCB) AND SHALL BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY AND CONTAMINATED SOILS REMOVED FROM DISPOSAL AREAS.
DEMOBILIZATION NOTES
1. AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, TEMPORARY FILL AND CONSTRUCTION
DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED TO PRE-PROJECT CONDITIONS.
2. EXCAVATED SOIL WILL BE RELOCATED TO THE SOIL DISPOSAL AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. DO NOT REMOVE FLAGS MARKING THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.
4. ALL T-POSTS AND ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE THE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND RESTORE THE
STAGING AREAS AND HAUL ROADS TO EXISTING CONDITIONS BY PERFORMING THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM ACTIONS:
a. DECONSOLIDATE THE AREA BY DISCING OR RIPPING TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 8"; b. RESEED WITH THE UPLAND SEED MIX AT THE SEEDING RATES THAT ARE INDICATED IN THE EROSION CONTROL AND SEED PLAN;
c. INSTALL NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL BMP'S
5. UPON STABILIZATION OF SITE WITH ESTABLISHED VEGETATION AND WITH PERMISSION OF THE
COUNTY INSPECTOR OR QSP, REMOVE SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AND STABILIZE THOSE AREAS DISTURBED BY THIS PROCESS.
AYERS ROAD
TURTLE CREEK ROAD
N
ABBREVIATIONS
CDFW CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
(E) EXISTING
FEMA FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY
FT FEET
LOG LIMIT OF GRADE
LOD LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
NTS NOT TO SCALE
RWQCB REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SCA STREAM CONSERVATION AREA
SF SILT FENCE
SSF WIRE BACKED SILT FENCE
SW STRAW WATTLE FIBER ROLL
SWPPP STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
SWR SEASONAL WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT
SWRS SEASONAL WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT SWALE
TYP TYPICAL
USFWS US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
TOPOGRAPHICAL DATA
1. HORIZONTAL COORDINATE SYSTEM: NAD83 STATE PLANE CALIFORNIA ZONE 3, EPOCH 1991.35
2. VERTICAL CONTROL SYSTEM: NAVD 88
3. TOPOGRAPHIC DATA SOURCE: USGS NATIONAL ELEVATION DATABASE AUGMENTED WITH TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 23 JULY 2019 USING RTK-GPS USING COASTAL NETWORK. FOR CONTROL, USE CENTER OF MANHOLE N:2172779.889, E:6136285.966, Z:255.004.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE A LICENSED SURVEYOR TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL ON SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM THAT THE EXISTING GRADES COMPLY WITH THE ESTABLISHED
VERTICAL CONTROL AND REPORT ANY MATERIAL DISCREPANCIES TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK.
DATA TABLE
STAGING
AREA
NEWHALL PKWY
PROJECT LIMITS
THE PROJECT HAS SPECIFIC WORK BOUNDARIES WITHIN THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY. THESE WERE
CREATED TO LIMIT PROJECT DISTURBANCES AND PROTECT EXISTING SENSITIVE WETLAND AND UPLAND HABITATS. THESE BOUNDARIES INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
· LIMIT OF GRADE - DEFINES THE BOUNDARY OF GRADING OPERATIONS INCLUDING EXCAVATION AND FILL PLACEMENT.
· LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE - DEFINES THE BOUNDARY OF PROJECT DISTURBANCES INCLUDING ACCESS, STAGING, SOIL STOCKPILE, AND HAUL ROUTES. THE LIMIT OF
DISTURBANCE WILL BE MARKED WITH ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING, SILT FENCING OR BRIGHTLY COLORED FLAGGING. THE FENCING AND FLAGGING WILL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
ACS
BSS
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
Path:L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\DWG\60p\C-1.0 Cover.dwg
PROJECT NOTES
C-1.2
EROSION CONTROL AND REVEGETATION NARRATIVE
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)
IF REQUIRED, A STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) WILL BE PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT BY A QUALIFIED STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION DEVELOPER (QSD).
THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT, MAINTAIN, MONITOR, AND COMPLY WITH REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SWPPP.
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE/COMPLY WITH THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN FOR THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT ORDER 2009-0009-DWQ.
TARGET HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES
THE GOAL OF THE PROJECT IS TO CREATE SEVERAL UNIQUE HABITAT TYPES, WHICH HAVE CHARACTERISTICALLY DIFFERENT VEGETATION AND INFLUENCE THE GOALS OF REVEGETATION AND THE APPLICATION AND APPLICABILITY OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR EROSION CONTROL. THIS INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING:
1. SEASONAL WETLANDS
A. SHALLOW BASINS WITH PERENNIAL WETLAND VEGETATION AND SOME AREAS WITH BARE SOIL DUE TO EXTENDED INUNDATION.
B. LIMITED INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES
2. SEASONAL WETLAND SWALES
A. SHALLOW SWALES WITH PERENNIAL UPLAND GRASSES AND WETLAND SPECIES.
B. LIMITED INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES
3. UPLAND AREAS
A. PERENNIAL UPLAND NATIVE GRASSES
REVEGETATION APPROACH
THE PROJECT WILL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING PRESCRIPTIONS TO REESTABLISH APPROPRIATE VEGETATION COMMUNITIES WITHIN EACH OF THE TARGET HABITAT TYPES.
1. SEASONAL WETLANDS
A. APPLY 6" OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IN THESE AREAS
B. DRILL SEED THE SEASONAL WETLAND BASINS WITH THE SEASONAL WETLAND SEED MIX.
2. SEASONAL WETLAND SWALES
A. APPLY 6" OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IN THESE AREAS
B. DRILL SEED THE SWALES WITH THE SEASONAL WETLAND SEED MIX.
C. DRILL ADJACENT 3:1 SLOPES IDENTIFIED ON PLANS WITH SEASONAL WETLAND SEED MIX.
3. UPLAND AREAS
A. APPLY 6" OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IN THESE AREAS.
B. DRILL SEED THE SOIL DISPOSAL AREAS AND STAGING/STOCKPILE LOCATIONS WITH UPLAND SEED MIX.
APPLICATION OF EROSION CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
5. SILT FENCE - USE SILT FENCE TO PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS THAT ARE DOWNSLOPE OF GRADED AREAS.
6. FIBER ROLLS
· USE FIBER ROLLS TO REDUCE THE VELOCITY OF WATER WITHIN SWALES. · USE FIBER ROLLS TO PROTECT WETLANDS THAT ARE DOWNSLOPE OF ADJACENT GRADED AREAS.
3. FIBER FABRIC - USE FIBER FABRIC TO REDUCE SHEER STRESS WITHIN SWALES THAT CONVEY THE LARGER VOLUME OF SURFACE RUNOFF.
4. GRAVEL BAG BERMS - USE GRAVEL BAG BERMS TO REDUCE THE VELOCITY OF WATER AND FILTER OUT SEDIMENT FROM SHEET FLOWS OVER THE FILTER FABRIC.
(E) STORMWATER
CULVERT (15" DIAM.)
DEMOLISH EXISTING CONCRETE
AND REPLACE WITH SOIL LIFTS
WITH ROCK TOE
SOIL LIFTS WITH ROCK TOE, TYP
SITE 1
SITE 2
SITE 3
SITE 4
(E) PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE (PIP)
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
SOIL LIFTS WITH ROCK TOE, TYP
SECTION C
(SEE SHEET C-2.4)
(SEE SHEET C-2.3) SECTION B
(SEE SHEET C-2.3) SECTION A
B'
A'
GALINDO CREEK
C'
(252)
(250)
(255)
(255)
(260)
(255)
(254)
(253)
(251)
(250)
(250)
(251)
(252)
(253)
(254)
(257)
(256)
(255)
(254)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257) (258)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
252
251
250
251
252
253
254
253
252
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
17+00
18+00
19+00
20+00
21+00
251
251
252
253
256
(257)
(256)
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
255
254
252
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(250)
(249)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(251)
(252)
(253)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257)
(258)
(259)
1+62
0+00
1+00
1+17
0+00
1+00
1+23
0+00
1+00
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
© 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS © 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS E
GRADING LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
PROPERTY LINE
(E) ROAD
(E) STREAM
(E) CONTOUR (1 FT)
PROPOSED CONTOUR (1 FT)
LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
LIMIT OF GRADE
STAGING AREA
FLOW
(E) ABOVE GROUND UTILITY LINE
BANKFULL CHANNEL STREAM BOUNDARY
FEMA 100-YR FLOOD BOUNDARY
BIO FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION SITE
100
(100)
N
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
0 20
GRADING PLAN
C-2.1
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2
ACS
BSS
PARKING
LOT
BURIED BOULDER
GRADE CONTROL
INTERPRETIVE PANEL,
PATH, AND BENCH
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
SITE 7
SPOIL MATERIAL
(E) 6 FT DIAM
CMP (N=3), (PIP)
BIO SWALE
DEMONSTRATION,
SEE SHEET C-3.0
SITE 5
SITE 6, SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
SECTION D (SEE SHEET C-2.4)
D'
SITE 8 & SITE 9, SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS
(245)
(250)
(250)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(255)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(246)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(244)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
251
250
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
12+00
(245)
(244)
(243)
(242)
(242)
(243)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
0+00
1+00
2+00
2+47
E
E E E
© 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS
STRIPE TO ELIMINATE ONE PARKING SPACE,
REMOVE WOOD EDGE AND GAURDRAIL
SECTION FOR ACCESS TO INTERPRETIVE PANEL
SMALL DECOMPOSED GRANITE AREA
REFRESH STRIPES AND
SLURRY SEAL PARKING LOT
STAGING AND STOCKPILE
AREA. ENCLOSE WITH 8'
CHAINLINK FENCE
REMOVE GUARDRAIL FOR
ACCESS TO STAGING AND
STOCKPILE AREA
RESTORE GUARDRAIL
AND LAYDOWN AREA PER
PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS
DEPARTMENT DIRECTION
E
GRADING LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
PROPERTY LINE
(E) ROAD
(E) STREAM
(E) CONTOUR (1 FT)
PROPOSED CONTOUR (1 FT)
LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
LIMIT OF GRADE
STAGING AREA
FLOW
(E) ABOVE GROUND UTILITY LINE
BANKFULL CHANNEL STREAM BOUNDARY
FEMA 100-YR FLOOD BOUNDARY
BIO FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION SITE
100
(100)
N
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
0 20
GRADING PLAN
C-2.2
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
ACS
BSS
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING TREE
Q100 WSEL
Q10 WSEL
QBF WSEL 2H:1V ELEVATION
STATION (FT)
CROSS SECTION A-A'
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
270
272
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
270
272
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1+75 1+88
STA:0+66
ELEV:254.4
STA:0+84
ELEV:252.4
STA:0+88
ELEV:251.3
STA:0+93
ELEV:251.2
STA:1+00
ELEV:255.0
STA:1+04
ELEV:255.1
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING TREE
Q100 WSEL
Q10 WSEL
QBF WSEL
2.5H:1V ELEVATION
STATION (FT)
CROSS SECTION B-B'
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
270
272
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
268
270
272
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+38
STA:0+49
ELEV:250.8
STA:0+35
ELEV:251.0
STA:0+30
ELEV:253.0
GRADING DETAILS
C-2.3
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
SITE 2 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 2
SITE 1 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 1
ACS
BSS
EXISTING
TREE
Q100 WSEL
Q10 WSEL
QBF WSEL
2.5H:1V ELEVATION
STATION (FT)
CROSS SECTION C-C'
246
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
246
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+38
STA:0+68
ELEV:249.0
STA:0+49
ELEV:249.5
STA:0+41
ELEV:252.7
BIO FILTRATION
SWALE
EXISTING TREES
SPOIL MOUND (GRADED TO
NOT AFFECT 100-YR FLOOD)
Q100 WSEL
Q10
WSEL
QBF WSEL
2.5H:1V
3H:1V
3H:1V
CROSS SECTION D-D'
238
240
242
244
246
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
238
240
242
244
246
248
250
252
254
256
258
260
262
264
266
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1+75 2+00 2+25 2+50 2+62 STA:1+56
ELEV:241.5
STA:1+30
ELEV:241.0
STA:1+70
ELEV:246.5
STA:1+74
ELEV:246.8
STA:2+13
ELEV:251.5
STA:2+18
ELEV:250.0
STA:1+82
ELEV:249.6
FLOW BOB BOB BOB BOB BOB BOB TOB TOB TOB TOB TOB TOB
A A'
700# COIR FIBER MATTING
W/ FLOODPLAIN SEED MIX
BOTTOM OF BANK
TOP OF BANK
18"-30" BOULDERS
2"-6"
GRAVEL/COBBLE MIX
18"-30" BOULDERS
INSTALL TOP OF BOULDERS AT
CHANNEL INVERT ELEVATION
6" AVERAGE
DEPTH
700# COIR FIBER MATTING
W/ FLOODPLAIN SEED MIX
BOTTOM OF BANK
TOP OF BANK
CHANNEL INVERT
GRADING DETAILS
C-2.4
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
SITE 4 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 3
SITE 7 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 4
ACS
BSS
PLAN VIEW - BURIED BOULDER GRADE CONTROL 5 NOT TO SCALE SECTION A-A' - BURIED BOULDER GRADE CONTROL 6 NOT TO SCALE
1'-9"
4.0' MIN
FINISHED GROUND
(CHANNEL BOTTOM)
EROSION CONTRON BLANKET
12" HIGH x 4' DEEP MIN. LIFTS
WITH 10" COBBLE MIX
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
12"HIGH x 4' DEEP MIN. LIFTS
WITH APPROVED NATIVE SOIL
6" APPROVED TOPSOIL
6" STAPLES @ 2' O.C.
THROUGHOUT BLANKET
6' MIN
50% ARROYO WILLOW (SALIX LASIOLEPIS)
50% POLISHED WILLOW (SALIX LAEVIGATA)
24" O.C., TYP
2H:1V SLOPE, USE 1.5H:1V TO AVOID TREES
15' - 6"
2" X 10" UNTREATED
REDWOOD TIMBER
12"
MIN
3"
5"
4"
17' - 6"
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
UNDISTURBED/COMPACTED
NATIVE SOIL
12"
18"
12"
UNDISTURBED/COMPACTED
NATIVE SOIL
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
3'-0"
4" PERFORATED PVC PIPE
CLASS 11 PERMANENT
DRAINAGE LAYER
SOIL MIX WITH MIN LONG TERM
INFILTRATION RATE OF 5"/HOUR
6" RIPRAP OUTFALL
2" X 10" UNTREATED
REDWOOD TIMBER
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
LEVEL SPREADER SECTION 2 SCALE: 1" = 1'
SOIL LIFT TYPICAL DETAIL 1 SCALE: 1" = 2' SCALE: 1 " = 2' 0 2
DETAILS
C-3.0
SCALE: 1 " = 1'
0 1
ACS
BSS
LID-1 BIOSWALE OUTFALL 3 SCALE: 1" = 1' SCALE: 1 " = 1' 0 1
(245)
(250)
(255)
(249)
(248)
(249)
(250)
9+00
12+00
E
E E E E
(249)
(250)
(248)
(247)
PARKING
LOT
INTERPRETIVE
PANEL, PATH,
AND BENCH
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
BANKFULL CHANNEL
DMA-1,
DRAINAGE AREA:
16419 SF
CREATE LEVEL
SPREADER WEIR AT
ELEVATION. 249.5
ENLARGE EXISTING GAPS IN
TELEPHONE POLE PARKING
LOT EDGE TO 1'
FILL GAPS IN TELEPHONE POLE
PARKING LOT EDGE WITH
EXPANDABLE SPRAY FOAM
(246)
(245)
LID-1, BIO SWALE
DEMONSTRATION 812 SF,
SEE DETAIL 2 THIS SHEET
3'X3' OUTFALL PAD @
ELEVATION 247.0, 6"
RIPRAP, 12" DEPTH
4" PIPE UNDERDRAIN
STORMWATER LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
PROPERTY LINE
(E) ROAD
(E) CONTOUR (1 FT)
LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE
LIMIT OF GRADE
FEMA 100-YR FLOOD BOUNDARY
BIO FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION SITE
LEVEL SPREADER WEIR
(100)
BIO SWALE UNDISTURBED SOIL
18" DEPTH SOIL MIX WITH MINIMUM LONG-TERM
INFILTRATION OF 5"/HOUR
TELEPHONE POLE PARKING LOT EDGE
PARKING LOT ASPHALT
12" MIN. DEPTH CLASS II PERM
DRAINAGE LAYER SEE UNDERDRAIN NOTES
3:1 3:1
12"
6" MIN
NOTES:
1. UNDERDRAIN SHALL BE A 4” DIAMETER, PVC SDR
35 PERFORATED PIPE INSTALLED NEAR THE TOP OF
THE AGGREGATE LAYER WITH HOLES FACING
DOWN.
2. PROVIDE CAPPED, THREADED PVC CLEANOUT FOR
UNDERDRAIN, 4" MIN. DIA. WITH SWEEP BEND.
3. SWEEP PARKING LOT REGULARLY TO PREVENT
ACCUMULATION OF LITTER AND DEBRIS. COLLECT
DEBRIS FROM PRESSURE WASHING TO PREVENT
ENTRY INTO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. COLLECT
WASHWATER CONTAINING ANY CLEANING
AGENT OR DEGREASER AND DISCHARGE TO THE
SANITARY SEWER NOT TO A STORM DRAIN.
4. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO
BIOSWALE PLANTINGS UNTIL THEY REACH
MATURITY.
OVERFLOW CONNECTS TO STABILIZED OUTFALL. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR LOCATION
OVERFLOW
STRUCTURE
18" MIN
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
0 20
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
DAG
BSS
BIO SWALE TYPICAL SECTION 2 SCALE: 1" = 1' SCALE: 1 " = 1' 0 1 C-4.0
STORMWATER
CONTROL PLAN
STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN 1 SCALE: 1" = 20'
16419 SF
16419 SF
.40 acres
PLANTING NOTES
GENERAL
1 SOIL AMENDMENTS ANDOR FERTILI=ER TA%LETS SHALL %E USED AS NEEDED TO ACHIEVE ADE4UATE SOIL NUTRIENT LEVELS IN PLANTING AREAS 2 FOLIAGE PROTECTION CAGES SHALL %E INSTALLED AS RE4UIRED TO PROTECT PLANTINGS FROM WILDLIFE %ROWSING
UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTING AREAS
1 PLANT INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR %ETWEEN OCTO%ER 15TH AND DECEM%ER 1ST OR AS APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE THE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL %E OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO PLANTING 2 THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A TYPICAL LAYOUT OF THE UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTS WITHIN FOR APPROVAL %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT THE UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTINGS ARE INSTALLED IN THE APPROPRIATE ELEVATION RANGES
FLOODPLAIN PLANTING AREAS
1 CONTAINER PLANT INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR %ETWEEN OCTO%ER 15TH AND DECEM%ER 1ST OR AS APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE THE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL %E OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO PLANTING 2 FLOODPLAIN PLANTINGS SHALL %E INSTALLED IN THE AREAS SHOWN IN THE PLANS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE OR MARK THE OUTER LIMITS OF THE PLANTING AREAS FOR APPROVAL %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A TYPICAL LAYOUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN PLANTS FOR APPROVAL %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION
WILLOW POLE CUTTINGS
A WILLOW POLE CUTTING INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR %ETWEEN DECEM%ER 1ST AND DECEM%ER 1ST OR AS APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE
% WILLOW POLE CUTTINGS WILL %E HARVESTED ONSITE IN AREAS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE
%IOSWALE PLANTING AREA
1 PLANT INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR %ETWEEN OCTO%ER 15TH AND DECEM%ER 1ST OR AS APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE THE SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL %E OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO PLANTING 2 %IOSWALE PLANTINGS SHALL %E INSTALLED IN THE AREA SHOWN IN THE PLANS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE OR MARK THE OUTER LIMITS OF THE PLANTING AREA FOR APPROVAL %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A TYPICAL LAYOUT OF THE %IOSWALE PLANTS FOR APPROVAL %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION
IRRIGATION NOTES
1 A TEMPORARY DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL %E USED FOR THE UPPER RIPARIAN AND FLOODPLAIN PLANTING AREAS WILLOW POLE CUTTINGS SHALL NOT %E IRRIGATED
2 A TEMPORARY SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL %E USED FOR THE %IOSWALE AREA THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS SHALL %E INSTALLED PRIOR TO PLANT INSTALLATION UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE THE IRRIGATION SCHEDULES WILL %E DETERMINED %ASED ON LOCAL RAINFALL AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA THE INTENT OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS IS TO PROVIDE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF WATER TO SUSTAIN GOOD PLANT HEALTH 5 A DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL %E INSTALLED AND OPERATED ACCORDING TO THE FINAL DESIGN PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS IRRIGATION WILL %E TAPERED OFF OVER TIME AND TURNED OFF COMPLETELY AFTER YEAR , %UT THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL NOT %E REMOVED COMPLETELY UNTIL THE END OF THE MONITORING PERIOD AFTER VEGETATION SUCCESS CRITERIA HAS %EEN ACHIEVED THE IRRIGATION PERIOD MAY %E E;TENDED TO SUPPORT REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS INSTALLED AFTER YEAR 2, AT THE DISCRETION OF THE MONITORS
REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS
1 REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS WILL %E INSTALLED AS NEEDED THROUGH YEAR IN ORDER TO MEET AT LEAST 0 SURVIVAL
SEEDING NOTES
1 SEED SHALL %E SUPPLIED ON THE %ASIS OF PURE LIVE SEED PLS
2 SEEDING AREAS SHALL %E MARKED PRIOR TO SEED APPLICATION AND APPROVED %Y THE OWNER·S REPRESENTATIVE SOIL WILL %E PREPARED FOR SEED INSTALLATION %Y HAND RAKING OR DISKING SEED APPLICATION METHODS SHALL %E AS FOLLOWS
A THE UPPER RIPARIAN SEED MI;ES SHALL %E APPLIED WITH A DRILL SEEDER ANDOR %E MANUALLY %ROADCASTED DRILL SEEDING SHALL NOT OCCUR ON
1 SLOPES OR STEEPER
% THE FLOODPLAIN SEED MI; SHALL %E MANUALLY %ROADCASTED
SITE PREPARATION NOTES
1 SITE PREPARATION, INCLUDING WEED CONTROL, WILL %E RE4UIRED WITHIN SEEDING AND PLANTING AREAS WHERE NO GRADING WILL OCCUR PRIOR TO SEEDING OR PLANTING, WEEDS WILL %E REMOVED %Y MECHANICAL CUTTING OF ANNUAL GRASSES AND OTHER HER%ACEOUS PLANTS
HAND PULLING OF
SEEDLINGS AND SAPLINGS WHERE FEASI%LE
AND SPECIFIC HER%ICIDE APPLICATION FOR TARGET WEEDS
2 ENGLISH IVY
HEDERA HELIX
AND TE;AS PRIVET
LIGUSTUM JAPONICUM
TE;ANUM
ARE THE DOMINANT WEEDS WITHIN THE WEED REMOVAL AREA SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS FOLLOWING WEED REMOVAL, THIS AREA SHALL %E SEEDED WITH THE UPPER RIPARIAN SEED MI; THE OWNER
S REPRESENTATIVE WILL IDENTIFY AND FLAG ANY NATURALLY RECRUITING NATIVE OAK SEEDLINGS OR OTHER DESIRA%LE E;ISTING NATIVE PLANTS AT THE SITE TO %E AVOIDED DURING WEED CONTROL ACTIVITIES POLE CUTTINGS SEE
WILLOW CUTTING
SPECIFICATIONS CUTTINGS
TO %E A MINIMUM OF
TALL PLANT CUTTINGS SUCH
THAT THE CUTTING E;TENDS
A MINIMUM OF %ELOW
THE FINISH GRADE
1 NOT TO SCALE
POLE CUTTING DETAIL
SECTION
SECTION
SET PLANT AT GRADE
SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANT PIT
MULCH CREATE FOUR
INCH HIGH %ERM AROUND
PLANTING HOLE TO DETAIN WATER
2; WIDTH OF ROOT%ALL
TREE SHRU% PLANTING DETAIL 2 NOT TO SCALE
%ACKFILL
PLAN
SECTION
MULCH
NOTE
INSTALL TREE STRAPS
SECURELY AT LOWEST POINT
NECESSARY TO HOLD TREE UPRIGHT
INSTALL STAKES SUCH THAT HEIGHT OF STAKES ARE
%ELOW CROWN OF TREE
2 DIA ;
LODGE POLE
PINE STAKES
CORDED RU%%ER TREE TIE
SEE PLAN VIEW
SET PLANT 2 A%OVE GRADE
CREATE FOUR
INCH HIGH %ERM AROUND
PLANTING HOLE TO DETAIN WATER
SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANT PIT
%ACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONS
2; WIDTH OF ROOT%ALL
TREE PLANTING DETAIL WITH TREE STAKES NOT TO SCALE
PLANTING DETAILS,
LEGENDS AND NOTES
L-1.1
PROJECT #20102
DRAWN %Y
CHECKED %Y
ORIGINAL DRAWING SI=E
2 ;
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
DDWH IVVXHV AQG RHYLVLRQV NR
SKHHW
02221
DRAFT 0 SET
001
DRAFT 0 SET
01
21 DRAFT UPDATE 0 SET
110121 DRAFT UPDATE 0 SET
01022 PERMIT SET
21
G EDVW FUDQFLVFR %OYG
SDQ RDIDHO, CA
01 15
5 PKRQH
LQIR#ZUDFDFRP
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
IM
%S, %%
(255)
(257)
(256)
(255)
(254)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257) (258)
254 253252
18+00
19+00
20+00
251
251
252
253
256
(257) (256)
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
255
254
252
(255)
(257)
(256)
(255)
(254)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257) (258)
254 253252
18+00
19+00
20+00
251
251
252
253
256
(257) (256)
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
255
254
252
UPPER RIP PLANT - 1
UPPER RIP SEED - 1
LEGEND
PROPOSED CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
UPPER RIPARIAN SEEDING AREA
UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTING AREA
BIOSWALE SEEDING AND PLANTING AREA
FLOODPLAIN SEEDING AND PLANTING AREA
5 5
PROPOSED LIMIT OF GRADE
WEED REMOVAL AREA
EXISTING STREAM
EXISTING TREE CANOPY
(252)
(250)
(255)
(254)
(253)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
252
251
250
251
252
253
12+00
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(250)
(249)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(251)
(252)
(253)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257)
(258)
(259)
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
(252)
(250)
(255)
(254)
(253)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
252
251
250
251
252
253
12+00
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(250)
(249)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(251)
(252)
(253)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257)
(258)
(259)
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
FLOODPLAIN PLANT - 1
FLOODPLAIN PLANT - 2
FLOODPLAIN SEED - 1
FLOODPLAIN SEED - 2
UPPER RIP SEED - 2
HARVEST WILLOW POLES
FROM EXISTING WILLOWS
UPPER RIP SEED - 3
UPPER RIP PLANT - 2
UPPER RIP PLANT - 3
GALINDO CREEK UPPER RIP SEED - 4
(E) PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (PIP)
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2
N
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
0 20
PLANTING PLAN
L-2.1
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
PLANTING PLAN - SITE 1
1" = 20' 3
PLANTING PLAN - SITES 2, 4, AND 5 2 1" = 20'
IM
BS, BB
(245)
(250)
(250)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(255)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(246)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(244)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
251
250
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
(245)
(244)
(243)
(242)
(242)
(243)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(255)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(246)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(244)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
251
250
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
(245)
(244)
(243)
(242)
(242)
(243)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
UPPER RIP SEED - 5
UPPER RIP PLANT - 4
UPPER RIP PLANT - 3
UPPER RIP SEED - 6
FLOODPLAIN PLANT - 3
FLOODPLAIN SEED - 3
WEED REMOVAL AREA
UPPER RIP SEED - 5
BIOSWALE SEED - 1
BIOSWALE PLANT - 1
NEWHALL PARKWAY
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2
2+00
3+00
UPPER RIP PLANT - 5
LEGEND
PROPOSED CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
UPPER RIPARIAN SEEDING AREA
UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTING AREA
BIOSWALE SEEDING AND PLANTING AREA
FLOODPLAIN SEEDING AND PLANTING AREA
5 5
PROPOSED LIMIT OF GRADE
WEED REMOVAL AREA
EXISTING STREAM
EXISTING TREE CANOPY
N
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
0 20
PLANTING PLAN
L-2.2
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
Sheet
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET
03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET
04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature Renewal Date Date
Lic. No. 6050
August 31, 2022
R
LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Brian
el
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N I A
Bart
PLANTING PLAN - SITE 9 1 1" = 20'PLANTING PLAN - SITES 5, 6, 7, AND BIOSWALE 2 1" = 20' IM
BS, BB
RESTORATION AND MONITORING PLAN
GALINDO CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
CONCORD,CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,CALIFORNIA
Prepared for: Prepared by:
Macerich Northwestern Associates
11411 North Tatum Boulevard
Phoenix, AZ 85028
Attn: Garrett Newland
[email protected]
WRA, Inc.
2169-G East Francisco Boulevard
San Rafael, CA 94901
Attn: Jemma Williams
[email protected]
WRA #23010-2
AUGUST 2021
Exhibit D to Attachment 2
This page intentionally left blank
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Project Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Ownership and Responsible Parties ................................................................................................... 1
2.0 RESTORATION PLAN .....................................................................................................................1
2.1 Pre-Project Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 1
2.2 Proposed Restoration of Riparian Functions ...................................................................................... 2
2.2.1 Increase Channel Geomorphic Stability ....................................................................................... 3
2.2.2 Reduce Abundance of Invasive Weeds ........................................................................................ 3
2.2.3 Establish Native Plant Cover ........................................................................................................ 3
2.2.4 Extend/Enhance Riparian Canopy ................................................................................................ 3
3.0 MONITORING ...............................................................................................................................6
3.1 Baseline Monitoring ............................................................................................................................ 6
3.2 Annual Monitoring .............................................................................................................................. 6
4.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA ........................................................................................................................8
5.0 MAINTENANCE .............................................................................................................................8
5.1 Irrigation .............................................................................................................................................. 8
5.2 Erosion Control and Browse Protection .............................................................................................. 9
5.3 Replacement plantings ....................................................................................................................... 9
5.4 Weed Management ............................................................................................................................ 9
6.0 REPORTING ................................................................................................................................ 10
7.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Anticipated Functional Uplift by Site............................................................................................... 2 Table 2. Riparian Planting Palette ................................................................................................................. 4 Table 3. Riparian Seeding Palette ................................................................................................................. 4 Table 4. Floodplain Planting Palette ............................................................................................................. 5 Table 5. Floodplain Planting Palette .............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Page ii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A – Figures
Figure 1. Project Location
Figure 2. Overview of Restoration Site Locations and Actions Appendix B – 60% Project Plans
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Page iii
LIST OF PREPARERS
Elan Alford – Plant Biologist
Leslie Allen – Senior Regulatory Specialist
Brian Bartell – Landscape Architect
Jemma Williams - Biologist
Rei Scampavia – Biologist
Ben Snyder – Senior Water Resources Engineer
Mikia Weidenbach – GIS Senior Technician
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Restoration and Monitoring Plan (Plan) describes the restoration, monitoring, and maintenance activities to be implemented at the Galindo Creek Restoration Project (Project), which provides off-site mitigation for the Broadway Plaza Master Plan Refined Project Alternative, located in Walnut Creek, California. This Plan has been prepared by WRA, Inc. (WRA) based on the Project’s 60% design plans and specifications. Construction/implementation of the Project will be conducted by a licensed contractor, based on final design plans to be prepared by licensed engineers and/or landscape architects. The contractor should prepare as-built documentation following Project construction to facilitate the monitoring and maintenance activities outlined in this Plan. To ensure that the monitoring and reporting prescribed in this Plan can be implemented successfully, certain steps are required prior to and immediately following Project construction/implementation to document baseline conditions (see Section 3.1).
1.1 Project Location
The Project is located along a segment of Galindo Creek in Newhall Community Park, in the City of Concord, Contra Costa County, California (Figure 1, Appendix A). The Project Area encompasses approximately 10 acres and occurs within Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 133-130-055 and 133-100- 016.
1.2 Project Objectives
The Project will provide 1,000 linear feet of riparian restoration along Galindo Creek by repairing and enhancing features and functions that have degraded within the riparian corridor in recent years.
Additionally, the project will benefit the park with public access, stormwater, and interpretive amenities.
1.3 Ownership and Responsible Parties
The City of Concord owns the Newell Park property and Galindo Creek riparian corridor. Macerich Northwestern Associates is the Responsible Party, responsible for implementing the project and retaining qualified professionals to conduct the monitoring, maintenance, and reporting.
2.0 RESTORATION PLAN
2.1 Pre-Project Conditions
The reach of Galindo Creek that flows through Newhall Park has been identified by resource agencies, local government, and stakeholder groups as in need of enhancement through bank stabilization, creation of inset floodplains, vegetation management, and riparian plantings. Historic changes in land use from undeveloped open space to grazing and residential development have changed the flow regime of Galindo Creek by increasing the frequency and magnitude of rainfall runoff events. Native vegetation that once stabilized creek banks, shaded the channel, and provided habitat for a variety of fauna has been removed, damaged, or altered by development along the creek corridor. The combination of increased and prolonged flows, especially in summer months, and changes in riparian vegetation has led to channel incision, disconnection of the creek from the floodplain, bank instability, and degradation of habitat.
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
The Project Area consists of landscaped/developed areas, ruderal areas, mixed riparian woodland surrounding Galindo Creek, and an area of emergent wetland located within Galindo Creek. Vegetation in upland landscaped or developed areas including mowed and planted parkland, consisted of primarily nonnative annual grasses and forbs.
Ruderal vegetation communities include those areas not actively maintained as part of Newhall Community Park. Ruderal vegetation includes grassy, un-mowed lands with scattered trees throughout.
Dominant vegetation includes non-native and invasive plants including English ivy (Hedera helix), glossy privet (Ligustrum lucidum), and Mexican fan palm (Washingtonia robusta).
Mixed riparian woodland occurs along Galindo Creek and is dominated by white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), Arizona ash (Fraxinus velutina), northern California black walnut (Juglans hindsii), California sycamore (Platanus racemosa), willow (Salix sp.), coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), and oak (Quercus sp.). The understory is dominated largely by non-native species similar to those described within ruderal areas.
Natural hydrological sources for the Project Area include precipitation and surface run-off from adjacent lands. A small tributary drains into Galindo Creek from the east through a culverted drainage from the adjacent residential community. Galindo Creek connects downstream to Walnut Creek which connects to Suisun Bay northwest of the Study Area. Galindo Creek remains an open channel until it connects to Walnut Creek, also an open channel until it reaches Suisun Bay. A review of historic aerial imagery show that the reach of Galindo Creek within the Project Area has been modified over time, including most recently in the 1980s.1
2.2 Proposed Restoration of Riparian Functions
The Project proposes restoration activities, at nine sites along the creek, intended to increase the ecological and hydrologic functions of Galindo Creek. Project design includes bioengineered bank stabilization, the creation of inset floodplains, a boulder grade control, removal/treatment of invasive vegetation, and installation of native riparian plantings. Anticipated functional uplift resulting from these restoration activities can be divided into four categories: increase channel stability, reduce abundance of invasive weeds, establish native plant cover, and extend/enhance the riparian canopy. An overview of the restoration sites and actions is provided in Figure 2 (Appendix A) and a summary of anticipated functional uplift resulting from the Project by site are outlined in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Anticipated Functional Uplift by Site
SITE
Functional Uplift 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Increase channel geomorphic stability X X X X X X
Reduce abundance of invasive weeds X X X X
Establish native plant cover1 X X X X2 X X X X
Extend/Enhance Riparian Canopy X X X X X X X
1 Sites 1 through 3 and Sites 6 through 9 would be seeded using the riparian seeding palette (Table 2). 2 The floodplain planting palette (Table 3) would be used at Site 4. 1 [USGS] U.S. Geological Survey. 1980. Clayton. 7.5-minute topographic map
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
2.2.1 Increase Channel Geomorphic Stability
Grading activities necessary to create inset floodplains, restore the channel profile, and install the soil lifts and buried boulder grade control at Sites 1 – 5 and 7 would be conducted during the dry season (June 15 to October 31) to the maximum extent feasible, during which Galindo Creek experiences its lowest flows.
Willow pole cuttings for soil lifts, harvested on-site, would be installed between December 1 and December 31. Willow pole cuttings would not be irrigated.
2.2.2 Reduce Abundance of Invasive Weeds
English ivy (Hedera helix), Texas privet (Ligustrum japonicum ‘texanum’), and non-native palms are the dominant invasive species in Sites 6-9 targeted for removal. In addition to targeted removal or treatment of these species at Sites 6-9, other weed management would be performed prior to seeding and planting any areas where no grading would occur. A pre-treatment survey of invasive plant cover will be implemented to establish baseline site conditions, as outlined in Section 3.1. The invasive plant survey will include English ivy, Texas privet, and non-native palms, plus any other exotic plant species identified by the California Invasive Plant Council’s (Cal IPC) online inventory with an invasiveness rating of “high” or (excluding grasses). The Project will aim to reduce relative cover of target invasive plants by at least 75% compared to pre-Project conditions. Prior to seeding or planting, weedy vegetation would be managed by mechanical cutting or mowing of non-native grasses and herbaceous plants, hand-pulling of seedlings and saplings where feasible, and application of aquatic-approved herbicide only where mechanical removal would be less effective or efficient. Naturally recruiting native oak seedlings or other desirable existing native plants would be identified and flagged for avoidance/preservation during weed management activities.
2.2.3 Establish Native Plant Cover
Following invasive weed treatment, sites to be seeded would be prepared by hand raking or disking. A temporary drip irrigation system would be installed in floodplain and riparian planting areas. The riparian container planting palette is provided in Table 2, and full planting specs are provided in the plan set provided as Appendix B. Container plantings installation would occur between October 15 and December
31. The floodplain seed mix (Site 4) would be manually broadcasted. The riparian seeding mix (Sites 1-3, 6-9) would be applied by seed drill, except on slopes steeper than 3:1. The riparian and floodplain seeding palettes are provided in Tables 3 and 4, respectively.
2.2.4 Extend/Enhance Riparian Canopy
Tree installation would occur between October 15 and December 31. A temporary drip irrigation system would be installed in floodplain and riparian planting areas. Foliage protection cages would be installed as necessary to protect developing plants from browsing by wildlife. Quantity estimates for riparian plantings are provided in Table 5 below.
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Table 2. Riparian Planting Palette
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME CONTAINER SIZE (GALLON) ON-CENTER SPACING (FEET) Aesculus californica California buckeye 15 20
Aesculus californica California buckeye 5 15
Baccharis pilularis Coyote bush 1 8
Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon 1 8
Juglans hindsii Northern California black
walnut
15 20
Juglans hindsii Northern California black
walnut
5 15
Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 15 20
Quercus agrifolia Coast live oak 5 15
Quercus lobata Valley oak 15 20
Quercus lobata Valley oak 5 15
Rosa californica California rose 1 8
Sambucus nigra ssp.
caerulea
Blue elderberry 1 10
Symphoricarpos albus Snowberry 1 6
Table 3. Riparian Seeding Palette
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SEEDING RATE (LBS/ACRE)
Achillea millefolium Yarrow 0.3
Bromus carinatus California brome 4
Elymus glaucus Blue wildrye 8
Elymus triticoides Creeping wild rye 4
Festuca microstachys Small fescue 6
Hordeum brachyantherum Meadow barley 6
Lupinus bicolor Miniature lupine 4
Melica torreyana Torrey melic 5
Poa secunda Native pine bluegrass 5
Stipa pulchra Purple needlegrass 6
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Table 4. Floodplain Planting Palette
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SEED/CONTAINER/CUTTING RATE Alnus rhombifolia White alder Container 12-foot spacing Artemisia douglasiana California mugwort Container 4-foot spacing Elymus glaucus Blue wildrye Seed 6 lbs/acre
Elymus triticoides Creeping wild rye Seed 8 lbs/acre
Hordeum brachyantherum Meadow barley Seed 8 lbs/acre
Juncus balticus Wire rush Seed 0.5 lb/acre
Juncus mexicanus Mexican rush Seed 0.5 lb/acre
Rubus ursinus California blackberry Container 6-foot spacing Salix laevigata Polished willow Cutting 10-foot spacing Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow Cutting 10-foot spacing
Sisyrinchium bellum Blue-eyed grass Seed 4 lbs/acre
Trifolium willdenovii Tomcat clover Seed 6 lbs/acre
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
3.0 MONITORING
Annual monitoring of the Project will be conducted for a minimum of five years (with a minimum of two consecutive growing seasons after ceasing irrigation) by biologists or restoration specialists experienced in the identification and ecology of locally native riparian plants as well as invasive plants common to Northern California. After annual monitoring for the first five years, monitoring will be repeated in Year 7 and Year 10 to ensure that success achieved in first five years has been sustained without maintenance.
Before annual monitoring can begin, limited baseline monitoring is necessary. It is recommended that monitoring data collection forms be created in advance of this monitoring effort.
3.1 Baseline Monitoring
Prior to any groundbreaking activities, a pre-construction monitoring visit will be conducted to document vegetation conditions at sites where invasive weed treatment, establishment of native plant cover, and/or enhancement/extension of the riparian canopy are to occur; and to document channel conditions where bank stabilization, floodplain improvements, or bioengineering will occur. a. Vegetation cover and species composition will be assessed and recorded for Sites 1-4 and 6-9.
Within each site, a list of the native and non-native plant species encountered (species composition) will be generated. The list will indicate which species are native, which are nonnative, and, among the non-native species, which are currently rated by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC)2 as “high” concern (excluding grasses). Relative percent cover of native vegetation and of non-native vegetation throughout each revegetation site will be visually estimated by walking through and around each site. The cover estimate for non-native vegetation will then be broken down further into two categories: “target invasives” (consisting of English ivy, Texas privet, non-native palms, and any other species currently ranked by Cal-IPC as high, excluding grasses) and “naturalized or other non-target weeds” (consisting of species not currently ranked by Cal-IPC as high).
b. At least one permanent photo point location per site (Sites 1 – 9) will be established and mapped using GPS technology. Digital photographs (at a minimum, one view each facing upstream and downstream) will be taken of pre-Project conditions.
Within two weeks following completion of planting, the same photo points will be revisited, and photographs taken (at a minimum, one view each facing upstream and downstream) to document baseline conditions of Project implementation.
3.2 Annual Monitoring
“Year 1” of monitoring will be the first growing season following planting. In summer or early fall of Years 1 through 5, and also Years 7 and 10, the following monitoring activities will occur:
2 Access current list online here: https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
a. Photo points
Photographs of site conditions (at a minimum, one view each facing upstream and downstream) will be recorded at the photo points established prior to Project construction/planting. Additional photographs of vegetation, hydrology, erosion, etc. will be collected to document conditions in support of monitoring results and recommendations for site maintenance. b. Vegetation
Native plantings (quantified in the as-built documentation) will be inspected for survival. Live and dead plantings will be tallied, and the precise locations of dead plantings will be documented with a GPS device. The tally of live and dead plantings will be converted to percent survival per site based on all plantings installed per site.
Consistent with the baseline monitoring methods employed (Section 3.1) vegetation cover and species composition will be assessed and recorded for Sites 1-4 and 6-9. Within each site, a list of the native and non-native plant species encountered (species composition) will be generated. The list will indicate which species are native, which are non-native, and, among the non-native species, which are currently rated by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC)3 as “high” concern. Relative percent cover of native vegetation and of non-native vegetation throughout each revegetation site will be visually estimated by walking through or around each site. The cover estimate for non-native vegetation will then be broken down further into two categories: “target invasives” (consisting of English ivy, Texas privet, non-native palms, and any other species currently ranked by Cal-IPC as high, excluding grasses) and “naturalized or non-target weeds” (consisting of species not currently ranked by Cal-IPC as high and/or grasses currently ranked by Cal-IPC as high).
c. Hydrology and Channel Stability
At least once per year, monitors will inspect the channel and stream banks at Sites 1-5 (including within 50 linear feet of the outfall at Site 3) and Site 7, to document any changes in the hydrology and channel stability, including, but not limited to: significant erosion/sedimentation, nick points or head cuts, incision, accumulation of debris, or bank sloughing. The monitors will consult with a geomorphologist or water resources engineer to determine if any such observations might be undermining restored banks or infrastructure (e.g., soil lifts, flood plains, buried boulder grade control) and whether remedial actions/repairs are warranted.
If the result of annual monitoring indicate that planting sites are not meeting the performance criteria outlined below in Section 4.0 and replacement plantings need to be installed, survival of the replacement plantings will likely need to be monitored for five years, particularly if the sites where they are located are not meeting native vegetation cover criteria.
In addition to annual monitoring to determine success, site inspections of all nine restoration sites should be conducted periodically or seasonally, by the monitors and/or the restoration maintenance contractor, to assess conditions and the need for and timing of irrigation and weed management (see Section 5.0). 3 Access current list online here: https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
4.0 SUCCESS CRITERIA
In accordance with Measure 3.2 of the Final Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement, Notification No. 1600-2019-0430-R3, all plantings shall attain a minimum 80% survival at the end of five years (the last two consecutive years of success must be achieved without irrigation) and shall attain 70% native cover after three years and 75% native cover after five years. Because the Streambed Alteration Agreement does not define what areas these cover criteria are relative to, this Plan proposes that if planting survival is meeting success criteria, then existing and naturally recruited native vegetation within the planting sites will be considered along with plantings in the analysis and reporting of the site’s relative native vegetation cover to achieve the 75% cover target.
Each year, relative cover by target invasive species at each site will be at least 75% lower than was documented by the pre-Project vegetation survey.
Additionally, the banks and channel at Sites 1-5 (including within 50 linear feet of the outfall at Site 3) and Site 7 will not exhibit significant erosion, sedimentation, head cuts, incision, accumulation of debris, or bank sloughing that could undermine the restored banks or infrastructure.
Achieving these criteria will ensure that the Project is increasing the functions of Galindo Creek. If the planting survival and/or native vegetation cover requirements are not meeting these criteria, the Responsible Party is responsible for replacement plantings, additional irrigation, weeding, or any other practice to achieve the requirements.
To satisfy Water Quality Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ for the Broadway Plaza Master Plan Refined Project Alternative, overall vegetation performance goals of reducing invasive plant cover and successfully reestablishing vigorous native riparian vegetation must continue to be achieved for an additional 5 years (with monitoring and reporting continuing in Years 7 and 10 as described below).
5.0 MAINTENANCE
Maintenance will be conducted by a restoration or landscaping contractor with demonstrated experience in installing and maintaining California native plantings as well as in treating and managing invasive plants species common to riparian settings in Northern California. Herbicide application will be conducted by a professional currently licensed by the state of California. Descriptions of maintenance activities are provided below.
5.1 Irrigation
A drip irrigation system will be installed and operated according to the final design plans and specifications. Irrigation will be tapered off over time and turned off completely after year 3, but the irrigation system will not be removed completely until the end of the monitoring period after vegetation success criteria has been achieved. The irrigation period may be extended to support replacement plantings installed after Year 2, at the discretion of the monitors.
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
5.2 Erosion Control and Browse Protection
Erosion control will be removed once the site is stabilized after one growing season is complete. Browse protection will be maintained throughout the first 5 years of monitoring and removed once the plantings are mature.
5.3 Replacement plantings
Replacement plantings will be installed as needed through year 3 in order to meet at least 80% survival.
If the survival criterion is not being met after Year 3, the monitors will assess the potential causes and will propose adaptive management strategies to achieve the overall vegetation targets. This may include additional replacement plantings, or an assessment by a qualified botanist to determine if plant density is sufficient.
5.4 Weed Management
After the first round of intensive weed management implemented at the time of Project construction, maintenance-level management and re-treatment of target invasive species will be implemented for a minimum of three years, at least once per year, during the time of year most effective for managing the target species. Adjustments to the weed management approach can be made based on the professional judgement of the restoration contractor and/or monitors.
Target invasive species will be managed using a combination of manual and mechanical removal, and selective herbicide application (spot treatments and/or cut-stem applications). Only herbicides registered with the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and approved for use in aquatic environments shall be used, and only where mechanical removal of invasive plants would be less effective or efficient.
All herbicides shall be applied in accordance with regulations set by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. All herbicides shall be used according to labeled instructions. Care shall be taken to avoid contact with any native vegetation, and it shall only be applied on calm days (wind speed equal to or less than 5 miles per hour) to prevent airborne transfer of herbicide.
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
6.0 REPORTING
An annual report will be prepared each year between Years 1 and 5, and again for Years 7 and 10. At minimum, the reports will include the following information. i. Dates and methodology of all surveys and site inspections conducted ii. Results of vegetation monitoring at Sites 1-4 and 6-9 relative to previous years iii. Results of Site 3 hydrology monitoring relative to previous years iv. Dates and descriptions of maintenance activities completed, including a. Number, size, and species of replacement plantings installed b. Target species, estimated area (in square feet), and methods of invasive weed management at each site
v. Photos taken at designated photo point locations with a map depicting their locations; include photos from past years for comparison
vi. Recommendations for the following year’s management or monitoring A draft report will be submitted to the Responsible Party by November 15 each year for review. A final version of the report will be submitted as follows:
AGENCY/ENTITY
REFERENCE THIS PERMIT
NUMBER
SUBMIT TO: SUBMIT BY:
Landowner Site Development
Permit # DEV21005
Bruce Davis,
Senior Civil Engineer – City of Concord
Community Development Department
1950 Parkside Drive, MS/52, Concord, CA
94519 [email protected]
November 30
Years 1-5, 7, 10
California Dept. of Fish and
Wildlife, Bay Delta Region 1600-2019-0430-R3
2825 Cordelia Road, Suite 100
Fairfield, CA 94534
Attn: Lake and Streambed Alteration
Program
Environmental Permit Information
Management System
https://epims.wildlife.ca.gov/index.do
November 30
Years 1-5 only
San Francisco Bay Regional
Water Quality Control
Board
Water Quality Order
No. 2004-0004-DWQ
Region 2:
[email protected]
State Board:
[email protected],
[email protected]
December 31
Years 1-5, 7, 10
U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, San Francisco
District
2019-00473S
Regulatory Division, South Branch
450 Golden Gate Ave, 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
[email protected]
December 31
Years 1-5, 7, 10
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Appendix A
APPENDIX A – FIGURES
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\GIS\ArcMap\2021\Figure1_Location_20210302.mxd Sources: National Geographic, WRA | Prepared By: mweidenbach, 3/2/2021 Project Area
View Extent
Galindo Creek Restoration Project
Concord, Contra Costa County, California
00 0.25 .5
Miles
Figure 1. Project Location
Site 9: Riparian Planting
Site 8: Riparian Planting
Site 7: Bank Stabilization, Inset
Floodplain, Riparian Invasive
Species Removal, Riparian Planting
Site 5: Riparian Planting
and Buried Boulder
Grade Control
Site 6: Riparian Invasive Species
Removal, Riparian Planting
Site 4: Bank Stabilization, Inset
Floodplain, Riparian Planting
Site 3: Bioengineering
at Outfall
Site 2: Bank Stabilization, Inset
Floodplain, Riparian Planting
Site 1: Bank Stabilization,
Soil Lifts, Riparian Planting
Staging and
Stockpile Area
Spoil Mound
Interpretive Area,
Bioswale
Path: L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\GIS\ArcMap\2021\Figure2_RestorationOverview_20210303.mxd Project Area (10.01 ac.)
Sources: NAIP 2018 Aerial Imagery, WRA | Prepared By: mweidenbach, 3/2/2021 Galindo Creek Restoration Project
Concord, Contra Costa County, California
Figure 2.
Overview of Restoration Site
Locations and Actions
0200 100
Feet
Galindo Creek Riparian Enhancement Plan
August 2021
WRA, Inc.
Appendix B
APPENDIX B – 60% PROJECT PLANS
© 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS © 2019 M © 2019 © 2019 M © 2019 M © 2019 M © 2019 © 201 9 © 201 M9icrosoft i rc osoft r Corpora Corpora Corpora Corpora Corpo a C tion ©2 tion © 2 tion © 2019 Di i 019 Digi 019 Dig 019 Dig 019 D i talGlobe talGlobe talGlobe t Ga lo ©CNES ( ©CNES ( ©CNES ( ©CNES ( ©CNES ( ©C ES ( © NES (2019) Di 2019) Di 2019) Di 201 ) stribut stributi s ribut on Airbu on Airbu on Airbu on Airbu on Air ub o A n irb o A us DS N
0 150
SCALE: 1 " = 150'
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R
ECI L SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\DWG\60p\C-1.0 Cover.dwg Path:
COVER SHEET
SCALE: AS INDICATED
C-1.0
GALINDO CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONCORD, CALIFORNIA
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
SITE PLAN
LOCATION DESCRIPTION
THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT NEWHALL COMMUNITY PARK IN CONCORD, CALIFORNIA. 3 1
SHEET INDEX
C-1.0 COVERC-1.1 SITE PREPARATION PLAN AND NOTESC-2.1 GRADING PLANC-2.2 GRADING PLANC-2.3 GRADING DETAILSC-2.4 GRADING DETAILSC-3.0 DETAILSC-4.0 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN L-1.1 PLANTING DETAILS, LEGENDS, AND NOTESL-2.1 PLANTING PLANL-2.2 PLANTING PLAN
PROPERTY BOUNDARY
NOT TO SCALE
2 DESIGNED FOR
MACERICH
11411 N. TATUM BLVD.
PHOENIX, AZ 85028
CONTACT: GARRETT NEWLAND
LEAD CONSULTANT
WRA, INC.
2169-G E. FRANCISCO BLVD.
SAN RAFAEL, CA 94901
CONTACT: BRIAN BARTELL
(415) [email protected]
ATION, SOIL LIFTS, NO SITE 1: BANK STABILIZATION, SOIL L ZI L B I N K N E B: 1
RIPARIAN PLANTING P N A RIPRIAN P PA
SITE 2: BANK STABILIZATION, INSET I BA NA : 2
DPLAIN, RIPARIAN FLOODPLAIN, R P D
PLANTING LPA
SITE 3: BIOENGINEERING 3
AT OUTFALL OTA
SITE 4: BANK STABILIZATION, INSET AB K N E ZA I BA T S K NA E A
FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN PLANTING L N FOODPLAIN F OL
SITE 5: RIPARIAN PLANTING NA
BURIED BOULDER D R AND BURIED NA RI
GRADE CONTROL GRA
E SPECIES SITE 6: RIPARIAN INVASIVE SPECIES AV NI NI RA R N IN EC
REMOVAL, RIPARIAN PLANTING MO I AN L A REMOVL, R MER V L SITE 7: BANK STABILIZATION, INSET , NO I BA
N, RIPARIAN INVASIVE A RIP FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN L
SPECIES REMOVAL, RIPARIAN PLANTING AV O SPECIES
8: RIPARIAN PLANTING N PLA SITE 8: RIPARIAN PLAN
OIL MOUND SPOIL MOUN PS O MO
9: RIPARIAN PLANTING P N PL SITE 9: RIPARIAN PLAN AI RAP N PL
TURTLE CREEK ROAD G AND STAGING AN G ST TOCKPILE AREA OSTCK
VE AREA, INTERPETIVE ARE T V
BIOSWALE
AYERS ROAD
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
THIS PROJECT WILL PROVIDE 1,000 LINEAR FEET OF STREAM ENHANCMENT ALONG
GALINDO CREEK THROUGH BIOENGINEERING BANK STABILIZATION, RECONNECTION OF THE CREEK TO ITS FLOODPLAIN, RIPARIAN PLANTINGS, ANDREMOVAL OF INVASIVE VEGETATION. IT WILL BENEFIT THE PARK WITH IMPROVEDPUBLIC ACCESS, TREATMENT OF STORMWATER RUNOFF, AND INTERPRETIVE AMENITIES.
REGULATORY CONTEXT
PROJECT GOALS AND THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED UNDER THE GUIDANCE AND APPROVAL OF THE FOLLOWING REGULATORY AGENCIES:
x US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSx US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICEx ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCYx CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFEx CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
AS SUCH THE PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND
RESTRICTIONS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT SENSITIVE HABITAT TYPES AND SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES.
THE PROJECT WILL BE PERFORMED WITH PERMITS AND/OR CONSULTATIONS FROMTHE FOLLOWING AGENCIES:
x US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERSx US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICEx CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFEx CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
x THE CITY OF CONCORD IS THE LEAD AGENCY AND IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR THE PROJECT.
CHARACTERIZATION OF THE PROJECT
1. BANK STABILIZATION - CHANNEL BANKS IDENTIFIED AS FAILING OR UNSTABLE WILL BE GRADED TO A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 2:1 (H:V) ANDPROTECTED BY VEGETATED SOIL LIFTS. A MIXTURE OF COARSE ALLUVIUM(GRAVEL TO SMALL BOULDER SIZED MATERIAL) WILL BE PLACED AT THE TOES OF THE BANK SLOPES.
2. INSET FLOODPLAINS - FLOOPLAIN SURFACES WILL BE LOWERED IN CERTAIN
AREAS TO ALLOW FOR RECONNECTION OF THE CREEK TO ITS
FLOODPLAIN AND PROVIDE A LOCATION FOR RIPARIAN PLANTINGS. THESEFEATURES WILL BE GRADED AT A 2% SLOPE TOWARD THE CHANNEL TOPREVENT STRANDING OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS.
3. BIOSWALE DEMONSTRATION SITE - STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM A
PARKING LOT NEAR THE NEWHALL PARKWAY ENTRANCE WILL BE
COLLECTED AND ROUTED INTO A SWALE PLANTED WITH NATIVE GRASSES
AND LINED WITH SAND AND GRAVEL TO ALLOW FOR POLLUTANTS TO BE
FILTERED AND SETTLE OUT OF SUSPENSION BEFORE FLOWING INTO GALINDO CREEK.
4. BURIED BOULDER GRADE CONTROL - MIGRATION OF A HEADCUT IN
GALINDO CREEK HAS BEEN IMPEDED BY THE PRESENCE OF DENSE TREE ROOTS IN THE CHANNEL BED. A STEP FEATURE COMPOSED OF COARSE ALLUVIUM WILL BE TRENCHED INTO THE CREEK BED 150 FEET UPSTREAM OF THE HEADCUT AND ROOT MASS TO REDUCE LIKELIHOOD OF FUTURECHANNEL INCISION AND UNDERMINING OF CHANNEL BANKS.
EARTHWORK QUANTITIES
THE PROJECT INVOLVES THE EXCAVATION AND RE-USE OF APPROXIMATELY 700 CU.
YDS. OF TOPSOIL INSIDE THE LIMIT OF GRADE THAT WILL BE STOCKPILED WHILE THE SITE IS BEING GRADED. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF SOIL EXCAVATED WILL BALANCE ON-SITE.
x CUT = 700 CU. YDS.x FILL = 700 CU. YDS.
PROJECT SCHEDULE
THE PROJECT IS SCHEDULED TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING THE 2022 SUMMER CONSTRUCTION SEASON (MAY 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 15TH).
CONTOUR INTERVAL AND DETAILED GRADING
THE PROJECT INVOLVES DETAILED GRADING. AS A RESULT, THE CONTOUR INTERVAL FOR THE GRADING PLANS IS 1'.
UTILITIES
THERE ARE KNOWN UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL AND WATER LINES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY. THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT BOUNDARY. THE CONTRACTOR WILL CONTACT A UTILITY COMPANY TO MARK UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND/OR CONFIRM THAT THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL UNDERGROUNDUTILITIES.
FEMA FLOODPLAIN NOTES
x THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN A FEMA DESIGNATED FLOODWAY.x NO NET FILL WILL BE PLACED WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN AT THE COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIAL THAT IS GENERATED WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN WILL EITHER BE MOVED AND PERMANENTLY PLACED OUTSIDE OF THIS BOUNDARY OR GRADED SO AS TO NOT AFFECT FLOODRISK. x WORK WITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN WILL NOT INCREASE RISK OF FLOODING.
ACS
BSS
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R
ECI L SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\DWG\60p\C-1.0 Cover.dwg Path:
SITE PREPARATION
PLAN AND NOTES
C-1.1
SITE PREPARATION NOTES
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STORE SALVAGED TOPSOIL WITHIN THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING ALL OF THE WETLANDS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS AND INDICATED IN THE REGULATORY PERMITS. THESE AREAS ARE OFF LIMITS FROM ANY DISTURBANCE.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT THE NUMBER AND EXTENT OF INTERNAL HAUL ROADS AND STOCKPILES WITHIN THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION ON SITE.
4. FOUR FOOT HIGH ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING SHALL BE PLACED ALONG THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE IN LOCATIONS WHERE THE WORK AREA IS WITHIN 10' OF (E) SEASONAL WETLANDS AS SHOWN ON THE PLAN. REFER TOEROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR LOCATIONS WHERE SILT FENCE WILL MARK LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE. IN ALL OTHER AREAS THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE AND HAUL RODS WITH 60" METAL T-POSTS WITH ORANGE FLAGGING SPACED EVERY 50 FEET. DO NOT INSTALL T-POSTS WITH FLAGGING IN LOCATIONS WITH SILT FENCE OR ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCE.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLING TREE PROTECTION MEASURES FOR ALL TREES TO REMAIN WITHIN 15 FEET OF LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LAY OUT CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE/EXIT, HAUL ROUTES, STAGING AREAS, CONSTRUCTION FENCE, AND STAKES BASED UPON THE DRAWINGS. STAKED AND FENCED OFF LOCATIONS MUST BE APPROVED BY THELANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BEFORE THE CONTRACTOR MOBILIZES HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN THE FENCING AND STAKES THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION WORK.
8. NO VEHICULAR ACCESS SHALL BE PERMITTED IN AREAS OF FINISHED GRADING.9. SEE GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS FOR DETAILED INFORMATION ON FENCING AND BOUNDARY MARKINGS.
STAGING AREA AND HAUL ROUTES PLAN
SCALE: AS SHOWN 1 SCALE: 1 " = 200 '
0 200
GENERAL NOTES
1. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL LAYOUTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT USA (UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT) AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF WORK.
3. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS CONTAINED HEREIN AND THE SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED.
4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING A COPY OF THE APPROVED GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS AND ALL APPLICABLE REGULATORY PERMITS ON SITE AT ALL TIMES.
5. ALL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE, STAGING, AND DISPENSING OF FUEL, OIL, COOLANT, OR OTHER SUCH ACTIVITIES SHALL OCCUR WITHIN THE DESIGNATED STAGING AREA ON THE PLANS. IN ADDITION, THESEACTIVITIES SHALL OCCUR GREATER THAN 100 FEET FROM EXISTING WETLANDS, CREEKS, AND SWALES.
CONTRACTOR EQUIPMENT SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS PRIOR TO OPERATION AND REPAIRED AS NECESSARY. ALL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT SHALL BE STORED OVERNIGHT WITHIN THE STAGING AREA.
SEE PROJECT SWPPP FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS.
6. ANY PROJECT-RELATED SPILLS OR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SHALL BE REPORTED TO APPROPRIATE ENTITIES
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE MARIN COUNTY, USFWS, CDFW, AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
CONTROL BOARD (RWQCB) AND SHALL BE CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY AND CONTAMINATED SOILS REMOVED FROM DISPOSAL AREAS.
DEMOBILIZATION NOTES
1. AFTER COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, TEMPORARY FILL AND CONSTRUCTION
DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED AND DISTURBED AREAS SHALL BE RESTORED TO PRE-PROJECT CONDITIONS.
2. EXCAVATED SOIL WILL BE RELOCATED TO THE SOIL DISPOSAL AREAS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
3. DO NOT REMOVE FLAGS MARKING THE LOCATION OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.
4. ALL T-POSTS AND ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING SHALL BE REMOVED WHEN CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETED.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE THE TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ACCESS AND RESTORE THE
STAGING AREAS AND HAUL ROADS TO EXISTING CONDITIONS BY PERFORMING THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM ACTIONS:
a. DECONSOLIDATE THE AREA BY DISCING OR RIPPING TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 8"; b. RESEED WITH THE UPLAND SEED MIX AT THE SEEDING RATES THAT ARE INDICATED IN THE EROSION CONTROL AND SEED PLAN;
c. INSTALL NECESSARY EROSION CONTROL BMP'S
5. UPON STABILIZATION OF SITE WITH ESTABLISHED VEGETATION AND WITH PERMISSION OF THE
COUNTY INSPECTOR OR QSP, REMOVE SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES AND STABILIZE THOSE AREAS DISTURBED BY THIS PROCESS.
AYERS ROAD
TURTLE CREEK ROAD
N
ABBREVIATIONS
CDFW CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
(E) EXISTING
FEMA FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AUTHORITYFT FEETLOG LIMIT OF GRADELOD LIMIT OF DISTURBANCENTS NOT TO SCALERWQCB REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SCA STREAM CONSERVATION AREASF SILT FENCESSF WIRE BACKED SILT FENCESW STRAW WATTLE FIBER ROLLSWPPP STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLANSWR SEASONAL WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENTSWRS SEASONAL WETLAND RE-ESTABLISHMENT SWALE
TYP TYPICAL
USFWS US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
TOPOGRAPHICAL DATA
1. HORIZONTAL COORDINATE SYSTEM: NAD83 STATE PLANE CALIFORNIA ZONE 3, EPOCH 1991.35
2. VERTICAL CONTROL SYSTEM: NAVD 88
3. TOPOGRAPHIC DATA SOURCE: USGS NATIONAL ELEVATION DATABASE AUGMENTED WITH TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CONDUCTED ON 23 JULY 2019 USING RTK-GPS USING COASTAL NETWORK. FOR CONTROL, USE CENTER OF MANHOLE N:2172779.889, E:6136285.966, Z:255.004.
4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UTILIZE A LICENSED SURVEYOR TO ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL CONTROL ON SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM THAT THE EXISTING GRADES COMPLY WITH THE ESTABLISHED
VERTICAL CONTROL AND REPORT ANY MATERIAL DISCREPANCIES TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK.
DATA TABLE
STAGING
AREA
NEWHALL PKWY
PROJECT LIMITS
THE PROJECT HAS SPECIFIC WORK BOUNDARIES WITHIN THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY. THESE WERE
CREATED TO LIMIT PROJECT DISTURBANCES AND PROTECT EXISTING SENSITIVE WETLAND AND UPLAND HABITATS. THESE BOUNDARIES INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
x LIMIT OF GRADE - DEFINES THE BOUNDARY OF GRADING OPERATIONS INCLUDING EXCAVATION AND FILL PLACEMENT.
x LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE - DEFINES THE BOUNDARY OF PROJECT DISTURBANCES INCLUDING ACCESS, STAGING, SOIL STOCKPILE, AND HAUL ROUTES. THE LIMIT OFDISTURBANCE WILL BE MARKED WITH ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING, SILT FENCING OR BRIGHTLY COLORED FLAGGING. THE FENCING AND FLAGGING WILL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
ACS
BSS
PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R
ECI L SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
L:\Acad 2000 Files\23000\23010-2\DWG\60p\C-1.0 Cover.dwg Path:
PROJECT NOTES
C-1.2
EROSION CONTROL AND REVEGETATION NARRATIVE
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)
IF REQUIRED, A STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) WILL BE PREPARED FOR THE PROJECT BY A QUALIFIED STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION DEVELOPER (QSD).
THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT, MAINTAIN, MONITOR, AND COMPLY WITH REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SWPPP.
1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE/COMPLY WITH THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN FOR THE PROJECT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT ORDER 2009-0009-DWQ.
TARGET HABITAT TYPES AND PLANT COMMUNITIES
THE GOAL OF THE PROJECT IS TO CREATE SEVERAL UNIQUE HABITAT TYPES, WHICH HAVE CHARACTERISTICALLY DIFFERENT VEGETATION AND INFLUENCE THE GOALS OF REVEGETATION AND THE APPLICATION AND APPLICABILITY OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR EROSION CONTROL. THIS INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING:
1. SEASONAL WETLANDS
A. SHALLOW BASINS WITH PERENNIAL WETLAND VEGETATION AND SOME AREAS WITH BARE SOIL DUE TO EXTENDED INUNDATION.
B. LIMITED INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES
2. SEASONAL WETLAND SWALES
A. SHALLOW SWALES WITH PERENNIAL UPLAND GRASSES AND WETLAND SPECIES.
B. LIMITED INVASIVE PLANT SPECIES
3. UPLAND AREAS
A. PERENNIAL UPLAND NATIVE GRASSES
REVEGETATION APPROACH
THE PROJECT WILL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING PRESCRIPTIONS TO REESTABLISH APPROPRIATE VEGETATION COMMUNITIES WITHIN EACH OF THE TARGET HABITAT TYPES.
1. SEASONAL WETLANDS
A. APPLY 6" OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IN THESE AREAS B. DRILL SEED THE SEASONAL WETLAND BASINS WITH THE SEASONAL WETLAND SEED MIX.
2. SEASONAL WETLAND SWALES
A. APPLY 6" OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IN THESE AREAS B. DRILL SEED THE SWALES WITH THE SEASONAL WETLAND SEED MIX. C. DRILL ADJACENT 3:1 SLOPES IDENTIFIED ON PLANS WITH SEASONAL WETLAND SEED MIX.
3. UPLAND AREAS
A. APPLY 6" OF STOCKPILED TOPSOIL IN THESE AREAS. B. DRILL SEED THE SOIL DISPOSAL AREAS AND STAGING/STOCKPILE LOCATIONS WITH UPLAND SEED MIX.
APPLICATION OF EROSION CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
5. SILT FENCE - USE SILT FENCE TO PROTECT SENSITIVE AREAS THAT ARE DOWNSLOPE OF GRADED AREAS.
6. FIBER ROLLS
x USE FIBER ROLLS TO REDUCE THE VELOCITY OF WATER WITHIN SWALES.x USE FIBER ROLLS TO PROTECT WETLANDS THAT ARE DOWNSLOPE OF ADJACENT GRADED AREAS.
3. FIBER FABRIC - USE FIBER FABRIC TO REDUCE SHEER STRESS WITHIN SWALES THAT CONVEY THE LARGER VOLUME OF SURFACE RUNOFF.
4. GRAVEL BAG BERMS - USE GRAVEL BAG BERMS TO REDUCE THE VELOCITY OF WATER AND FILTER OUT SEDIMENT FROM SHEET FLOWS OVER THE FILTER FABRIC.
(E) STORMWATER
CULVERT (15" DIAM.)
DEMOLISH EXISTING CONCRETE
AND REPLACE WITH SOIL LIFTS
WITH ROCK TOE
SOIL LIFTS WITH ROCK TOE, TYP
SITE 1
SITE 2
SITE 4
SITE 3
(E) PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE (PIP)
FEMA 100-YRFLOOD BOUNDARY
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
SOIL LIFTS WITH ROCK TOE, TYP
SECTION C
(SEE SHEET C-2.4)
SECTION B
(SEE SHEET C-2.3)
SECTION A
(SEE SHEET C-2.3)
B'
A'
GALINDO CREEK
C'
(252)
(250)
(255)
(255)
(260)
(255)
(254)
(253)
(251)
(250)
(250)
(251)
(252)
(253)
(254)
(257)
(256)
(255)
(254)
(254)
(256)
(255)
(257)
(258)
(252)
(253)
(251)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
250
251252
251
252
253
254
253252
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
17+00
18+00
19+00
20+00
21+00
251
251
252
253
256
(257)
(256)
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
255
254
252
(254)
(253)
(252)
(251)
(250)
(249) (248)
(249)
(250)
(251) (252)
(253)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257)
(258)
(259)
1+62
0+00
1+00
1+17
0+00
1+00
1+23
0+00 1+00 (E) ST (E) ST ORMWATER CULVERT (15" DIAM.) LVERT
DEMOLISH EXISTING CONCRETE ONCRET
AND RE AND REPLACE WITH SOIL LIFTS EWITH
WITH ROCK TO OCK E TH RO
SOIL LIFTS WITH ROCK TOE, TYP FTS WITH ROCK TO
SITE 1
SITE 2
SITE 3
SITE4
(E) PEDESTRIAN
BRIDGE (PIP) BRID
FEMA 100-YRFLOOD BOUNDARY OOD B
FEMA 100-YR A 00-Y
FLOODBOUNDARY LOOD
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE ST
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE REAM E
SOIL LIFTS WITH ROCK TOE, TYP FTS W TH RO ICK TO
O SECTI C N
HS (SEE CT HEE ) 4 2-. HE ES E S
SECTIONB
(SEE SHEET C-2.3)
EE SHE
SECTION A
(SEE SHEET C-2.3)
EE SHE
B'
A'
GALINDO CREEK
C'
252 ()
(250)
(255)
255) (
(260)
525) (
25 (4)
25 (3)
(251)
(250)
(250)
251) (
252) (
(253)
(254)
7) (25
56) (2
(255)
(254)
(254)
(255)
(256)
(257)
58) (2
(253)
(252)
) (251
(249)
51)
49) (2
(248)
247 ()
7) (24
(248)
(249)
(250)
9 50) (2
252251
250
2512
51 2523 25
524 3 25252
13+00
14+00
5+00 1
16+00
17+00
18+00
0 9+0 1 0 9+0 1 0 9+0 1
20+00
21+00
251
251
252
253
56 2
527 ()
256) (
54 2 () 54 2
25 (3)
5 (22)
51 2 ( ) 51 2 (
255
254
252
254 ()
25 (3)
(252)
251 ()
50 2 () 50 2
49 (2 ) 49 (248)
2(49)
(250)
25 (1) 25 (2)
25 (3)
254 ()
(255)
25 (6)
57) 2(
2(58)
(259)
1+62
0+00 0 +0 1
1+17
0+00 1+00
1+23
00 + 0 00 1+
+0
(2
(
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E © 2019 Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2019) Distribution Airbus DS Di or t u E
GRADING LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
PROPERTY LINE(E) ROAD(E) STREAM(E) CONTOUR (1 FT)PROPOSED CONTOUR (1 FT)LIMIT OF DISTURBANCELIMIT OF GRADE
STAGING AREA
FLOW(E) ABOVE GROUND UTILITY LINEBANKFULL CHANNEL STREAM BOUNDARYFEMA 100-YR FLOOD BOUNDARYBIO FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION SITE (100)
100
N
0 20
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
GRADING PLAN
GALINDO CREEK
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
C-2.1
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R
ECI L SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2
ACS
BSS
PARKING
LOT
BURIED BOULDER
GRADE CONTROL
INTERPRETIVE PANEL,
PATH, AND BENCH
FEMA 100-YRFLOOD BOUNDARY
SITE 7
SPOIL MATERIAL
(E) 6 FT DIAM
CMP (N=3), (PIP)
BIO SWALE
DEMONSTRATION,
SEE SHEET C-3.0
SITE 5
SITE 6, SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE
SECTION D
(SEE SHEET C-2.4)
D'
SITE 8 & SITE 9, SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS
(245)
(250)
(250)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(255)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(246)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(244)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
251
250
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
12+00
(245)
(244)
(243)
(242)
(242)
(243)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
0+00
1+00
2+00
2+47
PARKIN
GN
LOT
BURIED BOULDER
GRADECONTROL ADE R
INTERPRETIVE PANEL, VE N PEA
PATH,AND BENCH PATH A
MA 1 FE MA 1 FE 00-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY OOD B
SITE 7
SPOILMATERIAL OILMATERI
(E) 6FT DIAM
CMP (N=3), (PIP) MP(N
BIO SWALE
DEMONSTRATION, NS RT
SEE SHEET C-3.0 SEE
SITE 5
SITE 6, SEE LANDSCAPE SHEETS EE LANDSCAPE S
FEMA 1 00 Y-R
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM DGE E ST
BANKFULL CHANNEL
STREAM EDGE REAM
SECTION D
(SEE SHEET C-2.4) EE SHE
D'
SITE 8 & SITE 9 S, EELANDSCAPE SHEETS E 9 S,EE LANDSCAPE (245)
(250)
250) (
45) 2 (
) 05 2 ()
0) 25 ( 0) 25
24 (9)
(248)
(247)
46) 2 ( 46
(246)
(247)
48) (2
49) 2 (
44) 2 (
(244)
245) (
(246)
2(47)
(248)
(249)
250) (
) 6 24 ()
47) 2 (
8) 4 2 (8)
(249)
(250)
242
243
244
45 4 245
246
247
248
47 249
250
251
251
250
51 0 2
244
245
246
45 46
247
4 248
47 249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
+00 0 1 1+0 10
12+00
245) (
(244)
(243)
(242)
(242)
(243)
(244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
0+00
+00 1
2+00
+4 27
50 E
E E E
(242
© 2019Microsoft Corporation © 2019 DigitalGlobe ©CNES ( ©CNE 2019) Distribu istribution Ai tion A rbus DS © c o lo
STRIPE TO ELIMINATE ONE PARKING SPACE,
REMOVE WOOD EDGE AND GAURDRAIL
SECTION FOR ACCESS TO INTERPRETIVE PANEL
SMALL DECOMPOSED GRANITE AREA
REFRESH STRIPES AND
SLURRY SEAL PARKING LOT
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY LOOD
5) (25
STAGING AND STOCKPILE
AREA. ENCLOSE WITH 8'
CHAINLINK FENCE
REMOVE GUARDRAIL FOR
ACCESS TO STAGING AND
STOCKPILE AREA
RESTORE GUARDRAIL
AND LAYDOWN AREA PER
PUBLIC WORKS/PARKS
DEPARTMENT DIRECTION
E
GRADING LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
PROPERTY LINE(E) ROAD(E) STREAM(E) CONTOUR (1 FT)PROPOSED CONTOUR (1 FT)LIMIT OF DISTURBANCELIMIT OF GRADE
STAGING AREA
FLOW(E) ABOVE GROUND UTILITY LINEBANKFULL CHANNEL STREAM BOUNDARYFEMA 100-YR FLOOD BOUNDARYBIO FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION SITE (100)
100
N
0 20
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
GRADING PLAN
GALINDO CREEK
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
C-2.2
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R
ECI L SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
ACS
BSS
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING TREE
Q100 WSEL
Q10 WSEL
QBF WSEL 2H:1V
ELEVATION
STATION (FT)
CROSS SECTION A-A'
272
270
268266
264
262
260
258256
254
252
250
248
272270268266264262260258256254252250248
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1+75 1+88
STA:0+66
ELEV:254.4
STA:0+84
ELEV:252.4
STA:0+88
ELEV:251.3
STA:0+93
ELEV:251.2
STA:1+00
ELEV:255.0
STA:1+04
ELEV:255.1
EXISTING TREE
EXISTING TREE
Q100 WSEL
Q10 WSEL
QBF WSEL
2.5H:1V
ELEVATION
STATION (FT)
CROSS SECTION B-B'
272
270
268266
264
262
260
258256
254
252
250
248
272270268266264262260258256254252250248
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+38
STA:0+49
ELEV:250.8
STA:0+35
ELEV:251.0
STA:0+30
ELEV:253.0
GALINDO CREEK
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GRADING DETAILS
C-2.3
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
SITE 2 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 2SITE 1 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 1 ACS
BSS
EXISTING
TREE
Q100 WSEL
Q10 WSEL
QBF WSEL
2.5H:1V
ELEVATION
STATION (FT)
CROSS SECTION C-C'
266
264
262
260
258256
254
252
250
248246
266264262260258256254252250248246
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+38
STA:0+68
ELEV:249.0
STA:0+49
ELEV:249.5
STA:0+41
ELEV:252.7
BIO FILTRATION
SWALE
EXISTING TREES
SPOIL MOUND (GRADED TO
NOT AFFECT 100-YR FLOOD)
Q100 WSEL
Q10
WSEL
QBF WSEL
2.5H:1V
3H:1V
3H:1V
266
264
262
260
258256
254
252
250
248246
244
242
240
238
266264262260258256254252250248246244242240238
0+00 0+25 0+50 0+75 1+00 1+25 1+50 1+75 2+00 2+25 2+50 2+62 STA:1+56
ELEV:241.5 STA:1+30 ELEV:241.0
STA:1+70
ELEV:246.5
STA:1+74
ELEV:246.8
STA:2+13
ELEV:251.5 STA:2+18
ELEV:250.0
STA:1+82
ELEV:249.6
FLOW BOB BOB BOB
BOB BOB BOB
TOB TOB TOB
TOB TOB TOB A A'
700# COIR FIBER MATTING
W/ FLOODPLAIN SEED MIX
BOTTOM OF BANK
TOP OF BANK
18"-30" BOULDERS
B
O
B
T
2"-6"
GRAVEL/COBBLE MIX
18"-30" BOULDERS
INSTALL TOP OF BOULDERS AT
CHANNEL INVERT ELEVATION
6" AVERAGE
DEPTH
700# COIR FIBER MATTING
W/ FLOODPLAIN SEED MIX
BOTTOM OF BANK
TOP OF BANK
CHANNEL INVERT
GALINDO CREEK
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GRADING DETAILS
C-2.4
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
SITE 4 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 3SITE 7 TYPICAL SECTION VIEW 4 ACS
BSS
PLAN VIEW - BURIED BOULDER GRADE CONTROL
NOT TO SCALE 5
SECTION A-A' - BURIED BOULDER GRADE CONTROL
NOT TO SCALE 6
1'-9"
4.0' MIN
FINISHED GROUND
(CHANNEL BOTTOM)
EROSION CONTRON BLANKET
12" HIGH x 4' DEEP MIN. LIFTS
WITH 10" COBBLE MIX
EROSION CONTROL BLANKET
12"HIGH x 4' DEEP MIN. LIFTS
WITH APPROVED NATIVE SOIL
6" APPROVED TOPSOIL
6" STAPLES @ 2' O.C.
THROUGHOUT BLANKET
6' MIN
50% ARROYO WILLOW (SALIX LASIOLEPIS)
50% POLISHED WILLOW (SALIX LAEVIGATA)
24" O.C., TYP
2H:1V SLOPE, USE 1.5H:1V TO AVOID TREES
15' - 6"
2" X 10" UNTREATED
REDWOOD TIMBER
12"
MIN
3"
4"
5"
17' - 6"
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
UNDISTURBED/COMPACTED
NATIVE SOIL
12 18"
12"
12"
UNDISTURBED/COMPACTED
NATIVE SOIL
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
3'-0"
4" PERFORATED PVC PIPE
CLASS 11 PERMANENT
DRAINAGE LAYER
SOIL MIX WITH MIN LONG TERM
INFILTRATION RATE OF 5"/HOUR
6" RIPRAP OUTFALL
2" X 10" UNTREATED
REDWOOD TIMBER PROJECT #23010-2
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
LEVEL SPREADER SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 1' 2
SOIL LIFT TYPICAL DETAIL
SCALE: 1" = 2' 1 SCALE: 1 " = 2' 02
DETAILS
C-3.0
SCALE: 1 " = 1'
01 ACS
BSS
LID-1 BIOSWALE OUTFALL
SCALE: 1" = 1' 3 SCALE: 1 " = 1' 01
(245)
(250)
(255)
(248) (249)
(24 (247) (248)
(249) (250)
9+00
12+00
(245)
(2
9+00
E
E E E
(249)
(250)
(248)
(247)
PARKING
LOT
INTERPRETIVEPANEL, PATH,
AND BENCH
FEMA 100-YR
FLOOD BOUNDARY
BANKFULL CHAN
STREAM ED
DMA-1,
DRAINAGE AREA:
11796 SF
CREATE LEVEL
SPREADER WEIR AT
ELEVATION. 249.5
ENLARGE EXISTING GAPS IN
TELEPHONE POLE PARKING
LOT EDGE TO 1'
FILL GAPS IN TELEPHONE POLE
PARKING LOT EDGE WITH
EXPANDABLE SPRAY FOAM
(245)
(246)
LID-1, BIO SWALEDEMONSTRATION 812 SF,
SEE DETAIL 2 THIS SHEET
3'X3' OUTFALL PAD @
ELEVATION 247.0, 6"RIPRAP, 12" DEPTH
4" PIPE UNDERDRAIN
STORMWATER LEGEND
SYMBOL DESCRIPTION
PROPERTY LINE(E) ROAD(E) CONTOUR (1 FT)LIMIT OF DISTURBANCELIMIT OF GRADEFEMA 100-YR FLOOD BOUNDARYBIO FILTRATION DEMONSTRATION SITELEVEL SPREADER WEIR (100)
BIO SWALE UNDISTURBED SOIL
18" DEPTH SOIL MIX WITH MINIMUM LONG-TERM
INFILTRATION OF 5"/HOUR
TELEPHONE POLE PARKING LOT EDGE
PARKING LOT ASPHALT
12" MIN. DEPTH CLASS II PERM
DRAINAGE LAYER SEE UNDERDRAIN NOTES
3:1 3:1 12"
6" MIN
NOTES:
1. UNDERDRAIN SHALL BE A 4” DIAMETER, PVC SDR
35 PERFORATED PIPE INSTALLED NEAR THE TOP OF
THE AGGREGATE LAYER WITH HOLES FACING
DOWN.
2. PROVIDE CAPPED, THREADED PVC CLEANOUT FOR
UNDERDRAIN, 4" MIN. DIA. WITH SWEEP BEND.
3. SWEEP PARKING LOT REGULARLY TO PREVENT
ACCUMULATION OF LITTER AND DEBRIS. COLLECT
DEBRIS FROM PRESSURE WASHING TO PREVENTENTRY INTO THE STORM DRAIN SYSTEM. COLLECT
WASHWATER CONTAINING ANY CLEANING
AGENT OR DEGREASER AND DISCHARGE TO THE
SANITARY SEWER NOT TO A STORM DRAIN.
4. TEMPORARY IRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO
BIOSWALE PLANTINGS UNTIL THEY REACH
MATURITY.
OVERFLOW CONNECTS TO STABILIZED OUTFALL. SEE PLAN VIEW FOR LOCATION
OVERFLOW
STRUCTURE
18" MIN
0 20
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
DAG
BSS
BIO SWALE TYPICAL SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 1' 2 SCALE: 1 " = 1' 01
STORMWATER
CONTROL PLAN
C-4.0
STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN
SCALE: 1" = 20' 1
PLANTING NOTES
GENERAL:
1. SOIL AMENDMENTS AND/OR FERTILIZER TABLETS SHALL BE USED AS NEEDED TO ACHIEVE ADEQUATE SOIL NUTRIENT LEVELS IN PLANTING AREAS.
2. FOLIAGE PROTECTION CAGES SHALL BE INSTALLED AS REQUIRED TO PROTECT PLANTINGS FROM WILDLIFE BROWSING.
UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTING AREAS:
1. PLANT INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR BETWEEN OCTOBER 15TH AND DECEMBER 31ST OR AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE. THE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO PLANTING.
2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A TYPICAL LAYOUT OF THE UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTS WITHIN FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT THE UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTINGS ARE INSTALLED IN THE APPROPRIATE ELEVATION RANGES.
FLOODPLAIN PLANTING AREAS:
1. CONTAINER PLANT INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR BETWEEN OCTOBER 15TH AND DECEMBER 31ST OR AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE. THE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO PLANTING.
2. FLOODPLAIN PLANTINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN THE AREAS SHOWN IN THE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE OR MARK THE OUTER LIMITS OF THE PLANTING AREAS FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A TYPICAL LAYOUT OF THE FLOODPLAIN PLANTS FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
4. WILLOW POLE CUTTINGS:
A. WILLOW POLE CUTTING INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR BETWEEN DECEMBER 1ST AND DECEMBER 31ST OR AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE.
B. WILLOW POLE CUTTINGS WILL BE HARVESTED ON-SITE IN AREAS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE.
BIOSWALE PLANTING AREA:
1. PLANT INSTALLATION SHALL OCCUR BETWEEN OCTOBER 15TH AND DECEMBER 31ST OR AS APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE. THE SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO PLANTING.
2. BIOSWALE PLANTINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN THE AREA SHOWN IN THE PLANS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL STAKE OR MARK THE OUTER LIMITS OF THE PLANTING AREA FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE A TYPICAL LAYOUT OF THE BIOSWALE PLANTS FOR APPROVAL BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
IRRIGATION NOTES:
1. A TEMPORARY DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE USED FOR THE UPPER RIPARIAN AND FLOODPLAIN PLANTING AREAS. WILLOW POLE CUTTINGS SHALL NOT BE IRRIGATED.
2. A TEMPORARY SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE USED FOR THE BIOSWALE AREA.
3. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS SHALL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO PLANT INSTALLATION UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE.
4. THE IRRIGATION SCHEDULES WILL BE DETERMINED BASED ON LOCAL RAINFALL AND EVAPOTRANSPIRATION DATA. THE INTENT OF THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS IS TO PROVIDE THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF WATER TO SUSTAIN GOOD PLANT HEALTH.
5. A DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL BE INSTALLED AND OPERATED ACCORDING TO THE FINAL DESIGN PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
6. IRRIGATION WILL BE TAPERED OFF OVER TIME AND TURNED OFF COMPLETELY AFTER YEAR 3, BUT THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM WILL NOT BE REMOVED COMPLETELY UNTIL THE END OF THE MONITORING PERIOD AFTER VEGETATION SUCCESS CRITERIA HAS BEEN ACHIEVED.
7. THE IRRIGATION PERIOD MAY BE EXTENDED TO SUPPORT REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS INSTALLED AFTER YEAR 2, AT THE DISCRETION OF THE MONITORS.
SEEDING NOTES
1. SEED SHALL BE SUPPLIED ON THE BASIS OF PURE LIVE SEED (PLS).
2. SEEDING AREAS SHALL BE MARKED PRIOR TO SEED APPLICATION AND APPROVED BY THE OWNER’S REPRESENTATIVE.
3. SOIL WILL BE PREPARED FOR SEED INSTALLATION BY HAND RAKING OR DISKING.
4. SEED APPLICATION METHODS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS:
REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS:
1. REPLACEMENT PLANTINGS WILL BE INSTALLED AS NEEDED THROUGH YEAR 3 IN ORDER TO MEET AT LEAST 80 % SURVIVAL.
A. THE UPPER RIPARIAN SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED WITH A DRILL SEEDER AND/OR BE MANUALLY BROADCASTED. DRILL SEEDING SHALL NOT OCCUR ON 3:1 SLOPES OR STEEPER.
SITE PREPARATION NOTES
1. SITE PREPARATION, INCLUDING WEED CONTROL, WILL BE REQUIRED WITHIN SEEDING AND PLANTING AREAS WHERE NO GRADING WILL OCCUR. PRIOR TO B. THE FLOODPLAIN SEED MIX SHALL BE MANUALLY BROADCASTED.
SEEDING OR PLANTING, WEEDS WILL BE REMOVED BY MECHANICAL CUTTING OF ANNUAL GRASSES AND OTHER HERBACEOUS PLANTS; HAND PULLING OFSEEDLINGS AND SAPLINGS WHERE FEASIBLE; AND SPECIFIC HERBICIDE APPLICATION FOR TARGET WEEDS.
2. ENGLISH IVY (HEDERA HELIX) AND TEXAS PRIVET (LIGUSTUM JAPONICUM 'TEXANUM') ARE THE DOMINANT WEEDS WITHIN THE WEED REMOVAL AREA SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. FOLLOWING WEED REMOVAL, THIS AREA SHALL BE SEEDED WITH THE UPPER RIPARIAN SEED MIX.
3. THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WILL IDENTIFY AND FLAG ANY NATURALLY RECRUITING NATIVE OAK SEEDLINGS OR OTHER DESIRABLE EXISTING NATIVE PLANTS AT THE SITE TO BE AVOIDED DURING WEED CONTROL ACTIVITIES.
POLE CUTTINGS - SEE
WILLOW CUTTING
SPECIFICATIONS. CUTTINGS
TO BE A MINIMUM OF 48"
TALL. PLANT CUTTINGS SUCH
THAT THE CUTTING EXTENDS
A MINIMUM OF 36" BELOW
THE FINISH GRADE.
NOT TO SCALE 1 POLE CUTTING DETAIL
SECTION
SECTION
SET PLANT AT GRADE
SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANT PIT
3" MULCH CREATE FOUR (4) INCH HIGH BERM AROUND
PLANTING HOLE TO DETAIN WATER
2X WIDTH OF ROOTBALL
TREE & SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL
NOT TO SCALE 2
BACKFILL
PLAN
SECTION
3" MULCH
NOTE: INSTALL TREE STRAPS
SECURELY AT LOWEST POINT
NECESSARY TO HOLD TREE UPRIGHT
INSTALL STAKES SUCH THAT HEIGHT OF STAKES AREBELOW CROWN OF TREE 2" DIA. X 8' LODGE POLE
PINE STAKES
CORDED RUBBER TREE TIE
(SEE PLAN VIEW)
SET PLANT 2" ABOVE GRADE
CREATE FOUR (4) INCH HIGH BERM AROUND
PLANTING HOLE TO DETAIN WATER
SCARIFY SIDES OF PLANT PIT
BACKFILL AS PER SPECIFICATIONS
2X WIDTH OF ROOTBALL
TREE PLANTING DETAIL WITH TREE STAKES
NOT TO SCALE 3
PLANTING DETAILS,
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
LEGENDS AND NOTES
L-1.1
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
IM
BS, BB
(255)
(257) (256) (255)
(254)
(254)
(256) (255)
(257) (258)
254 253252
18+00
19+00
20+00
251
251
252
253
256
(257) (256) (254)(253) (252) (251)
255
254
252
1 152
0 54 2 3 25 19+00 25325219+00 25 52 2 2 1 252 251 252 251 9 2 2 52 52 2 92 52 15 2 2 52 5 2 1 5 95 2 25 25 9 252 251 25 9 (255)
(257) (256) (255)
(254)
(254)
(256) (255)
(257) (258)
254 253252
18+00
19+00
20+00
251
251
252
253
256
(257) (256) (254)(253) (252) (251)
255
254
252
UPPER RIP PLANT - 1
UPPER RIP SEED - 1
LEGEND
PROPOSED CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
FLOODPLAIN SEEDING AND PLANTING AREAUPPER RIPARIAN SEEDING AREA
UPPER RIPARIAN PLANTING AREA
BIOSWALE SEEDING AND PLANTING AREA
55 PROPOSED LIMIT OF GRADEEXISTING STREAMEXISTING TREE CANOPY
WEED REMOVAL AREA
(252)
(250)
(255) (254) (253)
(252)
(253)
(251)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
250
251 252
251 252 253
12+00
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
(254) (253) (252) (251) (250) (249)
(248) (249) (250) (251)
(252) (253) (254) (255) (256) (257) (258) (259)
0 (252)
(250)
(255) (254) (253)
(252)
(253)
(251)
(249)
(248)
(247)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(250)
250
251 252
251 252 253
12+00
13+00
14+00
15+00
16+00
(254) (253) (252) (251) (250) (249)
(248) (249) (250) (251)
(252) (253) (254) (255) (256) (257) (258) (259)
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
FLOODPLAIN PLANT - 1
FLOODPLAIN PLANT - 2
FLOODPLAIN SEED - 1
FLOODPLAIN SEED - 2
UPPER RIP SEED - 2
HARVEST WILLOW POLESFROM EXISTING WILLOWS
UPPER RIP SEED - 3
UPPER RIP PLANT - 2
UPPER RIP PLANT - 3
UPPER RIP SEED - 4 GALINDO CREEK
(E) PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (PIP)
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
N
0 20
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
PLANTING PLAN
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
L-2.1
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
PLANTING PLAN - SITE 1
1" = 20' 3 PLANTING PLAN - SITES 2, 4, AND 5 1" = 20' 2 IM
BS, BB
(245)
(250)
(250)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(255) (249) (248) (247) (246) (246) (247) (248) (249)
(244) (244) (245)
(246) (247) (248) (249) (250)
(246) (247) (248)
(249) (250)
242 243 244 245 246
247 248 249
250
251
251 250
244 245 246
247 248
249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
(245) (244)
(243)(242) (242) (243) (244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(245)
(250)
(250)
(255) (249) (248) (247) (246) (246) (247) (248) (249)
(244) (244) (245)
(246) (247) (248) (249) (250)
(246) (247) (248)
(249) (250)
242 243 244 245 246
247 248 249
250
251
251 250
244 245 246
247 248
249
250
251
7+00
8+00
9+00
10+00
11+00
(245) (244)
(243)(242) (242) (243) (244)
(245)
(246)
(247)
(248)
(249)
(251)
UPPER RIP SEED - 5
UPPER RIP PLANT - 4
UPPER RIP PLANT - 3
UPPER RIP SEED - 6
FLOODPLAIN PLANT - 3
FLOODPLAIN SEED - 3
WEED REMOVAL AREA
UPPER RIP SEED - 5
BIOSWALE SEED - 1
BIOSWALE PLANT - 1
NEWHALL PARKWAY
MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.2MATCHLINE SHEET L-2.1
3+00
LEGEND
UPPER RIP PLANT - 5
PROPOSED CONTOUR
EXISTING CONTOUR
FLOODPLAIN SEEDING AND PLANTING AREAUPPER RIPARIAN SEEDING AREAUPPER RIPARIAN PLANTING AREABIOSWALE SEEDING AND PLANTING AREA 55 PROPOSED LIMIT OF GRADEEXISTING STREAMEXISTING TREE CANOPY
WEED REMOVAL AREA
N
0 20
SCALE: 1 " = 20 '
PLANTING PLAN
GALINDO CREEK
RESTORATION
PROJECT #23010-2DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:ORIGINAL DRAWING SIZE: 24 X 36
L-2.2
PROJECT
NEWHALL PARK
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Date Issues And Revisions No.
02/22/19 DRAFT 30% SET03/08/19 DRAFT 60% SET04/19/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET 11/01/21 DRAFT UPDATE 60% SET
03/10/22 PERMIT SET
Sheet
2169-G East Francisco Blvd.
San Rafael, CA 94901
(415) 454-8868 Phone
[email protected]
PERMIT# DEV21005
Signature
Renewal Date
Date
Lic. No. 6050
R EC
I
L
SN ED LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC
T
obert Br ai n ell
S T A T E O F C A L I F OR N AI
Bart
PLANTING PLAN - SITE 9
1" = 20' 1 PLANTING PLAN - SITES 5, 6, 7, AND BIOSWALE 1" = 20' 2 IM
BS, BB
Staff Report
Date: June 28, 2022
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Prepared by: Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager
[email protected]
(925) 671-3155
Subject: Considering approval of a two-year agreement, with an automatic renewal provision of successive three (3) year terms, between the City of Concord and Contra Costa County for the provision of animal control services; and authorizing the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form
acceptable to the City Attorney.
CEQA: Not a project/exempt per Public Resources Code
Section 21065, 14 Cal Code Regs. Sections 15060(c)(2),
15060(c)(3), 15378, 15061(b)(2), 15061(b)(3) and/or 15378(b)(4).
Report in Brief
State law requires Concord to provide certain animal control services. The City’s Municipal Code facilitates the ability for Contra Costa County to provide these animal control services on behalf of the City. The County has been systematically improving the service levels it provides while also working with City Managers and Police Chiefs of Contra Costa County to control cost increases to the participating jurisdictions and improve existing animal control service agreements. The result is an updated animal services agreement and fee structure with more clearly defined terms and service levels. Approval of the County’s new animal services agreement is necessary for it to take effect.
Recommended Action
Approve a two-year agreement, with an automatic renewal provision of successive three (3) year terms, between the City of Concord and Contra Costa County for the provision of animal control services; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
8.h
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.h
June 28, 2022
Background
Contra Costa County provides animal control services to all cities and unincorporated areas in the County with the exception of Antioch. The County has been providing a variety of animal control services to Concord since at least 1985 and more recently under a 2006 agreement (Attachment 1). The services range from removal of dead animals in the public right of way to operating a shelter and providing adoptions, along with other ancillary services such as spay and neutering. In recent years, Contra Costa County began working to improve their provided service levels to pre-recession years, which necessitated increases in the cost of service. These changes in service and cost instigated conversations between cities and County staff regarding the need to improve the animal services agreement.
Analysis
The updated agreement (Attachment 2) and fee structure are the result of numerous meetings and touch points held with city officials from each of the County’s contracted cities. The new agreement reflects feedback provided during individual meetings, regional meetings that included the County Supervisor that represents Concord, as well as multiple presentations and listening sessions at the Public Managers Association and Police Chiefs Association. The updated agreement more clearly describes the services that the County will provide to Concord, and defines a funding structure to ensure the agency is able to cover the costs of providing those services. Seven of the eighteen cities served by the County have already adopted the new agreement; with the remaining cities expected to adopt within the next few months.
The new agreement does the following:
Details specific services provided under the agreement for all areas of operation, Creates accountability by listing target response times for each activity type, Defines what is covered under deceased animal services, Describes which services are not included under the agreement, and Codifies performance reporting within the agreement.
In order to facilitate an increase in provided service levels, Contra Costa County is implementing two phases of fee increases over a two-year period, beginning on July 1, 2022. The County currently charges each city a $6.79 per capita fee, which equated to an $883,671 expense in Concord’s FY 2021-22 budget. The amount is increasing by $146,635 ($7.97 per capita) in FY 2022-23, and another $147,577 ($9.11 per capita) in FY 2023-24. These increases will place Concord’s total expense for animal services at an estimated $1,179,317 in FY 2023-24. Concord will be billed actual costs following a year-end reconciliation.
City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 8.h
June 28, 2022
Contra Costa County’s fee increases will restore services equivalent to the level provided in 2006. Phase 1 of the County plan is to add four (4) FTE and related equipment in July 2022. Phase 2 will include an additional five (5) FTE and related equipment in 2023, for a total of nine (9) new positions. The contract with the County does not require Concord to approve these fees. The contract does provide Concord with the ability to give 90 days’ advance notice of termination should the City not approve of the fees or services provided. However, were the City to not contract with the County, the City would have to provide animal control services for the Concord community on its own and the cost would be significantly higher.
For Fiscal Year 2024-25 and each fiscal year thereafter, the per capita rate for the annual fee will be calculated using the following formula:
A. The County’s budgeted cost to provide animal services throughout the County in that fiscal year, minus the sum of animal licensing fees and user fees projected to be received from all County residents in that fiscal year, minus the budgeted County general fund contribution for that fiscal year, divided by:
B. The sum of the population of the unincorporated area plus the population of all cities for which the County provides animal services.
Each year, the County will prepare a reconciliation report of actual costs incurred by the County to provide animal services during the preceding year.
Financial Impact
Funding for the animal services agreement is included in the City’s adopted Fiscal Year 2022-23 operating budget.
Environmental Determination
None of the activities addressed herein constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065, 14 Cal Code Regs. Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), or 15378 because none of the activities has the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, even if any activity was a project under CEQA, each is exempt under 14 Cal. Code Regs. Sections 15061(b)(2), 15061(b)(3), and 15378(b)(4).
Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.
Attachments
1. 2006 Animal Services Agreement
2. Updated Animal Services Agreement
Attachment 1
1 CITY-COUNTY ANIMAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
The County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of California ("County"), and the City of Concord , a municipal corporation in the County ("City"), enter into this City-County Animal Services Agreement (“Agreement”) effective as of July 1, 2022 (“Effective Date”).
1. Authority. The City has adopted by reference Division 416 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code (hereafter "Division 416") governing animals.
Division 416 establishes requirements and procedures for animal control by the County’s Animal Services Department. This Agreement is entered into to memorialize the County’s provision of Animal Services and enforcement of Division 416 within the City as provided in Section 416-4.208, and as authorized by California Government Code section 51301.
2. Enforcement Duties and Personnel. The County will enforce Division 416 within the City’s boundaries. The City hereby designates and appoints the County's Animal Services Director and his or her staff as public officers of the City for the purposes of this Agreement and enforcing and carrying out its provisions.
3. Scope of Services.
a. In addition to enforcing Division 416, the County will provide to the City the Field Services, Shelter Services, and Deceased Animal Services described in this Agreement (collectively, “Animal Services”) in the manner provided for in this Agreement. During periods of emergency (such as fire, earthquake, flooding, pandemic), it might not be possible to provide the Animal Services to the same extent and within the same time frames as during non-emergency times.
b. Calls made to the County for services that are not provided by the County pursuant to this Agreement will be referred back to the City in which the call was requested. In such a case, the City is responsible for determining the next appropriate action.
c. The County will provide Animal Services within the City’s boundaries in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, including the Ordinance Code.
4. Definitions.
a. “Critically Sick or Injured Animals” means those animals that have lifethreatening conditions. b. “Emergency Calls” means complaints of animal bites, potential rabies exposure, or attacks on humans or domestic animals that are in progress, or, when a bite or attack has occurred, where the animal remains an immediate threat to humans.
c. “Livestock” means a large domesticated agricultural animal, such as a Attachment 2
2 cow, bull, steer, horse, sheep, or other large agricultural animal. d. “Regular Field Services hours” means between 8:00 am and 9:00 pm each day of the week, including Saturdays and Sundays.
5. Field Services. The County will provide the following services (collectively, “Field Services”) within the City upon a request from a City resident or person within the boundaries of the City.
a. Pick up and attempt to return to their owners domesticated animals that are found “at large,” to the extent possible without impoundment by relying on the animal’s identification, including dogs, trapped, injured, or sick cats, and other small, domesticated animals, including rabbits, chickens, turkey, geese, and ducks, but excluding wildlife, such as deer, mountain lions, opossums, wild turkeys, raccoons, skunks or squirrels unless a rabies exposure has occurred.
b. Investigate complaints of animal bites, rabies exposure and attacks to humans or domestic animals, including documenting the incident, interviewing witnesses, quarantining animals, preparing and transporting animals for rabies testing, and investigating any alleged violations of a quarantine order.
c. Enforce provisions governing potentially dangerous and dangerous animals, including but not limited to investigating complaints, designating animals, impounding animals, conducting hearings, and issuing permits for animals designated dangerous or potentially dangerous. d. Enforce provisions governing barking dogs and other noisy animals, including but not limited to conducting hearings.
e. Respond during regular business hours to police or fire department calls for assistance regarding animal-related issues. The County may provide after-hours warrant support to the City with advance notice, if County Animal Services personnel are available and willing to volunteer for the assignment, and provided the City pays additional fees sufficient to cover the County’s actual costs.
f. Investigate, cite, impound, and seek resolution of complaints regarding potential mistreatment of domestic animals by their owners.
6. Response Times for Field Services.
a. The County will attempt to respond to requests for Field Services during the hours and within the times specified in this section. The County shall maintain records of its response times to calls for Field Services. i. Priority 1 calls are Emergency Calls, which are calls for assistance from police or fire personnel and calls regarding rabies exposure, dangerous animals, and Critically Sick or Injured Animals.
1. The County will respond to Priority 1, 2, and 3 calls between 8:00 AM and 9:00 PM, seven (7) days per week, including
3 holidays.
2. For ninety-five percent (95%) of responses to Priority 1 calls, County personnel will attempt to arrive on the scene within two (2) hours from the time when the call for service is received by County staff.
ii. Priority 2 calls are calls to pick up animals that were at large but have since been confined at a location within the County, and calls regarding urgent, animal-related requests for assistance not involving Critically Sick or Injured Animals.
1. The County will respond to Priority 2 calls during regular Field Services hours.
2. For eighty percent (80%) of responses to Priority 2 calls received during regular Field Services hours, County personnel will attempt to arrive on the scene within 12 hours from the time the call for service is received by County staff.
3. The County will respond to Priority 2 calls received outside of regular Field Services hours no later than 7:00 pm on the next day.
4. The County may respond to Priority 2 calls by taking a report by phone or by contacting parties and witnesses at the scene. iii. Priority 3 calls are all other calls, such as calls regarding animals at large, animals causing a nuisance, and dead animals.
1. The County will respond to Priority 3 calls during regular Field Services hours.
2. For sixty-five percent (65%) of responses to Priority 3 calls received during regular Field Services hours, County personnel will attempt to arrive on the scene within 24 hours from the time the call for service is received by County staff.
3. The County will respond to calls received outside of regular Field Services hours on the next day.
4. The County will respond to Priority 3 calls only after the County has responded to all then-outstanding Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls.
5. The County may respond to Priority 3 calls by taking a report by phone or by contacting parties and witnesses at the scene.
7. Shelter Services.
a. The County will provide the following services to City residents (“Shelter Services”):
i. Impound and shelter lost or stray dogs, injured/sick, lost or endangered community cats, and other small, domesticated
4 animals that are brought to the shelter by County staff, residents of the County or cities that have contracts with the County for the provision of Animal Services. A community cat is considered endangered if it is in imminent risk of being killed, poisoned, or injured but not if, due to being at large, it is at risk of starvation, being attacked by another animal, or hit by an automobile. Orphaned kittens that cannot survive without human intervention are also considered endangered.
ii. Impound and quarantine biting animals.
iii. Provide rabies testing of animals suspected of infection. iv. Provide for reclamation of abandoned, lost or stray domestic animals.
v. Provide onsite services to the public at the County’s Martinez shelter for the following: search for lost animals, reclaim animals, adopt animals, answer inquiries regarding animals, accept complaints regarding animals, provide vaccines and spay/neuter services for a small fee, conduct humane education programs, and license animals onsite or online.
vi. Provide care for sheltered animals based on the California Veterinary Board Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters published by the Association of Shelter Veterinarians. vii. Provide services as required by the California Penal Code Section 597.1 and other laws governing shelters for animal care, treatment, holding periods, placements, and dispositions.
b. Medical Services. As part of the Shelter Services, the County will provide the following medical services (“Medical Services”):
i. The County will provide veterinarian services twenty-four (24) hours per day through partnerships with emergency vets to treat injured or sick impounded animals.
ii. If an animal’s condition requires immediate treatment outside of the County shelter’s regular business hours or when no veterinarian is on staff at the County’s shelter, then County Animal Services Department officers or Good Samaritans may take the animal to any emergency veterinarian clinic/hospital that is under contract with the County to provide emergency veterinary services (as posted on the County shelter’s doors and on the County’s Animal Services Department’s website).
iii. The County will monitor animals on a rabies virus quarantine. iv. The County will conduct a minimum of one vaccine clinic per month and maintain a spay and neuter clinic in Martinez, which for a fee paid by the animal’s owner will provide vaccine and spay/neuter services for County residents’ dogs and cats. The fee will be
5 approved by the County Board of Supervisors and published on the County Animal Services Department fee schedule.
v. Provide rabies control information free of charge to the public. vi. The County will provide emergency veterinary services in accordance with Section 597(f) of the California Penal Code. c. Shelter Services Hours
i. The Martinez shelter will be open to the public for a minimum of 30 hours per week, 5 days per week, 6 hours per day, including one weekend day each week except during weeks that are shortened by a County holiday.
ii. The Martinez Shelter will be closed on designated County holidays and one day per year dedicated to in-house staff training.
8. Deceased Animal Services. The County will provide the following services within the City in response to calls regarding deceased animals during regular Field Services hours:
a. Pick up deceased domestic animals, wildlife, and livestock from public property.
b. With property owners’ consent, pick up deceased domestic or wild animals from private property for a fee based on the Department’s fee schedule paid directly to the County Animal Services Department by the property owner or reporting party.
c. Identify and notify the owner of deceased animals, whenever possible. d. Dispose of the body of any deceased animal picked up by the County.
9. Excluded Services. The County will not provide the following services to the City under this Agreement:
a. Respond to requests for removal of live or deceased marine animals and disposal of deceased marine animals.
b. Pick up and transport wildlife, including baby birds. c. Pick up live animals for surrender. The County may, at its discretion, accept live animals belonging to County residents for surrender at the Martinez shelter and charge a fee to the animal owner or property owner as part of its regular operations.
d. Respond to pest control issues (i.e., infestations, perceived or real, of squirrels, rats, mice, insects, gophers, wasps, bees, spiders, or other pests).
e. Respond to calls regarding live, sick and injured racoons, opossum, deer, mountain lions, coyotes, wild turkeys, wild pigs, peacocks, or other wildlife unless a rabies exposure has occurred. The County will refer calls regarding live wildlife to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
6 10. Policies and Procedures. All policies and procedures shall be developed with the goal of ensuring animal welfare, enhancing cost efficiency and quality of services provided to the contracted cities and unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County. They will be developed to reflect best practices in the industry for animal control and shelter animal care using the Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters published by the Association of Shelter Veterinarians, ASPCA, the Humane Society of the United States, National Animal Control Association (NACA) and/or other currently accepted best practices for animal control and animal sheltering.
11. Performance and Activity Reports. The County will deliver to the City within 14 days of the end of each quarter, an Animal Control and Results Report summarizing Animal Services provided by the County to the City during the previous quarter and including year-to-date data. This report will include the following information:
a. The total number of calls for service received by the County under this Agreement, identified by type of service and Priority level. b. A response time report identifying response times by Priority level. c. The outcomes for animals impounded, identified by City/County jurisdiction.
d. The number of calls for service received from City residents or persons within the City’s boundaries.
e. A listing of dogs registered to City residents identified as potentially dangerous or dangerous (PDA/DA) that have a valid County-issued PDA/DA permit.
12. Fees and Fines. Pursuant to Food and Agricultural Code Section 30652, all fees and fines collected by the County for providing Animal Services to the City shall be deposited into the County Treasury and shall be used to meet the County’s cost of providing Animal Services to the City.
13. Annual Fee.
a. In consideration for Services provided by the County to the City, and in addition to any fees and fines imposed on City residents, the City agrees to pay to the County the following amounts (“Annual Fee”):
i. For fiscal year 2022-2023, $7.97 for each person residing within the City limits as of January 2022. For example, if the City’s population is 50,000, the Annual Fee is $398,500.
ii. For fiscal year 2023-2024, $9.11 for each person residing within the City limits as of January 2023. For example, if the City’s population is 50,000, the Annual Fee is $455,500.
iii. For each fiscal year thereafter, the per capita rate for the Annual Fee shall be calculated using the following formula: (A) The County’s budgeted cost to provide Animal Services throughout the
7 County in that fiscal year, minus the sum of animal licensing fees and user fees projected to be received from all County residents in that fiscal year, minus the budgeted County general fund contribution for that fiscal year, divided by (B) the sum of the population of all cities for which the County provides Animal Services. For example, if the budgeted cost to provide Animal Services throughout the County is $12,640,000, the animal licensing and user fees projected to be received are $1,620,000, the budgeted general fund contribution is $4,112,000, and the population is 866,583, then the per capita Annual Fee would be $7.97 per capita [($12,640,000 - $1,620,000 - $4,112,000) / 866,583]. For a City with a population of 100,000, the total Annual Fee would be $797,000.
b. The City shall pay the Annual Fee to the County in four equal quarterly installments. Each installment shall be due on the first day of each fiscal quarter (i.e., July 1, October 1, January 1, and April 1). The City shall make the payment to the County Treasurer-Tax Collector, 625 Court Street, Martinez, CA 94553.
c. The City shall pay the Annual Fee to the County regardless of the amount of any fees and fines collected by the County pursuant to Division 416.
d. Each year, the County will prepare a reconciliation report of actual costs incurred by the County to provide Animal Services during the immediately preceding year to ensure the Annual Fee paid by the City covers only actual costs incurred to provide Animal Services. The reconciliation report will be completed and sent to the City in the month of August for each fiscal year. Any cost savings for that fiscal year will be applied to the following fiscal year.
e. For purposes of calculating the Annual Fee, the County shall rely on the population figures reported by the California State Department of Finance E1 Population Estimates report as of January of each year. f. The County shall notify the City of the amount of the Annual Fee for the next fiscal year by March 1st of each year.
14. Term; Termination.
a. The term of this Agreement begins on the Effective Date and continues for two (2) years. This Agreement shall automatically renew for successive three-year periods until either party terminates this Agreement by giving the other party 90 days advance written notice of termination.
b. This Agreement shall automatically terminate if the County repeals Division 416 or if the City repeals its resolution incorporating and applying Division 416 within the City.
c. The County may terminate this Agreement if the City fails to pay the
8 Annual Fee by its due date by giving the City 30-days advance written notice.
d. The County agrees to meet jointly with all contracting city agencies annually during Quarter 2 of each fiscal year (i.e., October) to discuss potential revisions or updates through the Public Managers Association.
15. Entire Agreement; Amendment. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties, and supersedes any prior agreement between the parties, with respect to the subject matter hereof. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and approved by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors.
16. Governing law; Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Any dispute arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be brought in Contra Costa County Superior Court.
17. Notices. Any notice to be given to either of the parties in connection with this Agreement shall be sent by U.S. mail to the following address:
If to County:
Director, Animal Services
4800 Imhoff Place
Martinez, California 94553-4300
If to City:
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
The parties are signing this Agreement as of the Effective Date set forth above.
COUNTY CITY
By: Beth Ward By:
Title: Animal Services Director Title:
Date: Date:
From: Annie Wright <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2022 2:27 PM
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: City Council Meeting, June 28, 2022. Public Comments for Consent Calendar Item H. Animal Services Agreement
Dear City Clerk,
Please forward my letter, the Grand Jury Report 2105 and the Citygate reports attached to the council members and post to the June 28, 2022, agenda,Consent Item H. Animal Services Agreement.
Thank you for your assistance.
Annie Wright
Animal Rights Coalition (ARC)
Benched Correspondence
Agenda Item No. 8.h
June 28, 2022
June 25, 2022
As Contra Costa County residents, taxpayers and animal advocates, we are very concerned for the welfare of Contra Costa County pets, including dogs, owned cats, homeless community cats and wildlife.
Director Beth Ward has proposed her City-County Animal Services Agreement which has been sent to the eighteen incorporated Cities. The Agreement is below the basic standard of care in practice by shelters across the country, many of them serving much smaller populations with a fraction of CCAS’s budget. This agreement should consider citizens' needs and humane best practices for animal services and care. Over 1,100 citizens have sent letters to their City Officials objecting to this Agreement.
This Agreement does not outline these critical shelter services:
Quantify Spay/Neuter and Trap, Neuter, Return (TNR)
Public Education Program
Adoption Program
Adequate cat foster care program to ensure cats and dogs get out of the shelter.
Services for Injured Wildlife
Successful Foster Care System
Coordinated transfer to Rescues
Animal redemption program that reduces the number of animals returned to the shelter.
Pet Retention Program
Adoption guidelines to ensure animals are adopted into safe cruelty free homes Joint City-County Collaboration Committee
Scope of Services states, “Calls made to the County for services that are not provided by the County pursuant to this Agreement will be referred back to the City and the City is responsible for determining the next appropriate action.” Shelter and Emergency Veterinary Service:
The agreement states providing shelter services as required by the California Penal Code Section 597.1. The code addresses misdemeanors committed against animals in the field. Thus, citing of CA PC 597.1 as the governing law overseeing shelters is not applicable and inappropriate.
The agreement also states emergency veterinary services would be accordance with California Penal Code 597(f). However, this narrow definition should not be the only basis of emergency veterinary services.
A Coordinated Pet Retention, Transfer Partner and Adoption programs with assigned staff is required at the shelter. These positions were not included in this agreement, but promise in the fee increase letter.
Injured Wildlife:
In many areas of the county, wildlife such as deer, are being injured by cars, spiked fences, etc. It is inhumane to allow wildlife to suffer for hours or days without being euthanized. Citizens often attend to injured wildlife as resources are unavailable.
Contact with wildlife is a potential public safety risk (possible injury, exposure to diseases, etc.) and these interactions can be traumatic.
Contra Costa Animal Services eliminated services for all live wildlife calls in October 2020 - presumably because of budget restrictions. That same year CCAS had a 1.9 million dollar surplus that went back into the County general fund. These services included humanely euthanizing or transporting injured wildlife to Lindsay Wildlife Hospital. This agreement has a substantial increase in cities funds, however these services are not being reinstated as promised by Beth Ward. Animal Service is referring all calls to the Department of Fish and Game, which are unable to attend to most calls.
Field Officer Response:
The levels of response times are inadequate putting animal lives and people in danger.
Example is an "At Large" dog and the potential risks of endangerment to itself, other animals, people and causing traffic accident injuries and fatalities.
Budget:
CCAS presented to Contra Costa County's Public Protection Committee an annual 4.1 million general fund contribution, while the City fees increase every year.
CCAS presented the slide "Looking Ahead" to the Board of Supervisors on April 12, 2022. The increased City fees contribute toward non mandated services and these services should be included in the City-County agreement. The slide states an increase of spay and neuters to 47% in FY 21-22, however during the Board of Supervisors’ meeting, the director stated the 47% increase of spay and neuter is “projected” not from Fiscal year 2021/22.
The cities are contributing to these field and shelter staff positions, and they should be included in the Agreement. CCAS'S Budget Presentation slide:
February 22, 2022, Board of Supervisors (BOS) response to the Grand Jury Investigation into Animal Services: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
responded to the investigation and agreed there is a need to improve animal services throughout the County. The BOS stated “a new service agreement with the cities” will bring a greater level of service throughout the County.
The Grand Jury Recommendation states “The County Board of Supervisors request that CCAS apply for Measure X funding to lower the projected increased financial cost to CCAS-contracted cities and to support additional low-cost spay and neuter services.” At the Board of Supervisors’ meeting on February 22, 2022, clarification was given regarding Measure X funds being a general tax and Animal Services could have received Measure X funds, however the County decided not to pursue this funding despite the magnitude of advocacy efforts by concerned citizens. In an email dated October 19, 2021, County Finance Staff States: “Regarding Animal Services – … highly unlikely Measure X will be available now or in the future. Plan is to continue to pursue additional city funding"...
In addition to the many deficiencies in this agreement, the reduction of services has exacerbated the overpopulation of cats and dogs causing a community crisis.
Low-cost spay/neuters have been halted for two-years and were reinstated in March 2022. However, CCAS quickly reached their three month capacity for spay/neuter appointments.
Most of the recommended rescue groups providing low-cost spay/neuters on CCAS' website are no longer viable.
The Return to Field Program for community cats needs to be brought back and revised to minimize compromising the cats’ health.
There has been a 5-6 week waitlist for the Community Cat Program's trap-neuterreturn spay/neuters surgeries. Thirty-two appointments per week is inadequate.
Euthanasia for Animals:
The Director has documented that if the additional fees are not agreed: “The population of sheltered animals would have to be controlled significantly through euthanasia for animals with treatable conditions outside of the Department's veterinary scope of services and financial resources”.
However, the Haden law states that the animal be released to a nonprofit animal rescue or adoption organization in certain circumstances. Therefore, a robust transfer program should be implemented at the shelter and in this agreement.
In August 2020, the Board of Supervisors voted in favor of a recommendation by Animal Services Director, Beth Ward, to close the Pinole Shelter to consolidate services at the Martinez Shelter. This decision was part of a savings measure approved to close a $35 million budget deficit for fiscal year 20-21. There were on-going budget issues and the Shelter closure was considered for years. Covid-19 should not be the scapegoat for the demise of the Pinole Shelter. The photos below were taken on April 20, 2022. Potential adopters and pet owners looking for their lost pet or to surrender them, are met with a Temporarily Closed sign.
In 2017,
Signs posted at the
Pinole Animal
Shelter. Photos
taken April 20, 2022.
Animal Services hired the firm Citygate Associates to perform a cost analysis of the County's animal services operations for the contracted cities. This report cost the cities and county over $100,000 dollars, paid from the Animal Services Budget.
Citygate recommended to evaluate all contracted services for effectiveness and cost efficiency, to revise the current City-Animal Services agreement, review current shelter practices to ensure maximum use of shelter space and maximum customer access to the Pinole and Martinez shelters. Most of these recommendations are not reflected in the agreement.
Citygate summarized: In the nearly 10 years since 2008, the Department has experienced reduced staffing, chronic vacancies, budget cuts, retention problems, recruitment problems, and turnover in key leadership personnel. This succession of organizational change has left the agency with a significant loss of institutional knowledge and the need to rebuild and retool.
We highly recommend reading the Citygate Report, as well as the investigative, Grand Jury Report conducted in 2020-2021 (attached).
The agreement is below the basic standard of care in practice by shelters across the country. We urge the cities to revise the agreement to be a mutually agreeable, Joint City-County Collaboration. We agree that increased city funding is needed. A wellwritten humane agreement is required, outlining services and reinstating eliminated ones. City representatives, rescue groups and community members should be involved with creating a new agreement.
Thank you for your careful consideration of these serious issues affecting our pet population, Cities and residents of Contra Costa County.
Respectfully yours,
Annie Wright
ARC (Animal Rights Coalition)
Contra Costa County, California
June 25, 2022
We are very concerned about the explosive population growth of cats and dogs in Contra Costa County.
The community-based services provided by Contra Costa County Animal Services in Martinez, does not meet the needs of our vast population of 1.2 million people.
The number of low cost spay, neuter and vaccination appointments is inadequate.
The clinics were reopened recently after two years due to Covid-19 and quickly reached capacity. There was a 3 month wait for appointments. The number of Trap/Neuter/Return (TNR) surgeries for the Community Cat Program for unowned cats, is woefully inadequate, with a long wait list of 4-6 weeks and only 32 weekly surgeries.
Rescue groups have been filling the void in services to help our communities with abandoned and homeless cats and dogs. The lack of adequate services has been stressful and difficult. Many non-profit groups do not receive funding from CCAS’s Animal Benefit Fund. Private vet rates have continued to escalate. Spay and neuters average $400 to $800. Low-income families and people struggling to pay their bills, rely on County services.
Beth Ward, Director of Animal Services, has proposed a new Agreement to the 18 cities for services. I understand the Cities are concerned about the increased fees.
Animal advocates and rescuers are concerned about the vague scope of services and focus on mandated service, which does not address the overpopulation of pets.
A Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) investigated CCAS in 2020-2021. They recommended that CCAS apply for Measure X funding to offset the fees to the Cities.
At the Board of Supervisors’ meeting on February 22, 2022, clarification was given regarding Measure X funds being a general tax and Animal Services could have received Measure X funds, however the County decided not to pursue this funding despite the magnitude of advocacy efforts by concerned citizens. In an email dated October 19, 2021, County Finance Staff States: “Regarding Animal Services – … highly unlikely Measure X will be available now or in the future.
Plan is to continue to pursue additional city funding.
Although Director Ward drafted a proposal in December 2021, it was not submitted to MXCAB (attached). The proposal clearly shows the need for discretionary services and outlines the number of animals in need. Beth Ward has stated that the County-City Agreement is for mandated services and has never included spay and neuter services. Then why didn’t the County pursue Measure X funding for desperately needed animal services? This decision is having a negative impact on rescue groups, our communities, and our beloved animals.
The internal emails between the County departments regarding Measure X funding, including animal services, are attached for your review.
Please note that Measure X presentations to MXCAB concluded in July 2021. In November 2021, 75 million is Measure X funding had been allocated. In February 2021, there was approximately 12.5 million in unallocated funds available. This was a second chance to receive funding for animal services, yet the Board of Supervisors decided not to. Measure X is a 20-year tax and we urge City leaders to pursue the funding matter with CCAS and the County officials.
Sincerely,
Annie Wright
Animal Rights Coalition (ARC)
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 1 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury Contact: Samil Beret
Foreperson
(925) 608-2621
Contra Costa County Grand Jury Report 2105
Improving Animal Services in Contra Costa County
TO: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
City Council of Antioch
SUMMARY
Currently, Contra Costa County (County) Animal Services are centralized in one facility located at the northern edge of this large County, which creates logistical barriers to providing efficient service. The County can improve animal services by sharing resources and geographically distributing animal services.
Public and private animal shelters are experiencing pressure from the explosive growth in the homeless animal and abandoned pet populations. Community outreach and education are high priorities for both Contra Costa and Antioch Animal Services, the two public animal shelters within the County.
Wildlife retrieval provided by the County Animal Services is one of its most valuable services, especially in those areas of the County that border large open spaces. Recent funding restrictions have severely undermined the ability of Animal Services to retrieve live, wounded, or dead animals.
The Grand Jury recommends that Contra Costa Animal Services (CCAS) engage a consulting firm for guidance on the possible redistribution of animal services that could be achieved by a gradual process of cost-sharing and shelter co-ordination. A comparable consolidation currently underway between Monterey County and the City of Salinas Animal Shelters provides a possible model for the integration of Contra Costa and Antioch Animal Shelter services (CCAS and AAS). An example of countywide cooperative agreement already exists. The County Sheriff’s Office has a model for distributed services throughout the County. The Grand Jury recommends that CCAS consider specific, tailored regional service agreements between the cities and the County for animal services rather than a common countywide contract.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 2 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury The Grand Jury further recommends that both public animal shelters enhance their emphasis on community outreach to confront homeless animal overpopulation. The full array of services available can be communicated to the public including the existing inexpensive spay and neuter and vaccination programs. Increased staffing is necessary to implement expanded educational programs.
The Grand Jury recommends that CCAS selectively enhance community outreach to the contracted cities. Responses from the contracted cities stated that their residents are unaware of the broad range of field services provided by CCAS. The Grand Jury also recommends that CCAS increase public awareness of the importance of proper pet medical attention such as vaccination and spay and neuter procedures.
METHODOLOGY
The Grand Jury used the following investigative methods:
Reviewed compliance with the two previous Grand Jury investigations of the Antioch Animal Shelter (GJ Reports 1205 and 1708).
Received twenty-three Requests for Information.
Conducted nine personal interviews.
Visited AAS.
Conducted an online search of available databases, news articles, and web sites of regional and national rescue organizations and shelters. Contacted personnel managing animal shelters in other jurisdictions.
BACKGROUND
Two facilities provide public animal services in Contra Costa County: the Contra Costa Animal Shelter (CCAS) located in Martinez and the Antioch Animal Shelter (AAS) managed by the Antioch Police Department. These facilities provide a broad range of services such as licensing, wildlife retrieval, live and dead animal pickup, and spay and neuter clinics. The facilities offer community education and outreach programs, which emphasize responsible pet care.
The County shelter is on the northern edge of the County removed from the main population centers. This imbalance results in logistical difficulties for residents and CCAS personnel. For example, traffic congestion sometimes delays response times for live animal retrieval and noisy animal complaints.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 3 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury The City of Antioch voted in 1978 to establish its own shelter. In recent years, public concern about pet overpopulation at the Antioch Animal Shelter led to a 2017 Grand Jury investigation (Report 1708) that outlined deficiencies in shelter management, operations, and the physical facility. The current Grand Jury investigated the Shelter’s compliance with those previous recommendations and concluded that improvements in the management, facility, and operating procedures have successfully addressed the earlier concerns. Notably, a private rescue facility assisted the City of Antioch in the implementation of the recommended changes.
However, the current Grand Jury noted that one difficulty, cited in the earlier Grand Jury report, remains. Based on Grand Jury interviews, the proximity of Antioch to the underserved eastern areas of the County leads to persistent problems with animal abandonment at the Antioch Shelter from residents outside the City of Antioch.
Although there is an informal working relationship between CCAS and AAS personnel on this issue, a more formal agreement between AAS and CCAS would facilitate abandoned pet retrieval at both shelters.
As noted above, information collected by the Grand Jury identified the importance of wildlife retrieval by both animal services, especially in those parts of the County that border open space. Indeed, this function is often cited by cities with CCAS contracts as the most significant role of County animal services since it is a general service and not necessarily linked to pet ownership.
CCAS receives funding from the County’s General Fund and has the responsibility to provide animal services in the unincorporated communities in the County. CCAS also provides services to eighteen incorporated cities and towns through individual contracts.
These contracts stipulate that the funding increase permitted to CCAS be based upon the Consumer Price Index percentage and the individual municipality’s population growth. If this total funding is insufficient, then service restrictions might result and were indeed realized in September 2020. These countywide service changes were the number of officers allocated to Field Services decreased from sixteen to ten CCAS’s Field Services reduced its operating hours
On-call coverage was eliminated
Deceased wild animal retrieval on private property was stopped All live wildlife calls were referred to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 4 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury Animal shelters currently face conflicting demands. Public opinion increasingly opposes euthanasia, but abandoned pets lead to animal shelter overpopulation. Overpopulation is the primary reason cited for euthanasia at shelters nationwide.1 According to the American Humane Society’s position statement,2 all cats and dogs adopted from public or private animal care should be spayed or neutered to reduce euthanasia rates most effectively. Furthermore, the statement emphasizes that public awareness and cooperation with this approach is crucial. Information gathered by the Grand Jury corroborated these statements for both public animal shelters.
The cost of spaying and neutering pets can be a contributing factor to pet abandonment. AAS charges a flat fee of $90 for feline spay and neuter and $150 for canine spay and neuter operations. CCAS fees range between $50 and $74 for felines and $121 to $172 for canines. Although these fees compare favorably to private veterinarian fees, they still present a financial obstacle for many pet owners. No quantitative survey data on the possible efficacy of subsidized spay and neuter clinics within the County exists. Data from subsidized pilot programs in several other states (Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Texas) correlate with increased spay and neuter rates and declines in shelter populations.
DISCUSSION
Service Distribution
Geographic separation presents obstacles to efficient CCAS service. As the schematic map in Figure 1 highlights, the two public animal shelters are in the northern portion of the County. The County Board of Supervisors approved the closure of the Pinole facility, which was never designed for long-term animal housing, in September 2020.
1 A. Kleinfeldt, “Overview of Animal Euthanasia”, https://www.animallaw.info/article/overview-animal-euthanasia. 2 https://www.americanhumane.org/position-statement/animal-population-control.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 5 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury A single large facility, CCAS, is located far from the eastern and southern portions of the County increasing the commute time for resident’s access to public services. The recent closure of the Pinole facility reduces ready access to CCAS in-person services for the western part of the County. By comparison, Alameda County has seven public shelters serving an area nearly comparable (739 square miles) to Contra Costa County (716 square miles). These public shelters are listed in Table 1.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 6 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury Table 1
Bay Area government shelters in Contra Costa and Alameda Counties. The Pinole facility closed in September 2020.
Public Shelter Name City Owner pet
surrenders?
Contra Costa County
Antioch Animal Shelter Antioch Y
Contra Costa County Animal
Services
Martinez Y
Contra Costa County Animal
Services
Pinole
(closed)
NA
Alameda County
Alameda Animal Shelter Alameda Y
Berkeley City Animal Shelter Berkeley Y
East County Animal Shelter Dublin Y
Fairmont Animal Shelter San Leandro Y
Hayward Animal Control Hayward Y
Oakland Animal Shelter Oakland Y
Tri-City Animal Shelter Fremont Y
Table 2
Bay Area nonprofit animal shelters in Contra Costa and Alameda and Alameda Counties.
Organization Name City Owner pet
surrenders?
Contra Costa County
Animal Rescue Foundation Walnut Creek N
Milo Foundation Point Richmond Call
Contra Costa Humane Society Pleasant Hill N
Contra Costa SPCA Concord Call
Alameda County
Berkeley Humane Society Berkeley Y
East Bay SPCA - Tri-Valley Dublin Y
Oakland East Bay SPCA Oakland Y
Ohlone Humane Society Fremont N
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 7 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury The nonprofit animal shelters in both counties are listed in Table 2. Although Alameda County’s population of 1.67 million is approximately 45% larger than Contra Costa’s, the per capita access to public animal services in Alameda County is more evenly distributed than in Contra Costa County.
Both Tables include a column indicating whether the shelter accepts owner-surrendered pets -- that is, pets whose owners are relinquishing ownership of an animal to the shelter. The centrally located Animal Rescue Foundation (ARF) nonprofit, animal shelter in Contra Costa County, does not accept owner-surrendered animals. In the western part of the County, the Milo Foundation nonprofit animal shelter will accept and hold selected owner-surrendered pets. The Point Richmond Adoption Center, operated by the Milo Foundation, has existing physical resources for animal sheltering including a small 5,000 square foot physical space in Point Richmond. The Milo Foundation also manages a large, 283-acre, animal sanctuary in Mendocino County.
Resource Sharing
There is an existing instance of a decentralized countywide resource. The County Sheriff’s Office maintains a Patrol Division that operates from five station houses throughout the County to patrol unincorporated areas and a Special Operations Division which leverages County assets to support several incorporated municipalities (Danville, Lafayette, and Orinda). Each station house has its own Lieutenant with a variable number of deputies and staff support. The incorporated municipalities contract with the Sheriff’s Office but retain local control over police operation. This contractual arrangement leads to standardized training and the sharing of staff resources.
The decentralized structure of the County Sheriff’s services suggests that a similar redistribution of CCAS services might be possible and result in more efficient service.
Such an approach need not require construction of additional facilities. Animal service personnel could be stationed at suitable existing County and city buildings to improve response times. The cities in the County have different needs so the additional flexibility in requested animal services might be beneficial and cost-effective. CCAS currently has an identical contract agreement with each of the municipalities. This contract structure might be modified to maintain universal basic services to all contracted cities but offer enhanced services for those cities with differing needs ranging from noise complaints to roaming feral pigs. Increased communication between CCAS management and the individual city managers is necessary to explore these possibilities.
In the special case of the City of Antioch, information gathered by the Grand Jury also suggests that resource sharing between CCAS and AAS could be beneficial.
Establishing a partnership between AAS and CCAS for a low-cost spay and neuter clinic was cited as an example. This service would help control the pet and community cat population in the eastern part of the County. More extensive cooperation between the two public shelters, such as operating both shelters as one program, was
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 8 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury recommended but would require agreement from the management of both shelters to fund a comprehensive feasibility study.
A similar precedent for merging county and city animal services is the ongoing consolidation of animal services between the City of Salinas and Monterey County who contracted an independent consulting firm, Management Partners, in 2015, to provide options for the consolidation of services. The resulting comprehensive report outlined four options, one of which recommended the formation of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) between the County of Monterey and the City of Salinas. The selection of the JPA option facilitated the gradual merging of the two shelters in April 2020. Similarly, CCAS could engage a consulting firm to assist in determining how to proceed.
In Contra Costa County, the Antioch Animal Shelter has a proportionally larger animal intake than CCAS. See Table 3.
Table 3
Total live animal intake population by AAS and CCAS per year.
Year AAS CCAS
2018 2,786 8,454
2019 2,577 8,673
2020 1,366 5,015
Although CCAS handles about three times the total number of animals as AAS, the Antioch shelter has a disproportionately large live animal intake given its much smaller resident population.
This additional animal intake burden on AAS is reflected in the higher cost per capita, $15.44, for animal services for the residents of Antioch. As noted in Table 4, the overall per capita cost, $12.02, for CCAS services is comparable to other selected public animal shelters, but the individual fee rate for those cities that contract with CCAS is $6.54, less than half of the City of Antioch rate. The lower CCAS rate for the contracted cities is possible due to distributed base funding through the County’s General Fund and User Fee Revenue. Interviews conducted by the Grand Jury suggested that CCAS and AAS could share personnel and facility space to provide more access to low-cost rabies vaccination and spay and neutering services for East County residents.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 9 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury Table 4
Per capita cost for selected public animal shelters.
Public Shelter FY 20/21 Per Capita Rate
Solano County $11.11
Sacramento County $13.10
City of Oakland $12.09
City of Antioch $15.44
Contra Costa County (total) $12.02
Contra Costa County
(Cities) $6.54
Partnership with nonprofit animal rescue organizations might also be an effective means of distributing resources. As noted in Table 2, there are two nonprofit shelters in Contra Costa County, ARF in Walnut Creek and the Milo Foundation in Point Richmond. ARF was historically instrumental in providing oversight in the reorganization of AAS and, according to information supplied to the Grand Jury, it has maintained a favorable working relationship with both AAS and CCAS. Further coordination and expansion of mutual animal services can be beneficial.
Another nonprofit animal shelter located in Dublin is operated by East Bay SPCA (Table 2). Although this facility is within Alameda County, its stated mission is to provide services to both Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. Its proximity to the southern and eastern parts of Contra Costa County suggests that CCAS management could promote an enhanced working relationship between CCAS and East Bay SPCA. Similarly, CCAS management should consider resource sharing with the Milo Foundation, which maintains a 5,000 square foot facility in Point Richmond.
Funding
A possible new funding source available to CCAS is Measure X. County voters approved this measure in November 2020, increasing the sales tax in Contra Costa County by 0.5% for twenty years, which will generate an estimated $81 million per year for essential services. Allocation of these funds is overseen by an Advisory Board, which creates a detailed priority list of the top ten service gaps and submits a recommended list to the Board of Supervisors.
Current cost increases are placing a greater burden on some of the contracted cities given CCAS’s per capita cost structure. Effective July 1, 2022, the CCAS service fee will increase from $6.79 to $9.11 per capita. Measure X funding could supply funding to
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 10 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury offset this rate increase. Additional CCAS funding might also restore sick and wildlife animal retrieval and support distributed low-cost veterinarian services.
Community Outreach
Based on information gathered from Requests for Information and interviews, both AAS and CCAS struggle with community outreach and education. Outreach programs are essential to address the underlying cause of stress on animal services due to the increasing homeless pet population. Personnel at both facilities are aware of this deficiency but are hampered by lack of adequate staffing. Beyond staffing concerns, low-cost options for pet medical treatment would lead to a decrease in abandoned pets for those owners unable to afford proper pet care. Community awareness of the importance of spaying and neutering pets is also a key component of outreach programs.
Information collated from a Grand Jury survey indicated that most cities were “satisfied” (40%) or “somewhat satisfied” (40%) with existing CCAS services. However, there were common complaints from the cities responding as “unsatisfied” (20%). For example, existing CCAS services to some of the contracted cities are not adequately communicated to residents. Therefore, increased communication with the community would be beneficial especially concerning wildlife management and the availability of veterinary services.
The CCAS response to reports of dangerous, deceased, or distressed animals is considered by some of the contracted cities to be inadequate despite the recent (January 7, 2020) fee increase to the city contracts approved by the Board of Supervisors. Many municipality respondents noted that deceased and diseased animal retrieval is of special importance throughout the County due to public health and traffic safety concerns.
Volunteers
Based on interviews and site visits, assistance from volunteers is essential to animal care at CCAS and AAS due to the limited funding received by each facility. At CCAS, volunteers receive formal and practical training from experienced volunteers and staff.
Although AAS has created a Volunteer Coordinator / Community Outreach position, it is unfilled due to lack of funding. In many instances, volunteers are not assigned specific tasks and are left to establish their own work schedules. A redistribution of animal shelter services throughout the County would also increase the pool of potential volunteers in the County. The need to travel to Martinez could be an impediment to volunteering at the CCAS for people residing in the eastern, western, or southern parts of the county.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 11 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury
FINDINGS
F1. There is a need for improved animal services throughout the County.
F2. CCAS facilities are concentrated in the northern part of the County.
F3. AAS volunteers are often not assigned specific tasks and lack direction.
F4. AAS does not have funding for a Volunteer Coordinator / Community Outreach staff position.
F5. In some of the contracted municipalities, residents are not aware of CCASprovided services, especially wildlife retrieval.
F6. Funding reductions to the CCAS budget have hindered live wildlife retrieval and rescue.
F7. A satisfaction survey of the 18 CCAS-contracted cities revealed 40% satisfied, 40% somewhat satisfied, and 20% unsatisfied with the quality of overall CCAS services supplied.
F8. All CCAS contracts with municipalities provide identical services at the same cost per capita.
F9. Additional vaccination and spay and neuter clinics would reduce the number of homeless and surrendered animals in the shelters.
F10. There are private animal shelter facilities, The Milo Foundation and ARF, in the western and central parts of the County, respectively.
F11. A private animal shelter in Alameda County, East Bay SPCA, is located near the southern part of Contra Costa County.
F12. Measure X funding has not been allocated for CCAS operations.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Grand Jury recommends that the following be implemented by June 2022:
R1. The Antioch City Council allocate funding to fill the staff position of Volunteer Coordinator / Community Outreach at AAS.
R2. AAS improve volunteer training.
R3. The County Board of Supervisors allocate additional funding to provide outreach to educate residents about available CCAS services.
Contra Costa County 2020-2021 Civil Grand Jury Report 2105 Page 12 Grand Jury Reports are posted at http://www.cc-courts.org/grandjury R4. CCAS explore embedding Animal Control Officers at selected police stations to expand services, such as wildlife retrieval, throughout the county.
R5. CCAS engage a consulting firm to obtain guidance on the possible redistribution of animal services within the County.
R6. CCAS pursue a Memorandum of Understanding with ARF to coordinate resource sharing.
R7. CCAS pursue a Memorandum of Understanding with the Milo Foundation to coordinate resource sharing.
R8. CCAS pursue a Memorandum of Understanding with East Bay SPCA to coordinate resource sharing.
R9. CCAS management and City Managers pursue customization of the Animal Services contracts to include basic service plus extended services for an additional fee.
R10. AAS and CCAS explore sharing of resources for low-cost animal care clinics in the eastern part of the County.
R11. The County Board of Supervisors request that CCAS apply for Measure X funding to lower the projected increased financial cost to CCAS-contracted cities and to support additional low-cost spay and neuter services.
REQUIRED RESPONSES
Findings Recommendations
City Council of Antioch F1, F3, F4, F9 R1, R2, and R10
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors F1, F5-F12 R3-R11 These responses must be provided in the format and by the date set forth in the cover letter that accompanies this report. An electronic copy of these responses in the form of a Word document should be sent by e-mail and a hard (paper) copy should be sent to:
Civil Grand Jury – Foreperson
725 Court Street
P.O. Box 431
Martinez, CA 94553-0091
This page was intentionally left blank
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Table of Contents page i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME 1 of 2 – Main Report (this volume)
Section Page
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................1 Background......................................................................................................................... 1 Analyses Details.................................................................................................................. 2 Finding and Recommendation Themes .............................................................................. 3 Theme One: Strengthen Core Financial and Operational Activities ...................... 3 Theme Two: Address the Impacts of Population Growth and Service Demands... 4 Findings and Recommendations......................................................................................... 4 Theme One: Strengthen Core Financial and Operational Activities ...................... 4 Theme Two: Address the Impacts of Population Growth and Service Demands... 6 Strategic Action Plan .......................................................................................................... 7 Section 1—Introduction and Background...................................................................................9
1.1 Purpose of Study..................................................................................................... 9
1.2 Department Summary ........................................................................................... 10
1.2.1 History of the Department and Relationship with Incorporated Cities..... 11
1.2.2 Post-Great-Recession Rebuild .................................................................. 12
1.3 Organization of Report ......................................................................................... 12
1.3.1 Theme One: Strengthen Core Financial and Operational Activities ........ 13
1.3.2 Theme Two: Address the Impacts of Population Growth and Service Demands ................................................................................................... 13
1.4 Scope of Work: Contract Obligations................................................................... 14
1.4.1 Phase 1: Project Administration................................................................ 14
1.4.2 Phase 2: Review Data, Documentation, and Information......................... 14
1.4.3 Phase 3: Cost and Operational Analysis................................................... 15
1.4.4 Phase 4: Reporting .................................................................................... 15
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Table of Contents page ii
1.5 Documentation Reviewed by Citygate ................................................................. 16
1.6 Location of Requested Scope Items within This Report ...................................... 17
1.6.1 Fiscal Assumptions................................................................................... 17 Section 2—Animal Services Department Structure and Service Delivery Model .................19
2.1 Mission, Goals, Objectives, and Philosophy ........................................................ 19
2.2 Profile of Current Activities and Workload.......................................................... 20
2.2.1 Organizational Structure and Service Activities....................................... 20
2.2.2 Staffing...................................................................................................... 22
2.2.3 Personnel Management, Supervision, and Reporting ............................... 25
2.2.4 Current Department Performance Metrics................................................ 26
2.2.5 Technology: Chameleon ........................................................................... 34
2.2.6 Physical Condition of Shelters.................................................................. 34
2.2.7 Vehicle Fleet ............................................................................................. 35 Section 3—Financial Analysis.....................................................................................................37
3.1 Budget and Cost Analysis – Prior Fiscal Years.................................................... 37
3.1.1 Revenues................................................................................................... 37
3.1.2 Expenditures ............................................................................................. 43
3.1.3 Subsidy by County General Fund – Prior Years....................................... 49
3.2 Budget and Cost Analysis – Current Fiscal Year (FY 17/18) .............................. 52
3.2.1 Revenues................................................................................................... 53
3.2.2 Expenditures ............................................................................................. 57
3.2.3 Subsidy by County General Fund – FY 17/18.......................................... 60
3.2.4 Department Volunteer Program................................................................ 60
3.2.5 Costs and Revenues for Each Division (Cost Center) under the Current Operating Structure................................................................................... 60
3.3 Billing/Collection Process .................................................................................... 61
3.3.1 Licensing................................................................................................... 61
3.3.2 Other Billing/Collection............................................................................ 61
3.3.3 Waived Fees.............................................................................................. 62
3.3.4 Delinquencies............................................................................................ 63
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Table of Contents page iii
3.3.5 Animal Benefits Fund............................................................................... 63 Section 4—Fiscal Process............................................................................................................64
4.1 Costs and Revenues for Each New Citygate-Proposed Division.......................... 64
4.1.1 Field Services Division............................................................................. 66
4.1.2 Shelter Services......................................................................................... 68
4.1.3 Proposed Reallocation of Resources......................................................... 71
4.2 Development of Various Alternative Cost Allocation Methodologies for Each Contract City......................................................................................................... 71
4.2.1 History of the Department Contracts with Cities...................................... 72
4.2.2 Comparable Analysis................................................................................ 75
4.3 Best Practices........................................................................................................ 79
4.3.1 Organizational Structure ........................................................................... 80
4.3.2 Operational/Financial Practices................................................................ 82
4.3.3 Best Practices Metrics............................................................................... 83 Section 5—Strategic Findings, Recommendations, and Action Plan......................................85
5.1 Theme One – Strengthen Core Financial and Operational Activities................... 85
5.2 Theme Two – Address Population Growth and Service Demands....................... 93
5.3 Strategic Action Plan ............................................................................................ 98 Table of Tables
Table 1—Location of Requested Scope Items within Report ...................................................... 17 Table 2—Animal Service Activities by City in 2016................................................................... 22 Table 3—Total Activities by Year................................................................................................ 28 Table 4—Total Intake for Dogs and Cats Compared to Positive Outcomes – 2014–2016 .......... 31 Table 5—Total Intake for Dogs and Cats Compared to Quantity Euthanized – 2014–2016 ....... 32 Table 6—Department Revenue..................................................................................................... 38 Table 7—Contract City Charge for FY 17/18 .............................................................................. 41 Table 8—Contra Costa County Animal Benefits Fund Activity.................................................. 42 Table 9—High Level Personnel Comparison............................................................................... 45
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Table of Contents page iv
Table 10—Department County General Fund Subsidy................................................................ 49 Table 11—County General Fund Actual Subsidy Distribution.................................................... 52 Table 12—Department Cost Center Summary for FY 17/18 ....................................................... 53 Table 13—Staff Positions Summary – FY 17/18 ......................................................................... 58 Table 14—Field Services Staffing................................................................................................ 67 Table 15—NACA Formula for Determining Kennel Staffing – Feeding and Cleaning Only ..... 71 Table 16—Animal Services Cost Per Capita – Highest to Lowest .............................................. 76 Table 17—Animal Services Cost Per Capita Change – Lowest to Highest ................................. 77 Table 18—Animal Services Comparative .................................................................................... 78 Table of Figures
Figure 1—Organizational and Financial Cost Analysis Overlap ................................................... 3 Figure 2—Map of Contra Costa County Animal Services Shelters............................................. 11 Figure 3—Staffing Organization Chart ........................................................................................ 24 Figure 4—Summary of Spay and Neuter Surgeries ..................................................................... 27 Figure 5—Budgeted versus Actual Revenues – FY 12/13 through 16/17.................................... 43 Figure 6—Budgeted versus Actual Expenditures – FY12/13 through 16/17............................... 44 Figure 7—Major Expenditure Categories – FY 12/13 through 16/17.......................................... 48 Figure 8—Budgeted Revenues versus Expenditures – FY 12/13 through 17/18 ......................... 50 Figure 9—Actual Revenues versus Expenditures – FY 12/13 through 16/17.............................. 51 Figure 10—Annual Service Charge – FY 17/18........................................................................... 55 Figure 11—FY 17/18 Contract City Population........................................................................... 74 Figure 12—Contract City Charge versus Budgeted Expenditures – FY 12/13 through 17/18 .... 75 Figure 13—Staffing Organization Chart ...................................................................................... 81 VOLUME 2 of 2 – Cost Analysis Appendices (separately bound)
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Executive Summary page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
Provision of animal services in Contra Costa County has a long and proud history, and Countywide it began through the Agricultural Department in the 1950s and evolved in the 1980s into the Animal Services Department. Throughout its history, the officers in field services, the shelter caregivers, the dispatchers, the clerks, the medical team, and the volunteers have dedicated themselves to ensuring public health and safety and humane care of animals. From its beginnings, the Department has faced the challenges associated with providing animal services in a geographic mix of space containing deep agricultural roots, growing cities, densely populated newer and older sub-divisions, suburban neighborhoods, as well as commuter-packed freeways and arterial road networks.
For many public agencies throughout the state, the economy has been marked by the inability of revenue growth to keep pace with public service demands and expense pressures after the Great Recession. This lag in revenues prevents many public agencies from replacing staff and other resources cut from budgets during recessionary years. This has been deemed “the new normal” in public service circles, by the media, and by pundits as a description of an era characterized by the demand to “do more with less.”
Citygate Associates, LLC (Citygate) is pleased to present this field operations and sheltering practices cost analysis that has been prepared for the Contra Costa County (County) Animal Services Department (Department) as a first step to address the ways the Department can recover
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Executive Summary page 2
and adapt to the staffing and resource reductions it suffered. In the nearly 10 years since 2008, the Department has experienced reduced staffing, chronic vacancies, budget cuts, retention problems, recruitment problems, and turnover in key leadership personnel. This succession of organizational change has left the agency with a significant loss of institutional knowledge and the need to rebuild and retool.
Citygate commends the Department and acknowledges that its leaders, managers, and staff have already been engaged in many activities recommended in this report. The Department has been working to address many of the issues in areas involving new budget practices, cost allocation, development of policy procedures, training, efforts to fill vacancies, use of skill sets within the existing employee resources, and review of contracted services and possible contract changes.
Just as improvement has been underway during this study, the data relied upon, such as position vacancy quantities, activity counts, and other data, has been subject to change over the six months of this project effort.
ANALYSES DETAILS
The Animal Services Director and Administrative Services Officer have wisely taken this first step toward adapting and reorganizing. The detailed financial and operational cost analysis contained in this report, comprised of data organized and presented in original documents developed by Citygate for this study, will serve as the factual and analytical base upon which critical decisions for the Department’s future can be formed.
With a relatively new Director and new Administrative Services Officer, these study results are intended to provide the operational and financial analysis necessary to begin recovery for the Department, to strengthen its operational and financial foundation, and to position it for successful future service.
The operational cost analyses completed for this study included assessing 16 different components of field and shelter operations provided by the Department and included all aspects of the agency’s finances, including revenues, expenditures, personnel, operations, equipment and facilities, and financial practices. The financial analyses also included a comparative study and best practices.
At times, the operational and financial analyses overlap within this study; for example, one looks through the operational lens of field services and one assesses those same field services through the lens of revenues, expenditures, and other financial practices.
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Executive Summary page 3
Figure 1—Organizational and Financial Cost Analysis Overlap
FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION THEMES
The multi-disciplinary Project Team assembled by Citygate to conduct this engagement and formulate study themes, findings, and recommendations included both an active and a retired County Animal Services Director, a retired local government Finance Director, and two retired City Managers. Two of the consultants on Citygate’s Project Team each have over a decade of experience as consultants with our firm. Citygate’s findings and recommendations stemming from the detailed analyses contained in this study are presented in two theme areas.
Theme One: Strengthen Core Financial and Operational Activities Findings and recommendations included in Theme One are based on actions the Department can take with its current resources and staff. The Department can act to strengthen its core financial and operational activities now by following steps recommended for forecasting and budgeting of revenues and expenditures, applying cost allocation, establishing fees, developing and using policies and procedures, and reaching out to promote licensing, fill vacant positions, and conduct training for employees.
Organizational
Cost Analysis
Financial Cost
Analysis
• Organizational structure
• Personnel management,
supervision, and reporting
• Training
• Workload
• Live release rate discussion
• Field Officer activities
• Dispatch function
• Reports to contract cities
• Shelter services
• State Rabies Activities Report
• Technology: Chameleon
• Physical condition of shelters
• Budget and cost analysis
• Revenues
• Contract humane services
(contract city charge)
• Miscellaneous humane services
• Restricted donations (Animal
Benefits Fund)
• Expenditures
• Vacancies
• Services/supplies
• Transfers out – reimbursement –
Gov/Gov
• Capital improvements
• Comparative study (per-capita
and comparative agencies)
• Best practices
• Staffing and
Personnel
• Spay and Neuter
Surgeries / Spay
Clinic Fees
• Pet Licensing
Program and
Animal Licensing
• Vehicle Fleet and
EquipmentRolling
Stock
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Executive Summary page 4
Theme Two: Address the Impacts of Population Growth and Service Demands Findings and recommendations included in Theme Two are those that will help to position the Department to address the current and future impacts of changing population growth and service demands with Contra Costa County administration and outside agencies. Action items within this theme include planning for shelter needs, working with contract cities to provide service data and information, creating strong intergovernmental relationships, clarifying service costs, and possibly setting up animal services as an enterprise.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Nine findings from this study are accompanied by 21 recommendations, as follows:
Theme One: Strengthen Core Financial and Operational Activities Finding #1: Financial practices within the Department can be improved to reduce variance in budgeted revenues and expenditures versus actuals to provide for improved cost allocation within the Field Services Division and Shelter Services Division and to more accurately assess the true cost of providing these services.
Finding #2: Revenues for the Department may be enhanced by improving the animal licensing program and implementation of an updated consumer fee study and fee schedule.
Finding #3: Establishing a formalized collection policy, an improved cost allocation system, and providing for expanded internal audit mechanisms can strengthen the Department’s ability to provide a strong business basis for its delivery of services.
Finding #4: The Department is not currently emphasizing staff training or compliance and as such it will not be successful in implementing new cost accounting, improved record keeping, and operational systems.
Finding #5: All authorized but vacant positions allocated in the FY 17/18 Department budget need to be filled.
Finding #6: Current allocated personnel resources can be better maximized, particularly while alternative dispatch and other contracted specialized service providers are considered.
Recommendation #1: Reduce variance occurring in the Department’s budgeted revenues and expenditures; use multi-year data to develop both revenue and expenditure trends; review with sources internal and external to the Department.
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Executive Summary page 5
Recommendation #2: Establish subaccounts and full cost allocation systems within the Department and within the County’s accounting systems, as appropriate.
Recommendation #3: Reorganize the licensing program to include outreach components such as offsite vaccine and licensing clinics, brochures, posters, press releases, and a formal canvassing program.
Recommendation #4: Conduct a fee study to update the schedule adopted in 2012.
Recommendation #5: Develop and adopt a formalized collection policy for the Department.
Recommendation #6: Establish and refine a new accounting system to allocate expenses and revenues by service divisions.
Recommendation #7: Work with the County internal auditor to review accounting and operational activity of the Department in greater detail than what previous audits have performed.
Recommendation #8: Develop, maintain, and use an updated Policy and Procedures Manual to strengthen the Department’s financial and operational systems.
Recommendation #9: Re-establish an in-house Policy and Procedures Manual training program for new hires; provide ongoing refresher training for existing staff.
Recommendation #10: Fill all vacant positions; consult with the Human Resources Director and the County Administrator; develop an 18-month schedule that delineates hiring milestones; report to the County Administrator on a regular basis.
Recommendation #11: Review results of exit interviews, recruitment practices and results, workers’ compensation practices, and compensation information to determine if there are barriers to retention and recruitment efforts that can be identified and addressed by either the Department directly or in combination with the County’s Human Resources Department.
Recommendation #12: Consider using experienced clerical employees to handle dispatch duties; ensure Chameleon’s features are fully utilized to maximize the use of current field response personnel.
Contra Costa County Animal Services
Field Operations and Sheltering Practices Cost Analysis Executive Summary page 6
Recommendation #13: Evaluate all contracted services for effectiveness and cost efficiency, including the behavior team, veterinary services team, and the role of the foster and transfer partners; consider using temporary assistance workers, as needed, while recruiting to fill vacancies.
Theme Two: Address the Impacts of Population Growth and Service Demands Finding #7: Ongoing population growth patterns in Contra Costa County indicate there may be additional population growth eastward while shelters are located in the west portion of the County. Traffic congestion impacts both the ability to deliver timely services and customer ability for animal drop-off and shelter visits.
Finding #8: Current outreach efforts involving presentations to cities, interactions with City Managers, and field services leadership exchanges with Police Chiefs and city police departments can be increased and regularly scheduled. These efforts are essential and form the basis for future information and data exchanges. Monthly reports reflecting services delivered can be improved to provide additional serviceand cost-related information.
Finding #9: Future business relationships between the Department within the internal County structure and between cities served could be enhanced through clarifying the way mandated costs are covered and by establishing an enterprise fund for the animal services function.
Recommendation #14: Review current shelter practices to ensure maximum use of shelter space and maximum customer access to the Pinole and Martinez shelters.
Recommendation #15: Evaluate field efficiencies, response time data, and priority goals to ensure that the services being rendered to the cities are adequate.
Recommendation #16: Evaluate the need for additional shelter locations only after current financial and operational processes are resolved.
Recommendation #17: Strengthen working relationships by establishing regular contacts between the Department Director and all 18 City Managers; establish regular and scheduled exchanges between field staff personnel.
Recommendation #18: Provide monthly reports to all the contracted cities that document the animal service activities provided by the County.