CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT
SUCCESSOR AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Meeting Date: April 20, 2026
Time: 06:00 PM
City Hall Council Chamber
401 Grove Street
Healdsburg, CA 95448
To join by computer, tablet, or mobile device:
Go to https://zoom.us/join and type in the Webinar ID: 815 8894 3494 or follow this link:
healdsburg.gov/zoom (Pre-registration for the meeting is not required.) To view the agenda online, visit healdsburg.gov/agendas. To view the Council Meeting PowerPoint presentations or correspondence received after the agenda packet has been posted, visit healdsburg.gov/agendas. To electronically submit correspondence regarding an item on the agenda, please email [email protected]. Documents and correspondence received 72 hours prior to the meeting will be posted by 10:00 a.m. the following business day.
Interpretation Services
Interpretation services are available on-site during City Council meetings. To utilize this service, please see the interpreter located in the back of the Council Chamber.
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Pledge of Allegiance
Approval of Agenda
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION(S)
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
Proclamation Recognizing April 2026 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month
Warm Springs 4-H Government Club Youth Survey Results
1. 1.a
1.b
2. 3.
3.a
3.b
1 of 648
Annual Update from Healdsburg Library Commissioner Andy Elkind
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND NON
AGENDA ITEMS
This time is set aside to receive comments from the public on any item of interest to the public within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council, other than scheduled agenda items. Pursuant to the Brown Act, however, the City Council cannot consider any issues or take action on any requests during this comment period. Public comment on non-agenda items is limited to thirty (30) minutes total for all speakers, with each speaker given no more than three (3) minutes. If there are more than ten (10) audience/public comment speakers, the Mayor may reduce each speaker’s time from three (3) minutes so that all speakers have an equal time to speak. At the Mayor’s discretion, the public comment period may be extended past 30 minutes. Members from the public wishing to speak on a Consent Agenda item should notify the Mayor during Public Comments.
CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered routine in nature or have been previously reviewed by the Council and require little or no further discussion by the Council, public, or applicant and action will be taken by the City Council by a single motion. A Councilmember may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and action taken separately. Consent by a majority of the Councilmembers present will be required in order to remove the item. In the event an item is removed, the matter will be considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Calendar.
Annual Water Supply Forecast
Receive a report regarding the status of the City's water supply and forecasted water demands through June 2028.
Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas for Plan Review and Inspection Services
Adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas to provide plan review and inspection services for the City and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Agreement to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $50,000 to $200,000 over the 3-year contract term ending on December 31, 2026.
City Council Manual of Procedures and Protocols
Adopt a Resolution adopting revised procedures and protocols and rescinding Resolution No. 20-2018 and any other resolutions in conflict herewith.
3.c
4. 5.
6. 6.a
6.b
6.c
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Agenda April 20, 2026
2 of 648
Agreement with Bryce Consulting for a Classification and Compensation Study.docx
Adopt a Resolution approving an agreement with Bryce Consulting for a Classification and Compensation Study in an amount not-to-exceed $80,800 and authorizing the City Manager to execute said agreement.
Lease Amendment to Verizon Communication Site Located at 923 South Fitch Mountain Road
Adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the Lease Agreement with GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership, d/b/a/ Verizon Wireless, authorizing the City Manager to sign the lease amendment with Verizon Wireless on the City’s behalf so long as it is substantially in the form of the Final Draft Amendment provided and authorize the City Manager to take any additional action necessary to effectuate the implementation of the lease amendment.
Approval of Minutes
Approve the April 6, 2026 Regular Meeting Minutes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
OLD BUSINESS
Budget Development Update
Receive a presentation from City staff on the community engagement results and budget development progress and provide feedback and direction to staff.
Update Police Department Public Safety Camera Use
Receive a report on the Police Department Public Safety Camera use.
Professional Services Agreement with Opticos Design, Inc. for Preparation of the SMART Station Area Specific Plan
Adopt a Resolution approving a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Healdsburg and Opticos Design, Inc. for consultant support to prepare the SMART Station Area Specific Plan for a not to exceed amount of $1,130,000 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City Council, and to approve any future minor modifications to the scope of services being performed.
Establish a Community Advisory Committee for the SMART Station Area Specific Plan
Adopt a Resolution establishing a Community Advisory Committee and appointing
6.d
6.e
6.f
7. 8.
8.a
8.b
8.c
8.d
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Agenda April 20, 2026
3 of 648
its members to provide input and guidance on the development of the SMART Station Area Specific Plan.
NEW BUSINESS
COUNCIL REPORTS ON MATTERS OF INTEREST OCCURRING SINCE
PREVIOUS REGULAR MEETING/EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT REPORTS
ADJOURN CITY COUNCIL/RSA MEETING
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Future Agenda Items for 2026
SB 343 - DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPEN SESSION AGENDAS: Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council/Redevelopment Successor Agency Board regarding any item on this agenda after the posting of this agenda and not otherwise exempt from disclosure, will be made available for public review in the City Clerk's Office located at City Hall, 401 Grove Street, Healdsburg, during normal business hours. If supplemental materials are made available to the members of the City Council/Redevelopment Successor Agency Board at the meeting, a copy will be available for public review at the City Hall Council Chambers, 401 Grove Street, Healdsburg, CA 95448.
These writings will be made available in appropriate alternative formats upon request by a person with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
DISABLED ACCOMMODATIONS: The City of Healdsburg will make reasonable accommodations for persons having special needs due to disabilities. Please contact Raina Allan, City Clerk, at Healdsburg City Hall, 401 Grove Street, Healdsburg, California, 431-3317, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting, to ensure the necessary accommodations are made.
9. 10.
11. 12.
12.a
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Agenda April 20, 2026
4 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
PROCLAMATION
A PROCLAMATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG RECOGNIZING APRIL 2026 AS SEXUAL
ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH IN THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG
WHEREAS, Sexual Assault Awareness Month is intended to draw attention to the fact that sexual violence is widespread and has a profound and lasting impact on every community member of Sonoma County; and
WHEREAS, Verity, Sexual Assault Prevention, Intervention & Healing Center, works with over 1,200 survivors in Sonoma County every year with a 24/7/365 crisis and support line and tailored advocacy services at any point in their healing and justice journeys; and WHEREAS, Verity hosts over 200 presentations and events, reaching over 14,000 community members with age-appropriate outreach and education to prevent sexual violence, encourage people to show up for one another, and recognize signs of unhealthy relationships; and WHEREAS, Verity provides hundreds of sessions of individual and group therapy to support people in processing and healing from trauma; and
WHEREAS, nearly half of all women will experience some form of sexual violence; at least 1 in 6 men have experienced sexual abuse or assault; youth under 18, people with disabilities, people of color, queer, transgender, and nonbinary people, homeless people, undocumented people, youth in foster care, and people of other marginalized identities are at much greater risk; and WHEREAS, over 18,000 members of the military and over 80,000 people who are incarcerated experience sexual violence every year; and
WHEREAS, the City of Healdsburg strongly supports the efforts of Verity and encourages every resident to actively engage in efforts to end sexual violence, including conversations about what sexual violence is, how to prevent it, how to help survivors of all backgrounds connect with crucial services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROCLAIMED, that the City Council of the City of Healdsburg hereby recognizes the month of April 2026 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month in the City of Healdsburg.
DATED: April 20, 2026
SO ORDERED:
_________________________________
J. Chris Herrod, Mayor
Item 3.a
5 of 648
Healdsburg Youth Interest
Survey Results & Findings
Warm Springs Government & Civics Project
Item 3.b
6 of 648
Introduction to our Project
- The purpose of this survey was to help amplify the experiences, needs, and perspectives of the youth in Healdsburg
- We incentivised participation by offering 3 Starbucks gift cards worth $25 each - The survey was sent to grades 6 - 12 at HJH, THS, St. John’s, and HHS - 271 responses were received from an estimated 916 recipients, we had an almost 30% return rate!
- Our goal was to give the city insight into the interests of youth in Healdsburg while also giving youth the ability to voice their opinions!
- It’s important to note that we did not verify residency but we assume that students surveyed use city services.
Item 3.b
7 of 648
Cleanliness
- We asked local youth to rank the cleanliness of our local areas, such as parks, the plaza, and the streets
- Cleanliness was a portion of our survey as we noticed that some of these target areas have a reputation for being dirty or having trash - Our goal for this section was to discover which areas the city youth found to be not clean, so we can target these areas for improvement in the future - We asked the youth to vote each area on a scale from 1-5 on its cleanliness (1=less clean/5 = very clean)
Item 3.b
8 of 648
Cleanliness Responses Pt 2
Giorgi
Park
Badger
Park
Sidewalks
and
Streets
The Plaza
The Bike
Paths
The Skate
Park
53% of respondents ranked
a 4/5
83% of respondents ranked a
3/5 or 4/5
45% of respondents ranked
a 4/5
48% of respondents ranked
a 4/5
39% of respondents ranked
a 3/5
40% of respondents ranked
a 3/5
Item 3.b
9 of 648
Interest Response Data
Beach
Volleyball
Courts
BMX Pump
Tracks
Increased
Mountain
Biking Trails
More
Improved
Sport Courts
142 Respondents
Requested
(53.8%)
54 Respondents
Requested
(20.5%)
52 Respondents
Requested
(19.7%)
138 Respondents
Requested
(52.3%)
Item 3.b
10 of 648
Interest Response Data Pt 2
- Bowling Alley
- Improved Basketball Courts
- Teen Rec Center
- Improved Soccer Fields (Turf)
- Rock Climbing
- Indoor Tennis Courts
- Improved Public Pool
- Skate Park Improvement
- Fencing, Archery, and Dance
Studio Spaces
Item 3.b
11 of 648
True West Film Interest
- Respondents were asked about
their interest level in a
youth/teen movie day at True
West Film Center
- 43% said they would attend
weekly/definitely attend
- Increases youth involvement in
local businesses, as long as
prices stay affordable
Item 3.b
12 of 648
Public Transit
- Methods of public transportation
most likely to be used by youth
- SMART Train (60.5%)
- Waymo Taxis (20.3%)
- Rentable Bikes (19.2%)
- When the Smart Train is introduced
into Healdsburg, it will be
popularly used by youth
Item 3.b
13 of 648
SMART Train Usage
- 43% of respondents said they
will use the SMART Train often
during the week and weekends
- Youth will provide a huge
engagement for this system,
especially with the free fare
policy
- Maintaining safety on the train
and platforms
Item 3.b
14 of 648
What can Healdsburg do?
- Take measures to improve the cleanliness of the Skate Park and the bike paths
- Consider encouraging True West to adopt a teen-related movie day - Consider that the Healdsburg SMART train station should serve the needs of youth travellers, for example by lighting platforms, adding bike locks, or having a vending machine
- Consider including youth interest into City planning so amenities can serve both adult and youth needs
Item 3.b
15 of 648
Thank You!
- Thank you for taking the time to listen to our findings. - We hope this provided valuable insight into the perspectives and voices of the youth in Healdsburg
- By considering this feedback, the city has an opportunity to better support and improve the lives of young people and we are grateful for the chance to contribute to that conversation.
Item 3.b
16 of 648
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
17 of 648
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
It has been an honor to serve as your Commissioner!
Item 3.c
18 of 648
Four Principal Challenges
• Leadership
• Revenue
• Fiscal Responsibility
• Healdsburg Branch
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
19 of 648
Leadership: Challenge
• When I joined the Commission in 2018, the Library was led by our third successive Interim Director since the middle of 2017.
• In 2019, after conducting an extensive nationwide search, we hired Ann Hammond as a fulltime Director. • Ann had served as the Director of the Lexington Public Library in Kentucky, and she brought much-needed stability and professionalism to the leadership team. • One of Ann’s best decisions was to hire Erika Thibault as Deputy Director. • In 2022, Ann retired and Erika was promoted to the position of Interim Director. • The Commissioner conducted another nationwide search and confirmed that Erika was the best person to lead the Sonoma County Library.
• In 2023 Erika was officially appointed to the position of Director.
Item 3.c
20 of 648
Leadership: Accomplishment
Erika Thibault, Library Director
Item 3.c
21 of 648
Revenue: Challenge
• Prior to 2016, the Sonoma County Library’s only revenue came from Property Tax.
This was wholly inadequate to fund a modern county-wide library system. • In November 2016, Sonoma County voters approved Measure Y, a one-eighth of a cent sales tax to support the Sonoma County Library system. • This additional revenue source currently provides about $15 million annually to:
–Increase hours and access
–Expand collections
–Expand programs and services
–Maintain library facilities
• However, Measure Y had a 10-year expiration date and was due to expire in 2027.
Item 3.c
22 of 648
Revenue: Accomplishment
• In November 2024, Sonoma County voters approved measure W. • Measure W renewed the sales tax and keeps it in effect until removed by voters. • The Library now has stable revenue sources for the foreseeable future and the ability to undertake serious long-term financial planning.
Item 3.c
23 of 648
Fiscal Responsibility: Challenge
• When I joined the Commission, the Library had substantial unfunded long-term liabilities:
– CalPERS Pension Fund had an Unfunded Accrued Liability of about 20%. – There was also a $17 million unfunded liability in Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB).
• Our financial reporting was complex and opaque.
• The long-term CFO departed soon after I arrived.
• We went through a period of failed short-term hires and interim CFOs. • At one point we were more than a year late in conducting our audit.
Item 3.c
24 of 648
Fiscal Responsibility: Accomplishment
• In 2018, the Commission adopted a 10-year plan to fund our OPEB liability and we continue to make substantial progress toward that goal. • In 2021 we hired Myrna Lopez as our CFO and she has done an outstanding job of bringing clarity to our reporting and discipline to our financial practices. • We have developed a close and effective working relationship with the County of Sonoma Accounting Services.
• For the past several years our audits have been timely and completely “unqualified.”
• Earlier this year, the Commission approved a plan to fully fund our Pension Plan.
Item 3.c
25 of 648
Healdsburg Branch: Challenge
• Our Healdsburg branch was a much-loved and much-utilized local resource. • Branch Manager Jon Haupt had done a great job of building a strong and customerfocused team. • The branch itself was 40 years old and was showing its age – in terms of both its design and functionality and “wear and tear.”
Item 3.c
26 of 648
Healdsburg Branch: Accomplishment
• In 2025 the Library completed a $3.1 million modernization project. – The City of Healdsburg provided $247,801 for external ADA upgrades. – The Friends of the Healdsburg Library donated $101,600 for windows in the Children’s Area – The Sonoma County Library invested $2,787,388.
• More photos are included in the Appendix!
Item 3.c
27 of 648
What’s Ahead?
• A new Strategic Plan with these areas of focus:
– Be the destination for free and essential connection
– Expand culturally-aligned, hyperlocal services
– Close community gaps in technology access, literacy, and employment – Continue upgrading access to services
– Reimagine outreach and communications
• The Annual Budget Workshop will take place on April 22. • Now the Library has an opportunity to build on a strong foundation of excellence.
Item 3.c
28 of 648
Please Appoint A New Commissioner
• My term as Library Commissioner ends on July 31.
• The City Council does not meet in July.
• Please get started on the recruitment process right away. • I’ll do everything I can to assure a smooth hand-off and transition to my successor.
Item 3.c
29 of 648
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
QUESTIONS?
Item 3.c
30 of 648
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
HEALDSBURG MODERNIZATION PROJECT
APPENDIX:
Item 3.c
31 of 648
Library Service Desk
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
32 of 648
Children’s Room
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
33 of 648
Main Reading Room
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
34 of 648
Teen Room
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
35 of 648
Study Room
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
36 of 648
Wine Library
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
37 of 648
Patio
Sonoma County Library | Andy Elkind
Item 3.c
38 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Annual Water Supply Forecast
PREPARED BY: Patrick Fuss, Utility Engineering Manager
STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Maintain and Improve Infrastructure and Facilities
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Receive a report regarding the status of the City's water supply and forecasted water demands through June 2028.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
No community engagement was sought for this item.
BACKGROUND:
With the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the Department of Water Resources (DWR) requires all Urban Water Suppliers to provide their governing boards with yearly water supply and demand updates. The annual update provides the current year’s forecasted water supply and customer demands along with an assumption that the following year will meet drought conditions and restricted water supplies. This information can help communities prepare for water shortages and plan to implement portions of their water supply contingency plans.
Healdsburg’s water supply and demand vary with yearly and seasonal changes. During the winter months water usage is low, and water supplies tend to be plentiful. However, due to summer irrigation demands, Healdsburg’s water usage nearly doubles at a time when our water supplies are the most restricted. This pattern of high summer demand and limited summer water supply creates imbalances between water demands and available water supplies.
A recent development on the water supply horizon for the City is the actions being taken on the Potter Valley Project (PVP). The PVP diverts water from the Eel River system to the Russian River system through a series of dams before reaching a power generation station on Scott Dam that forms Lake Pillsbury. Water run through the power generation station would continue to Lake Mendocino to supply the Russian River. In 2025 PG&E applied to surrender its license for the PVP, which was accepted by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). In the FERC Item 6.a
39 of 648
license surrender process, PG&E will need to decommission the PVP facilities and remove the Scott Dam on Lake Pillsbury and the Cape Horn Dam, which forms the Van Ardale Reservoir.
This decommissioning work is in the planning stages and could be under construction as soon as 2028 although delays are likely. In future years, with the removal of the PVP, these differences in water supply, particularly sources on the Russian River, are expected to become more pronounced.
The City will need to invest in new and more resilient water sources.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
At the end of March 2026, Ukiah and Santa Rosa are reporting below average rainfall for the 2025- 2026 rain season (89% and 74% of normal, respectively). In spite of this below average rainfall, regional water supplies and storage levels are strong heading into the dry summer months. As of the end of March 2026, Lake Mendocino near Ukiah (Russian River supply) is reported at approximately 86% of storage capacity and Lake Sonoma northwest of Healdsburg (Dry Creek supply) is reported approximately 99% of storage capacity.
At this time there are no indications that water restrictions or curtailments will be needed this summer. While rain this year has been below average, storage levels are at or near average. As such, there remains a need to be mindful of water use and what future drought years may bring.
The chart below shows Healdsburg’s average water demands and forecasted demands for the fiscal year 2026-27. The average water demands are based upon water produced by the City’s usage during calendar years 2017, 2018, and 2019 (pre-COVID years that are considered “normal” for customer usage). These demands include water system losses, due to leaks and system operations (e.g. flushing of water mains) necessary to provide safe drinking water. The average water usage of 2017, 2018, and 2019 has been reduced by roughly 5% to the predicted 2026-27 water usage.
Long-lasting conservation measures, such as lawn conversions and appliance replacements, are helping Healdsburg remain below historic usage numbers. Healdsburg’s average water demand significantly increases during irrigation months at the same time water supplies are the most constrained. The uppermost line on the graph below indicates the City’s water supplies under normal conditions (full water rights and access to contracted water from Sonoma Water). Under normal conditions the City’s water supply is adequate for current needs and future growth, during years of below average rainfall and storage, or prolonged drought there remains a need for conservation.
Item 6.a
40 of 648
Healdsburg’s summertime water usage is expected to fall roughly five percent below the 2017- 2019 average due to long-lasting conservation measures achieved during the past several years.
Based upon this forecast, the City’s water supply for fiscal year 2026-27 is sufficient to meet expected customer demand.
Per the 2020 UWMP, the Board requires urban water suppliers to further predict water supplies and demands under a single dry-year (drought) condition. For the single-dry year criteria, Healdsburg’s planning criteria are the recent drought years of 2014, 2015, 2021, and 2022. For a conservative approach, City staff assumes 2021 conditions represent the worst-case scenario for a single dry year. During 2021, the City lost the use of all permitted water rights. This left Healdsburg with only a Human Health and Safety (HH&S) exemption to pull water from the Russian River and Dry Creek. Under a petition filed with the Board, Healdsburg requested a total HH&S water limit of 112 gallons per capita day (GPCD). This limit represents the combined needs of both residents, businesses, and institutional needs throughout Healdsburg. This number also represents a roughly 50% decrease in water usage during the summer months.
Item 6.a
41 of 648
To achieve a 50% reduction in water usage the City would need to implement Stage 5 of the current water shortage contingency plan early in the irrigation season. Stage 5 significantly restricts outdoor water usage, initiates water budgets for residential customers, and delays certain types of development. The single dry-year graph shows forecasted water supplies and demands starting July 2026 and running through June of 2027. The demand reduction shown is very similar to summer 2021 water conservation efforts. Again, the dry-year forecast is a planning exercise and not what is expected.
City staff continue to develop alternative water supplies that are not immediately impacted by lowrain years or flow reductions from upstream sources like the PVP. These projects include the recently completed municipal recycled water pipeline and planned aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) wells. In 2025, the municipal recycled water pipeline offset roughly 31 million gallons of potable water and provides a more stable supply of irrigation water for City parks and recreation areas.
The City was awarded a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program grant for the completion of Phase 1 of the ASR wells. The program was cancelled in 2025, halting funding, but later reinstated by court order following legal challenges. Due to delays caused by the cancellation, the City was unable to meet required project timelines and therefore needed to decline the restored funding. Staff continue to search for other funding opportunities to construct ASR wells that have the ability to access groundwater resources as well as to store surface water when it is plentiful into these isolated aquifers for use when surface water is scarce. The City has a pending application for funding through a separate FEMA program and intends to re-apply for BRIC funding later this year.
In addition to the development of long-term water supply projects, the City will need continued efforts to implement efficient landscape irrigation. Starting January 1, 2027, State regulations Item 6.a
42 of 648
require irrigation of non-functional turf to be phased out. The phase out will apply as follows:
• 2027 – Local government sites
• 2028 – Commercial sites
• 2029 – Homeowners Associations (HOAs)
As part of the most recent water and wastewater rate study, City staff continue to work toward reestablishing pumping capacity along Dry Creek such that the City can better access water stored within Lake Sonoma. Unlike Lake Mendocino, which typically has a single year of water storage, Lake Sonoma has multiple years of water storage and therefore provides a more stable source of water during periodic droughts. With the loss of the PVP, Lake Sonoma will also provide an alternative source of water during dry years and years of low storage within Lake Mendocino. At this time, the City has contracted with Sonoma Water for 425 acre feet of water for use when the City’s water rights were not available. Staff is working with Sonoma Water to expand this purchased water to 900 acre feet to better serve the City’s needs. Since the increased supply of purchased water has not been contracted and the Dry Creek pump facilities are yet to be restored, this future supply is not included in the annual outlook. When these two efforts (contracted water and increased pumping capacity) are complete, water supplies during single dry-year scenarios will see measurable improvements.
There is no recommended action with this staff report. Staff are providing this information to meet regulatory requirements and inform the City Council of the current water supplies and demands as well as providing predictions of what a dry year may require in conservation.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
The annual water supply and demand update increases the City Council and Community’s awareness of a finite natural resource. A better understating in this ultimately leads to improved management of our region’s water supply.
ALTERNATIVES:
There are no actions requested, or alternatives provided with this staff report.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact directly associated with this staff report. Continued conservation and development of new water supplies will create a fiscal impact on Healdsburg’s Water Department.
Conservation will lower fiscal year revenues and additional projects will increase capital costs in addition to ongoing operational costs. Conservation efforts like lawn conversions that have lasting impacts will help lessen the need to develop new water supplies and may help reduce total fiscal impacts by reducing the scale of new projects required to support increased water demands.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
The receipt and review of annual water supply and demand forecasts is not subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because informational items are not a project since they are not a discretionary action by a governmental agency and will not have a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect impact on the environment.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Item 6.a
43 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas for Plan Review and Inspection Services
PREPARED BY: David Willoughby, Building Official
STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Provide Effective Governance
Maintain and Enhance Public Health and Safety
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Bureau Veritas to provide plan review and inspection services for the City and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Agreement to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $50,000 to $200,000 over the 3-year contract term ending on December 31, 2026.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
Not Applicable, no outreach was performed for this item.
BACKGROUND:
On December 4, 2023, City Council Adopted Resolution 148-2023, approving a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Bureau Veritas to provide general plan review and inspection services for an amount not-to-exceed $150,000 over three years. The City’s current utilization rate of the services from Bureau Veritas is anticipated to exceed the existing PSA not-to-exceed amount far in advance of the contract term expiration.
The cost to pay the consultant for plan review are offset by the application fees collected when a building permit application is submitted to the City. Bureau Veritas charges the City a portion of the plan review fee collected from the applicant according to their fee schedule (approximately 70% of the collected plan review fee) or an hourly fee based on their rate sheet depending on the project. Fees used to pay the consultant for building inspection services are collected when a building permit is issued.
The City uses consultants for plan review and building inspections to supplement building permit plan review and inspection services as needed.
Item 6.b
44 of 648
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The current Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Bureau Veritas will shortly exceed the not-to-exceed amount of $150,000. Staff is recommending City Council approve an amendment to the PSA to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $50,000 to $200,000 over the 3-year contract term ending on 12/31/2026 and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City.
The scope of work for this PSA includes Building and Fire plan review and inspection services giving the City additional breadth to cover plan review and inspections when City inspectors have time off and additional help is needed, as well as providing additional capacity during periods of high construction activity. Staff intends to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit these services in the future years.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
Not applicable.
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council could choose not to approve the amendment to the Professional Services Agreement and provide further directions to staff on how to proceed.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed amendment to the Bureau Veritas contract will increase the not-to-exceed amount by $50,000. There are sufficient appropriations in the Building Department operational budget in the general fund to support the additional contracted services expenses. The plan review and building inspection fees collected upon application submission and building permit issuance are also received in the Building Department of the general fund and offset the cost of providing these services.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act and Title 14, the California Code of Regulations (“CEQA Guidelines”), Section 15378(b) (2), continued administrative actions do not qualify as a “Project”. Therefore, no further CEQA or environmental review is required.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution
Item 6.b
45 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
RESOLUTION NO. _____-2026
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BUREAU
VERITAS, INCREASING THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT
BY $50,000 TO $200,000 OVER THE 3-YEAR CONTRACT
TERM ENDING ON DECEMBER 31, 2026, AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2023, City Council Adopted Resolution No. 148-2023, approving a Professional Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas to provide general plan review and inspection services for an amount not to exceed $150,000 over three years; and WHEREAS, the City’s current utilization rate of the services from Bureau Veritas is anticipated to exceed the existing PSA’s not-to-exceed amount far in advance of the contract term expiration; and
WHEREAS, due to continued increased workloads and volume of work, the City depends on the use of contract agencies to supplement plan review and inspection services to provide the level of service the community expects; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending that Council approve an amendment to the PSA to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $50,000 to $200,000 over the 3-year contract term ending on 12/31/2026, and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment on behalf of the City; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act and Title 14, the California Code of Regulations (“CEQA Guidelines”), Section 15378(b)(2), continued administrative actions do not qualify as a “Project”. Therefore, no further CEQA or environmental review is required.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Healdsburg hereby:
1. Approves the amendment to the PSA increasing the not-to-exceed amount of the Professional Services Agreement by $50,000 to $200,000 over the 3-year contract term ending on December 31, 2026.
2. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the Professional Services Agreement amendment.
3. Finds that pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act and Title 14, the California Code of Regulations (“CEQA Guidelines”), Section 15378(b)(2), continued administrative Item 6.b
46 of 648
Resolution No. __ -2026
actions do not qualify as a “Project”. Therefore, no further CEQA or environmental review is required.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 20th day of April 2026 by the following vote:
SO ORDERED: ATTEST:
__________________________________ ___________________________________ J. Chris Herrod, Mayor Raina Allan, City Clerk
Item 6.b
47 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: City Council Manual of Procedures and Protocols PREPARED BY: Raina Allan, City Clerk
STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Provide Effective Governance
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Adopt a Resolution adopting revised procedures and protocols and rescinding Resolution No. 20- 2018 and any other resolutions in conflict herewith.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
The City Council held a goal setting workshop on April 18, 2025, at Healdsburg Golf Club at Tayman Park Clubhouse. The workshop was open to the public and included multiple opportunities for public comment. At the workshop, City Council identified a goal to update its protocols. This was affirmed by City Council on June 2, 2025.
BACKGROUND:
The City Council first adopted protocols on November 4, 2013 (Resolution No. 128-2013), in an effort to ensure the orderly and efficient conduct of its meetings. On May 19, 2014 (Resolution No. 65-2014), City Council revised those protocols to address certain questions and comments received from the public concerning the public comment process. On March 19, 2018 (Resolution No. 20-2018), City Council further revised the protocols making them more comprehensive and included and/or referenced language found in City Council adopted resolutions, the City’s Municipal Code, and best practices in other Sonoma County cities.
One of the 2025-2026 City Council goals is to update the City Council protocols, including a comprehensive review and look at best practices from other agencies.
On August 4, 2025, the City Council appointed a subcommittee of Council Member Mitchell (then Mayor Mitchell) and Council Member Kelley to work with staff to further review the existing protocols and make recommendations to the full City Council for consideration.
On October 20, 2025, the subcommittee provided a progress update to City Council and City Item 6.c
48 of 648
Council provided feedback regarding taking positions on legislation and ballot measures.
On January 20, 2026, staff provided a progress update to City Council and City Council provided feedback regarding remote participation.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
Following the January 20, 2026, City Council meeting the City Council subcommittee and staff met three additional times completing the draft protocols based on direction from the full City Council, best practices, administrative clean up, and current practices.
During this process, the subcommittee met a total of seven times to discuss and refine the drafted City Council protocols.
On March 16, 2026, the City Council had the opportunity to discuss and provide feedback on the complete draft protocols. There were no additional edits from the City Council.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
Not applicable.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council could choose not to adopt the revised protocols and provide further direction to staff.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impact is anticipated from the adoption of the proposed protocols.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to Title 14, the California Code of Regulations, Section 15378(b)(4)(5) of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) guidelines, the proposed action is an administrative activity of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment; and therefore, is not a project for purposes of CEQA.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution
Revised Protocols
Summary of Changes
Item 6.c
49 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG ADOPTING REVISED PROCEDURES AND
PROTOCOLS AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 20-2018
AND ANY OTHER RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2018 the City Council of the City of Healdsburg adopted revised protocols and procedures to assure the orderly and efficient conduct of the meetings of the Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council seeks to further amend the protocols and procedures to be more comprehensive, formalize existing practices and procedures, and reference provisions included in the Municipal Code regarding the roles of the Mayor, City Council, and City Manager.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City hereby adopts amendments to the City of Healdsburg City Council Manual of Procedures and Protocols attached hereto as Exhibit A and rescinds Resolution No. 20-2018 and any other resolutions in conflict herewith.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Healdsburg this 20th day of April, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers: ( )
NOES: Councilmembers: ( )
ABSENT: Councilmembers: ( )
ABSTAINING: Councilmembers: ( )
SO ORDERED: ATTEST:
________________________________ ______________________________ J. Chris Herrod, Mayor Raina Allan, City Clerk
I, MARIA CURIEL, City Clerk of the City of Healdsburg, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of Resolution No. _____-2018 adopted by the City Council of the City of Healdsburg on the 19th day of March, 2018.
________________________________
Maria Curiel, City Clerk
Item 6.c
50 of 648
CITY COUNCIL
MANUAL OF
PROCEDURES AND
PROTOCOLS
Adopted:
Item 6.c
51 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -2-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Subject Page
I. CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
A. Adoption of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order 5
B. Regular Meetings 5
C. Adjourned Meetings 5
D. Special Meetings 5
E. Brown Act 5
F. Attendance 6
G. Quorum 6
II. AGENDA
A. Preparation of Agenda & Agenda Packets 6
B. Placement of Items on Agenda by Councilmembers 6
C. Teleconferencing/Remote Public Participation 7
D. Agenda Content/Order 7
E. General Procedure for Presentations/Discussion of Agenda Items 9 F. Public Comment 9
III. PRESIDING OFFICER
A. Mayor to Preside 9
B. Powers and Duties of Presiding Officer 10
IV. CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING
AGENDA ITEMS
A. Written Correspondence 10
V. DEBATE AND DECORUM
A. Getting the Floor 11
B. Questions to Staff 11
C. Interruptions 11
D. Points of Order 11
E. Decorum and Order, City Council and City Staff 11
F. Decorum and Order, Audience 11
G. Enforcement of Decorum 12
H. Failure to Observe Rules of Order 12
I. Use of Technology 12
J. Bring Your Own Device 12
VI. VOTING
A. Voting Procedure 12
B. Failure to Vote 12
C. Conflict of Interest 13
Item 6.c
52 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -3-
D. Reconsideration and Rescission of Prior Action 13
E. Lost Motion 13
VII. MINUTES
A. Preparation of Minutes 13
B. Minutes of Public Hearings 13
C. Approval of Minutes 13
VIII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND CONTRACTS
A. Preparation of Ordinances, Resolutions, and Contracts 14 B. Prior Approval by Administrative Staff 14
C. Ordinances 14
D. Adoption of Resolutions 15
IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Application and Definition 15
B. General Procedure 15
C. Presentation of Evidence 16
D. Continuances 17
E. Decision 17
F. Record of Hearing 17
X. MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR: RESPONSIBILITIES/SELECTION
A. Powers and Duties Generally 17
B. Term 17
C. Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor 17
D. Proclamations 18
XI. CITY COUNCIL GOALS 18
XII. CORRESPONDENCE
A. Correspondence received directly by Councilmembers 19 B. Correspondence received at City Hall 19
C. Community Notifications 19
XIII. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION 19
XIV. CITY COUNCIL/CITY STAFF RELATIONS 19
XV. CITY BOARDS, COMMISSION, AND COMMITTEES 20
XVI. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION 21
XVII. STATIONERY USE AND RELATED GUIDELINES 21
Item 6.c
53 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -4-
Subject Page
XVIII. GENERAL
A. District Elections 22
B. Travel 22
C. Ballot Measures 22
XIX. CONDUCT BY COUNCILMEMBERS 23
APPENDIX A - Rosenberg’s Rules of Order 26
APPENDIX B - Resolution No. 100-2006 37
Item 6.c
54 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -5-
I. CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
A. Adoption of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
The City Council adopts Rosenberg’s Rules of Order as the general procedures for conducting its meetings unless otherwise specified in this manual. In the event of a conflict between this manual and Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, the provisions of this manual shall control. When necessary to resolve issues that may arise over process, the Mayor will refer to the City Attorney who will act as the Parliamentarian.
B. Regular Meetings
The City Council shall hold its regular meetings on the first and third Mondays of each and every calendar month beginning at 6:00 p.m. unless, by a majority vote of Councilmembers present and eligible to vote on the matter at a regular City Council meeting, the City Council elects to cancel a regularly scheduled City Council meeting. In the event that a regular City Council meeting falls on a recognized City holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next regular business day at 6:00 p.m., or at such other time as the City Council may choose. Unless otherwise determined by the City Council or necessary based on the nature of the meeting or an emergency, City Council meetings shall be held at City Hall, 401 Grove Street, Healdsburg, CA.
In November or December of each year, the City Clerk will present the City Council for consideration and action the proposed meeting schedule for the following calendar year, noting the regular meeting dates that fall on a City recognized holiday and anticipated special meeting dates.
City Council meetings may be broadcast live on the City’s website, Facebook, Zoom, and YouTube. City Council meetings may also be rebroadcast on the City’s local government access channel.
C. Adjourned Meetings
Any regular meeting may be adjourned to a time, place, and date specified in the order of adjournment but not beyond the next regular meeting. If no time is stated in the order of adjournment, it shall be the same time as for a regular meeting. An adjourned regular meeting is a regular meeting for all purposes.
D. Special Meetings
Special meetings may be called at any time by a majority of the City Council or by the City Manager. The notice shall specify the time and place of the special meeting and the business to be transacted. No other business shall be considered at such meetings.
E. Brown Act
All meetings of a quorum or more of the City Council shall be held in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.
Item 6.c
55 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -6-
F. Attendance
Councilmembers are expected to attend all meetings of the City Council.
G. Quorum
The City Council consists of five (5) members, one of whom is the Mayor. Three (3) members of the City Council shall constitute a quorum and shall be sufficient to transact business. If fewer than three (3) Councilmembers appear at a regular meeting, no meeting shall occur.
II. AGENDA
A. Preparation of Agenda and Agenda Packets
Agendas for all City Council meetings shall comply with the Brown Act and these Protocols.
Electronic agenda packets for all regular meetings will be distributed to the City Council and staff at least 72 hours before the meeting. Special meeting agendas/packets will be distributed as soon as practicable, but no later than 24 hours prior to the meeting.
Additionally, the electronic agenda packets may be posted on the City’s website and notifications sent to those subscribing to agenda notifications.
B. Placement of Items on Upcoming Agendas by Councilmembers Councilmembers may make a request during “Council Reports” to add an item to a subsequent meeting agenda. The purpose of the City Council discussion on such a request will be limited to whether it will be placed on a future agenda. A concurrence of one Councilmember, in addition to the Councilmember who suggested the item, will be sufficient to place the item on a subsequent agenda, for discussion.
At the subsequent meeting (“Meeting No. 2”), discussion on the matter will focus on the subject matter to be agendized, including details of the City Council’s request; staff time required to research the matter and prepare the staff report; other priorities; and timeline of when the item would be placed on the agenda. No staff report shall be prepared for this discussion, and the primary purpose is for the City Council to provide direction to staff, not to take further action. If the City Council would like to move forward, the item will be further discussed, and a staff report presented, at a subsequent meeting (“Meeting No. 3”).
The City Manager shall have the discretion to skip Meeting No. 2 and place the item on a future agenda for action if, in the City Manager’s determination, the item does not require significant work from staff or additional information from the City Council.
Item 6.c
56 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -7-
C. Teleconferencing/Remote Public Participation
Councilmembers may participate in meetings by teleconference as permitted by the Brown Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Councilmembers requesting teleconference participation must notify the City Clerk as soon as practicable to allow compliance with applicable noticing and access requirements.
When remote participation is provided, members of the public will be allowed to observe and address the City Council using the access methods identified on the agenda.
D. Agenda Content/Order
The agenda shall contain the title headings and shall be conducted in the order and manner as set forth below:
1. Call to Order and Roll Call
The City Clerk shall enter the names of the Councilmembers present and absent in the minutes.
a. Approval of Agenda
The City Council will vote on approval of agenda.
2. Report on Closed Session(s)
If a closed session is held prior to the City Council meeting, the Mayor will report out any reportable actions.
3. Announcements/Presentations
Presentations should be limited to 10 minutes each. If more than one person will be presenting, the entire presentation by all presenters shall not exceed 10 minutes. PowerPoints should be limited to 10 slides.
At the discretion of the Presiding Officer, presentation of proclamations maybe streamlined by only reading the opening and last paragraph. Proclamations will not be read if the requesting person/group is not present.
4. City Manager Reports
The City Manager may provide updates regarding matters of general interest to the Council. No City Council action will be taken.
5. Public Comments on Items on the Consent Calendar and Non-Agenda Items
This period is set aside for members of the public to address the City Council on any item of interest to the public within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council, other than scheduled agenda items. Comments are limited to three minutes, unless otherwise determined by the Presiding Officer. Members from the public wishing to speak on a Consent Agenda item should do so during this time.
Item 6.c
57 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -8-
6. Consent Calendar Items
Items that are routine in nature or have been previously reviewed by the City Council and require little or no further discussion by the City Council, public, or applicant, are considered Consent Items. Operational expenditures, regardless of expenditure amount, which are approved in the budget such as purchase of vehicles, miscellaneous equipment, contracts for services, etc. as well as ministerial actions (i.e. Final Maps) may also be included in the Consent Calendar.
Councilmembers will make every attempt to get their questions regarding Consent Items answered by staff in advance.
The City Council may act on these items in one motion unless any Councilmember requests that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and action taken separately. In the event an item is removed, the matter will be considered immediately following adoption of the Consent Calendar.
7. Public Hearings
The City Council shall conduct all public hearings in accordance with Sections IX and applicable law.
8. Business Items
The City Council shall consider items of City business and the introduction and adoption of ordinances and the adoption of resolutions or motions, as appropriate.
9. Council Reports on Matters of Interest occurring since previous regular meeting/expense reports
Individual Councilmember’s reports and comments on: (1) Council appointed committees and commissions as well as volunteer activities related to City business; and (2) meetings/trainings/conferences, etc. attended where eligible travel expenses are paid by the City as required by AB 1234 and City Council Resolution No. 100-2006, attached hereto as Appendix B.
10. Written Communications
Reports on actions taken by the City Council’s various Committees. No Council action is required.
11. Adjournment of Meeting
12. Future Agenda Items
Staff will prepare a list of future agenda items that may include two months of agenda items with the understanding that items may change from time to time depending on other priorities or as items of an important nature arise.
Item 6.c
58 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -9-
E. General Procedure for Presentation/Discussion of Agenda Items The City Council procedure for consideration of items on the agenda is as follows:
1. Staff presents its report.
2. Council members may ask questions of staff.
3. Public comment.
4. The Mayor may ask staff to answer questions raised during public comment.
5. The City Council deliberates on the issue and, if appropriate, takes action.
F. Public Comment
1. Public comment shall be conducted as follows:
a. Any person who wishes to speak is requested to come to the podium, state their name and address for the record, and, if speaking for an organization or other group, identify the organization or group represented. b. Comments should be addressed to the City Council, and not to individual members, staff, or members of the public.
c. Councilmembers and staff generally will not respond to individual comments. At the end of public comment, the Mayor may, in their discretion, direct any outstanding questions to staff.
2. Public comment is limited to items within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. Each comment is limited to three (3) minutes, unless otherwise determined by the Presiding Officer. An individual may only speak once during any public comment period.
3. Public Comment on Agenda Items - Any member of the public wishing to address the City Council orally on City business matters appearing on the City Council agenda may do so when that item is taken up by the City Council, or as otherwise specified by the Mayor.
4. In lieu of public comment persons may submit comments in writing, in advance, care of the City Clerk, for prior distribution to the City Council.
Submission of comments in writing is encouraged.
III. PRESIDING OFFICER
A. Mayor to Preside
The Mayor shall be the Presiding Officer at all meetings of the City Council. In the absence of the Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall preside.
In the absence of both the Mayor and Vice Mayor, the Councilmember with the longest period of continuous service shall serve as the Presiding Officer. Should Item 6.c
59 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -10-
there be two or more Councilmembers of equal length of service, the Councilmember who received the highest number of votes in the most recent election shall function as the Presiding Officer.
B. Powers and Duties of Presiding Officer
1. Participation
The Presiding Officer may make any motion or second any motion. They shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges of a Councilmember by reason of their acting as Presiding Officer.
2. Questions to be Stated
The Presiding Officer shall decide all questions of order; subject, however, to an appeal by any Councilmember, in which event a majority vote of the Councilmembers present shall govern. Voting on all resolutions and ordinances shall be by roll call vote called by the City Clerk, and the Mayor shall be entitled to vote on all questions, their name being called last.
3. Maintaining Order and Decorum
The Presiding Officer shall be responsible for the maintenance of order and decorum at all meetings, consistent with applicable law.
4. Signing of Documents
The Presiding Officer shall sign all ordinances, resolutions, contracts, and other documents necessitating their signature, which were adopted in their presence, unless they are unavailable, in which case an alternate Presiding Officer may sign such documents.
IV. CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING AGENDA ITEMS A. Councilmembers who receive any non-privileged documents relating to an opensession agenda item, less than 72 hours before the meeting, should forward the documents to the City Clerk as soon as practicable, but no later than the next business day.
Non-privileged public records relating to an open-session agenda item that a majority of the City Council receives will be made available for public inspection, as required by Government Code Section 54957.5.
Correspondence pertaining to an item on the agenda and submitted to the City Clerk’s Office by 12:00 p.m. the Wednesday before the City Council meeting will be included in the agenda packet. Written correspondence received after the Wednesday deadline and before 10:00 a.m. the day of the meeting will be distributed to Councilmembers at the City Council meeting and posted on the City website. All written correspondence pertaining to matters on the agenda and received after 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting will be available for public review on the City website.
Item 6.c
60 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -11-
V. DEBATE AND DECORUM
A. Getting the Floor
Councilmembers wishing to speak during City Council meetings shall raise their hand or otherwise indicate to the Presiding Officer their desire to speak and gain recognition by the Presiding Officer. Councilmembers shall confine themselves to the question under debate.
B. Questions to Staff
Every Councilmember desiring to question the City staff shall, after recognition by the Presiding Officer, address their questions to the presenter of an agenda item, the City Manager, or the City Attorney. The City Manager or City Attorney shall answer the inquiry themselves, or designate a member of their staff for that purpose.
C. Interruptions
A Councilmember, once recognized, shall not be interrupted when speaking unless called to order by the Presiding Officer, unless a point of order is raised by another Councilmember, or unless the speaker chooses to yield to a question by another Councilmember. If a Councilmember, while speaking, is called to order by the Presiding Officer, they shall cease speaking until the question of order is determined; if determined to be in order, they may proceed.
D. Points of Order
The Presiding Officer shall determine all points of order subject to the ability of any Councilmember to appeal to the City Council. They may request an opinion of the City Attorney in making such determination. City Council decision shall conclusively determine any question of order.
E. Decorum and Order, City Council and City Staff
While the City Council is in session, the Councilmembers and City staff shall endeavor to preserve order and decorum. A member shall neither, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings or the peace of the City Council, nor disturb any member while speaking or refuse to obey the directives of the Presiding Officer.
F. Decorum and Order, Audience
No person shall engage in any conduct so as to disrupt, disturb, or otherwise impede the orderly conduct of any City Council meeting. Persons who violate this rule may be barred from attendance for the remainder of the City Council meeting, provided that the Mayor has warned the person that they will be removed if they continue to disrupt the City Council meeting. If after notification and warning the person persists in disrupting the meeting, the Mayor may order the person to leave the City Council meeting and recess the meeting if necessary. If the person does not remove themselves, the Mayor may request the Sergeant-at-Arms or any law enforcement officer who is on duty at the meeting to remove that person from the Council Chamber. Removal will be based on conduct that actually disrupts, disturbs, or impedes the meeting. This rule applies equally to conduct occurring in person or Item 6.c
61 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -12-
through any remote participation platform.
G. Enforcement of Decorum
The Chief of Police, or their designee, shall serve as the Sergeant-at-Arms at the City Council meetings and they shall attend meetings when requested by the Presiding Officer, City Manager, or City Council. They shall be available to attend all meetings immediately upon request. They shall carry out all orders given by the Presiding Officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at the City Council meetings. Any Councilmember may move to require the Presiding Officer to enforce the rules, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the Councilmembers present shall require them to do so.
H. Failure to Observe Rules of Order
Rules adopted to expedite the transaction of the business of the City Council in an orderly fashion are deemed to be procedural only and the failure to strictly observe such rules shall not affect the jurisdiction of the City Council or invalidate any otherwise lawful action taken by the City Council.
I. Use of Technology
Use of communication system devices (such as phones, tablets, and laptops) during City Council meetings by Councilmembers shall be limited to accessing the agenda materials and any information relevant to the meeting.
J. Bring Your Own Device
Councilmembers frequently perform position related tasks that require connecting to city-provided resources, systems, and/or email. In support of these tasks, Councilmembers may wish to use their own portable devices such as laptops, tablets, and smartphones as specified in Resolution No. 103-2022.
VI. VOTING
A. Voting Procedure
When any motion is in order, a vote thereon shall be taken either by voice vote or roll call and entered in the record. Motions may be passed by a simple majority of the members present at a properly noticed meeting unless otherwise required by City ordinance or state law. A supermajority of the City Council is four members.
If a Councilmember participates via teleconference, a roll call vote shall be required in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.
B. Failure to Vote
Every member should vote unless disqualified due to a conflict. Recusal without a conflict, which results in a tie vote, should be avoided as thwarting City Council action, but no Councilmembers shall be forced to vote. Tie votes shall result in no action taken.
Item 6.c
62 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -13-
C. Conflict of Interest
Any Councilmember who has a financial interest or other conflict of interest in any matter coming before the City Council shall state the nature of the disqualification and disqualify themselves from discussing or voting on that matter. The Councilmember shall leave the City Council Chamber before any discussion on the matter commences and shall remain outside of the City Council Chamber until the matter is concluded. If the matter is on the Consent Calendar, the Council Member shall announce their conflict, and refrain from participating in any City Council discussion or consideration of that item. A Councilmember stating such disqualification shall not be counted as part of a quorum and shall be considered absent for the purpose of determining the outcome of any vote on such matter.
D. Reconsideration and Rescission of a Prior Action
A motion to reconsider shall be permitted only as outlined in Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
E. Lost Motions
A lost motion is one that fails to receive the necessary number of votes to carry. Tie votes result in a lost motion.
VII. MINUTES
A. Preparation of Minutes
Minutes of City Council meetings will be action minutes. Action minutes will include final motions and will note for the record how each Councilmember voted.
City Council and staff discussion and comments will not be included in the minutes.
The City Clerk or the designee will have exclusive responsibility for preparation of the minutes. The action minutes shall serve as the official record and shall be retained indefinitely.
Any direction for alterations in the minutes shall be made only by action of the City Council.
Corrections or typographical or clerical errors are not considered alterations.
B. Minutes of Public Hearings
Whenever the City Council acts in a quasi-judicial proceeding, such as hearings defined in Section IX.A, the minutes shall contain a summary of the evidence.
C. Approval of Minutes
Approval of minutes will be placed on the Consent Calendar within 60 days of the meeting occurring.
Item 6.c
63 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -14-
VIII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, AND CONTRACTS
A. Preparation of Ordinances, Resolutions, and Contracts
1. Ordinances
An ordinance is a local law with the force of legislation, and usually amends the Municipal Code. Most ordinances require two readings before the City Council and are effective thirty days after adoption. Ordinances are generally used to update the Municipal Code, make zoning changes, adopt development agreements, or implement regulatory schemes.
All ordinances shall be reviewed and approved before presentation, as to form and legality, by the City Attorney. Ordinances shall be presented to the City Council only when ordered by the City Council or City Manager or prepared by the City Attorney on their own initiative.
2. Resolutions
A resolution is a formal administrative or policy action. They are adopted at one meeting and effective immediately. Resolutions are used for a much broader range of actions than ordinances, including approval of contracts and fee schedules, policy updates, and regulations implementing ordinances.
All resolutions shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. In matters of urgency, a resolution may be presented verbally in motion form together with instructions for written preparation for later execution.
3. Contracts
All contracts shall be approved as to form by the City Attorney and shall be presented to City Council for approval unless the City Council has delegated that authority to the City Manager or other staff, or to the City Attorney. The City Council has delegated authority to the City Manager to approve contracts and expenditures of up to $50,000 (Healdsburg Municipal Code Section 3.24).
B. Prior Approval by Administrative Staff
All ordinances, resolutions, and contract documents shall, before presentation to the City Council, have been approved as to form by the City Attorney and shall have been examined and approved for administration by the City Manager or their authorized representative.
C. Ordinances
Ordinances shall be introduced for first reading by motion. When ordinances, other than urgency ordinances, are altered after introduction, they must be re-introduced at a subsequent meeting Corrections of typographical or clerical errors are not considered alterations.
Item 6.c
64 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -15-
1. Passage
Ordinances may be passed by motion and a majority vote of the City Council, except for those ordinances which require a super majority vote.
Ordinances, except for urgency ordinances, shall not be passed within five (5) days of their introduction. Adoption of an ordinance may be placed on the Consent Calendar unless otherwise prohibited by law.
2. Urgency Ordinance
An urgency ordinance is an ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety of the City. It may be passed immediately upon introduction either at a regular or special meeting, and may be effective immediately. It must include findings explaining the urgency and requires a supermajority vote to pass.
3. Effective Date
Ordinances take effect thirty (30) days after adoption, provided they are published at least once after adoption. Certain ordinances, including urgency ordinances and those relating to an election or taxes, take effect upon adoption.
D. Adoption of Resolutions
Resolutions may be adopted by motion on the date they are first presented to the City Council. Resolutions may be adopted as amended by the City Council on the date they are first presented unless the City Council by majority vote directs the City Clerk to place an amended resolution on a subsequent meeting agenda for adoption.
IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Application and Definition
As used herein, “hearing” shall include all public hearings required by State law or City ordinance, and proceedings for the revocation, suspension, or reinstatement of permits, licenses, and franchises.
B. General Procedure
The City Council procedure for the conduct of public hearings is generally as follows:
1. For quasi-judicial hearings, Councilmembers disclose any ex parte communications or information obtained outside the Council Chamber, such as field trips, views of the premises, and discussions with individuals.
2. Mayor introduces item.
3. Councilmembers may ask questions regarding procedure and responses.
Item 6.c
65 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -16-
4. Staff presents its report; up to 15 minutes.
5. Councilmembers may ask questions of staff.
6. The Mayor opens the public hearing.
7. The appellant may present comments, testimony, or arguments; up to fifteen (15) minutes.
8. City Council may ask questions of the appellant and appellant may respond.
9. Applicant may present comments, testimony, or arguments; up to fifteen (15) minutes.
10. City Council may ask questions of the applicant and applicant may respond.
11. The Mayor will invite members of the public to comment. In the case of an appeal, appellant and applicant teams may only speak during their allotted presentation and rebuttal time. Public comment will be limited to 3 minutes per speaker, or any other equal amount (per person) determined by Mayor.
12. Respond to comments as appropriate and additional City Council questions, as directed by Mayor.
13. The appellant may have an additional speaking time/rebuttal, if desired; up to 10 minutes.
14. The City Council may ask questions of appellant and appellant responses.
15. The applicant may have an additional speaking time/rebuttal, if desired; up to 10 minutes.
16. The City Council may ask questions of applicant and applicant may respond.
17. The public hearing is closed.
18. The City Council deliberates on the issue.
19. The City Council takes action.
C. Presentation of Evidence
Public hearings need not be conducted according to technical rules of evidence.
The City Council may consider all information presented, including oral statements, documents, petitions, staff reports, and maps and other drawings as evidence. Any party may voluntarily offer their comments under oath.
Item 6.c
66 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -17-
D. Continuances
Any hearing may, by motion, be continued by a majority vote of the City Council.
If the hearing is not continued to a date certain, the City will re-notice the hearing.
E. Decision
The City Council shall consider all evidence properly presented in accordance with the rules stated herein and, unless otherwise provided by law, said decision or determination shall be made by motion, resolution, or ordinance, as appropriate.
Any Councilmember who failed to hear portions of the hearing and who did not familiarize themselves with the hearing or conduct thereof so as to be able to publicly state that they were familiar with the issues and evidence presented at the hearing should disqualify themselves from discussing or voting on such matter.
F. Record of Hearing
An electronic recording shall be made of the oral evidence presented at the hearing.
Said recording, together with all documents, maps, exhibits, and displays admitted into evidence, shall be retained by the City Clerk for a period of one (1) year from the date of the close of the hearing.
X. MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR: RESPONSIBILITIES/ SELECTION
A. Powers and Duties Generally.
The Mayor shall be the official head of the City for all ceremonial purposes and shall perform all duties imposed upon them by the laws of the State or by ordinance of the City Council. The Mayor shall serve in such capacity at the pleasure of the City Council. (Healdsburg Municipal Code 2.20.010)
B. Term
The Mayor is appointed for a one-year term at the first regular meeting in December on non-election years or immediately following the installation of the newlyelected Councilmembers if the results of the election are not certified at the first City Council meeting of December.
The Vice Mayor is appointed for a one-year term. The Vice Mayor is not a natural ascendancy to Mayor and there is no rotation system for selecting the Mayor or the Vice Mayor. The Vice Mayor shall also serve at the pleasure of the other Councilmembers.
C. Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
1. Presiding Officer for Selection of Mayor
The officer presiding over the selection process shall serve as Mayor Pro Tempore and preside over City Council meetings until a Mayor is elected. The individual functioning as Presiding Officer for the election of Mayor shall be in the following order:
a. The incumbent Mayor is still on the City Council.
Item 6.c
67 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -18-
b. The incumbent Vice Mayor is still on the City Council. c. The Councilmember with the longest period of continuous service. Should there be two or more Councilmembers of equal length of service, the Councilmember who received the highest number of votes in the most recent election shall function as the Presiding Officer.
2. Nominations
The Presiding Officer shall call for nominations from the dais for Mayor and Vice Mayor. The Presiding Officer, at their discretion, may call for separate nominations. Each nomination must receive a second and be accepted by the nominee prior to a vote on the nomination.
3. Voting
If only one Councilmember is nominated for Mayor and Vice Mayor, the Presiding Officer shall call for a vote on the nomination. If two or more Councilmembers are nominated for each of the positions and those nominations receive a second and are accepted by the nominees, the Presiding Officer shall ask for separate votes on each of the nominations.
In the event that separate nominations are called for Mayor and Vice Mayor the same voting procedure shall be followed.
If the incumbent Mayor is no longer on the City Council, the newly selected Mayor will assume the role of Presiding Officer immediately following the selection. If the incumbent Mayor is on the City Council and during nonelection years; the Mayor and Vice Mayor term will be effective the first of the year.
D. Proclamations
Proclamations are issued and/or scheduled for presentation at a City Council meeting at the discretion of the Mayor in consultation with the City Manager.
Proclamations shall be limited to three per meeting, unless otherwise directed by the Mayor.
XI. CITY COUNCIL GOALS
A. City Council Goals are set by the City Council.
B. Staff will prepare an update on City issues, trends, and relevant information to assist the City Council with preparations for their goal setting process.
C. The purpose of the goal setting process is to establish a limited number of high priority consensus goals that the City will focus on for the next year.
D. Staff will develop projected outcomes for each goal for approval by the City Council.
Item 6.c
68 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -19-
E. The City Manager is an active participant in the goal setting process. Other staff, such as Department Heads may also participate in goal setting at the direction of the City Council and/or City Manager.
F. Staff will take steps to distribute City Council goals to staff and the public.
G. The City Council will review progress on the goals bi-annually.
XII. CORRESPONDENCE
A. Correspondence received directly by Councilmembers
All correspondence, including e-mails and text messages received directly by individual Councilmembers, regardless of whether they are received on a Cityissued or personal email account, pertaining to City business is public information and part of any administrative record. Any communications are subject to the Public Records Act.
B. Correspondence received at City Hall
The City Manager or their designee is authorized to receive and open all mail addressed to the City Council, with the exception of correspondence marked confidential.
Correspondence marked confidential will be date stamped and placed in the addressee’s mail box.
Correspondence directed to theCityCouncil and/or theCity Manager relating to City Council business is a public record and available to the public upon request.
C. Community Notifications
In an effort to increase communications with the community, every effort will be made to notify residents of issues that will affect their neighborhood that will be coming before the City Council or any of the City’s boards, commissions, and advisory committees.
XIII. REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION
A. All Councilmembers’ requests for information, regardless of subject matter, shall be submitted to the City Manager or City Attorney. When appropriate, information gathered will be distributed to all Councilmembers without a notation indicating which Councilmember requested the information.
XIV. CITY COUNCIL/STAFF RELATIONS
A. City Council-Manager Relations
The City Council shall deal with the administrative services of the City only through the City Manager, except for purpose of inquiry, and no City Item 6.c
69 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -20-
Councilmembershall give orders to any subordinates of the City Manager. The City Manager shall take orders and instructions from the City Council majority only when sitting in a duly held meeting of the City Council, and no individual Councilmember shall give any orders or instructions to the City Manager.
No individual Councilmember shall attempt to influence the City Manager in the making of any appointment or in the purchase of supplies.
The City Manager and the City Attorney are the only officials directly appointed by the City Council. All department heads, Assistant City Manager, City Clerk, and their subordinates are supervised by the City Manager.
B. City Council relies on staff for technical work and reports.
C. Staff handles all labor negotiations.
D. City Council shall not attempt to coerce or influence staff in the preparation of staff reports, the making of appointments, the awarding of contracts, the selection of consultants, the processing of development applications, or the granting of licenses or permits. The City Council shall not attempt to change or interfere with the operating policies and practices of any City department.
E. Councilmembers should confer with the City Manager on issues of concern. The City Manager shall provide written notice to the City Council on all matters of major impact to the City.
F. The City Manager and the City Attorney shall receive annual performance reviews.
G. Staff provides support to Councilmembers serving on regional agencies, boards or commissions, or on any League of California Cities affiliated committee or body.
XV. CITY BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEES
A. All applicantsfor City boards, commissions, or advisory committeesshall complete and file a standard application form with the City Clerk.
B. The City Clerk shall advertise any vacancies in the local newspaper and post the vacancies on the City’s website and social media. After the deadline to submit applications, the City Clerk shall report to the City Council at the next available City Council meeting the number of applications received. If City Council determines that sufficient applications were received, City Council may form a subcommittee to interview the applicants and make recommendations to the full City Council.
C. Attendance by Councilmembers at City Council Committee/Commission meetings
Councilmembers may attend meetings of City Council-appointed boards, Item 6.c
70 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -21-
commissions, and advisory committees but will not become involved in the meeting’s discussion or business, and will avoid even the appearance of bias on any matter that could, at some point, come before the City Council.
From time to time, members of the City Council who have not been appointed to a particular committee may wish to attend and participate in the discussion. The Brown Act (Government Code section 54952.2(c)(6)) states that when a majority of the members of a legislative body attend an open and noticed meeting of a standing committee of that body, the members of the legislative body who are not members of the standing committee may attend only as "observer." Thus, if a quorum of the City Council is present at the committee meeting and all members present wish to participate, the meeting must be noticed as a special meeting of the City Council.
XVI. CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
A. Councilmembers shall avoid disclosing information, which is confidential or not generally known or readily available to the public, concerning the business or of the City, for the purpose of benefiting any private interest.
B. If the City Council, in closed session, has provided direction to City staff on proposed terms and conditions for any type of negotiations whether property acquisition or disposal, a proposed or pending claim or litigation, and/or employee negotiations, all contact with the other party should be by the designated City staff representative handling the negotiations or litigation. Unless otherwise authorized by a majority of the City Council, a Councilmember shall not have any contact or discussions with the other party or its representatives involved with the negotiations, nor communicate any discussion conducted in closed session. All public statements, information, and press releases should be handled by the designated staff spokesperson.
XVII. STATIONERY USE AND RELATED GUIDELINES
A. City letterhead may:
1. Be used by the Mayor and Councilmembers only for official City correspondence and communications.
2. The use of City letterhead, title, City Seal, logo, other insignia and/or Councilmember title on personal matters is not permitted.
B. All Councilmember business cards will contain only the Councilmember’s name, title, City Hall address, and telephone number. Business names and/or addresses are prohibited.
C. All documents/correspondence using the City letterhead are public documents. Copies of all correspondence/documents shall be provided to the City Manager.
D. All Councilmembers should be copied on correspondence signed by the Mayor or other Item 6.c
71 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -22-
Councilmembers.
XVIII.GENERAL
A. District Elections
1. On April 21, 2025, the City Council adopted an Ordinance establishing district-based elections for all five (5) Councilmembers. Prior to the adoption of the Ordinance, each member of the City Council was elected in at-large elections by registered voters of the entire City.
2. The City Council understands the value of citywide governance regardless of the method by which each Councilmember is elected. Governing citywide allows for the continuation of inclusive and accessible customer service, the most effective use of taxpayer resources, and consistency in City services.
3. Each member of the City Council will continue to serve all of the people of Healdsburg, govern on a citywide basis, considering the needs and interests of the entire community, regardless of the district in which a resident resides or a proposed project is located, or from which a Councilmember is elected.
4. Resources will continue to be allocated based on long-term strategic planning efforts, with citywide considerations of equitable service levels and financial capacity.
5. City Council fiscal management, best practices, and City systems will continue to reflect services provided to all residents citywide.
B. Travel
1. Travel arrangements for City related business should be coordinated with the City Clerk and/or City Manager’s Office staff.
2. Receipts and travel expense reports are to be submitted no later than 30 days after the date of the meeting, conference, or event. Expenses shall be reimbursed in accordance with City Council Resolution No. 100-2006 (Appendix B).
3. Councilmembers must report under Reports from City Council attendance at the meeting, conference, event, etc. in order to be eligible for reimbursement.
C. Ballot Measures
1. The City Council may take an official position (support, oppose, or take no position) on a ballot measure when the City Council determines that the measure or proposition directly relates to the City’s governmental interests, fiscal health, service delivery, infrastructure, public safety, environmental goals, or overall community well-being.
Item 6.c
72 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -23-
2. Criteria for Taking a Position.
In considering whether to take a position on a ballot measure, the City Council may evaluate the following factors:
a. Direct fiscal or operational impacts to the City.
b. Effects on City authority, governance, or regulatory responsibilities. c. Impacts on City services, infrastructure, or public programs. d. Alignment with adopted City policies, plans, or strategic goals. e. Broad and demonstratable benefit or detriment to City residents.
3. Process
a. Any proposed City Council position shall be considered at a duly noticed public meeting.
b. A City Council position shall be adopted by no fewer than four Councilmembers.
XIX. CONDUCT BY COUNCILMEMBERS, COMMISSIONERS AND COMMITTEE
MEMBERS
A. To increase public confidence in City government; assist Councilmembers, Committee, and Commission members with decision-making; and to encourage high standards of behavior by Councilmembers and Committee/Commission members the following Code of Conduct shall be followed by the City Councilmembers and Committees and Commissions of the City of Healdsburg:
1. Councilmembers are expected to read staff reports and supporting information in the agenda packets and get necessary clarification on issues prior to City Council meetings.
2. Study sessions are held to help educate the City Council and allow staff to receive comments and direction to bring items back on a later agenda for possible action.
3. In order to reach the best possible solutions, information is shared freely between Councilmembers during City Council meetings.
4. Councilmembers treat each other, the public, and staff with respect at all times.
5. There is a respect for differing opinions.
6. The City Council will address the issue(s) before the body based on the merits and substance of the matter regardless of the person/group presenting those issues.
7. There are individual interests and areas of expertise of Councilmembers – allowing the City Council to rely on one another for information and positive action.
Item 6.c
73 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -24-
8. City Council looks to boards, commissions, and committees for independent advice and possible legislative actions.
B. Ethical Considerations
1. Comply with the Law. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall comply with all applicable laws in the performance of their public duties.
2. Conduct of Councilmembers, Board and Commission Members. The professional and personal conduct of members must be above reproach and avoid the appearance of impropriety. While it is understood that Councilmembers, and Board and Commission members enjoy First Amendment rights, they should refrain from abusive conduct, personal charges, or verbal attacks upon the character or motives of other members of the City Council, Boards, Commissions, staff, or the public that is intended to disrupt and not further the City’s business.
3. Respect for Process. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall perform their duties in accordance with the processes and rules of order established by City Council governing the deliberation of public policy issues, meaningful involvement of the public, and implementation of policy decisions of the City Council by City staff.
4. Decisions based on Merit. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall base their decisions on the merits and substance of the matter at hand, rather than on unrelated considerations.
5. Gifts and Favors. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall follow the laws and regulations that apply to the acceptance of gifts or favors by a public official.
6. Confidential Information. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall respect the confidentiality of information concerning the property, personnel, or legal affairs of the City. They shall neither disclose confidential information without proper legal authorization, nor use such information to advance their personal, financial, or other private interests.
7. Use of Public Resources. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall not use public resources, such as staff time, equipment, supplies, or facilities, for private gain or personal purposes.
8. Advocacy. Councilmember and Board and Commission members shall represent the official policies or positions of the City Council, Board, or Commission to the best of their ability when designated as delegates for this purpose. When presenting their individual opinions and positions, Item 6.c
74 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -25-
Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall explicitly state they do not represent the position of the entire City Council, the Board, or the Commission.
9. Positive Work Environment. Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall support the maintenance of a positive and constructive work environment for City staff, private citizens, and businesses dealing with the City.
Councilmembers and Board and Commission members shall recognize their roles in individual dealings with City staff.
Item 6.c
75 of 648
4916-9506-5748 v1 -26-
APPENDIX A
ROSENBERG’S RULES OF ORDER
Item 6.c
76 of 648
Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
REVISED 2011
Simple Rules of Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century By Judge Dave Rosenberg
Item 6.c
77 of 648
ii
MISSION and CORE BELIEFS
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
VISION
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California’s cities.
About the League of California Cities
Established in 1898, the League of California Cities is a member organization that represents California’s incorporated cities.
The League strives to protect the local authority and automony of city government and help California’s cities effectively serve their residents. In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the state capitol, the League provides its members with professional development programs and information resources, conducts education conferences and research, and publishes Western City magazine.
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
About the Author
Dave Rosenberg is a Superior Court Judge in Yolo County. He has served as presiding judge of his court, and as presiding judge of the Superior Court Appellate Division. He also has served as chair of the Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee (the committee composed of all 58 California presiding judges) and as an advisory member of the California Judicial Council. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Rosenberg was member of the Yolo County Board of Supervisors, where he served two terms as chair. Rosenberg also served on the Davis City Council, including two terms as mayor. He has served on the senior staff of two governors, and worked for 19 years in private law practice. Rosenberg has served as a member and chair of numerous state, regional and local boards. Rosenberg chaired the California State Lottery Commission, the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, the Yolo County Economic Development Commission, and the Yolo County Criminal Justice Cabinet. For many years, he has taught classes on parliamentary procedure and has served as parliamentarian for large and small bodies.
Item 6.c
78 of 648
1 Table of Contents
About the Author............................................................................................................ii Introduction....................................................................................................................2 Establishing a Quorum...................................................................................................2 The Role of the Chair......................................................................................................2 The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion........................................................2 Motions in General.........................................................................................................3 The Three Basic Motions................................................................................................3 Multiple Motions Before the Body.................................................................................4 To Debate or Not to Debate............................................................................................4 Majority and Super-Majority Votes ...............................................................................5 Counting Votes................................................................................................................5 The Motion to Reconsider..............................................................................................6 Courtesy and Decorum ..................................................................................................7 Special Notes About Public Input..................................................................................7 Item 6.c
79 of 648
2 Establishing a Quorum
The starting point for a meeting is the establishment of a quorum.
A quorum is defined as the minimum number of members of the body who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally transacted. The default rule is that a quorum is one more than half the body. For example, in a five-member body a quorum is three.
When the body has three members present, it can legally transact business. If the body has less than a quorum of members present, it cannot legally transact business. And even if the body has a quorum to begin the meeting, the body can lose the quorum during the meeting when a member departs (or even when a member leaves the dais). When that occurs the body loses its ability to transact business until and unless a quorum is reestablished.
The default rule, identified above, however, gives way to a specific rule of the body that establishes a quorum. For example, the rules of a particular five-member body may indicate that a quorum is four members for that particular body. The body must follow the rules it has established for its quorum. In the absence of such a specific rule, the quorum is one more than half the members of the body.
The Role of the Chair
While all members of the body should know and understand the rules of parliamentary procedure, it is the chair of the body who is charged with applying the rules of conduct of the meeting. The chair should be well versed in those rules. For all intents and purposes, the chair makes the final ruling on the rules every time the chair states an action. In fact, all decisions by the chair are final unless overruled by the body itself.
Since the chair runs the conduct of the meeting, it is usual courtesy for the chair to play a less active role in the debate and discussion than other members of the body. This does not mean that the chair should not participate in the debate or discussion. To the contrary, as a member of the body, the chair has the full right to participate in the debate, discussion and decision-making of the body. What the chair should do, however, is strive to be the last to speak at the discussion and debate stage. The chair should not make or second a motion unless the chair is convinced that no other member of the body will do so at that point in time.
The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion
Formal meetings normally have a written, often published agenda.
Informal meetings may have only an oral or understood agenda. In either case, the meeting is governed by the agenda and the agenda constitutes the body’s agreed-upon roadmap for the meeting. Each agenda item can be handled by the chair in the following basic format:
Introduction
The rules of procedure at meetings should be simple enough for most people to understand. Unfortunately, that has not always been the case. Virtually all clubs, associations, boards, councils and bodies follow a set of rules — Robert’s Rules of Order — which are embodied in a small, but complex, book. Virtually no one I know has actually read this book cover to cover. Worse yet, the book was written for another time and for another purpose. If one is chairing or running a parliament, then Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite useful handbook for procedure in that complex setting. On the other hand, if one is running a meeting of say, a five-member body with a few members of the public in attendance, a simplified version of the rules of parliamentary procedure is in order.
Hence, the birth of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
What follows is my version of the rules of parliamentary procedure, based on my decades of experience chairing meetings in state and local government. These rules have been simplified for the smaller bodies we chair or in which we participate, slimmed down for the 21st Century, yet retaining the basic tenets of order to which we have grown accustomed. Interestingly enough, Rosenberg’s Rules has found a welcoming audience. Hundreds of cities, counties, special districts, committees, boards, commissions, neighborhood associations and private corporations and companies have adopted Rosenberg’s Rules in lieu of Robert’s Rules because they have found them practical, logical, simple, easy to learn and user friendly.
This treatise on modern parliamentary procedure is built on a foundation supported by the following four pillars:
1. Rules should establish order. The first purpose of rules of parliamentary procedure is to establish a framework for the orderly conduct of meetings.
2. Rules should be clear. Simple rules lead to wider understanding and participation. Complex rules create two classes: those who understand and participate; and those who do not fully understand and do not fully participate.
3. Rules should be user friendly. That is, the rules must be simple enough that the public is invited into the body and feels that it has participated in the process.
4. Rules should enforce the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The ultimate purpose of rules of procedure is to encourage discussion and to facilitate decision making by the body. In a democracy, majority rules. The rules must enable the majority to express itself and fashion a result, while permitting the minority to also express itself, but not dominate, while fully participating in the process.
Item 6.c
80 of 648
3 Ninth, the chair takes a vote. Simply asking for the “ayes” and then asking for the “nays” normally does this. If members of the body do not vote, then they “abstain.” Unless the rules of the body provide otherwise (or unless a super majority is required as delineated later in these rules), then a simple majority (as defined in law or the rules of the body as delineated later in these rules) determines whether the motion passes or is defeated.
Tenth, the chair should announce the result of the vote and what action (if any) the body has taken. In announcing the result, the chair should indicate the names of the members of the body, if any, who voted in the minority on the motion. This announcement might take the following form: “The motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with Smith and Jones dissenting. We have passed the motion requiring a 10-day notice for all future meetings of this body.”
Motions in General
Motions are the vehicles for decision making by a body. It is usually best to have a motion before the body prior to commencing discussion of an agenda item. This helps the body focus.
Motions are made in a simple two-step process. First, the chair should recognize the member of the body. Second, the member of the body makes a motion by preceding the member’s desired approach with the words “I move … ”
A typical motion might be: “I move that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
The chair usually initiates the motion in one of three ways:
1. Inviting the members of the body to make a motion, for example, “A motion at this time would be in order.”
2. Suggesting a motion to the members of the body, “A motion would be in order that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
3. Making the motion. As noted, the chair has every right as a member of the body to make a motion, but should normally do so only if the chair wishes to make a motion on an item but is convinced that no other member of the body is willing to step forward to do so at a particular time.
The Three Basic Motions
There are three motions that are the most common and recur often at meetings:
The basic motion. The basic motion is the one that puts forward a decision for the body’s consideration. A basic motion might be: “I move that we create a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.”
First, the chair should clearly announce the agenda item number and should clearly state what the agenda item subject is. The chair should then announce the format (which follows) that will be followed in considering the agenda item.
Second, following that agenda format, the chair should invite the appropriate person or persons to report on the item, including any recommendation that they might have. The appropriate person or persons may be the chair, a member of the body, a staff person, or a committee chair charged with providing input on the agenda item.
Third, the chair should ask members of the body if they have any technical questions of clarification. At this point, members of the body may ask clarifying questions to the person or persons who reported on the item, and that person or persons should be given time to respond.
Fourth, the chair should invite public comments, or if appropriate at a formal meeting, should open the public meeting for public input.
If numerous members of the public indicate a desire to speak to the subject, the chair may limit the time of public speakers. At the conclusion of the public comments, the chair should announce that public input has concluded (or the public hearing, as the case may be, is closed).
Fifth, the chair should invite a motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who makes the motion.
Sixth, the chair should determine if any member of the body wishes to second the motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who seconds the motion. It is normally good practice for a motion to require a second before proceeding to ensure that it is not just one member of the body who is interested in a particular approach. However, a second is not an absolute requirement, and the chair can proceed with consideration and vote on a motion even when there is no second. This is a matter left to the discretion of the chair.
Seventh, if the motion is made and seconded, the chair should make sure everyone understands the motion.
This is done in one of three ways:
1. The chair can ask the maker of the motion to repeat it;
2. The chair can repeat the motion; or
3. The chair can ask the secretary or the clerk of the body to repeat the motion.
Eighth, the chair should now invite discussion of the motion by the body. If there is no desired discussion, or after the discussion has ended, the chair should announce that the body will vote on the motion. If there has been no discussion or very brief discussion, then the vote on the motion should proceed immediately and there is no need to repeat the motion. If there has been substantial discussion, then it is normally best to make sure everyone understands the motion by repeating it.
Item 6.c
81 of 648
4 First, the chair would deal with the third (the last) motion on the floor, the substitute motion. After discussion and debate, a vote would be taken first on the third motion. If the substitute motion passed, it would be a substitute for the basic motion and would eliminate it. The first motion would be moot, as would the second motion (which sought to amend the first motion), and the action on the agenda item would be completed on the passage by the body of the third motion (the substitute motion). No vote would be taken on the first or second motions.
Second, if the substitute motion failed, the chair would then deal with the second (now the last) motion on the floor, the motion to amend. The discussion and debate would focus strictly on the amendment (should the committee be five or 10 members). If the motion to amend passed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) as amended. If the motion to amend failed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) in its original format, not amended.
Third, the chair would now deal with the first motion that was placed on the floor. The original motion would either be in its original format (five-member committee), or if amended, would be in its amended format (10-member committee). The question on the floor for discussion and decision would be whether a committee should plan and put on the annual fundraiser.
To Debate or Not to Debate
The basic rule of motions is that they are subject to discussion and debate. Accordingly, basic motions, motions to amend, and substitute motions are all eligible, each in their turn, for full discussion before and by the body. The debate can continue as long as members of the body wish to discuss an item, subject to the decision of the chair that it is time to move on and take action.
There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire of the body to move on. The following motions are not debatable (that is, when the following motions are made and seconded, the chair must immediately call for a vote of the body without debate on the motion):
Motion to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to recess. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately take a recess. Normally, the chair determines the length of the recess which may be a few minutes or an hour. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to fix the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to adjourn the meeting at the specific time set in the motion. For example, the motion might be: “I move we adjourn this meeting at midnight.” It requires a simple majority vote.
The motion to amend. If a member wants to change a basic motion that is before the body, they would move to amend it. A motion to amend might be: “I move that we amend the motion to have a 10-member committee.” A motion to amend takes the basic motion that is before the body and seeks to change it in some way.
The substitute motion. If a member wants to completely do away with the basic motion that is before the body, and put a new motion before the body, they would move a substitute motion. A substitute motion might be: “I move a substitute motion that we cancel the annual fundraiser this year.”
“Motions to amend” and “substitute motions” are often confused, but they are quite different, and their effect (if passed) is quite different.
A motion to amend seeks to retain the basic motion on the floor, but modify it in some way. A substitute motion seeks to throw out the basic motion on the floor, and substitute a new and different motion for it. The decision as to whether a motion is really a “motion to amend” or a “substitute motion” is left to the chair. So if a member makes what that member calls a “motion to amend,” but the chair determines that it is really a “substitute motion,” then the chair’s designation governs.
A “friendly amendment” is a practical parliamentary tool that is simple, informal, saves time and avoids bogging a meeting down with numerous formal motions. It works in the following way: In the discussion on a pending motion, it may appear that a change to the motion is desirable or may win support for the motion from some members. When that happens, a member who has the floor may simply say, “I want to suggest a friendly amendment to the motion.” The member suggests the friendly amendment, and if the maker and the person who seconded the motion pending on the floor accepts the friendly amendment, that now becomes the pending motion on the floor. If either the maker or the person who seconded rejects the proposed friendly amendment, then the proposer can formally move to amend.
Multiple Motions Before the Body
There can be up to three motions on the floor at the same time.
The chair can reject a fourth motion until the chair has dealt with the three that are on the floor and has resolved them. This rule has practical value. More than three motions on the floor at any given time is confusing and unwieldy for almost everyone, including the chair.
When there are two or three motions on the floor (after motions and seconds) at the same time, the vote should proceed first on the last motion that is made. For example, assume the first motion is a basic “motion to have a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” During the discussion of this motion, a member might make a second motion to “amend the main motion to have a 10-member committee, not a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” And perhaps, during that discussion, a member makes yet a third motion as a “substitute motion that we not have an annual fundraiser this year.” The proper procedure would be as follows:
Item 6.c
82 of 648
5 Motion to close nominations. When choosing officers of the body (such as the chair), nominations are in order either from a nominating committee or from the floor of the body. A motion to close nominations effectively cuts off the right of the minority to nominate officers and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to object to the consideration of a question. Normally, such a motion is unnecessary since the objectionable item can be tabled or defeated straight up. However, when members of a body do not even want an item on the agenda to be considered, then such a motion is in order. It is not debatable, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to suspend the rules. This motion is debatable, but requires a two-thirds vote to pass. If the body has its own rules of order, conduct or procedure, this motion allows the body to suspend the rules for a particular purpose. For example, the body (a private club) might have a rule prohibiting the attendance at meetings by non-club members. A motion to suspend the rules would be in order to allow a non-club member to attend a meeting of the club on a particular date or on a particular agenda item.
Counting Votes
The matter of counting votes starts simple, but can become complicated.
Usually, it’s pretty easy to determine whether a particular motion passed or whether it was defeated. If a simple majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then one vote more than 50 percent of the body is required. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is three in favor and two opposed, the motion passes. If it is two in favor and three opposed, the motion is defeated.
If a two-thirds majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then how many affirmative votes are required? The simple rule of thumb is to count the “no” votes and double that count to determine how many “yes” votes are needed to pass a particular motion. For example, in a seven-member body, if two members vote “no” then the “yes” vote of at least four members is required to achieve a two-thirds majority vote to pass the motion.
What about tie votes? In the event of a tie, the motion always fails since an affirmative vote is required to pass any motion. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is two in favor and two opposed, with one member absent, the motion is defeated.
Vote counting starts to become complicated when members vote “abstain” or in the case of a written ballot, cast a blank (or unreadable) ballot. Do these votes count, and if so, how does one count them? The starting point is always to check the statutes.
In California, for example, for an action of a board of supervisors to be valid and binding, the action must be approved by a majority of the board. (California Government Code Section 25005.) Typically, this means three of the five members of the board must vote affirmatively in favor of the action. A vote of 2-1 would not be sufficient. A vote of 3-0 with two abstentions would be sufficient. In general law cities in Motion to table. This motion, if passed, requires discussion of the agenda item to be halted and the agenda item to be placed on “hold.” The motion can contain a specific time in which the item can come back to the body. “I move we table this item until our regular meeting in October.” Or the motion can contain no specific time for the return of the item, in which case a motion to take the item off the table and bring it back to the body will have to be taken at a future meeting. A motion to table an item (or to bring it back to the body) requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to limit debate. The most common form of this motion is to say, “I move the previous question” or “I move the question” or “I call the question” or sometimes someone simply shouts out “question.” As a practical matter, when a member calls out one of these phrases, the chair can expedite matters by treating it as a “request” rather than as a formal motion. The chair can simply inquire of the body, “any further discussion?” If no one wishes to have further discussion, then the chair can go right to the pending motion that is on the floor.
However, if even one person wishes to discuss the pending motion further, then at that point, the chair should treat the call for the “question” as a formal motion, and proceed to it.
When a member of the body makes such a motion (“I move the previous question”), the member is really saying: “I’ve had enough debate. Let’s get on with the vote.” When such a motion is made, the chair should ask for a second, stop debate, and vote on the motion to limit debate. The motion to limit debate requires a two-thirds vote of the body.
Note: A motion to limit debate could include a time limit. For example: “I move we limit debate on this agenda item to 15 minutes.” Even in this format, the motion to limit debate requires a twothirds vote of the body. A similar motion is a motion to object to consideration of an item. This motion is not debatable, and if passed, precludes the body from even considering an item on the agenda. It also requires a two-thirds vote.
Majority and Super Majority Votes
In a democracy, a simple majority vote determines a question. A tie vote means the motion fails. So in a seven-member body, a vote of 4-3 passes the motion. A vote of 3-3 with one abstention means the motion fails. If one member is absent and the vote is 3-3, the motion still fails.
All motions require a simple majority, but there are a few exceptions.
The exceptions come up when the body is taking an action which effectively cuts off the ability of a minority of the body to take an action or discuss an item. These extraordinary motions require a two-thirds majority (a super majority) to pass:
Motion to limit debate. Whether a member says, “I move the previous question,” or “I move the question,” or “I call the question,” or “I move to limit debate,” it all amounts to an attempt to cut off the ability of the minority to discuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Item 6.c
83 of 648
6 Now, exactly how does a member cast an “abstention” vote? Any time a member votes “abstain” or says, “I abstain,” that is an abstention. However, if a member votes “present” that is also treated as an abstention (the member is essentially saying, “Count me for purposes of a quorum, but my vote on the issue is abstain.”) In fact, any manifestation of intention not to vote either “yes” or “no” on the pending motion may be treated by the chair as an abstention. If written ballots are cast, a blank or unreadable ballot is counted as an abstention as well.
Can a member vote “absent” or “count me as absent?” Interesting question. The ruling on this is up to the chair. The better approach is for the chair to count this as if the member had left his/her chair and is actually “absent.” That, of course, affects the quorum. However, the chair may also treat this as a vote to abstain, particularly if the person does not actually leave the dais.
The Motion to Reconsider
There is a special and unique motion that requires a bit of explanation all by itself; the motion to reconsider. A tenet of parliamentary procedure is finality. After vigorous discussion, debate and a vote, there must be some closure to the issue. And so, after a vote is taken, the matter is deemed closed, subject only to reopening if a proper motion to consider is made and passed.
A motion to reconsider requires a majority vote to pass like other garden-variety motions, but there are two special rules that apply only to the motion to reconsider.
First, is the matter of timing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the meeting where the item was first voted upon. A motion to reconsider made at a later time is untimely. (The body, however, can always vote to suspend the rules and, by a two-thirds majority, allow a motion to reconsider to be made at another time.)
Second, a motion to reconsider may be made only by certain members of the body. Accordingly, a motion to reconsider may be made only by a member who voted in the majority on the original motion. If such a member has a change of heart, he or she may make the motion to reconsider (any other member of the body — including a member who voted in the minority on the original motion — may second the motion). If a member who voted in the minority seeks to make the motion to reconsider, it must be ruled out of order. The purpose of this rule is finality. If a member of minority could make a motion to reconsider, then the item could be brought back to the body again and again, which would defeat the purpose of finality.
If the motion to reconsider passes, then the original matter is back before the body, and a new original motion is in order. The matter may be discussed and debated as if it were on the floor for the first time.
California, as another example, resolutions or orders for the payment of money and all ordinances require a recorded vote of the total members of the city council. (California Government Code Section 36936.) Cities with charters may prescribe their own vote requirements. Local elected officials are always well-advised to consult with their local agency counsel on how state law may affect the vote count.
After consulting state statutes, step number two is to check the rules of the body. If the rules of the body say that you count votes of “those present” then you treat abstentions one way. However, if the rules of the body say that you count the votes of those “present and voting,” then you treat abstentions a different way. And if the rules of the body are silent on the subject, then the general rule of thumb (and default rule) is that you count all votes that are “present and voting.” Accordingly, under the “present and voting” system, you would NOT count abstention votes on the motion. Members who abstain are counted for purposes of determining quorum (they are “present”), but you treat the abstention votes on the motion as if they did not exist (they are not “voting”). On the other hand, if the rules of the body specifically say that you count votes of those “present” then you DO count abstention votes both in establishing the quorum and on the motion. In this event, the abstention votes act just like “no” votes.
How does this work in practice?
Here are a few examples.
Assume that a five-member city council is voting on a motion that requires a simple majority vote to pass, and assume further that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Accordingly, the default rule kicks in and we count all votes of members that are “present and voting.” If the vote on the motion is 3-2, the motion passes. If the motion is 2-2 with one abstention, the motion fails.
Assume a five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and further assume that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Again, the default rule applies.
If the vote is 3-2, the motion fails for lack of a two-thirds majority. If the vote is 4-1, the motion passes with a clear two-thirds majority. A vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” also results in passage of the motion. Once again, the abstention is counted only for the purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective 3-1 vote is clearly a two-thirds majority vote.
Now, change the scenario slightly. Assume the same five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, but now assume that the body DOES have a specific rule requiring a two-thirds vote of members “present.” Under this specific rule, we must count the members present not only for quorum but also for the motion. In this scenario, any abstention has the same force and effect as if it were a “no” vote. Accordingly, if the votes were three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain,” then the motion fails. The abstention in this case is treated like a “no” vote and effective vote of 3-2 is not enough to pass two-thirds majority muster.
Item 6.c
84 of 648
7 Appeal. If the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body disagrees with, that member may appeal the ruling of the chair. If the motion is seconded, and after debate, if it passes by a simple majority vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed.
Call for orders of the day. This is simply another way of saying, “return to the agenda.” If a member believes that the body has drifted from the agreed-upon agenda, such a call may be made. It does not require a vote, and when the chair discovers that the agenda has not been followed, the chair simply reminds the body to return to the agenda item properly before them. If the chair fails to do so, the chair’s determination may be appealed.
Withdraw a motion. During debate and discussion of a motion, the maker of the motion on the floor, at any time, may interrupt a speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the floor. The motion is immediately deemed withdrawn, although the chair may ask the person who seconded the motion if he or she wishes to make the motion, and any other member may make the motion if properly recognized.
Special Notes About Public Input
The rules outlined above will help make meetings very publicfriendly. But in addition, and particularly for the chair, it is wise to remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item:
Rule One: Tell the public what the body will be doing.
Rule Two: Keep the public informed while the body is doing it.
Rule Three: When the body has acted, tell the public what the body did.
Courtesy and Decorum
The rules of order are meant to create an atmosphere where the members of the body and the members of the public can attend to business efficiently, fairly and with full participation. At the same time, it is up to the chair and the members of the body to maintain common courtesy and decorum. Unless the setting is very informal, it is always best for only one person at a time to have the floor, and it is always best for every speaker to be first recognized by the chair before proceeding to speak.
The chair should always ensure that debate and discussion of an agenda item focuses on the item and the policy in question, not the personalities of the members of the body. Debate on policy is healthy, debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off discussion that is too personal, is too loud, or is too crude.
Debate and discussion should be focused, but free and open. In the interest of time, the chair may, however, limit the time allotted to speakers, including members of the body.
Can a member of the body interrupt the speaker? The general rule is “no.” There are, however, exceptions. A speaker may be interrupted for the following reasons:
Privilege. The proper interruption would be, “point of privilege.” The chair would then ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of privilege relate to anything that would interfere with the normal comfort of the meeting. For example, the room may be too hot or too cold, or a blowing fan might interfere with a person’s ability to hear.
Order. The proper interruption would be, “point of order.” Again, the chair would ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of order relate to anything that would not be considered appropriate conduct of the meeting. For example, if the chair moved on to a vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that discussion or debate.
Item 6.c
85 of 648
1400 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 658-8200 | Fax (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org
To order additional copies of this publication, call (916) 658-8200. $10
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
Printed on recycled paper.
Item 6.c
86 of 648
26 4916-9506-5748 v1
APPENDIX B
RESOLUTION NO. 100-2006
Item 6.c
87 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
RESOLUTION NO. 100-2006
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG ESTABLISHING A WRITTEN POLICY FOR
EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT AND ETHICS TRAINING FOR
CITY OFFICIALS PURSUANT TO AB1234
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Healdsburg (“City Council”) takes seriously its stewardship over the use of limited public resources; and WHEREAS, City resources should be used when they provide a benefit to the City; and WHEREAS, without limitation, such benefits include:
1. The opportunity to discuss City concerns with other public officials.
2. Participating in local, regional and professional organizations whose activities affect the City.
3. Attending educational seminars designed to improve the skills and information levels of City officials.
4. Promoting public service and morale by recognizing same.
WHEREAS, this Resolution will establish a policy to provide guidance to elected and appointed officials on the use and expenditure of City resources; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 1234 (“AB 1234”) establishes certain restrictions on compensation and the reimbursement of expenses for members of local legislative bodies and creates a new ethics training requirement for local public officials; and WHEREAS, the policy established by this Resolution will satisfy the expense reimbursement policy and ethics training requirements of AB 1234; and WHEREAS, Government Code §§ 54950 et seq., defines “members of a Legislative Body” to include the City Council and members of Commissions or advisory bodies created by the Council; and
WHEREAS, AB 1234 requires the adoption of a more restrictive reimbursement policy with respect to members of City’s legislative bodies;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopts the City Of Healdsburg Expense Reimbursement Policy set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that each and every member of the City Council, any member of a commission appointed by the City Council and any City Employee who is eligible Item 6.c
88 of 648
Item 6.c
89 of 648
Resolution No. 100-2006
EXHIBIT A
City Of Healdsburg Expense Reimbursement Policy
1. Purpose. The purpose of this policy is to ensure that the reimbursement of members of City legislative bodies and certain City employees for expenses incurred in the performance of official duties complies with state law, including recently enacted Assembly Bill 1234, which adds Sections 53232.2 et seq. to the Government Code, to establish a reimbursement policy for city officials, and to establish other requirements related to travel and educational expenses paid by the City.
2. Policy. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of official duties only as provided in this Policy.
3. Definitions. The following definition shall apply to this policy:
“Legislative Body” means the City Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, Airport Commission, and any other advisory body appointed by the City Council to act on behalf of the City.
“City Employees” means any employee of the City of Healdsburg who can authorize reimbursement of expenses incurred by such employee without review of another City employee or official.
4. Types of Occurrences that Qualify for Reimbursement. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of official duties, including (a) attending conferences or organized educational activities that benefit the City or affect the City’s interests, (b) meeting with local, state, and federal legislators and officials regarding official city business, (c) meeting with staff and officials of surrounding communities regarding matters of mutual concern, (d) attending City events, (e) participating in regional, state, and national organizations whose activities affect the City’s interests, (f) attending meetings and conferences of associations, including without limitation, joint action agencies and joint powers authorities, whose activities provide a benefit to the City and (g) such other business that provides a benefit to the City.
5. Travel for other Agencies. Members of a Legislative Body may be reimbursed for all actual and necessary expenses (up to the per diem daily limits) incurred when traveling on official business as members or representatives of another public agency or body to which the City is a member.
6. Government Rates. Airlines, hotels, and rental car companies often make special rates available to state, federal, and local governments. These rates are presumed to be the most economical and reasonable rates for the purposes of this Policy. Those booking travel should consult available resources, such as www.catravelsmart.com, to determine the applicable government rates or most affordable rate.
Item 6.c
90 of 648
Resolution No. 100-2006
Exhibit A – Page 2
7. Transportation.
a. Cost Comparison to Determine Mode of Transportation. In general, members of a Legislative Body and City Employees should choose the least expensive mode of travel. For example, in some cases, it may be less expensive for the City to reimburse members of a Legislative Body or City Employees for mileage associated with vehicle transportation than to pay for air travel. Members of legislative bodies and City Employees shall also consider costsaving strategies such as car-pooling in the cost comparison. b. Air Travel. When possible, members of a Legislative Body and City Employees should arrange for air travel to be paid for in advance by the City at the most economical and reasonable round-trip fare consistent with the member or employee’s scheduling needs. If advance arrangements cannot be made due to lack of advance warning or other extenuating circumstances as approved by the City Manager or his or her designee before the expenses are incurred, members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for the expense of the airfare, so long as it is the most economical and reasonable round-trip fare consistent with the member or employee’s scheduling needs. c. Personal Vehicle Travel. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees shall use City vehicles for travel in performance of official duties, when available. If a City vehicle is unavailable a member or employee may be reimbursed for expenses incurred in traveling by personal vehicle on official business at the annual Internal Revenue Service Standard Mileage Rate. The distance of travel will start from the place of work or from home, whichever is closer to the destination point of official business. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees shall be responsible for procuring and maintaining liability insurance for their personal vehicles.
d. Car Rental Reimbursement. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees should arrange for car rentals to be paid for in advance by the City at the most economical rate available. If advance arrangements cannot be made due to lack of advance warning or other extenuating circumstances as approved by the City Manager or his or her designee before the expenses are incurred, members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for the expense of car rental. Since the City is self-insured, members and employees shall not be reimbursed for optional liability insurance or other fees.
8. Meals.
a. Meals in Conjunction with Travel. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for expenses incurred for meals consumed in conjunction with travel on official business.
Item 6.c
91 of 648
Resolution No. 100-2006
Exhibit A – Page 3
Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for meals in amounts that do not exceed the meals and incidental expenses limits as set by the U.S. General Services Administration for the Santa Rosa area at the time of the adoption of this Resolution, which amounts are shown below:
Breakfast: $12
Lunch: $18
Dinner: $32
TOTAL $62
Meals for spouses, family members, and other third parties shall not be reimbursed. b. The travel per diem and meal reimbursement amounts set forth above may be adjusted periodically to reflect changes to meal and incidental expenses published by the U.S.
General Services Administration for Santa Rosa.
c. If a meal is provided by a conference or organized educational activity, or otherwise included in the payment of registration fees, members of legislative bodies and City Employees may not be reimbursed for meals purchased in lieu of, or in addition to, the provided meal.
9. Lodging.
a. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for lodging expenses if the destination of the conference, meeting, or other official duty is more than 50 miles from the place of work or home, whichever is closer to the destination. b. When possible, members of a Legislative Body and City Employees should arrange for lodging expenses to be paid in advance by the City at the most economical and reasonable rates for single occupancy lodging that is in a location that is reasonable and convenient in relation to the member or employee’s scheduling and official business needs.
Members and employees may share reimbursement for a double-occupancy room if the room will be shared with a co-member or co-employee.
For lodging in connection with a conference or organized educational activity, such lodging costs shall generally not exceed the maximum group rate published by the conference or activity sponsor, provided that lodging at the group rate is available at the time of booking. c. If advance arrangements cannot be made due to lack of advance warning or other extenuating circumstances as approved by the City Manager (or designee) before the expenses are incurred, Members of a Legislative Body or City Employees may be reimbursed for lodging expenses, so long as the amount of the reimbursement does not exceed the government or group rates offered by a provider of lodging in a location that is reasonable and convenient in relation to the member or employee’s official business needs or the maximum group rate published by the event or activity sponsor, whichever is higher.
Item 6.c
92 of 648
Resolution No. 100-2006
Exhibit A – Page 4
10. Incidental Expense Reimbursement. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for actual and necessary incidental expenses incurred in connection with a conference, organized educational activity, or other performance of official duties. Incidental expenses include reasonable gratuities for hotel and airline employees, baggage fees, parking fees, cab fares, public transportation costs, tolls, telephone calls, faxing, and special delivery services related to the performance of official duties, hotel internet charges, and other such incidental expenses. Members of a Legislative Body may be reimbursed for such incidental expenses related to reasonable gratuities for which receipts are not customarily given.
11. Conference Registration Fee Reimbursement. When possible, members of a Legislative Body and City Employees should arrange for conference and organized educational activity registration fees to be paid in advance of the conference by the City. If such advance arrangements cannot be made due to lack of advance warning or other extenuating circumstances as approved by the City Manager (or designee), Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees may be reimbursed for the actual cost of a conference or organized educational activity registration fee.
12. Other Expenses. All other actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of official duties that are not described in this Policy shall not be reimbursed unless approved by the City Manager.
13. Expenses Not Reimbursed. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees will not be reimbursed for non-business expenses including, but not limited to alcoholic beverages, spouse or family meals, entertainment expenses such as movie rental fees, theater tickets or sporting event fees, fines for parking citations, laundry, replacement fees for lost keys, and fees assessed for damage to lodging premises.
14. Brief Report to Legislative Body. Members of a Legislative Body shall provide brief reports on meetings attended at the expense of the local agency at the next regular meeting of the Legislative Body immediately following the event for which reimbursement is sought. Reports may be made orally or in writing. If more than one member of a Legislative Body attends the event, a report from one of the members that mentions the other’s presence is sufficient.
15. Documentation Requirements. Members of a Legislative Body and City Employees shall file a Travel Expense Form with the Finance Department within thirty (30) business days of incurring the expense to request reimbursement of expenses and to document expenses paid with a travel advance. The Travel Expense Form shall be accompanied by itemized receipts documenting each expense, except that detail regarding the nature of the expense provided in the expense report shall suffice for incidental expenses for which receipts are not customarily given.
Travel expense forms from City Council members will be submitted to the City Clerk who will then circulate said forms among the remaining Council members for review and/or comment.
The failure by a reviewing City Council member to provide a comment(s) on any Travel Expense form shall be deemed to be an approval, without comment, by that Council member.
16. Public Record. All documents related to reimbursable expenditures shall be considered public records subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act.
Item 6.c
93 of 648
Original
Agenda
Section
Updated
Agenda
Section
Agenda Topic Summary of Update
All N/A All Updated to be Gender Neutral - Updated document to be general neutral I.A. I.A. Adoption of Rosenberg's Rules of Order - Updated to reflect current practice I.B. I.B. Regular Meetings - Updated to reflect current practice I.E. N/A Closed Session - Removed, covered under Brown Act: Closed Session I.F. N/A Study Sessions - Removed, covered under Brown Act: Special Meetings I.G. I.E. Meetings to be Public - Updated language to be more concise I.H. I.F. Attendance - Removed last paragraph, as it is duplicative of Section II.C.
II.A. II.A. Preparation of Agenda and Agenda Packets
- Updated langauge to reference the Brown Act and removed language defining the City Clerks role
- Removed language not relevant to how the Council governs itself II.B. II.B. Placing Items on the Agenda
- Added the purpose
- Changed from a majority of Councilmembers to a concurrence of one other Councilmember
- Updated to reflect current practice
II.C. II.C. Teleconferencing/Remote Public Participation -Updated language to reference allowable participation as permitted by the Brown Act and the American with Disabilities Act II.D. N/A Order of Business - Updated to reflect current practice II.E. II.D. Agenda Content/Order - Updated to reflect current practice II.E.4. N/A Approval of Minutes
- Moved to Section VII.A. (pages 17 & 18)
- Updated to reflect current practice
II.E.7. II.D.6. Public Comments - Updated to reflect current practice II.E.8. II.D.7. Consent Calendar Items
- Changed from a majority of the Councilmembers may remove an item to any Councilmember may request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar
II.E.9. II.D.8. Public Hearing - Updated language to be more concise and cross reference Section IX II.E.10.
II.E.11.
II.D.9. New Business and Old Business
- Combined New and Old Business into one section titled, "Business Items"
Item 6.c
94 of 648
Original
Agenda
Section
Updated
Agenda
Section
Agenda Topic Summary of Update
II.F. II.E. General Procedure for Presentation/Discussion of Agenda Items - Updated to reflect current practice II.G. II.F. Public Comment - Updated to reflect current practice II.G.5. N/A Public Hearings - General Procedure - Removed section, it is duplicative of Section IX (page 20) III.B. III.B. Power and Duties of Presiding Officer - Updated to reflect current practice IV.A. IV. Correspondence from the Public regarding Agenda Items -Updated language to add specificity for Councilmembers who receive non-priviledged documents related to open session agenda items
- Updated to reflect current practice
- Updated to be consistent with new Brown Act requirements V.C. V.C. Interruptions - Updated to reflect current practice V.F. V.F. Decorum and Order, Audience - Updated to reflect current and best practices VI.A. VI.A. Voting Procedures - Updated lanaguage to clarify a supermajority VI.C. VI.C. Conflict of Interest -Updated to reflect legal requirements for recusal VII.A. VII.A. Preparation of Minutes
- Updated to reflect that Action Minutes shall serve as the official record
VII.C. N/A Reading of Minutes - Updated to reflect current practice N/A VII.C. Minutes
- Updated to reflect current practice
- Added new language for approval of minutes is to be placed on the Consent Calendar within 60 days of the meeting occuring VIII.A.1.
VIII.A.2.
VIII.A.1.
VIII.A.2.
Ordinances & Resolutions
- Added a definition of ordinances
- Added a definition of resolutions
VIII.C. VIII.C. Enactment of Ordinances
- Updated to remove duplicative language
- Updated to reflect current practice
- Updated to remove language that is duplicative of what is in the Brown Act
IX.B. N/A Rights of Interested Persons - Updated to remove language that is duplicative of other provisions IX.C. IX.B. Public Hearings - General Procedure
- Added language outlining process
- Updated to reflect current practice
Item 6.c
95 of 648
Original
Agenda
Section
Updated
Agenda
Section
Agenda Topic Summary of Update
IX.D. IX.C. Public Hearings - Presentation of Evidence - Updated to reflect current practice IX.E. IX.D. Public Hearings - Continuances - Updated to reflect current practice IX.G. IX.F. Public Hearings - Record of Hearing - Updated to reflect current practice X.D. X.D. Proclamations - Added language for maximum number of proclamations per meeting XI.G. XI.G. City Council Goal Setting - Updated language to bi-annual reports XII.A.
XII.B.
XII.A.
XII.B.
Correspondence - Updated to reflect current practice
XIII.A. XIII.A. Requests for Information - Updated to reflect current practice XIV.A. N/A Council/Staff Relations - Removed language, not necessary in protocols XV. XV. City Boards, Commissions, and Committees - Updated to reflect current practice XVII. XVII. Stationery Use and Related Guidelines - Updated to reflect current practice N/A XVIII.A. District Elections - Added new language regarding District Elections N/A XVIII.C. Positions on ballot measures - Added new language regarding positions on ballot measures Item 6.c
96 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Agreement with Bryce Consulting for a Classification and Compensation Study
PREPARED BY: Nicole Lopez, Chief Human Resources Officer STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Provide Effective Governance
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Adopt a Resolution approving an agreement with Bryce Consulting for a Classification and Compensation Study in an amount not-to-exceed $80,800 and authorizing the City Manager to execute said agreement.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND:
A classification and compensation study is a periodic review of the City’s job classifications and pay structure to ensure employees are appropriately classified and compensated in a way that is fair, competitive, and supports recruitment and retention. The last time the City completed a comprehensive classification and compensation study was in 2018. Since that time, the City has experienced organizational, operational, and labor market changes that warrant a comprehensive review. As agreed in the 2024-2027 employment agreements with two of the City’s bargaining groups (Mid-Management and Police) adopted by the City Council, the City will conduct and conclude a classification and compensation study prior to the conclusion of the agreements. While the Mid-Management and Police agreements include provisions requiring this study, the agreements with Fire personnel and miscellaneous employees (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, or IBEW) do not. However, staff recommends including all employee groups, including executive management, in this effort to ensure a comprehensive, equitable, and citywide approach to classification and compensation.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The City’s goal in updating the classification plan is to ensure that the City’s job classifications are compliant with state and federal laws that impact classification, compensation, and public Item 6.d
97 of 648
employment. The job classifications will also be updated to reflect description changes that have resulted from organizational changes, technological changes, certification and/or licensing requirements, and educational requirements. This ensures internal alignment, external competitiveness, and compliance with applicable laws.
The study can also offer guidance on whether the City’s compensation practices are competitive for recruitment and retention purposes, and consistent with those of comparable employers.
Attached is the proposal received by Bryce Consulting. The proposed not-to-exceed amount is $80,800.
Once the study begins, the timeline allows approximately 25 weeks to complete. The deliverables from the study will include a classification plan, including a plan structure, allocation of positions, updated job descriptions, and a salary plan based on relevant labor market data.
The final report will be brought to the City Council for approval.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
ALTERNATIVES:
While Bryce Consulting was selected due to their familiarity with the City’s prior 2018 classification and compensation study, allowing for greater efficiency and reduced onboarding time, City Council may alternatively request staff to issue a request for proposals seeking proposals to solicit additional firms. This approach would likely extend the project timeline and increase administrative effort.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed contract with Bryce Consulting is for an amount not to exceed $80,800. The City Managers department within the General Fund does not have sufficient appropriations to support the proposed contract. Staff are proposing to increase the contracted services budget by $80,800 to fund the proposed contract.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
The Project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Title 14, the California Code of Regulations, Section 15378(b)(5).
ATTACHMENT(S):
Resolution
Bryce Proposal
Item 6.d
98 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
RESOLUTION NO. ___-2026
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH BRYCE
CONSULTING IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF
$80,800 TO COMPLETE A CLASSIFICATION AND
COMPENSATION STUDY, AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT AND
AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 ADOPTED BUDGET
WHEREAS, 2018 was the last time the City completed a comprehensive classification and compensation study; and
WHEREAS, the City has experienced organizational, operational and labor market changes that warrant a comprehensive review; and
WHEREAS, as agreed in the 2024-2027 MMPEA and HPOA MOUs adopted by the Council, the City agreed to conduct and conclude a classification and compensation study prior to the conclusion of those agreements.; and
WHEREAS, while not all bargaining groups include provisions requiring a classification and compensation study, the City intends to include all employee groups, including executive management to ensure a comprehensive, equitable and citywide approach; and WHEREAS, the City’s goal in updating the classification plan is to ensure that job classifications are compliant with applicable state and federal laws reflect current organizational needs, duties, and labor market conditions; and
WHEREAS, Bryce Consulting has prior experience conducting the City’s 2018 classification and compensation study, providing familiarity with the City’s organizational structure and reducing onboarding time for this effort.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Healdsburg hereby:
1. Approves an agreement with Bryce Consulting in an amount not-to-exceed $80,800 to complete a classification and compensation study.
2. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the agreement.
3. Approves amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 budget as depicted on the attached Exhibit A.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Healdsburg this 20th day of April 2026 by the following vote:
SO ORDERED: ATTEST:
Item 6.d
99 of 648
Resolution No. _____-2026
________________________________ ______________________________ J. Chris Herrod, Mayor Raina Allan, City Clerk
Item 6.d
100 of 648
1024 Iron Point Road, Ste. 100
Folsom, CA 95630
(916) 974-0199
www.bryceconsulting.com
BRYCE
CONSULTING
PROPOSAL TO CONDUCT A CLASSIFICATION AND
COMPENSATION STUDY FOR THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG
Item 6.d
101 of 648
March 24, 2026
Ms. Nicole Lopez
Chief Human Resources Officer
City of Healdsburg
Ms. Lopez
Thank you very much for the opportunity to submit a proposal to conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation study for the City of Healdsburg.
Bryce Consulting brings to this assignment over twenty-five years of experience in providing management consulting services to local government clients. We recognize the importance of maintaining a meaningful classification plan reflective of today's organization as well as a competitive compensation plan. The firm will devote all necessary resources to undertake a successful comprehensive study of City positions. Furthermore, we will work with you and the City at every step during the project to maintain open communication, provide status updates, and ensure the successful accomplishment of the study's objectives.
The terms of the proposal are good for 60 days. Again, thank you for the opportunity to be considered for this project. If you need additional information, please contact me at (916) 974-0199.
Sincerely,
Shellie Anderson
Principal
Item 6.d
102 of 648
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary 4
II. Study Methodology 5
III. Study Process 9
IV. Project Staffing, Timing, Cost and Insurance 15
Exhibit A Corporate and Staff Qualifications 16
Exhibit B Project Schedule 18
Exhibit C Project Hours and Cost 19
Exhibit D References 20
Item 6.d
103 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 4
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Healdsburg is seeking consulting assistance to conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation study of approximately 148 full-time positions currently allocated to approximately 90 classifications. The specific study objectives would include the following:
Classification Study
The classification phase of the study would result in:
• Detailed job analysis of each position.
• Development of a classification structure for all City classes that reflects the City’s current and future human resources needs.
• Review and modification of class specifications to ensure they are up-to-date, accurate, and reflect the City’s organization as it currently exists and supportive of the City’s plans for the future. The class specifications will include, in addition to appropriate job definitions, distinguishing characteristics, and duty statements, a qualifications section that addresses minimum qualifying level knowledge, skills and abilities for each of the classifications as well as ADA-compliant language. • Allocation of each position to the appropriate classification based on the duties and responsibilities being performed.
• A review process that will permit each employee to review the draft classification recommendations and to submit concerns directly to the consultant.
Compensation Study
This phase of the study would result in:
• Review and analysis of an appropriate labor market and recommended benchmark job classes.
• The collection and analysis of base salary and benefit survey data for the selected survey classes.
• Assignment of a salary range to each classification that reflects the results of the market survey and is consistent with an analysis of the City’s internal relationships.
Item 6.d
104 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 5
II. STUDY METHODOLOGY
This section of the proposal is intended to provide a background to the overall assignment and includes:
• Discussion of classification and compensation methodology • Discussion of the roles the study participants may assume during the study process
CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION METHODOLOGY
In conducting a classification and compensation study, we would propose to use the following methodology.
Classification Methodology
Our proposal assumes the utilization of the whole job method of classification. This is the system preferred by and is most common to most local government employers. In summary, the classifications of work are created, and individual positions are allocated based on a series of well-defined allocation standards. These standards are tailored to each organization's needs but typically include the following:
Decision Making
This standard consists of (a) the decision making responsibility and degree of independence or latitude that is inherent in the position and (b) the impact of decisions.
Scope and Complexity
This standard defines the breadth and difficulty of the assigned function or program responsibility inherent in the classification.
Contact With Others Required By the Job
This standard measures (a) the types of contacts and b) the purpose of the contacts.
Supervision Received and Exercised
This standard describes the level of supervision received from others and the nature of supervision provided to other workers.
Knowledge, Skills and Abilities
This standard defines the KSA's that are inherent in a given classification.
Distinctions are made between what is required to meet job requirements versus what may be learned on the job.
Item 6.d
105 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 6
Once the above standards are refined to meet the City’s particular needs, they are fully described prior to their application to the City’s jobs. The allocation standards then become the fundamental building block for the study of the classes. These standards form the basic criteria for:
• Developing the overall classification structure.
• Defining various levels within class series.
• Allocating individual positions to the appropriate level in a series. • Establishing internal pay relationships within series and among related classes.
Discussion of Labor Market Survey Criteria
The overall objective in selecting survey employers is to define as accurately as possible the City’s "Labor Market". A labor market consists of those employers with whom the City competes for employees. The consultant will confirm the labor market with the City taking into consideration that the criteria typically utilized in identifying those employers includes the following:
Employer Size - As a general rule, the more similar employers are in size and complexity, the greater the likelihood that comparable positions exist within both organizations. Specifically, agencies of similar size to the City are likely to have departmental structures and organization of positions more similar to the City than organizations that are significantly different in size. The specific criteria utilized to evaluate size include population served, services provided, and number of employees.
Geographic Proximity - Geographic proximity is another factor utilized in identifying an appropriate labor market. This factor is particularly important because it identifies those employers with which the City must directly compete to recruit and retain quality staff. Furthermore, by selecting employers within reasonably close geographic proximity, it helps to ensure that the resulting labor market will be indicative of the region's cost of living.
Nature of Services Provided - As a general rule similar organizations are selected as survey employers, because they provide similar services. This is important for the following reasons:
• Employers who provide similar services are most likely to compete with one Item 6.d
106 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 7
another for employees.
• These employers are most likely to have comparable jobs. • These employers are most likely to have similar organizational characteristics.
Data Collection Methodology
After the labor market is confirmed, the consultants would apply the following data collection methodology.
• Determine the exact functional scope and organization level of each City survey class. • Prepare information packets for the labor market agencies that describe in detail the survey class.
• Contact each survey agency to ensure cooperation and participation in the survey process.
• Collect salary and benefit data and then determine comparability by reviewing the scope, reporting relationship, and content of each classification. • Compile raw salary data by survey class and calculate the labor market mean, median or other percentile and the percent the City is from the market.
INVOLVEMENT OF STUDY PARTICIPANTS
The precise involvement of the various study participants needs to be carefully defined at the beginning of the assignment. This is critical to ensure that the study results meet the City’s needs and can be implemented. While there is no one way to approach participation, the following outlines an approach which has been successful, with various modifications, for other organizations that are similar to the City in size and complexity.
City Manager and Chief Human Resources Officer: The City Manager and Chief Human Resources Officer would normally provide the consultant with the day-to-day guidance and administrative direction. In most cases, the key contact is with the Chief Human Resources Officer while the City Manager is consulted on significant decisions and review processes.
City Council: The City Council normally participates on policy level decisions affecting the classification and compensation study. The consultants will meet periodically with the City Council to update them on the project status and at critical milestones to ensure participation and understanding of all recommendations.
Item 6.d
107 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 8
Management: The extent of involvement by management can vary significantly from client to client. Typical points of contact include an initial briefing concerning the study objectives and process, a detailed review with the consultant of the City's organization structure, reporting relationships, and staffing patterns, and a review of classification study findings and recommendations.
Bargaining Units: The bargaining units can be involved in the complete study process. It is our recommendation that the City utilize a process where the consultants meet with representatives from the bargaining units to ensure a collaborative process and to have input at critical stages of the study. It is our experience that this style and type of involvement is essential to the success of a project.
Study Participants: The study process has been carefully designed to provide for employee involvement. Specific activities include attendance at a study briefing to ensure understanding of the study process and methodology, the completion of Position Information Questionnaires, participation in the interview process, review of draft findings and recommendations and, where appropriate, follow-up interviews.
Item 6.d
108 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 9
III. STUDY PROCESS
The study process presented below is designed to achieve the specific objectives presented in the previous section. Each task has been carefully tailored to meet the City’s needs and is intended to insure:
Client Involvement - All study participants are provided an appropriate opportunity to be involved in the study process.
Quality - All study results are based on sound technical methods and provide the City with quality classification and compensation recommendations that are acceptable and can be implemented.
Service And Value - The assignment is completed on time and in the most efficient and effective manner possible to ensure that the City receives the greatest value for its consulting dollar.
PHASE I - CLASSIFICATION STUDY
This phase of the assignment will result in the study of all study classes. Study tasks include project initiation and orientation, completion of Position Information Questionnaires by employees, the analyses of questionnaires and interviews with employees, the preparation of revised or new class specifications, and a review process for all employees included in the scope of the study.
Task 1 - Project Initiation
This task involves all the steps required to initiate the project and includes:
• Consultant review of class specifications, organizational charts, salary schedules, and other documentation related to the study. The consultant will request these materials prior to the project initiation meeting so that the consultant has an understanding of the scope of the study, an understanding of the City’s current classifications, and is prepared to seek further relevant information during the initial meetings.
• Review and finalization of the study objectives, study process, Position Information Questionnaire, and project schedule with the Chief Human Resources Officer.
Item 6.d
109 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 10
Task 2 – Conduct Interviews with Department Heads
This task will involve meeting with each Department Head to develop an understanding of the structure of the departments, how classifications are used, and to hear and respond to questions. This interview will also help to identify positions where possible classification issues are occurring and are in need of further review through the interview process.
Task 3 – Conduct Employee Orientations
This task involves conducting orientation meetings for study participants to review the overall study process and to answer questions. In addition, detailed instructions will be provided to study participants regarding the completion of the Position Information Questionnaire.
Task 4 - Study Participants Complete Position Information Questionnaires Every study participant will have an opportunity to complete a detailed Position Information Questionnaire that is designed to clearly document the assigned duties, responsibilities, and qualification standards. Once the questionnaires are completed, they are reviewed by appropriate management staff and forwarded to the consultant for analysis.
Task 5 - Conduct Employee and Supervisor Interviews
The completion of the Position Information Questionnaires by employees will provide the consultant with important job analysis information. This information will then be supplemented by interviews with a large majority of the study participants. The purpose of these interviews is to clarify and supplement questionnaire data, resolve any differences of perception concerning the role and responsibility of a position, and to provide an opportunity for employees to participate in the study process. We recommend that approximately 60% of incumbents be interviewed where there are multiple position classifications and all incumbents in single position classifications.
Task 6 - Develop Classification Plan Structure
Based on the results of the previous tasks, the consultant will develop the basic framework for the classification plan. This will include:
• Definition of terms.
• Development of career ladders.
• Initial allocation of positions to classes.
Task 7 - Review Classification Plan Structure with the City Following the completion of the above task, the consultant will meet with the City Manager Item 6.d
110 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 11
and Chief Human Resources Officer, and appropriate management to review the proposed structure for the classification plan. This critical review step will ensure that no factual information is overlooked and that the ultimate recommendations are fair and consistent with the City’s overall classification and compensation needs.
Task 8 - Prepare Preliminary Draft of Classification Plan Based on the results of the above review process, the consultant will finalize the basic classification structure and develop revised job descriptions. All the components of the classification structure and the revised job descriptions will then be compiled into a preliminary draft of the classification plan.
Task 9 - Review Preliminary Draft of the Classification Plan with the City The preliminary draft will then be submitted to the City for a thorough technical review. This review would be completed by the Chief Human Resources Officer with the assistance of management staff.
Task 10 – Check In With Bargaining Units
At this time, the consultant will meet with representative from the various bargaining units to discuss the classification recommendations and respond to any questions they might have.
Task 11 - Conduct Employee Review Process
This task will provide each study participant with an opportunity to review the consultant's draft recommendations. This review process is intended to be consistent with the City’s policies and practices and would include:
• Review of the recommendations by each employee.
• An opportunity for each employee to submit written comments to the consultant.
• Follow-up interviews with the consultant to clarify employee concerns and resolve questions of fact, as required.
Once the above steps are complete, the consultant will prepare a response to each employee which outlines the nature of the concern and the consultant's findings and final recommendations.
Item 6.d
111 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 12
Task 12 - Finalize Classification Plan
Following the completion of the review process, the consultant will finalize the classification plan. This document will include:
• Classification plan structure.
• Allocation of positions.
• Modified and up-dated job descriptions.
PHASE II - COMPENSATION STUDY
This phase of the study will result in the development of labor market survey parameters and the collection and evaluation of labor market survey data. Specific study tasks include the analysis and recommendation of the labor market and survey classes, the collection and analysis of survey data, preparation of salary recommendations, and development of an implementation plan.
Task 1 – Review and Recommend Compensation Survey Parameters This task will result in the confirmation of all the compensation survey parameters consistent with the City’s overall classification and compensation plan and will include the following:
Labor Market - The consultant will review and confirm the survey agencies with the City.
Survey Classes - The consultant will also recommend job classes that should be used as survey classifications. These survey classes would be representative of all levels of classifications and job series.
Survey Methodology - The third key survey parameter is the clear definition of what data will be collected, how it will be analyzed, and in what form it will be presented. It is our understanding the City wants to consider base salary and total compensation benefits in the survey data collection.
Task 2 - Review Compensation Survey Parameters with the City Prior to initiating the compensation survey, the consultant will review the survey parameters with the City Manager and Chief Human Resources Officer. This key review step will ensure that the survey results meet the City’s needs and will facilitate the implementation of the results.
Item 6.d
112 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 13
Task 3 - Review Compensation Survey Parameters with Bargaining Units The consultants will review the compensation parameters with representatives from the bargaining units to allow for review and comment and to gain buy in on the survey agencies, survey classifications and data elements.
Task 4 - Finalize Compensation Survey Parameters
Based on any feedback received from the review with the bargaining units, Bryce will finalize the compensation parameters and present them to the City.
Task 5 - Contact Survey Employers and Prepare Information Packet Once the above task is completed, the consultant will contact each survey employer. The purpose of the contact is to elicit cooperation, explain the scope of the survey, and explain who will collect the data. The consultant will then prepare and distribute a comprehensive survey packet to each employer that includes the criteria for establishing comparability, descriptions of the survey classes, and a list of the required survey information.
Task 6 - Collect and Analyze Salary Survey Data
Once the data is collected it will be thoroughly analyzed utilizing an electronic spreadsheet. It is anticipated that this analysis would include a detailed presentation of base salary and benefit information for each survey class including the name of the comparable class, the top step salary, the labor market mean, median, or other percentile of top step salary, and a comparison between the City and the labor market for each survey classification. The spreadsheet will also show the total compensation calculations and a comparison between the City and the labor market.
Task 7 - Review Preliminary Survey Results with the City Following the preliminary analysis of the survey data, the consultant will conduct an in-depth review of the survey results with the City Manager and Chief Human Resources Officer. The purpose of this review is to identify any additional information needs or areas that require further analysis.
Task 8 – Conduct Data Review Meetings with Bargaining Units The review of data with the bargaining units provides an opportunity for them to be involved in the study and helps in addressing questions and issues that otherwise may come up further in the process or during negotiations. Following the initial review of the data with City staff, the consultant would conduct data review meetings with the labor groups. The point of the Item 6.d
113 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 14
meeting is to provide an opportunity for the labor groups to review the classifications for comparability so that there is a better understanding and acceptance of the recommendations. The labor groups will be provided with the datasheets and the job descriptions from the survey agencies for the classes that have been determined to be comparable and have an opportunity to review the job descriptions and ask questions. The consultant would then research each question and meet with the units a second time to provide the response.
Task 9 – Follow Up Data Collection
Throughout the review phase of the study the consultant will collect any additional information needed or requested.
Task 10 – Prepare Preliminary Salary Plan and Internal Relationship Analysis The project consultant will prepare salary range recommendations for all classifications included in this study based on relevant labor market data and internal relationship guidelines recommended by the consultant.
Task 11 – Review and Revise Salary Plan with the City
Following the completion of the above, the consultant will review the draft salary plan and internal relationship analysis with the City Manager and Chief Human Resources Officer.
Task 12 - Prepare and Present Final Report
Following the completion of the above review, the consultant will prepare the final report. This report will fully document all survey activities and recommendations including:
• Discussion of the labor market survey parameters.
• Presentation and analysis of the survey results.
• Presentation and discussion of the salary structure recommendations.
Task 13 – Ongoing Support in Negotiations
The consultant will be available to receive and respond to questions that either the City or the bargaining units may have regarding the study throughout negotiations.
Item 6.d
114 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 15
IV. PROJECT STAFFING, TIMING AND COST
PROJECT STAFFING
Our consulting team has extensive experience dealing with local government service delivery, restructuring, and personnel management efforts. Shellie Anderson and Stacy James, Principals with the firm, will serve as project managers for this study and will assume responsibility for on-going client contact, survey design, data collection, and preparation and presentation of reports. Ms. Anderson has more than 25 years of experience providing human resources consulting experience, including 20 years with Bryce Consulting. Ms. James brings 17 years of experience, including 15 years with Bryce Consulting. Staff Resumes are included in Exhibit A.
TIMING
We are prepared to begin immediately upon the execution of a contract. We can complete all study tasks outlined in this proposal in approximately 25 weeks. All efforts will be directed to an early completion date. Exhibit B includes a project schedule.
Bryce Consulting takes its commitment to clients very seriously. The firm will not present a proposal if the consultant cannot dedicate themselves to a successful conclusion because of prior or conflicting commitments.
COST
The fees for professional services for the classification phase would cost $47,200 and the compensation phase would cost $27,600 - $31,600. The total cost for professional fees would be $74,800 - $78,800 as outlined on Exhibit C. While the majority of tasks will be performed remotely, it is estimated that reimbursable expenses related to travel will be $2,000 for a not to exceed amount of $76,800 – $80,800. Professional service costs and reimbursable expenses would be billed and paid monthly.
REFERENCES
Please see Exhibit D for references of current and past clients.
Item 6.d
115 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 16
EXHIBIT A
CORPORATE AND STAFF QUALIFICATIONS
Bryce Consulting was formed in July 1995 to provide the full range of human resource consulting services to governmental clients. We offer comprehensive and integrated advisory services in the areas of human resources management, recruitment and selection, organization development and training. Our scope and approach to consulting is based on a solid foundation of professional experience in providing consulting services to local governments.
SERVICES
Bryce Consulting offers a comprehensive range of human resource consulting services including:
Classification and Compensation - This area of the practice includes the development, installation, and modification of all or part of an agency's classification plan and compensation program. Typical study results include compensation policy development; the preparation of class specifications and career ladders that are in compliance with the ADA; internal salary relationship analysis; external compensation surveys; and the development of a revised compensation plan.
Training - This service provides both off-the-shelf and custom designed training programs on a wide variety of salient topics to organizations. Depending on the needs of the organization, we provide employee, mid-management, executive management or agency-wide training on topics such as supervisory skills, negotiation and conflict resolution skills, performance development and evaluation, communicating with your boss and interpersonal skills.
Human Resources Systems - Typical assignments in this area result in the development or modification of the basic policy and administrative framework for the agency's human resource management system. Study results include the preparation of personnel rules, policies, and procedures, and employee handbooks.
Performance Appraisal - This service area involves the development and installation of comprehensive performance appraisal systems for both management and non-management staff. These systems are complete and include the necessary forms, procedure manuals, Item 6.d
116 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 17
and the training of management and supervisory staff.
STAFF RESUMES
SHELLIE ANDERSON
Shellie Anderson is a principal with the firm who brings 25 years of human resource consulting experience within the State of California, specifically within the public sector. Her background includes managing and participating in compensation and classification studies of varying sizes, organizational analyses, recruitment and selection, development of performance evaluation systems, and succession planning. Ms. Anderson has personally completed hundreds of compensation studies and has worked with a variety of public agencies including the State of California, cities, counties, and electric, water, wastewater, and irrigation districts. Ms. Anderson has successfully worked with labor-management groups on multiple studies, to ensure successful accomplishment of study objectives. Ms.
Anderson received a Bachelor’s degree in Psychology and a Master’s degree in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from the California State University, Sacramento. In addition, Ms.
Anderson is a Certified Senior Professional in Human Resources. Ms. Anderson served on the Board for the IPMA – HR Sacramento Mother Lode Chapter for nearly a decade.
STACY JAMES
Stacy James is a principal with 17 years of professional human resources experience within the State of California including classification and compensation, recruitment and selection, development of work policies and procedures, and performance appraisal design. Ms. James previously oversaw the personnel practices in nine California Counties for social services and child support services departments which included serving as a business partner, conducting recruitments, determining and developing a variety of assessment processes, conducting job analyses, conducting classification studies, and providing training on rules and regulations governing the departments’ merit system. Ms.
James has extensive experience with compensation data collection and analysis. In addition, Ms. James has served as consultant to a variety of State agencies, counties, cities, non-profits, and special districts in the State of California. Ms. James earned her Bachelor’s degree in Psychology from California State University, Sacramento.
Item 6.d
117 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 18
EXHIBIT B
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY
PROJECT SCHEDULE
TASK WEEK
PHASE I CLASSIFICATION STUDY
1. Project Initiation 1
2. Conduct Interview with Department Heads 2
3. Conduct Employee Orientations 2
4. Study Participants Complete Position Information Questionnaire 3 – 5
5. Conduct Employee and Supervisor Interviews 6 – 7
6. Develop Classification Plan Structure 8 – 9
7. Review Classification Plan Structure with the City 10 – 11
8. Prepare Preliminary Draft of Classification Plan 12 – 14
9. Review Preliminary Draft of the Classification Plan with the City 15 – 16
10. Check In With Bargaining Units 17 - 18
11. Conduct Employee Review Process 19 – 21
12. Finalize Classification Plan 22
PHASE II COMPENSATION STUDY
1. Review and Recommend Compensation Survey Parameters 9
2. Review Compensation Survey Parameters with the City 10
3. Review Compensation Survey Parameters with Bargaining Units 11
4. Finalize Compensation Parameters 12
5. Contact Survey Employers and Prepare Information Packet 13
6. Collect and Analyze Salary Survey Data 13 – 16
7. Review Preliminary Survey Results with the City 17 – 18
8. Conduct Data Review Meetings with Labor Groups 19 - 21
9. Follow Up Data Collection 22
10. Prepare Preliminary Salary Plan and Internal Relationship Analysis 23
11. Review and Revise Salary Plan with the City 24
12. Prepare and Present Final Report 25
13. Ongoing Support in Negotiations TBD
Item 6.d
118 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 19
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY
PROJECT WORK PLAN
TASK HOURS COST
PHASE I CLASSIFICATION STUDY
1. Project Initiation 4 $8,00
2. Conduct Interviews with Department Heads 8 $1,600
3. Conduct Employee Orientations 6 $1,200
4. Study Participants Complete Position Information Questionnaire ----
5. Conduct Employee and Supervisor Interviews 50 $10,000
6. Develop Classification Plan Structure 16 $3,200
7. Review Classification Plan Structure with the City 12 $2,400
8. Prepare Preliminary Draft of Classification Plan 70 $14,000
9. Review Preliminary Draft of the Classification Plan with the City 16 $3,200
10. Check In With Bargaining Units 12 $2,400
11. Conduct Employee Review Process 26 $5,200
12. Finalize Classification Plan 16 $3,200
Total Classification Hours 236 $47,200
PHASE II COMPENSATION STUDY
1. Review and Recommend Compensation Survey Parameters 4 $800
2. Review Compensation Survey Parameters with the City 2 $320
3. Review Compensation Survey Parameters with Bargaining Units 4 $640
4. Finalize Compensation Parameters 4 $640
5. Contact Survey Employers and Prepare Information Packet 4 $640
6. Collect and Analyze Salary and Benefit Survey Data 60 $9,600
7. Review Preliminary Survey Results with the City 8 $1,280
8. Conduct Data Review Meetings with Labor Groups 16 $2,560
9. Follow Up Data Collection 8 $1,280
10. Prepare Preliminary Salary Plan and Internal Relationship Analysis 8 $1,280
11. Review and Revise Salary Plan with the City 12 $1,920
12. Prepare and Present Final Reports 8 $1,280
13. Ongoing Support in Negotiations 0 - 20 $0 - $4,000
Total Compensation Hours 138 - 158 $27,600 - $31,600
Total Project Hours 374-394 $74,800 - $78,800
Item 6.d
119 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 20
EXHIBIT D
REFERENCES
Below provides references for current and past clients.
City of Roseville
Stacey Peterson, Human Resources Director
(916) 774-5475
[email protected]
311 Vernon Street, Roseville, CA 95768
The City of Roseville is a long-term and current client. Bryce conducted a City-wide classification study of over 1,200 positions and has conducted multiple City-wide total compensation studies over the years with the most recent including approximately 16 survey agencies and 105 benchmark classifications. Bryce maintains a Technical Services Agreement with the City to provide on demand human resources support and services with respect to classification, compensation, and organizational analysis.
City of Hayward
Ian Tecson, Deputy Director of Human Resources
(510) 583-4831
[email protected]
777 B Street, Hayward, CA 94541
The City of Hayward is a long-term and current client with Bryce Consulting providing on demand human resources services as it relates to classification and compensation studies ranging from single position/classification to studying a large number of positions/classifications in response to labor negotiations.
City of Pleasanton
Xaviera Scoggins, Director of Human Resources and Labor Relations (925) 931-5052
[email protected]
123 Main Street, Pleasanton, CA 94566
The City of Pleasanton has engaged Bryce Consulting since 2023 in a Technical Services Agreement whereby the consultants provide on demand human resources support including classification and compensation ranging from single position/classification to City-wide studies.
Item 6.d
120 of 648
Proposal to the City of Healdsburg 21
Modesto Irrigation District
Irma Perrone, Human Resources Manager
(209) 526-7340
[email protected]
1231 11Th Street, Modesto, CA 95354
Modesto Irrigation District has been a client since 2009, with the consultants providing compensation, classification, and organizational structure services. Currently, Bryce provides on demand human resources support including classification and compensation.
San Juan Water District
Donna Silva, Director of Finance and Human Resources
(916) 791-6907
[email protected]
9935 Auburn Folsom Road, Granite Bay, CA 95746
San Juan Water District is a long-term and current client. Bryce Consulting has assisted the District with multiple recruitments, conducted an organizational/succession planning study and concluded a District-wide compensation study that included 29 survey classifications and 14 agencies in 2019 and 2022.
Item 6.d
121 of 648
Resolution No.
Exhibit A
Account Number Increase Amount Decrease Amount Description 101-2021-43205-00000 $ 80,800 Increase Contracted Services Expense for Classification and Compensation Study FY 25-26 Budget Amendment
Item 6.d
122 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Lease Amendment to Verizon Communication Site Located at 923 South Fitch Mountain Road
PREPARED BY: Scott Duiven, Community Development Director STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Maintain and Improve Infrastructure and Facilities
Provide Effective Governance
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the Lease Agreement with GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership, d/b/a/ Verizon Wireless, authorizing the City Manager to sign the lease amendment with Verizon Wireless on the City’s behalf so long as it is substantially in the form of the Final Draft Amendment provided and authorize the City Manager to take any additional action necessary to effectuate the implementation of the lease amendment.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND:
In 2021, City Council authorized the City Manager to enter into a Land Lease Agreement between the City of Healdsburg and GTE Mobilnet of California, dba Verizon Wireless at 923 South Fitch Mountain Road and a Grant of Easement and Memorandum of Grant of Easement between the City of Healdsburg, Verizon Wireless, and Tayman Park Golf Group, Inc., at 931 South Fitch Mountain Road, relating to the construction and operation of a Wireless Telecommunication Facility on the City-owned property.
The Land Lease Agreement was executed on April 14, 2022. The facility was constructed and received a final inspection on June 24, 2024, and is currently operating.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
T-Mobile submitted plans to the City on April 4, 2025 to install a communication facility on the existing Verizon tower (colocation). However, in order for the City to approve a building permit to construct the improvements, Verizon must first amend its current lease to allow for T-Mobile's Item 6.e
123 of 648
colocation. Colocation is a desirable option for the City because it results in improved communications for the community without the need for a new tower elsewhere in the community.
The City and Verizon began discussions on the proposed lease amendment in May 2025. Lease terms were agreed to by both parties in October 2025. City staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a lease amendment substantially in the form as the current final draft provided in Exhibit A of Attachment 1. The final site plan will be attached to the agreement as an exhibit to the Final Draft Lease Amendment once the Community Development Department approves the construction documents. The City has negotiated an increase in rent of $15,000 per year ($1,250 per month) to account for the additional carrier, an administrative fee of $6,000 to cover staff and attorney time in preparing this lease amendment, and to add four (4) additional 5-year renewal terms.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
Colocation of telecommunication facilities on existing towers reduces the greenhouse gas emissions and impacts associated with constructing an entirely new facility.
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council may choose not to authorize the City Manager to enter the lease amendment. In that case staff requests additional direction from City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Verizon agreed to pay an administrative fee of $6,000 upon execution of the Amendment to the City in order to compensate for staff and attorney time required in preparation of this Amendment.
Section 4 of the Lease is amended to add 4 additional 5-year renewal terms. The lessee agrees to pay the City a monthly fee of $1,250 per month, subject to the applicable annual rental increase of 3% contained in the original Lease. This amounts to an additional $15,000 in rent in the first year.
The current rate with Verizon only on the tower is currently $2,357 per month, or $28,284 per year, bringing the total future rent to $43,284 adjusted annually. Payments shall commence on the first day of the month following the date that T-Mobile commences payments to Verizon Wireless under its respective sublease or similar agreement.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
The California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines identify classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant impact on the environment and as a result are exempt from review. The City contracted with First Carbon Solutions, a qualified CEQA consulting firm, to prepare the environmental analysis of the existing tower, which included the potential for colocation of an additional provider in the future. The analysis concluded, based on the proposed design, location, and standard conditions of approval, that the project would be exempt pursuant to CEQA Section 15303(c) New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, including evaluation of the project in light of CEQA Section 15300.2 Exceptions.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Attachment 1: Resolution
Exhibit A: Lease Amendment
Item 6.e
124 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
RESOLUTION NO. -2026
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF HEALDSBURG APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH GTE MOBILNET of
CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, D/B/A/ VERIZON
WIRELESS, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
SIGN THE LEASE AMENDMENT WITH VERIZON
WIRELESS ON THE CITY’S BEHALF SO LONG AS IT IS
SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE FORM OF THE FINAL DRAFT
AMENDMENT PROVIDED AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY
MANAGER TO TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL ACTION
NECESSARY TO EFFECTUATE THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE LEASE AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, on April 14, 2022, the City and GTE Mobilnet of California, dba Verizon Wireless, entered into a Land Lease Agreement at 923 South fitch Mountain Road and a Grant of Easement and Memorandum of Grant of Easement between the City of Healdsburg, Verizon Wireless, and Tayman Park Golf Group, Inc., at 931 South Fitch Mountain Road, relating to the construction and operation of a Wireless Telecommunication Facility; and
WHEREAS, the facility was constructed and received a final inspection on June 24, 2024 and is currently operational; and
WHEREAS, on April 4, 2025, T-Mobile submitted plans to install a communication facility on the existing Verizon tower (colocation); and WHEREAS, Verizon Wireless must amend its current lease in order to allow for colocation by another carrier on the existing facility; and WHEREAS, the City and Verizon Wireless have reached an agreement to amend the lease to account for the colocation; and
WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed the plans and are ready to approve the plans upon execution of the lease; and
WHEREAS, the City and Verizon Wireless have reached an agreement to amend the lease to increase the rent to $15,000 per year ($1,250 per month), to include an administrative fee of $6,000 to cover staff and attorney time in preparing the lease amendment, and to add four (4) additional 5-year renewal terms; and
WHEREAS, the colocation of T-Mobile on the Verizon Wireless facility at 923 South Fitch Mountain Road will add another carrier providing service to an area within Healdsburg Item 6.e
125 of 648
where cellular service has historically been unreliable and there are limited locations upon which to locate a cellular tower due to geography, restrictions in the City Land Use Code, and other factors.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Healdsburg does hereby:
1. Approve an amendment to the Lease Agreement with Verizon Wireless.
2. Authorize the City Manager to sign the lease amendment with Verizon Wireless on the City’s behalf so long as it is substantially in the form as the Final Draft Amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3. Authorize the City Manager to take any additional action necessary to effectuate the implementation of the lease amendment.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Healdsburg this 20th day of April 2026 by the following vote:
SO ORDERED: ATTEST:
_________________________________ __________________________________ J. Chris Herrod, Mayor Raina Allan, City Clerk
Item 6.e
126 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6 1
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
EXHIBIT A
FIRST AMENDMENT TO LAND LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT TO Land Lease Agreement (this “Amendment”), dated as of this _____ day of _________________, 20__ (the “Effective Date”), by and between by and between City of Healdsburg, a California municipality, (“Lessor”), whose address is 401 Grove Street, Healdsburg, California 95448, and GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless (“Lessee”), recites and provides:
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Lessor is the fee owner of certain real property located in Sonoma County, California, located at 923 South Fitch Mountain Road, Healdsburg, CA 95448 (the “Property”).
WHEREAS, Lessee, is the current tenant under that certain Land Lease Agreement with Lessor, dated April 14, 2022 (the “Lease”).
WHEREAS, Lessor, pursuant to the Lease, leases to Lessee a portion of the Property, as more particularly described on Exhibit A (the “Premises”).
WHEREAS, Lessor, pursuant to the Lease, provided Lessee with a non-exclusive access and utility easement over a portion of the Property, as more particularly described on Exhibit B (the “Access and Utility Easement”).
WHEREAS, Lessee owns, operates, and maintains one wireless communications tower, equipment, shelter, and other associated improvements on the Premises (collectively, “Improvements”).
WHEREAS, Lessee desires to sublease a portion of Premises to allow T-Mobile to install a communication facility on the existing tower; and
WHEREAS, Lessor and Lessee now desire to amend the Lease as more particularly provided below.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements set forth below and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows.
Item 6.e
127 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6 2
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
1. Defined Terms; Recitals. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings given to such terms in the Lease. The recitals set forth here and above are true and correct in all respects and are incorporated herein by reference.
2. Administrative Fee. Simultaneous with execution of this Amendment and as a condition to its effectiveness, Lessee shall pay an administrative fee of Six Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($6,000) to Lessor.
3. Additional Renewal Terms. Section 4 of the Lease is amended to add Four (4) additional Five (5) year renewal periods (each an “Additional Renewal Term”).
Each such Additional Renewal Term shall be deemed automatically exercised by Lessee unless Lessee provides written notice to Lessor of non-renewal at least six (6) months prior to expiration of the then current term.
4. Co-Location. Lessee desires to, and Lessor agrees, to sublease a portion of the Premises to T-Mobile to install an additional communications facility on the existing tower. T-Mobile shall be deemed a subleasee under the Lease. The communication facility to be installed is depicted on the site plans attached hereto as Exhibit C.
5. Assignment. Section 22 (a) and 22 (b) of the Lease are hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
“(a) Lessee may sublet the Premises with written approval of the Lessor. Beginning with the second (2nd) communications provider, Lessee agrees to pay Lessor One Thousand Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($1,250.00) for each communications facility installed, (“Sublease Fee”) subject to the following terms and conditions. The applicable Sublease Fee shall commence on the first day of the month following the date that such additional communications provider(s) commences payments to Lessee under its respective sublease(s) or similar agreement. The Sublease Fee shall only be due and payable in the event there are two (2) or more communication providers. If at any time, subsequent to the addition of a second (2nd) communication provider, the number of communication providers is reduced to one (1) communication provider, then no Sublease Fee shall be due and payable.
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, the Sublease Fee shall only be due and payable by Lessee to Lessor hereunder during the term of such communication providers’ sublease agreement(s) or similar agreement. The Sublease Fee shall be subject to all the same provisions of the Lease that are applicable to the annual rental payments including but not limited to the annual rental increase at paragraph 5 of the Lease.
(b) Intentionally Deleted.”
6. Notices. All notices under the Lease shall be delivered by Federal Express, or US certified mail return receipt requested, and addressed to:
Item 6.e
128 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6 3
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
If to Lessee:
VB Acquisitions, LLC
c/o Vertical Bridge REIT, LLC
22 W Atlantic Ave, Suite 310
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Attention: General Counsel
Ref: US-CA-7817
(561) 437-3720
If to Lessor:
City of Healdsburg
Attention: City Manager
401 Grove Street
Healdsburg, California 95448
7. Counterparts/Digital Signatures. This Amendment may be executed in counterparts with the same effect as if both parties hereto had executed the same document. Both counterparts shall be construed together and shall constitute a single document.
Delivery of a copy of this Amendment (or any notices pursuant to the Lease) bearing an original signature by facsimile transmission, by DocuSign, by electronic mail in “portable document format” (“.pdf”) form, or by any other electronic means intended to preserve the original graphic and pictorial appearance of a document, will have the same effect as physical delivery of the paper document bearing the original signature.
8. Ratification. Except as amended and modified in this Amendment, the terms and conditions of the Lease (in existence prior to this Amendment) are ratified and confirmed in all respects and shall continue in full force and effect. In the event of any dispute between the terms of the Lease (in existence prior to this Amendment) and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall govern and supersede those set forth in the Lease (in existence prior to this Amendment). [The remainder of this page is intentionally blank; signature page follows.] Item 6.e
129 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the Effective Date.
ATTEST:
Name: Raina Allan, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Name: Samantha W. Zutler, City Attorney
LESSOR:
City of Healdsburg,
a California municipality
By:
Name: Chris Herrod
Title: Mayor
Date:
[Lessor’s Signature Page to Amendment]
Item 6.e
130 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
WITNESSES:
Name:
Name:
LESSEE:
GTE Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership,
d/b/a Verizon Wireless
By: VB Acquisitions, LLC
Its: Attorney-In-Fact via a Power of Attorney dated
February 4, 2025 and is authorized to legally bind GTE
Mobilnet of California Limited Partnership, d/b/a/
Verizon Wireless
By:
Name:
Title:
Date:
[Lessee’s Signature Page to Amendment]
Item 6.e
131 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Exhibit “A”
(Legal Description of Lessor’s Property)
Real property in the City of Healdsburg, County of Sonoma, State of California, described as follows:
Commencing at the quarter section stake between Sections 21 and 22 in Township 9 North, Range 9 North 50 V20 West 21.08 chains; thence North, 59 1A 0 East 40 chains to the point of beginning; thence North 12 V20 East 3.56 chains; thence North 76 V2 0 East, 3.26 chains; thence South 57° East 3.90 chains; thence South 2 %° East 2.22 chains; thence South 08 ¥2° West 2.71 chains; thence North 68° West 4.19 chains; thence North 58° West, 3.38 chains to the point of beginning.
APN: 002-361-003
Real property in the City of Healdsburg, County of Sonoma, State of California, described as follows:
BEGINNING AT THE CORNER TO SECTIONS 15, 16, 21 AND 22, TOWNSHIP 9 NORTH, RANGE 9 WEST, M.D.M.; THENCE, FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, ALONG THE SECTION UNE, WEST 14.19 CHAINS TO A STAKE DRIVEN IN THE GROUND; THENCE SOUTH 45° 10' WEST 3.70 CHAINS TO A STAKE; THENCE SOUTH 1<> 30' EAST 17.90 CHAINS TO A STAKE; THENCE SOUTH 770 45' EAST 1.91 CHAINS TO A STAKE; THENCE SOUTH 12° 15' WEST 2.59 CHAINS TO AN IRON PIN, BEING THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE RESERVOIR; THENCE, ALONG THE BOUNDARY UNES OF SAID RESERVOIR, NORTH 78° 30' EAST 3.26 CHAINS TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE SOUTH 57° EAST 3.90 CHAINS TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE SOUTH 2° 45' east 2.22 CHAINS TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE SOUTH 8° WEST 2.71 CHAINS TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE NORTH 68° west 4.19 CHAINS TO AN IRON PIN; THENCE SOUTH 6° 15' EAST
21.90 CHAINS TO A GATE POST IN THE NORTHERLY UNE OF MATHESON STREET, EXTENDED; THENCE, ALONG SAID UNE, NORTH 83<> EAST 0.61 CHAINS TO A STATION; THENCE NORTH 45° 30' EAST 6.80 CHAINS TO A STATION; THENCE NORTH 68° 30' EAST 5.30 CHAINS TO A STATION IN THE SECTION UNE BETWEEN SECTIONS 21 AND 22; THENCE, ALONG SAID SECTION UNE, NORTH 43.07 CHAINS TO THE PU\CE OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF CAUFORNIA IN DEED RECORDED JANUARY 11, 1949, IN BOOK 853, PAGE 70, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SONOMA COUNTY.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SONOMA IN DEED RECORDED DECEMBER 17, 1976, IN BOOK 3166, PAGE 261, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SONOMA COUNTY.
APN: 002-361-004
Item 6.e
132 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Exhibit “B”
(Depiction and Description of Premises within Property) See attached.
Item 6.e
133 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
134 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
135 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
136 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
137 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
138 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
139 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
140 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
141 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
142 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
143 of 648
4929-7447-6676 v6
Site Name: Healdsburg High School
Site Number: US-CA-7817
147464532.5
Item 6.e
144 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT SUCCESSOR AGENCY
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
April 6, 2026
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBER
401 Grove Street, Healdsburg
.
CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Mayor/Chairperson Herrod called to order the concurrent meeting of the City Council and Redevelopment Successor Agency of the City of Healdsburg at 6:00 p.m. with the following Council Members present:
Present: Council Members/: Edwards, Mitchell and Mayor Herrod Board Members
Absent: Council Members/: Hagele and Kelley
Board Members
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
On a motion by Councilmember Mitchell, seconded by Vice Mayor Edwards, approved the April 6, 2026, City Council and Redevelopment Successor Agency meeting agenda as submitted. The motion carried on a voice vote with Councilmember’s Hagele and Kelley noted as absent. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
None.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS – PROCLAMATION CELEBRATING THE
HEALDSBURG HIGH SCHOOL GIRL BASKETBALL TEAM
Mayor Herrod with Council concurrence issued a Proclamation Celebrating the Healdsburg High School Girl Basketball Team for their remarkable Winter season.
Cassidy Jordan thanked the Council for the Proclamation and commented on all of the hard work and effort from the girls’ basketball team.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS – PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 2026 AS ARTS, CULTURE AND CREATIVITY MONTH
Mayor Herrod with Council concurrence issued a Proclamation declaring April 2026 as Arts, Culture and Creativity Month in the City of Healdsburg.
Item 6.f
145 of 648
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Minutes
April 6, 2026
Noah Jeppson Chair of the Arts and Culture Commission, thanked the Council for the Proclamation and commented on arts in Healdsburg.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS – PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 2026 AS NATIONAL VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION MONTH
Mayor Herrod with Council concurrence issued a Proclamation declaring April 2026 as National Volunteer Appreciation Month in the City of Healdsburg.
Cindy Martin Friends of the Healdsburg Senior Center commented on volunteering in Healdsburg and encouraged others to volunteer.
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS – MARIE SPARKS 2025 VOLUNTEER OF
THE YEAR
Recreation Supervisor Anna Grant provided background information on the Marie Sparks Memorial Volunteer Award which was established by the City Council to recognize volunteerism in the community. Supervisor Grant introduced Richard Bugarske.
Richard Bugarske read aloud a statement about Susan Sheehy, the 2025 recipient of the Marie Sparks Appreciation Award and noted the contributions she has made to Healdsburg, the Healdsburg Kiwanis Club, Healdsburg Museum and Alexander Valley Ladies Aid.
Susan Sheehy thanked the Council for the recognition, announced various upcoming events and thanked the community for the support.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Kay announced the construction has begun along March Avenue, the first Farmers’ Market of the year is happening this coming Saturday and noted a few items the Council may be hearing about at the next City Council meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND NON
AGENDA ITEMS
Claire O’Neill announced how Arts, Culture and Creativity month is being celebrated in Healdsburg and commented on coasters with different poems on them that were passed out at various businesses in Healdsburg.
Cathy Waterbury commented on items she has been monitoring on Facebook.
Item 6.f
146 of 648
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Minutes
April 6, 2026
CONSENT CALENDAR
On a motion by Councilmember Mitchell, seconded by Vice Mayor Edwards, approved the Consent Calendar as follows:
A. RECEIVE THE MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 2026 Received and approved the Monthly Treasurer’s Investment Report for February 2026. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
B. APPROVAL OF DISBURSEMENT REPORT FOR WITHDRAWALS DURING THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY 2026
Approved the Disbursement Report for February 2026. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
C. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT WITH MYRIAD ENGINEERING, INC.
Adopted Resolution No. 26-2026, titled “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF HEALDSBURG APPROVING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT WITH MYRIAD ENGINEERING, INC. FOR
ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE BROWN STREET
SEWER AND WATER REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $43,956. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley) D. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF WATER AND WASTEWATER
Adopted Resolution No. 27-2026, titled “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF HEALDSBURG ESTABLISHING THE LIST OF AUTHORIZED
POSITIONS LIST AND COORESPOINDING SALARY SHCHEDULE EFFECTIVE APRIL 6, 2026.” (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley) E. RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF MEASURE B - THE SMART INITIATIVE: SAFE,
MODERN AND ACCESSIBLE RAIL AND TRANSIT
Adopted Resolution No. 28-2026, titled “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HEALDSBURG SUPPORTING THE SMART INITIATIVE: SAFE,
MODERN AND ACCESSIBLE RAIL AND TRANSIT SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS OF SONOMA COUNTY AT THE JUNE 2, 2026 ELECTION.” (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
Item 6.f
147 of 648
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Minutes
April 6, 2026
F. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approved the March 16, 2026 Regular Meeting Minutes. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
The motion to approve the Consent Calendar as above carried on a roll call vote with Councilmember’s Hagele and Kelley noted as absent. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
OLD BUSINESS – CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR GROVE STREET
UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECT
Utilities Engineer Manager Fuss stated the action this evening was to adopt a resolution rejecting the Grove Street Underground Conversion Project. Manager Fuss provided information on the three main goals of the proposed project, reviewed the history of the proposed project and noted the appeal to underground utilities along Grove Street.
Manager Fuss further reviewed the intent of the proposed project, the need for other utility providers to participate in the project and how the CPUC provides oversight on the rules.
Additionally, Manager Fuss noted the variance between cost sharing of the project among the various utility providers and reviewed the proposed alternatives.
In response to Council’s inquiries, Manager Fuss provided information on the budget for the project, undergrounding utilities, noted the current setup is safe for residents and how completing the project at a later date could be feasible. City Manager Kay provided information on what would happen to the funds if the project doesn’t move forward.
Public Comment
Bill Adams thanked Manager Fuss for his level of customer service during this project and commented on the Grove Street project, PG&E and the Healdsburg Avenue project.
Council Comments
Councilmember Mitchell was supportive of the staff recommendation and rejecting the Grove Street bids.
Item 6.f
148 of 648
City Council/RSA Regular Meeting Minutes
April 6, 2026
Vice Mayor Edwards was supportive of the staff recommendation and inquired about updating the ordinance.
Mayor Herrod expressed support for staff’s recommendations and rejecting the bids.
On a motion by Vice Mayor Edwards, seconded by Councilmember Mitchell, adopted Resolution No. 29-2026 titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG REJECTING ALL BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE GROVE STREET UNDERGROUND CONVERSION PROJECT (PROJECT EL005).” The motion carried on a roll call vote with Councilmember’s Hagele and Kelley noted as absent. (Ayes 3, Noes 0, Absent – Hagele and Kelley)
NEW BUSINESS
None.
COUNCIL REPORTS ON MATTERS OF INTEREST OCCURRING SINCE PREVIOUS
REGULAR MEETING/EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT REPORTS
Councilmember Mitchell reported she participated in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade, City Council Goal Setting, attended the Farmers’ Market pop up, Community Housing Resource Fair and the Zero Waste Sonoma Meeting.
Vice Mayor Edwards reported he attended the Opening Day for Healdsburg Little League and the SMART Community Meeting.
Mayor Herrod reported he attended the St. Patrick’s Day Parade, Opening Day for Healdsburg Little League, Farmers’ Market pop up, Vamos Al Tianguis, Community Housing Resource Fair, Kiwanis Pancake Breakfast, El Sombrero’s 40th Anniversary Celebration and toured the Wastewater Treatment Plant with the Environmental Science students from the High School.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further City Council/Redevelopment Successor Agency business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:19 p.m.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
_________________________________ __________________________________ J. Chris Herrod, Mayor Raina Allan, City Clerk
Item 6.f
149 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2026-27 and 2027-28 Budget Development Update PREPARED BY: Katie Edgar, Finance Director
STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Provide Effective Governance
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Receive a presentation from City staff on the community engagement results and budget development progress and provide feedback and direction to staff.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
City staff kicked off budget development activities with City Council at the February 2, 2026, City Council meeting. Since that time, staff have held two community workshops, completed interactive budget simulation and prioritization surveys, and spoken with different community groups about the budget development process. Each engagement offered an opportunity for residents to provide their input on budget priorities.
BACKGROUND:
The City operates on a two-year budget cycle. The current two-year budget cycle will end on June 30, 2026. The next two-year budget, for fiscal year’s 2026-27 and 2027-28 is on schedule to be adopted in early June to ensure a smooth transition between fiscal years.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The purpose of this report is to provide a status update to the City Council on budget activities completed to date including status of budget goals, a summary of community input, a review of next steps, and provide an opportunity for feedback on key items.
Status of Budget Development Process:
Finance staff have gathered input from department heads and are currently in the process of creating an initial draft of the budget for each fund. To date, salary and benefit calculations, employee allocations, and internal service fund fees have been developed and initial operational budget needs have been discussed with department heads. The full draft budget will be ready for Council review during the May 11th Special meeting.
Item 8.a
150 of 648
During the February 2, 2026, Budget Kickoff, staff presented the following budget development goals to the City Council:
1. Align Budget Resources with City Council Goals
2. Prioritize Infrastructure Funding
3. Increase Technology Transparency
4. Review Finance Policies
5. Continue to Expand Public Engagement
The proposed budget is anticipated to provide adequate funding to support the City Council Goals developed on March 25, 2026 (Goal 1). Many of the new priorities can be achieved within the existing staffing levels and require no additional funding. Several of the goals may require additional funding to be fully implemented; however, until staff initiate working on these goals and develop clear deliverables the costs are still to be determined. Staff’s presentation to City Council on this item will include an overview of the financial landscape of the Community Service Fund to provide a foundation for the upcoming council goal to develop a financial strategy and spending priorities.
Staff are developing the Capital Improvement Plan to prioritize Infrastructure Funding (Goal 2).
The preliminary draft budget will include approximately $1.8 million in additional City funding to complete the construction of multiple grant funded streets projects that were initiated in the last budget cycle including Grove Street Neighborhood Plan Implementation and Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements at Powell Ave and Johnson Street. Staff are currently working to prioritize the long list of additional streets projects and align them with available funding. City Council feedback on this prioritization is requested tonight. The Water and Wastewater Utility funds include over $7 million each in utility and impact fee funding to address the aging infrastructure throughout the City. The Building Maintenance Fund will also include appropriations to address deferred maintenance projects at facilities around the City.
Staff are continuing to improve transparency through accounting development by updating the methodology used to account for subscription-based information technology software. The technology industry has increasingly transitioned to the subscription-based model, and the Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has implemented new financial reporting requirements. Goal 3 will streamline financial reporting and increase awareness of existing and future subscription-based software.
The Pension Liability Funding Policy and the General Fund Surplus Policies were reviewed by City Council on February 17, 2026, and City Council approved staff’s recommended updates to the General Fund Surplus Policy (Goal 5).
A summary of staff’s efforts to continue to expand public engagement through community input is provided below (Goal 6).
Community Engagement:
City staff held two public budget workshops to discuss the City budget process and introduce the Item 8.a
151 of 648
public engagement tools. The first workshop was held in partnership with Corazón Healdsburg, on March 3, 2026, at the Abel de Luna Multicultural Center. The second workshop was held on March 4, 2026, at the Senior Center. Devices were available for attendees to complete the online engagement tools and simplified paper copies were also made available. In total there were approximately 30 public attendees, with the first workshop reflecting much stronger attendance.
Staff also attended a Senior Bistro Brunch at the Senior Center to engage the senior community in discussions of the City Budget. Many participants completed paper copies of the budget survey and others were guided to the full budget simulation to provide more detailed feedback. City staff brought devices to the Day Labor Center and encouraged the staff and community members to complete the survey while answering questions about the budget process. Corazón further engaged community members through a coordinated telephone campaign and direct contact throughout the community.
A long version of the budget simulation with detailed categories as well as a short version with summarized categories was launched on February 20, 2026, in both English and Spanish. The online budget simulation is designed to replicate the challenge of balancing the broad array of community needs with the limited resources available. The simulation closed on March 24, 2026, and 50 responses were submitted online. The long version of the online budget simulation received 35 responses, and the short version received 15 responses. Of the online budget simulation responses, 46 were English and four were Spanish.
Paper surveys allowing respondents to generally increase or decrease expense categories were also provided in both English and Spanish. While the paper survey reflects the same summarized expense categories as the short budget simulation, it does not capture the challenge of working within available resources. The City received a total of 149 paper budget survey responses. Of the paper survey responses, 15 were English and 134 were Spanish.
This year the City also launched a new tool designed to allow the community to prioritize twelve projects and initiatives. The online prioritization tool asked the community to allocate $1.5 million amongst competing priorities and then rank those selected. The paper version provided the same twelve projects and allowed respondents to select those most important to them or to rank them all. The City received a total of 39 responses to the online prioritization tool of which five were in Spanish and 34 in English. Another 115 responses were received in the form of the paper prioritization survey. Of the paper survey responses, 108 were in Spanish and 15 were in English.
Staff’s presentation to City Council on this item will include a summary of major themes and findings.
Next Steps:
City Council will convene for a Special Meeting on May 11, 2026, to begin reviewing the full budget. This meeting will highlight anticipated revenues and expenses, as well as major changes to budgets and projects for consideration.
During the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on May 18, 2026, staff will provide a third quarter update for the current fiscal year, which will include a discussion on year-end position, outstanding funding priorities, and any final budget amendments needed.
Item 8.a
152 of 648
On the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on June 1, 2026, staff will present a final draft budget with a recommendation to City Council for adoption. If for any reason the budget is not adopted at the June 1, 2026, meeting, staff will return for the June 15, 2026, City Council meeting to finalize the budget adoption.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
Staff have taken several steps to reduce the environmental impact of budget development, including, encouraging the online feedback tool in place of the paper survey, and increasing use of existing functionality within the City’s Enterprise Resource Planning system to reduce paper processes.
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council can provide direction to City staff to make changes to the proposed budget development goals, timeline, and public participation plan.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with providing this staff report and presentation.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Consideration of the City’s Budget is an administrative activity, which is not considered a 'project' as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (CEQA Guidelines§15378).
Consequently, no CEQA action is required.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Item 8.a
153 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Update Police Department Public Safety Camera Use PREPARED BY: Matt Jenkins, Chief of Police
STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
Maintain and Enhance Public Health and Safety
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Receive a report on the Police Department Public Safety Camera use.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
In July 2022, prior to initiating a license plate reader program, the Police Department hosted a community meeting in both English and Spanish on Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology for public safety purposes. Since that time, public awareness and concern about ALPR technology has increased significantly, both locally and nationally. The Department remains committed to transparency and ongoing dialogue with the community regarding the use of this technology.
BACKGROUND:
The Healdsburg Police Department began using ALPR technology in October 2018, for parking enforcement. Following City Council direction in May 2022, and subsequent community engagement, the City Council approved the deployment of fixed ALPR cameras for public safety purposes in August 2022, and the cameras went live in January 2023. The Department currently operates 11 fixed ALPR cameras throughout the City with a 90-day data retention period. The City also operates an additional 10 public safety cameras that do not have ALPR capability. Current contracts with Flock Safety are as follows:
Total Cameras Annual Cost Contract Expiration
ALPR Cameras 11 $33,300 December 2028
Public Safety Cameras 10 $45,500 August 2027
The ALPR system is governed by State law and Healdsburg Police Department Policy 465, which establish strict limitations on data use, sharing, and access. The policy and State law explicitly Item 8.b
154 of 648
prohibits the use of ALPR data for immigration enforcement purposes and restricts data sharing to authorized law enforcement agencies for legitimate law enforcement purposes only. All system access is logged and auditable.
In preparation for the annual police update to City Council and in response to emerging concerns about ALPR technology use in other California jurisdictions, staff conducted an extensive audit of the Department's ALPR system access logs. This audit revealed data access patterns that warranted additional attention and have prompted follow-up with Flock Safety. In all, staff found that six agencies from outside of California had queried Healdsburg’s data on 38 occasions in 2023. There were 63 additional queries from multiple out-of-state agencies made on January 11, 2023.
During the annual Police Department update on March 2, 2026, staff acknowledged that there are concerns in various communities about Flock Safety and ALPR technology and offered the option for a more detailed discussion at a subsequent meeting. City Council opted to schedule this more comprehensive informational report, recognizing that doing so would provide the community a greater opportunity to engage on this topic and would give staff the opportunity to provide detailed information to City Council.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The Department's ALPR system currently consists of 11 ALPR cameras deployed at fixed locations throughout the City, with a 90-day data retention period. The system averages more than 135,000 vehicles detected per month, and Healdsburg police officers conduct an average of 74 searches per month. Department policy and State law include strict prohibitions against immigration enforcement, out-of-state data sharing, and uses based on protected characteristics.
The system operates by capturing images of license plates on vehicles in public view, comparing them against "hot lists" of stolen vehicles, wanted persons, and missing persons from databases such as the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and California Department of Motor Vehicle records. Officers receive real-time alerts when a plate of interest is detected and can also conduct investigative searches of historical data within the retention period.
The Police Department has conducted annual audits since the program launched in January 2023.
In conducting those audits, the Department used a methodology similar to the California Department of Justice's audits of the Department's inquiries into state databases, wherein a random sampling of inquiries (or data) was looked at for policy and legal compliance. Those audits did not produce any findings of violations.
Investigative Value and Case Successes
Since the deployment of fixed ALPR cameras in January 2023, the technology has provided significant investigative value and has been instrumental in solving serious crimes and recovering stolen property. The ALPR system serves as a critical law enforcement tool that enhances public safety in Healdsburg. The following case examples demonstrate the benefit the system provides to the community:
Item 8.b
155 of 648
The ALPR system detected a vehicle traveling through Healdsburg that had been involved in a retail theft in Sonoma County. Officers stopped the vehicle and arrested the suspect.
During the arrest, officers obtained information that led them to recover an illegal firearm.
In a kidnapping case, the ALPR system quickly confirmed where the victim and suspect's vehicle were last seen. This information helped officers provide other law enforcement agencies with the likely direction the suspect was traveling. Because officers knew the vehicle had already left Healdsburg, they were able to focus their efforts on gathering evidence at the crime scene instead of spending valuable time searching for the vehicle.
The ALPR system confirmed a suspect's license plate and showed that the vehicle was last seen in Cloverdale. This information, combined with other investigative work, helped officers determine that the suspect likely lived in Cloverdale. He was later arrested at his home.
Officers reviewed video surveillance and used the ALPR system to confirm the license plates of vehicles connected to a burglary ring. When one of the suspect vehicles returned to Healdsburg, the ALPR system alerted officers, who were able to stop a burglary that was already in progress.
The ALPR system detected a vehicle entering Healdsburg that was connected to a repeat organized retail theft ring. This alert led to the identification and arrest of the suspects.
A vehicle that had been reported stolen in San Rafael was recovered in Healdsburg after the ALPR system identified the vehicle.
Officers had poor-quality video surveillance from a burglary. The ALPR system helped officers identify the suspect vehicle from the grainy footage. The system also alerted officers when the vehicle was located in Healdsburg, leading to its recovery.
Officers were investigating a credit card fraud case and had only a vague description of the suspect vehicle from video surveillance. Using the ALPR system, officers were able to find a matching vehicle in Santa Rosa. The system's records also confirmed that this vehicle had been in Healdsburg at the time of the crime. When the ALPR system later detected the suspects' location, officers arrested them in Windsor.
These cases represent a range of serious crimes including kidnapping, organized retail theft, burglary, firearms recovery, and stolen vehicle recovery. The ALPR system has proven particularly valuable in cases where suspect vehicle information is partial or unclear, where suspects have fled the jurisdiction, and where real-time alerts allow officers to interrupt crimes in progress or apprehend suspects shortly after an offense. This technology continues to be an essential investigative tool for the Department's mission to protect and serve the Healdsburg community.
Audit Findings: Unauthorized Data Access
Item 8.b
156 of 648
As mentioned, in preparation for the annual police update to City Council and in response to emerging concerns about ALPR technology use in other California jurisdictions, staff conducted an extensive audit of the Department's ALPR system access logs. In conducting this review which analyzed each individual item in the audit logs, staff identified search/lookup activity by out-ofstate and federal law enforcement agencies that accessed Healdsburg's ALPR data. This access occurred despite Department policy explicitly restricting data sharing to authorized California law enforcement agencies only.
The audit logs revealed searches conducted by numerous out-of-state agencies, including Houston Police Department (Texas), Fort Worth Police Department (Texas), Altoona Police Department (Iowa), Cherokee County Sheriff's Office (Georgia), Kane County Sheriff's Office (Illinois), St.
Tammany Parish Sheriff's Office (Louisiana), and multiple other agencies across the country.
Additionally, the U.S. Park Police (San Fransico division), a federal agency, accessed the data.
The vast majority of these unauthorized searches occurred on January 11, 2023, within an approximately 45-minute window. This date corresponds with the Department's initial system setup and onboarding training with Flock Safety. Upon discovery of these activities, staff immediately initiated contact with Flock Safety to understand how this occurred.
Meetings with Flock Safety
Staff conducted multiple meetings with Flock Safety representatives, including senior executive staff members. Through these discussions, Flock Safety provided several explanations for the unauthorized access.
Regarding the system architecture prior to 2023, Flock acknowledged that its system controls allowed agencies to change what state they were designated as, which in turn allowed them access to that state's data through a "lookup" feature. The company did not maintain logged files of sharing setting changes and stated it had "a philosophy at the time of not having to police the police." Because audit logs did not capture setting changes previously, Flock cannot definitively determine which specific agencies changed their state settings to gain access to California data.
Audit data shows that six local and/or county agencies from across the country were able to query Healdsburg data on 38 occasions using this loophole.
Regarding the January 11, 2023, instances, Flock representatives indicated that during the setup process, a sharing setting was likely checked and then unchecked, creating a brief window during which out-of-state agencies could access Healdsburg's data. This was characterized as an inadvertent configuration issue during onboarding. While approximately 63 inquiries were made against the Department's database on this date, no Federal agencies were part of these inquiries, and it is not believed that any information was obtained by out-of-state agencies.
Staff's audit review also revealed that there has been no out-of-state access to Healdsburg data since August 2023. Importantly, no ICE or DHS access was noted anywhere in the audit logs, and no out-of-state access has occurred under the current Federal administration. Enhanced audit logs implemented by Flock in 2025, now show whether searches returned results, though this capability was not available for the historical searches that occurred in 2023-2024.
Item 8.b
157 of 648
Flock Safety's Response and System Improvements
Flock Safety has acknowledged these issues and has implemented significant changes to its platform, particularly for California agencies. These changes were implemented between March 2025 and December 2025 and represent a substantial shift in how the system operates. The City has verified that Flock Safety maintains FBI CJIS compliance, which requires adherence to federal security standards for criminal justice information systems.
In March 2025, Flock disabled the National Lookup feature for all California agencies, preventing access to out-of-state camera networks. By June 2025, the company had blocked out-of-state agencies from creating data sharing relationships with California agencies, discontinued out-ofstate sharing functionality for California customers, and reviewed current sharing settings to revoke any remaining one-to-one sharing with out-of-state agencies with customer consent.
In July 2025, Flock applied search filters that automatically flag and block keywords for prohibited searches involving immigration and reproductive healthcare. If a search containing a blocked keyword is attempted, agency data will not be queried and no data will be returned. This was followed in August 2025 by a complete block on immigration searching for California agencies.
In December 2025, Flock made the offense type dropdown mandatory for all searches, requiring selection from standardized NIBRS (National Incident-Based Reporting System) offense categories. This creates clearer audit trails and helps guard against prohibited use cases. On an ongoing basis, all changes to sharing settings are now permanently logged in audit files, enhanced audit logs now show whether searches returned results, and technical controls now prevent California agencies from accepting or initiating data sharing with out-of-state or federal agencies.
Federal agencies cannot discover or broadly request data sharing in California and are not part of statewide or national lookup networks.
Flock Safety has published these commitments publicly and has communicated them directly to California law enforcement agencies, including Healdsburg.
Community Concerns
There have been concerns raised in the Healdsburg and other communities about ALPR programs.
These concerns include questions about data security vulnerabilities, the potential for federal agencies to access local ALPR data for purposes including immigration enforcement, the proportionality of collecting data on a large number of vehicles to support a smaller number of investigative searches, and broader questions about participation in a national surveillance infrastructure.
Staff takes these concerns seriously. The audit findings documented in this report confirm that unauthorized access to Healdsburg's ALPR data did occur, that similar issues have been documented in other California jurisdictions, and that questions about data security, vendor accountability, and system oversight are legitimate. These same vulnerabilities are not exclusive to this specific vendor or technology and are an inherent risk with any technology. Staff notes that some concerns reference allegations and incidents in other jurisdictions that staff has not independently verified.
Item 8.b
158 of 648
Current Safeguards and Ongoing Monitoring
Healdsburg Police Department Policy 465 explicitly prohibits immigration enforcement use and data sharing with out-of-state or federal agencies. The policy requires individual login credentials with full audit capability, mandates annual system audits, and lists specific permitted and impermissible uses. Violations subject employees to criminal prosecution, civil liability, and/or administrative sanctions.
At the technical level, Flock has implemented controls that prevent California agencies from accepting or initiating data sharing out-of-state or with federal agencies. Federal agencies cannot discover or broadly request data sharing in California and are not part of statewide or national lookup networks. Immigration and reproductive healthcare search terms are automatically blocked, every search requires a standardized NIBRS offense type, all sharing setting changes are permanently logged, and enhanced audit logs now show search results. Additionally, Flock Safety operates under FBI CJIS compliance requirements, which mandate specific security and technical controls for systems handling criminal justice information.
At the operational level, the Department maintains a 90-day data retention period that is shorter than many jurisdictions, limits the system to 11 fixed ALPR camera locations, requires officers to verify ALPR hits through CLETS before enforcement action, restricts access to trained personnel only, and conducts regular audit reviews.
Department administration is actively working with Flock Safety to ensure continued compliance with all safeguards and to prevent any recurrence of unauthorized access. Staff conducts ongoing monitoring of audit logs and maintains regular communication with the vendor regarding system security and technical controls. The Department remains committed to protecting the privacy of community members while utilizing this important investigative tool responsibly and in full compliance with California law.
Legal and Policy Compliance
California law governing ALPR systems includes SB 34 (Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq.), which requires ALPR operators to adopt usage and privacy policies and restricts data sharing; and the California Values Act (Government Code § 7282.5; § 7284.2 et seq.), which limits cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Importantly, staff's review of audit logs found no evidence of sharing with federal immigration enforcement officials. Additionally, there is no evidence that any information was obtained from the searches of Healdsburg's network by unauthorized agencies. For information to have been obtained, an exact match of a license plate would have had to occur on each individual search.
While the audit logs show that searches were conducted, there is no indication that any of those searches returned results that would have provided actionable data to the searching agencies.
It should be noted that Flock Safety's FBI CJIS compliance requires the company to adhere to federal security standards for criminal justice information systems, including physical security, personnel security, technical security controls, and audit requirements. This compliance is independently verified and provides a baseline level of security assurance for law enforcement data.
Item 8.b
159 of 648
Department Administration Response
Staff has carefully analyzed the unauthorized access incidents to determine responsibility and identify appropriate measures to prevent future occurrences. Based on this analysis, staff has determined that the violations resulted primarily from vendor control failures rather than Departmental failures.
The Healdsburg Police Department had clear policies in place prohibiting out-of-state data sharing and immigration enforcement use. Department personnel did not authorize the access that occurred, nor did they have the ability to prevent it through policy alone. The Department's regular audits, conducted using methodology similar to California Department of Justice standards with random sampling, did not detect the violations. Only when staff conducted a comprehensive lineby-line review of all audit log entries did the unauthorized access come to light.
The primary responsibility for the violations lies with Flock Safety, which failed to implement adequate technical controls to enforce California's legal requirements and the City's policy restrictions. Flock's system architecture allowed agencies to manipulate their state designations to circumvent restrictions, the company did not maintain audit logs of setting changes, and a configuration error during Healdsburg's onboarding created a window for unauthorized access.
Department administration is working directly with Flock Safety to ensure that the enhanced technical controls implemented in 2025 remain effective and that no future violations occur. Staff has implemented more rigorous audit procedures and maintains ongoing communication with the vendor regarding system security. As part of their commitment to transparency, Flock Safety has provided the Department with early access to an enhanced auditing tool, that proactively alerts department administration of patterns that might require further scrutiny.
Department administration has contacted the administration of the agencies who are believed to have had personnel change their state in 2023 resulting in unauthorized access to Healdsburg data.
The ALPR system has proven to be an important law enforcement tool, providing critical assistance in solving serious crimes including kidnapping, organized retail theft, burglary, and firearms recovery. The case examples demonstrate the practical public safety benefits this technology provides to the Healdsburg community.
Staff acknowledges that unauthorized access to Healdsburg's ALPR data occurred in 2023-2024 due to vendor control failures. Department administration has worked diligently to understand how these violations occurred, ensure they do not recur, and hold responsible parties accountable. Flock Safety has implemented substantial technical improvements, and the Department maintains ongoing monitoring and communication with the vendor to ensure continued compliance with all safeguards.
The Department is implementing the following procedures to ensure continued compliance and accountability:
• Monthly audits of network data on a line-by-line level Item 8.b
160 of 648
• Any unauthorized access discovered will be publicly reported on the Police Department’s website and City Council will be advised.
Department Policy 465 is being updated to reflect these changes.
Staff believes that strong safeguards are now in place, including technical controls that prevent out-of-state and federal access, mandatory audit logging of all system changes, and enhanced oversight by Department administration. Staff remains committed to protecting community privacy and providing transparency, while responsibly utilizing this important investigative tool in full compliance with California law and Department policy.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
Not applicable.
ALTERNATIVES:
The system provides investigative value in identifying stolen vehicles, solving serious crimes, and supporting criminal investigations as demonstrated in the case examples provided in this report.
No changes are recommended at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The current ALPR contract with Flock Safety, which runs through December 2028, costs $33,300 annually. The current contract for public safety cameras, which runs through August 2027, costs $45,500 annually.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 15378(b)(5) of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") guidelines, receiving this report is an administrative activity of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Item 8.b
161 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 20, 2026
SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement with Opticos Design, Inc. for Preparation of the SMART Station Area Specific Plan
PREPARED BY: Scott Duiven, Community Development Director STRATEGIC INITIATIVE(S):
• Establish Proactive Policies/Programs to Continue to Promote Economic Diversity & Sustainable Growth
• Expand Affordable Housing Opportunities
• Maintain and Improve Infrastructure and Facilities
• Provide Effective Governance
RECOMMENDED ACTION(S):
Adopt a Resolution approving a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Healdsburg and Opticos Design, Inc. for consultant support to prepare the SMART Station Area Specific Plan for a not to exceed amount of $1,130,000 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City Council, and to approve any future minor modifications to the scope of services being performed.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT/OUTREACH:
Extensive community outreach and engagement will be central to successful preparation of the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan. The planning effort is anticipated to take two to three years during which there will be significant engagement and outreach to the community at large, directly affected stakeholders (e.g., property owners, businesses, residents, and interest groups), and civic decision-makers. To further support this effort the City Council will establish a Community Advisory Committee to provide input and guidance on the development of the SMART Station Area Specific Plan.
BACKGROUND:
Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy (MTC Resolution 4530) was adopted in September 2022 and revised in October 2023. The TOC Policy seeks to support the region’s transit investments by ensuring communities within half-mile of transit stations and along transit corridors are places that not only support transit ridership, but Item 8.c
162 of 648
are places where Bay Area residents of all abilities, income levels, and racial and ethnic backgrounds can live, work, and access services.
The TOC Policy is rooted in Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050), the region’s Long Range Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy and addresses all four elements of the Plan including transportation, housing, the economy, and the environment. Compliance with the TOC Policy is voluntary for jurisdictions that want to advance the goals of PBA 2050 or to be eligible and/or competitive for some MTC discretionary funding such as the One Bay Area Grants (OBAG). Four goals guide the TOC Policy and advance PBA 2050 implementation:
· Increase the overall housing supply in part by increasing the density for new residential projects and prioritize affordable housing in transit-rich areas. · In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for new commercial office development.
· Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility within and to/from transit rich areas, particularly to Equity Priority Communities located more than ½ mile from transit stops or stations.
· Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit-oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area.
Healdsburg applied to MTC’s 2024 Transit-Oriented Communities Planning and Implementation Grants program seeking to prepare a Specific Plan for Healdsburg’s Priority Development Area which includes the half-mile around the Planned Healdsburg SMART Station and the Priority Site known as the South Entry Area. While Healdsburg is well-positioned with its recently adopted Housing Element to address the TOC Policy requirements related to affordable housing production, preservation, and protection; a Specific Plan is needed to address the requirements related to minimum residential and commercial office densities, parking management, and transit station access and circulation. Furthermore, the Plan will integrate housing, employment, transportation, and infrastructure needs in the South Entry Area which is currently not served with public utilities (water, sewer, stormwater). A programmatic EIR will be prepared allowing for future streamlining of development projects consistent with the Plan. The City has received grant funds in the amount of $1,130,000 to prepare the Specific Plan and EIR.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The grant funds will be used to prepare the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan.
Preparation of a Specific Plan requires the support of an interdisciplinary team with expertise in land use, urban design, transportation, infrastructure and utilities, economics, public outreach and engagement, and environmental review. A Request for Proposals (RFP) to assist the City in preparing the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan was released on January 6, 2026, with proposals due on February 20, 2026. Links and information about the RFP were posted on the City’s website and sent directly to firms known for providing these services.
The City received eight (8) proposals in response to the RFP. Staff reviewed and evaluated the proposals received and conducted interviews with the top three (3) firms identified by the review committee comprised of staff from the Community Development Department and Public Works.
Opticos Design, Inc. (Opticos) is recommended as the most qualified firm by virtue of their team’s Item 8.c
163 of 648
proposed approach, budget, and the specialized experience, education, and expertise of its principals and employees to prepare the SMART Station Area Specific Plan. Opticos brings familiarity with Healdsburg from prior work, a visual approach to conveying planning concepts, a strong focus on missing middle housing, and a comprehensive approach to community outreach and engagement.
The proposed Scope of Work, Budget, and Schedule are included as Exhibit A to the Resolution (Attachment 1). The proposals from MIG and Perkins&Will, both of whom were short-listed and interviewed are included for reference as Attachment 2 and Attachment 3 respectively. All three of the firms interviewed, along with their assembled project teams, and examples of prior experience demonstrated the expertise required to assist with this project.
TABLE 1: Short-Listed Firms
Consultant Team Schedule Cost
MIG, Inc.
• EPS
• Fehr & Peers
• BKF Engineers
• Community Strong Strategies
• Corazon Healdsburg
30 Months $1,129,887
$124,415 optional tasks
Opticos Design, Inc.
• Lisa Wise Consulting
• Fehr and Peers
• Sherwood Engineering
• Plan to Place
• PlaceIt!
• Rincon
24 Months $1,130,000
Perkins&Will
• Fehr & Peers
• BKF Engineers
• CirclePoint
• EPS
24 Months $1,129,917
In addition to the teams that were interviewed, proposals were received from the following five firms which submitted proposals but were not short-listed.
TABLE 2: Other Firms
Gensler
• Kittelson & Associates
• BKF Engineers
• Kosmont Companies
• David J. Powers & Associates
30 Months $1,129,850
$16,640 optional task
Item 8.c
164 of 648
• Cumming Group
JZMK
• Sherwood Engineering
• Fehr & Peers
• EPS
• Rincon
26 Months $1,269,800
Kevin Gardiner & Associates (KGA)
• Carlile-Macy
• Hexagon Transportation Consultants
• Journey
• Land Econ Group
• M-Group – Planning & CEQA
28-30 Months $1,556,832
SWA Group
• Acorn
• BKF Engineers
• EPS
• Kittelson
32 Months $1,124,348
Wallace Roberts & Todd (WRT)
• 4 Leaf
• Fehr & Peers
• EPS
• WPS
• Munselle Civil Engineering
36 Months $1,130,000
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP:
Development and future implementation of the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan will result in increased housing and jobs within the area surrounding the SMART rail station and in close proximity to services and entertainment which could reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as residents, employees, and visitors could drive less to meet daily needs.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City Council could ask staff to consider other consultants or adjust the Scope of Work for Opticos Design, Inc.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The City has received grant funds in the amount of $1,130,000 to prepare the Specific Plan. There are no local matching funds required. The grant will be administered on a reimbursement basis, and the grant includes federal funding sources. The grant period commenced on September 1, 2025, and the funds must be obligated no later than June 30, 2029.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS:
Item 8.c
165 of 648
This action does not qualify as a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5) that states that organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment are not projects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3) any activity that is not a project is not subject to environmental review under CEQA.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Attachment 1: Resolution
Exhibit A: Opticos Proposal
Attachment 2: MIG Proposal
Attachment 3: Perkins&Will Proposal
Item 8.c
166 of 648
CITY OF HEALDSBURG
RESOLUTION NO. _____-2026
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HEALDSBURG AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH OPTICOS DESIGN, INC. FOR CONSULTANT
SUPPORT TO PREPARE THE HEALDSBURG SMART
STATION AREA SPECIFIC PLAN FOR A NOT TO EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $1,130,000 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF
OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND TO APPROVE ANY FUTURE
MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES
BEING PERFORMED
WHEREAS, in September 2022, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”) adopted Resolution 4530, the Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (“TOC Policy”); and WHEREAS, the TOC Policy incentivizes local jurisdictions to plan and zone for higher residential and commercial densities in areas within one half mile of existing and planned fixedguideway transit stops and stations to support the region’s transit investments and implement key greenhouse gas reduction strategies from Plan Bay Area 2050; and WHEREAS, incentivizing local jurisdictions to also adopt policies focused on increasing housing production of all types, particularly affordable housing production, preservation and protection, commercial anti-displacement and stabilization, parking management, and transit station access and circulation further supports regional transit investments and Plan Bay Area 2050 implementation; and
WHEREAS, in 2023 MTC identified the planned Healdsburg SMART Rail Station as a Tier 4 Transit Station Service; and
WHEREAS, MTC conditions the allocation of regional discretionary funding for fixedguideway transit extension projects on compliance with the TOC Policy; and WHEREAS, MTC anticipates that future regional funding, such as the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) program, will consider compliance with the TOC Policy as part of the prioritization and project selection process starting with OBAG 4, a grant expected to be awarded in 2026; and WHEREAS, the TOC Policy establishes different compliance expectations for existing and planned station areas based on the level of transit service; and WHEREAS, the TOC Policy identifies four TOC Policy areas (density, housing affordability, parking, and access/circulation); and
WHEREAS, on September 30, 2024 the MTC announced a Call for Projects for Transit Item 8.c
167 of 648
Resolution No. XX-2026
Oriented Communities (TOC) Planning and Implementation Grants, and informed local jurisdictions of a November 22, 2024 deadline for submittals of Applications, as well as grant application guidance and requirements including compliance with the Transit Oriented Communities Policy; and
WHEREAS, the City of Healdsburg submitted a grant application to MTC and was awarded $1,130,0000 for the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the Healdsburg 2030 General Plan calls for the preparation of a specific plan for the area south of the Healdsburg Memorial Bridge known as the South Entry Area, a significant portion of which lies within a ½ mile radius of the planned SMART station; and WHEREAS, the planning boundary for the SMART Station Area Specific Plan incorporates the ½ mile radius around the planned SMART rail station at the historic rail depot and the entirety of the South Entry Area; and
WHEREAS, the City released a Request for Proposals (RFP) on January 6, 2026; and WHEREAS, in addition to posting the RFP on the City’s website, the City sent the RFP to firms known for having the experience necessary to prepare the Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, prior to the February 20, 2026, deadline for submitting proposals in response to the RFP, eight (8) firms submitted proposals; and
WHEREAS, staff reviewed, evaluated, and ranked the proposals received and conducted interviews with the top three firms and their respective team members; and WHEREAS, staff recommends Opticos Design, Inc. (Opticos) as the most qualified firm by virtue of approach, specialized experience, education, and expertise of its principals and employees to prepare the Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with Opticos to assist in the preparation of the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Healdsburg hereby:
1. Finds that entering into a Professional Services Agreement does not qualify as a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines, Section 15378(b)(5), because entering into the Agreement is an organizational or administrative activity of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. Entering into the Agreement is thus not a project under CEQA.
Item 8.c
168 of 648
Resolution No. XX-2026
2. Authorizes the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Opticos Design, Inc. to prepare the Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan in an amount not to exceed $1,130,000 as described in the attached scope of work and budget – Exhibit A.
3. Authorizes the City Manager to approve any future minor modifications to the scope of services being performed and take any other actions necessary to effectuate the contract.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of April 2026, by the following vote:
SO ORDERED: ATTEST:
________________________________ ___________________________________ J. Chris Herrod, Mayor Raina Allan, City Clerk
Item 8.c
169 of 648
Learn more at bcorp.com
Healdsburg Station Area
Specific Plan
Proposal submitted
February 20, 2026
CITY OF HEALDSBURG | RFP-01-26 | NARRATIVE PROPOSAL
Prepared by
Opticos Design, Inc.
Item 8.c
170 of 648
Prepared For:
City of Healdsburg
Community Development Department
401 Grove Street,
Healdsburg CA 95448
ATTN:
Scott Duiven,
Community Development Director
Prepared By:
Opticos Design, Inc.
2100 Milvia Street, Suite 125
Berkeley, California 94704
510.558.6957
Fehr + Peers
fehrandpeers.com
Rincon
rinconconsultants.com
Lisa Wise Consulting
lisawiseconsulting.com
Sherwood Engineers
sherwoodengineers.com
Plan to Place
plantoplace.com
Place It!
placeit.org
Item 8.c
171 of 648
Contents
Introduction 4
Project Team 6
Project Understanding 7
Work Plan 9
Schedule 20
Project Team Qualifications 23
Project Personnel 82
Attachment 2: Proposer Information and Certifications 84 Attachment 3: References 88
Attachment 1 and Costs are in a
separate envelope.
Item 8.c
172 of 648
Our Approach & Project Understanding
Healdsburg enters this planning effort from a position
of strength: its recently adopted Housing Element
already advances key TOC Policy requirements related
to affordable housing production, preservation, and
protection. However, to fully realize the opportunities of the SMART Station area and comply with the remaining
TOC obligations, a comprehensive Specific Plan is
essential. This Plan will address minimum residential
and commercial office densities, modernize parking
management strategies, and improve multimodal access
and circulation around the station, all in a way that honors Healdsburg’s small-town way of life, builds on regional strengths and opportunities, and engages the community
to build consensus.
The Specific Plan will holistically integrate housing,
transportation, and infrastructure planning to create a cohesive, implementation-ready framework. Preparation of a programmatic EIR will further enable future development projects to benefit from streamlined CEQA review when
consistent with the Plan. Central to this effort is an
equitable engagement strategy that ensures meaningful
participation from all community members—including
residents who are low income or non English-speaking—
so the Plan reflects Healdsburg’s needs and priorities
A Seasoned, Multidisciplinary Team
Our multidisciplinary team has successfully delivered past plans through strong coordination, shared values, and
aligned methodologies. Our established rapport enables
us to produce high quality plans with efficiency, clarity, and a unified approach that Healdsburg can rely on. Our team is committed to this effort and is able to prioritize this project. Team members include the Petaluma
office of Fehr and Peers focusing on multimodal
transportation and parking, and the Napa office of
Sherwood Design Engineers, providing infrastructure
planning and implementation. Lisa Wise Consulting
will analyze market and development feasibility analysis, provide anti-displacement strategies, and assist with
implementation and zoning. Rincon Consulting will lead
environmental review and CEQA compliance. And PlaceIt!
and Plan to Place will provide a unique and equitable
outreach strategy that provides various opportunities for Healdsburg’s diverse stakeholders to engage with the
plan. We are accustomed to managing multidisciplinary
teams and can assure a well-managed and seamless
process.
Opticos is pleased to submit our proposal for the
Healdsburg SMART Station Area Specific Plan. We
understand that the City of Healdsburg is looking to create a comprehensive, implementation ready Specific Plan for the area around the planned Healdsburg SMART Station
that fulfills TOC Policy requirements, integrates housing and jobs, transportation, and infrastructure planning, all in a manner driven by community vision and which honors
Healdsburg’s unique sense of place and reginal context.
Who we are.
Opticos Design is a nationally recognized urban
design, planning, and architecture firm dedicated to
creating vibrant, healthy, and sustainable places. For
over two decades, we’ve delivered downtown plans,
revitalization strategies, form-based codes, and strategic implementation advice for cities across the country.
As a founding B Corporation, our work is anchored in a
triple bottom line—social, economic, and environmental
outcomes—and a public process that is inclusive,
transparent, and effective at navigating complex local
issues.
Proven results.
Our plans are known for clarity, usability, and graphic excellence, and our community engagement approach
builds consensus even in contentious environments.
Recent Northern California work includes the Downtown
San Rafael Precise Plan and Code (2021), the Downtown
Davis Specific Plan and Code (2022), and the Downtown
Modesto Master Plan (2020). Our downtown plans in Davis and San Rafael catalyzed a notable uptick in post adoption development applications, and our Mesa, Arizona plan
and code (2012) helped enable more than $500 million
in private investment. We bring this same rigor and
momentum-building approach to Headlsburg.
Deep TOD + implementation expertise.
Opticos brings 25+ years of experience with Form Based
Codes and Objective Design & Development Standards
(ODDS) aligned with California’s pro housing laws. We
pair policy clarity with site testing to remove barriers and unlock attainable infill. Our codes are grounded in local character, using pattern based standards where
appropriate to make by right approvals work in practice.
INTRODUCTION - COVER LETTER
Dear Scott Duiven + Selection Committee,
4 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
173 of 648
Collaborative, Quality Focused Process.
Our work plan is designed to ensure a consistent,
high quality deliverable development process through
both internal and City review at each step. Instead of
consolidating multiple subtasks into large, infrequent
deliverables, we propose a series of incremental work
products that build on one another. This approach
distributes the review effort more evenly for City
staff and supports timely feedback throughout the
project. In addition, we have incorporated a dedicated
working session with City staff at the key Preferred Plan milestone to confirm alignment and resolve questions
before initiating the draft Specific Plan.
We are excited to partner with the City of Healdsburg
to deliver a Specific Plan that is community crafted
and ready to implement—one that makes the most of
the SMART investment and advances the City’s long
term vision. Thank you for your consideration; we look
forward to the opportunity to serve.
Sincerely,
■ Consensus you can build on.
We bring an engagement approach designed to
broaden participation and authentically capture
community values and vision.
■ Implementation focus.
Our work pairs market tested development
prototypes with objective standards and practical
financing tools to create conditions that attract and
sustain investment.
■ Extensive SMART Station Planning
Experience.
Led station area planning efforts for Petaluma
and San Rafael; tools in the Marin County ODDS
(created by Opticos) tailored for zoning for housing
around transit, including approaches successfully
applied by Novato to guide rezoning around its
SMART stations.
■ Balancing Scale With Housing Attainability.
Brought strategic, context sensitive solutions to
Downtown Healdsburg to reconcile community
character with the need for more attainable
housing options.
■ Expertise in Transitioning Industrial/Post
Industrial Districts.
Deep experience working in complex, evolving
environments—such as the Richmond Bay Specific
Plan—where legacy industrial uses interface with
new transit oriented mixed use development.
Skilled in addressing land use compatibility,
supporting economic transitions, and navigating
negotiations with industrial property owners.
■ We get small towns.
Much of our practice centers on places that value
small town scale, agricultural heritage, and natural
beauty, and our work is tailored to reinforce those
qualities.
■ We can’t wait to be back!
Having recently completed the Downtown
Healdsburg Housing Capacity Study, we’re excited
to build on that momentum and deepen our
relationship with the community through this next
phase of planning.
Why Opticos for Healdsburg?
CLOSER LOOK
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 5 Stefan Pellegrini, AICP, LEED AP, NCARB
Principal and Vice President, Opticos Design, Inc.
510.558.6957 x 106
[email protected]
Drew Finke, AICP, LEED AP, NCARB
Senior Associate, Urban Design Team Lead, and
Point of Contact
510.809.9581
[email protected]
Item 8.c
174 of 648
City of Healdsburg
Community Development Department
Opticos Design, Inc.
Prime Consultant
INTRODUCTION - PROJECT TEAM
6 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg
1. Housing Access +
Attainability, Anti-Displacement
Opticos Design
Lisa Wise Consulting
(LWC)
2. Infrastructure + Connectivity
Sherwood Engineering
Fehr and Peers
Opticos Design
3. Economic Revitalization
Opticos Design
LWC
4. Analyze Existing Conditions
Opticos Design
Sherwood
Fehr + Peers
LWC
Plan to Place
Rincon
5. Long-Range Infrastructure
Planning
Sherwood Engineering
LWC
Opticos Design
Fehr and Peers
Rincon
6. Community Engagement
Plan to Place
PlaceIt!
Opticos Design
LWC
Opticos Design has assembled the best team for your project and we have the skills to manage this large, complex project while maintaining a highly collaborative process with City planning staff and the consultant team. Our project team combines deep understanding of Healdsburg’s needs and
key issues with expertise.
Key personnel are available and committed to the project with no substitutions. Additional team and staff information is provided later in this document.
Our Project Management Approach
Opticos is skilled at managing large, complex projects while maintaining a highly collaborative process including City planning staff and the consultant team. Clear, open, and intentional communication is the foundational element of any successful collaborative effort. To facilitate this, we propose:
Regularly scheduled team check-in calls. Successful
communication relies on engaging the right people about the right topic at the right time. To facilitate this, we propose establishing a schedule for regular team check-in calls using screenshare and video conference. Agendas will be made
available beforehand to identify necessary attendees, and both agendas and meeting notes will be made accessible
online for reference by the team.
Online site for team collaboration. Straightforward access to information and a record of team decisions is critical to facilitate communication across a team where different
members may be involved at different capacities over the course of the project. We propose creating and managing an online site to enable file sharing, a shared project calendar, project contacts, and real-time document collaboration. This site will be project the team’s go-to source for project-related information and will help to reduce time spent searching email inboxes to find links, attachments, and meeting notes.
Project status updates. Communication is most effective when everyone starts on the same page. To ensure
consistency of expectations and consistent progress towards deadlines, we propose to provide a weekly/ bi-monthly team email highlighting progress on tasks, identifying next steps, and articulating action items and task responsibilities for the coming weeks.
We know things change and any project management
approach is only as good as its capacity to accommodate changing realities. By facilitating a collaborative approach founded on open communication and accessible project
information, it is our intent to create a team structure that makes it possible to identify changes early-on and efficiently pivot as needed.
Item 8.c
175 of 648
1. A Tailored Approach to Delivering
Appropriate Housing Density
The project area contains a wide range of lot sizes
and development contexts, requiring a flexible
strategy for introducing new housing. A mix of
housing typologies will be essential to avoid
costly lot consolidation and to support both the
transformative redevelopment of larger sites and
the incremental evolution of smaller parcels. Our
approach emphasizes housing forms—such as
Missing Middle Housing and thoughtfully scaled
mixeduse buildings—that can increase density while
preserving Healdsburg’s smalltown character.
Affordability and housing stability are central to
this strategy. By diversifying housing types and
enabling appropriately scaled infill, the plan can
expand opportunities for affordable homes while
reducing pressure on existing neighborhoods. Our
team brings substantial experience working with
communities navigating change, helping them
integrate muchneeded housing in ways that protect
existing residents, minimize displacement risk, and
enhance quality of life for both current and future
Healdsburg households.
Key Tasks | Lead + Supporting Consultants:
• 3.3 Market Demand Analysis
Lisa Wise Consulting (LWC)
• 3.4 Affordable Housing + Anti-Displacement
Strategy | LWC
• 4.1 Building Prototype Testing + Feasibility Analysis
LWC, ODI
• 4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
Opticos Design, LWC, Sherwood
• 5.4 Anti|Displacement Feasibility Study
Opticos Design, Plan to Place, LWC
• 8.2 Zoning Amendments
Opticos Design, LWC, Fehr and Peers (F+P)
2. Strengthening Connections to
the SMART Station
Building on the Foss Creek Pathway Plan, this
project presents an opportunity to create safe,
intuitive, and accessible connections for people
walking, biking, taking transit, and those with limited mobility. Key destinations—such as Downtown and
the Russian River—should be easily reachable from
the SMART Station, serving residents, workers,
and visitors alike. Addressing the physical and
psychological barrier created by the rail tracks is
central to creating a more cohesive, connected
district and improving access to the station for
existing and future residents.
Key Tasks:
• 3.1 Existing Conditions Report + Map
Sherwood, F+P, ODI, Rincon, LWC
• 4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
ODI, LWC, Sherwood
• 4.5 Community Workshop: Refined Vision +
Alternatives Testing
ODI, Plan to Place, LWC
• 6.2 Implementation + Financing Plan
LWC, ODI, F+P, Sherwood
3. Creating a Strategic Vision for
Legacy Industrial Uses
The alternatives process allows for evaluating how
landuse changes east of the Russian River may
affect industrial operations, including infrastructure
capacity, fiscal impacts, transportation activity,
and housing/jobs balance. This moment also
offers a chance to articulate a longterm vision for
the evolving mix of residential and industrial uses
surrounding the SMART Station. Different scales
of industrial activity have different needs, and
smallscale artisanal production—when wellsited—
can activate streets, support transitoriented
districts, and coexist with nearby housing. Our
approach emphasizes a nuanced strategy for
compatibility, economic transition, and collaborative
implementation, including proactive engagement
with industrial property owners and stakeholders.
Key Tasks:
• 2.3 Stakeholder Interviews
ODI, LWC, Sherwood
• 3.2 Community Assessment Memo
LWC, ODI
• 3.3 Market Demand Analysis | LWC
• 4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
ODI, LWC, Sherwood
• 6.2 Implementation + Financing Plan
LWC, ODI, F+P, Sherwood
• 8.2 Zoning Amendments
ODI, LWC, F+P
INTRODUCTION - PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 7 Item 8.c
176 of 648
4. Building on Prior Planning Efforts
Healdsburg has already made progress toward
the vision outlined in previous planning initiatives
such as the Central Healdsburg Avenue Plan
(2013) and the Foss Creek Pathway Plan. This project
provides an opportunity to update those concepts
where necessary, refine what remains relevant,
and build upon an established foundation rather
than reinventing it. By honoring prior work, the
community can move forward with continuity and
confidence.
Key Tasks:
• 3.1 Existing Conditions Report + Map
Sherwood, F+P, ODI, Rincon, LWC
• 3.6 Community Meeting: Existing Conditions +
Initial Visioning
ODI, Plan to Place, LWC
• 4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
ODI, LWC, Sherwood
• 5.1 Preferred Plan Framework + Working Session
ODI, LWC
• 8.1 General Plan Amendment Identification
ODI, F+P
• 8.2 Zoning Amendments
ODI, LWC, F+P
5. Planning Infrastructure for LongTerm Needs
This plan will help prioritize future infrastructure
investments needed to support new development
near the station. Utilities and roadways likely
require upgrades, and any shift in land use
across the Russian River could necessitate
major capital investment—creating an important
moment to evaluate tradeoffs. Our team brings
forward-thinking and experience with low-impact,
cost-efficient infrastructure strategies that can
meet future needs while minimizing cost and land
burdens.
Key Tasks:
• 3.1 Existing Conditions Report + Map
Sherwood, F+P, ODI, Rincon, LWC
• 4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
ODI, LWC, Sherwood
• 6.1 Infrastructure and Service Needs + Costs
Sherwood, ODI, F+P, LWC
• 6.2 Implementation + Financing Plan
LWC, ODI, F+P, Sherwood
• 8.1 General Plan Amendment Identification
ODI, F+P
• 9.2 NOP and Scoping
Rincon
6. Meaningful Participation for All
Stakeholders
Our engagement strategy is designed to reach
a wide spectrum of stakeholders—from those
who are traditionally very active in planning
conversations to those who may be less familiar
with public processes, face language barriers, or
have limited time to participate. We combine a
flexible mix of open houses, handson workshops,
popups, and digital tools scheduled at varied
times to accommodate different work and family
commitments. Popups, in particular, allow us
to meet people in everyday settings, creating
a comfortable entry point for participants who
may not attend formal events. To ensure inclusive
access, we provide translated materials and live
interpretation, and we collaborate with PlaceIt!,
whose tactile, creative, and languageneutral
engagement methods reduce barriers and help all
community members imagine the Station Area’s
future.
Key Tasks:
• 2.2 Community Engagement Strategy
Plan to Place, ODI, F+P
• 2.4 Project Branding + Outreach Toolkit
ODI, Plan to Place
• 2.5 Translation Services
ODI, Plan to Place
• 4.4 + 5.5 Popup Engagements
Plan to Place, ODI, Place It!
• 3.6 + 7.4 Community Open Houses
ODI, Plan to Place, Place It!
• 4.5 Community Workshop
ODI, Plan to Place, LWC
8 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
177 of 648
Task 1 Project Initiation + Management
This task starts the project by confirming goals and objectives, establishing communications protocols, identifying opportunities and constraints, and requesting necessary data and background information. This task also provides ongoing project management, including coordination with City staff, schedule tracking, progress reporting and compliance with MTC TOC requirements. ■ Kick-Off Meeting + Site Visit
The Opticos team will kick off the project with an in-person meeting to confirm goals, finalize schedules and deliverables, and set communication protocols.
The meeting will also address analysis and outreach objectives. Afterward, the team will conduct a site visit to document existing conditions and assess walkability, public realm quality, and built-form patterns. ■ 1.2 GIS Database + Project Basemap
Opticos will coordinate a consolidated data request to the City and develop a GIS database with project basemaps to ensure consistency and clarity throughout the project.
■ On-Going Project Management
Opticos will manage the consultant team, coordinate with City staff, and ensure quality control to keep the project on schedule and budget. We will provide monthly progress reports summarizing milestones and upcoming tasks. Biweekly meetings with City staff will be led by the Opticos project manager to review progress, address questions, and discuss in-progress deliverables, with agendas and notes provided for each meeting. As part of on-going project management, Opticos will manage compliance with MTC’s requirements for TOC projects by monitoring project activities, documentation, deliverables and reporting to ensure all requirements are met throughout the project.
Task 1 Deliverables:
• Kickoff Meeting + Summary
• GIS Database and Project Basemap
• Bi-Weekly Progress Meetings + Summaries
Task 2 – Community Engagement
The consultant team will lead an inclusive engagement process that intentionally integrates historically underserved and disadvantaged groups. The strategy includes collaboration with local organizations, regular advisory committee meetings, pop-up events, stakeholder interviews, and multilingual online tools to ensure broad participation. Public workshops and detailed summaries of community input will guide decision-making and demonstrate how feedback is integrated.
■ 2.1 Convene CAC + TAC
Opticos will work with the City to form a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). The Community Engagement Strategy will outline the schedule and initial agendas for meetings of each committee, timed with key milestones and engagement events to provide Work Plan
9 Item 8.c
178 of 648
• Deliver clear, consistent messaging and
compelling promotional materials to support
events, workshops, and online questionnaires;
• Coordinate timely translation of materials and
live interpretation services to remove language
barriers and ensure equitable participation;
• Monitor outreach and engagement efficacy
throughout the process using real-time analytics,
allowing the team to adapt strategies and coursecorrect to better reach target communities; and • Clearly define coordination protocols, facilitation
approaches, and roles and responsibilities
between the project team and City staff.
■ 2.3 Stakeholder Interviews
The project team will conduct up to four hours
of stakeholder interviews, individually or in focus
groups, with property owners, developers,
community organizations, and advocacy groups.
Participants will be identified in the Community
Engagement Strategy and confirmed with the City.
These interviews are essential for gathering topicspecific insights and local knowledge to inform the plan.
■ 2.4 Project Branding + Outreach Toolkit
Opticos will establish a project color palette,
document template, and logo to ensure consistent
graphic and document design over the course of
the specific plan project. The project team will coproduce messaging with city staff, and members of the local CBOs as appropriate, to effectively
communicate the background and intention of
the Station Area Specific Plan effort. Consistent
and identifiable messaging will be used across
promotional and outreach materials for in-person
and online engagement, including:
• Outreach Templates: Building off of the existing
City branding and style guide, the project
team will draft outreach templates (e.g., digital
/ physical postcard, newsletters, social media
posts), document templates and graphic style
guidelines.
• Promotional/website collateral: The project
team will provide language and graphics for
electronic formats for inclusion in the City’s
project website, media release, e-blast notice,
regular opportunities for feedback and elevate
community voices and local technical expertise.
Participation in each committee will be confirmed
through the Community Engagement Strategy, but
could include:
• Community Advisory Committee: property and
business owners in the plan area, members of
the development community, members of local
organized groups, and Healdsburg residents and
business owners outside the plan area.
• Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): technical
experts from City of Healdsburg departments,
Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART), MTC
Project Manager, and the Sonoma County
Transportation and Climate Authority (SCTCA)
■ 2.2 Community Engagement Strategy
Opticos and Plan to Place will collaborate with
City staff to prepare an inclusive outreach and
engagement strategy that will be updated
throughout the project to ensure its effectiveness.
This strategy will serve as a living, shared resource—
continuously refined and accessible to all team
members—to ensure alignment, transparency, and
responsiveness. The engagement strategy will be
designed to:
• Establish clear goals and measurable objectives
that guide meaningful, productive community
conversations;
• Provide a coordinated schedule, engagement
formats, and resource requirements for
all outreach activities, enabling efficient
implementation and accountability;
• Identify priority demographic and interest groups
and deploy multilingual communication strategies
(including Spanish and others as needed), with
tailored approaches to reach hard-to-engage
communities and individuals with special needs,
supported by metrics to track effectiveness;
• Leverage a range of targeted communication
strategies developed in close collaboration with
the City’s communications team to maximize
reach, relevance, and trust within the community;
• Deploy a robust mix of outreach tools—including
social media, SMS outreach to Spanish-speaking
communities, targeted email campaigns and
newsletters, as well as traditional mailings and
surveys—to reach audiences where they are;
10 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
179 of 648
newsletters, and social media postings and other
print and digital outreach collateral.
• Fact Sheets/FAQs/Public-Facing Engagement
Strategy: In an effort to set accurate expectations
and understanding of this effort, the project team
will collaborate with city staff, and members of
the local CBOs as appropriate through an iterative
process to prepare project messaging templates
(Fact Sheets or FAQs) and engagement timeline
graphic, that will continue to evolve throughout
the duration of the project. This important
collateral will be critical in helping identify the
overall project objectives and helping provide
answers to common questions, how information
will be disseminated and how the input gathered
will be used to inform the process.
This task will also include a 2-page public facing
handout that outlines the project objectives,
timeline and engagement opportunities, enabling
the project team to effectively communicate the
background and intention of the effort and engage
stakeholders to solicit necessary feedback. It
will be important to articulate project goals in a
user-friendly format to emphasize the importance
of community input to chart the course of the
strategies as they evolve.
■ 2.5 Translation Services
Translation of engagement materials and in-person
presentations will be provided by Plan to Place. An
allowance for live translation during community
meetings has been provided for use by the City’s
preferred translation provider.
■ 2.6 Website Content
Opticos will provide the City’s website team with
materials produced in other public-facing tasks
such as pop-ups, workshops, and public draft
documents for upload to the City’s project website.
When designing outreach materials, Opticos will
consider on-screen legibility and accessibility to
promote compatibility with the website.
Task 2 Deliverables:
• Community Engagement Strategy Memo (PDF)
• Outreach Toolkit (PDF)
• Stakeholder Interview Summary (PDF)
Task 3 — Existing Conditions
This task will establish a comprehensive baseline
of the specific plan area’s physical, social, and
economic conditions through assessments of
demographics, infrastructure, mobility, and historic
resources. Findings will be compiled into an Existing
Conditions Report and an Opportunities and
Constraints Map, supported by a Historic Context
Statement and Resource Survey. Additionally, a
Market Demand and Feasibility Memo will analyze
development viability, and a Preliminary Housing
Strategy Memo will outline housing capacity,
affordability strategies, and production barriers to
inform the policy framework.
■ 3.1 Existing Conditions Report + Map
The team will efficiently analyze existing conditions
using available resources including project
background materials, GIS data, online resources,
photographic documentation from the site
visit, and coordination with relevant agencies.
This task is meant to provide a foundation to
inform opportunities that will be explored in the
Alternatives to be developed in later tasks. The
analysis will include maps and narrative focused
on existing land use, including the number of
existing affordable and market rate dwelling units;
physical conditions, including structures in poor or
deteriorating condition; environmental conditions,
including areas of known soil or groundwater
contamination; urban form; civic and recreational
spaces; pending and approved development
projects; planned public and private improvement
projects; circulation network; transit use; community
assets and infrastructure; historic resources; market
conditions and development potential.
As part of this analysis, the team will review existing regulatory and policy documents applicable to the
project area. Drawing on findings from all analysis
performed for this task, the project team will
identify opportunities and constraints, which will be
described and mapped. Findings from this task will
form the basis for the CEQA project baseline.
■ 3.2 Community Assessment Memo
The project team will prepare a Community
Assessment Memo that contextualizes the project
area and the Healdsburg community within the
greater Bay Area and North Bay region. Whereas the
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 11 Item 8.c
180 of 648
Existing Conditions Report will focus specifically
on the project area, the Community Assessment
Memo will use a more expansive lens to identify
opportunities and constraints at the regional level
related to equity, affordable housing and jobs,
mobility, community assets and infrastructure,
open space and recreation, resilience, and climate
adaptation.
■ 3.3 Market Demand Analysis
LWC will analyze the regional market and
identify basic opportunities and constraints for
development in Healdsburg. Demographic trends
will be presented using information from the
American Community Survey and other state
and local data sources as appropriate. LWC will
prepare a demographic analysis of the Plan area
and compare it to the larger Sonoma County
market. This demographic review will provide
baseline information on the plan area’s population,
households, and the incomes of residents.
In addition to demographic factors, LWC will
document and analyze trends in employment and
economic activities that are occurring in the Plan
area. This will include identification of employment,
retail sales, and key economic activities that are
currently in place. Data sources on employment and
economic activities will include California Economic
Development Department Labor Market Information
Division QES data, California Department of Tax and
Fee Administration (CDTFA), records on retail sales
and business directory and financial data available
from private sources.
Based on the above analysis, LWC will:
• Evaluate market potential for multifamily housing
to estimate demand for both market-rate and
affordable housing types. LWC will also reference
existing housing needs assessments prepared by
the City and other relevant studies to address the
ongoing need for affordable housing (available
to households earning less than 120% of median
household income).
• Evaluate demand for commercial, industrial, and
institutional uses in the Station Area considering
economic and employment trends in Sonoma
County, current commercial inventories, rents,
vacancies, and emerging opportunities tied to
SMART transit service. Best practices for retail
repositioning will also be reviewed to address
challenges facing traditional retail spaces.
The analysis will include a forecast of development
potential and absorption through the planning
period’s horizon year. This will integrate land use
capacity data, government agency forecasts,
private sector trends, and historical data. Analysis
and findings will be summarized in a memorandum
that includes tables and a narrative.
■ 3.4 Affordable Housing and Anti-Displacement
Strategy
Taking into account the findings of the previous
three tasks, a strategy to provide existing and
future Plan area residents with a range of housing
options that are affordable to households at all
income levels consistent with the City’s Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance will be developed. This Strategy
will identify policies and actions to meet this need,
including potential Specific Plan recommendations
such as zoning changes or incentives to address
any obstacles to providing affordable housing.
To limit or prevent displacement in the Plan area,
this Strategy will identify how non-subsidized
affordable housing units in or near the Plan area
may be impacted by the Specific Plan build-out.
This Strategy will describe existing preservation
policies to maintain neighborhood affordability,
including acquisition and/or rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units, and additional zoning
changes or policies recommended.
This strategy will include language for potential
Specific Plan policies and programs addressing
affordable housing, anti-displacement, affirmatively
furthering fair housing, equity, inclusion, and equal
access to all, including vulnerable populations.
The equity analysis and findings described in the
Community Assessment Memo (Task 3.2) will be
considered during this task. Equity metrics will be
proposed for development projects and public
works projects.
■ 3.5 CAC + TAC Meeting
• Community Advisory Committee: Agenda
to include review of community feedback on
opportunities and constraints direction of land
use and circulation alternatives.
12 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
181 of 648
• Technical Advisory Committee: Agenda to
include discussion of technical opportunities and
constraints. Input will guide alternatives analysis
■ 3.6 Community Meeting: Existing Conditions +
Initial Visioning
The first community workshop will introduce the
project and consultant team to the community,
present a summary of the existingconditions
analysis completed to date, and highlight key issues
identified through stakeholder interviews. It will
also engage participants in interactive visioning
exercises designed to help shape an emerging
vision for the project area.
To maximize accessibility, Opticos and Plan to
Place will host the workshop as an Open House
offered twice—once at lunchtime and again in the
evening—so community members can participate
at a time that works best for them. Between the two
sessions, the project team will lead a walking and/or
biking tour of the project area and engage directly
with stakeholders.
All workshop materials will be provided in both
English and Spanish, and a translator will be
available throughout the event to ensure inclusive
participation for nonEnglishspeaking attendees.
Event Objectives: Inform community about project
and collaborate on project vision.
Task 3 Deliverables:
• Existing Conditions Report – Draft and Final (PDF)
• Community Assessment Memo – Draft and Final
(PDF)
• Market Demand Analysis Memo (PDF)
• Agenda and Summary for CAC and TAC Meetings
(PDF)
• Materials and Facilitation of Community Meeting
Task 4 – Alternatives Development +
Analysis
This task focuses on developing a shared
community vision and evaluating alternative
development scenarios for the specific plan area.
Opticos will lead visioning workshops to create a
Community Vision Statement and prepare up to
three land use alternatives that integrate mobility
and streetscape concepts. These alternatives will be
analyzed for feasibility, costs, and equity impacts,
with findings documented in an Alternatives Report
and a Development Feasibility Report
■ 4.1 Building Prototype Testing + Feasibility
Analysis
This task will analyze development prototypes, cost
considerations, and potential barriers, ensuring that
the preferred plan is grounded in economic reality.
Findings will guide refinements to the plan and
inform implementation strategies, and results will
be summarized in a memo. Opticos and LWC will
work closely to iteratively develop prototypes that
illustrate feasible development in the project area.
• Prototype Testing: Opticos will develop six
building prototypes that illustrate land use
mixes, densities, heights, and planning-level cost
estimates. It is anticipated that the six types will
illustrate a range of building typologies and will be
developed as 3D digital models that can be used
as outreach and engagement tools during the
Alternatives task.
• Feasibility Analysis: LWC will prepare a static
developer’s side pro forma that will illustrate the
financial feasibility of proposed development
concepts at up to six (6) development prototypes.
The analysis anticipates one initial model run
based on preliminary concepts and a second
revised model run based on revisions to initial
concepts that would be required to meet
feasibility goals. LWC will prepare development
cost estimates, and land valuations to allow for
comprehensive and consistent comparisons
among development options for each of the
proposed building prototypes.
■ 4.2 CAC + TAC Meetings
Community Advisory Committee: Agenda to
include brainstorming with CAC members on
strategies to inform Alternatives.
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): Agenda to
include review of community input received to date
and implications of initial concepts for Alternatives.
■ 4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
The project team will develop two land use and
circulation alternatives, each testing different mixes
of residential, commercial, institutional, and public
spaces. Alternatives will incorporate community
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 13 Item 8.c
182 of 648
input, and opportunities for revitalization and
development. These alternatives will integrate
mobility and streetscape concepts to improve
multimodal access, safety, and connectivity to the
SMART station. It is anticipated that at least one
Alternative will investigate a change in land use for
parcels within the project area to the east of the
Russian River, pending feedback received from
staff, stakeholders, and community members.
Assessment of transportation impacts, including
VMT, LOS, multimodal effects and parking will be
assessed and described in an Alternatives Report
that will be prepared following community input on
the Alternatives.
■ 4.4 Popups: Hands-On Model Building
PlaceIt! will facilitate a popup event where
participants take part in a handson modelbuilding
activity using provided found objects to construct
representations of both their memories of the area
and their ideal future spaces. This activity helps
reveal shared community values while generating
creative ideas to inform the Specific Plan vision.
As a popup activity, the modelbuilding experience
will be brought directly to locations where people
already gather, making it easier to engage a broader
audience. A simple, largescale base model of the
project site will serve as the foundation on which
participants can build their concepts, and Postit
notes will be available so contributors can label their ideas—allowing the project team to document and
record all input.
While specific location and date will be finalized
through the Community Engagement Plan, the
Healdsburg Farmer’s Market or the Vamos al
Tianguis Mercado are anticipated to be strong
venues for this activity, particularly because
the format is approachable and welcoming for
nonEnglishspeaking audiences.
Event Objectives: Inform community about project
and involve on ideation for alternatives.
■ 4.5 Community Meeting: Workshop on Refined
Vision + Alternatives Testing
Opticos and Plan to Place, and other members of
the consultant team will host a daylong community
workshop to explore potential development
alternatives for the project area. The design team
will establish a temporary onsite studio where they
will present two draft land use alternatives that test
different combinations of residential, commercial,
institutional, and public spaces. Each alternative will incorporate mobility and streetscape improvements
aimed at enhancing multimodal access, safety, and
connectivity.
The workshop will include a mix of formal
presentations, interactive activities, and an
openhouse component that summarizes work
completed to date, highlights key opportunities and
constraints, explains feasibility findings, and reflects feedback from previous engagement efforts. To
maximize participation, the core presentation may
be offered twice—once around midday and again
in the evening—allowing community members to
engage at a time that works best for them.
Following each presentation, participants will take
part in a facilitated design exercise to help shape
their preferred alternative. Between presentations,
the project team will continue developing
concepts in an Open Studio environment, creating
opportunities for ongoing dialogue and direct
collaboration with community members and City
leadership. This handson format is intended to
deepen engagement and ensure that community
insights directly influence the evolving design
concepts.
Workshop materials will be prepared in English and
Spanish, and a translator will be available for the
duration of the workshop to provide translation as
necessary.
Event Objectives: Collaborate on creation of
alternatives.
■ 4.6 Alternatives Report
Alternatives prepared for Subtask 4.3 will be
refined based on input received from community
engagements and advisory committees. An
assessment of transportation impacts, including
VMT, LOS and multimodal effects will be described
in a report that presents both alternatives, evaluates
trade-offs, and illustrates concepts with diagrams,
maps, and visualizations. The report will include
a comparative analysis, show how community
feedback shaped each alternative, and provide
14 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
183 of 648
recommendations for identifying a Preferred
Alternative.
Task 4 Deliverables:
• Prototype Testing + Feasibility Analysis (PDF)
• Agenda and Summary for CAC and TAC Meetings
(PDF)
• Materials and Facilitation of Popup Engagement
• Materials and Facilitation of Community Meeting
• Alternatives Report (PDF)
Task 5 – Preferred Plan
This task identifies a preferred alternative for the
statin area plan. Specific topics to be included
in the preferred plan will include, among others,
a preferred land use and circulation plan; a
multi-modal access and connectivity strategy; an
accessible design strategy; and a parking analysis
and strategy. Along with the affordable housing/
anti- displacement strategy developed in Task 3, the
preferred plan will establish the framework for the
Plan and a strategy for implementation.
■ 5.1 Preferred Plan Framework + Working
Session
Prior to starting work on the draft Specific Plan,
Opticos will prepare a Plan Framework that
demonstrates how the Specific Plan will describe
and provide guidance for implementation of the
Preferred Alternative. Included with the framework
will be a style sheet and example document
templates for review by City staff to inform the
look, feel, and organization of the Specific Plan
document. Opticos will facilitate a Working
Session with City staff and relevant department
representatives to provide clarifications, make
modifications and confirm approach and document
layout for starting work on the Specific Plan.
■ 5.2 CAC + TAC Meetings
• Community Advisory Committee: Agenda
to include review of community feedback on
Alternatives to define Preferred Plan direction.
• Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): Agenda
to include review of community input received
to date and implications of initial concepts for
Alternatives.
■ 5.3 Preferred Plan Report
The Preferred Plan Report will translate the
communityvetted preferred alternative into a
clear, implementable framework, detailing the
preferred land use and circulation plan, multimodal
access and connectivity strategies, accessible
design guidance, and a comprehensive parking
approach. It will document how feedback from
prior engagement and advisory committee
meetings shaped the plan and define the structure
for implementation. The report will be supported
by refined transportation analysis—including
LOS at key intersections, VMT assessment or
exemption justification, safety, truck and transit
circulation—and parking supply and management
recommendations. Building on the Affordable
Housing and AntiDisplacement Strategy, it will
integrate updated antidisplacement findings
and recommended policies to advance housing
objectives within the plan area. Together, these
components establish the technical basis and
policy direction needed to develop the Specific
Plan.
■ 5.4 Anti-Displacement Feasibility Study
Building off the Affordable Housing and AntiDisplacement Strategy (Task 3.4), LWC will analyze neighborhood composition and potential impacts
of revitalization based on the preferred plan. LWC
will refined, revise, and/or expand recommended
policies and programs identified in the Affordable
Housing and Anti-Displacement Strategy (Task
3.4) that could be included in the Specific Plan to
advance affordable housing objectives. Key findings
from the analysis and revised recommended
policies and programs will be integrated into the
Preferred Plan Report.
■ 5.5 Popup Engagement: Preferred Plan
To supplement the community workshops, the
project team will prepare for and facilitate an
in-person pop-up event focused on the Preferred
Plan to meet with the community at times and
locations that are convenient to them. This will be an
opportunity to share information about the station
area planning effort and gather input through
efficient interactive activities. We will work with City staff to identify the location and logistic but the
events could include Art Nites, Farmer’s Markets,
Sundays and Tuesdays in the Plaza, Wine & Food
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 15 Item 8.c
184 of 648
Experience Grand Tasting, Movies Under the Stars,
and Healdsburg Art Festival.
Event Objectives: Inform community about project
status and involve in refining preferred plan.
■ 5.6 Planning Commission + City Council
Presentation
Opticos will present the Preferred Plan Report to
City Council and Planning Commission for feedback
and refinement prior to drafting the Administrative
Draft Station Area Specific Plan.
Task 5 Deliverables:
• Plan Approach Memo + Style Sheet – Draft + Final
(PDF)
• Preferred Plan Framework – Draft + Final (PDF)
• Agenda and Summary for Preferred Plan Working
Session (facilitated virtually)
• Agenda and Summary for CAC and TAC Meetings
(PDF)
• Preferred Plan Report (PDF)
• Materials and Facilitation for Popup Event
• Presentation Materials and Attendance at one (1)
Planning Commission meeting
• Presentation Materials and Attendance at one (1)
City Council meeting
Task 6 – Infrastructure Financing +
Implementation
This task defines what infrastructure and funding will
be needed to support the Specific Plan. It includes
analyzing existing and future utility and service
demands, identifying required improvements and
their costs, and evaluating financing strategies and
fiscal impacts to ensure the Plan is both technically
feasible and financially sustainable.
■ 6.1 Infrastructure and Service Needs + Costs
Sherwood will prepare a conceptual Infrastructure
Development and Services Plan to define the utility
and public service systems needed to support the
preferred land use alternatives for the Specific Plan
Area, with a focus on extending services east of
the Healdsburg Memorial Bridge. In coordination
with City Public Works and Utilities staff, we will
assess existing and future infrastructure needs
across water, wastewater, stormwater (including
low impact development opportunities), energy,
communications, transportation, greenways, and
parks, distinguishing between improvements
required for existing conditions versus future
development to support equitable cost allocation
and CEQA documentation.
We will develop high-level utility demand forecasts,
including water balance modeling based on
projected land uses, and evaluate available water
and sewer models to identify capacity constraints,
infrastructure upgrade needs, priority service areas,
and phasing strategies for utility expansion. Existing
and proposed infrastructure improvements will be
mapped in GIS and AutoCAD to integrate with City
datasets and planning frameworks.
In collaboration with City staff and project
stakeholders, Sherwood will identify required
capital improvements, explore potential funding
mechanisms, and prepare planning-level cost
estimates to inform an infrastructure financing
strategy and implementation phasing. Together,
these efforts will establish a technically sound and
actionable framework to support sustainable growth
and long-term service delivery within the Plan Area.
■ 6.2 Implementation + Financing Plan
This task evaluates the fiscal impacts of the
preferred land use alternative and identifies feasible
financing tools and funding strategies to support
longterm implementation of the Specific Plan.
Municipal Services and Revenue Analysis:
Working with the project team, LWC will conduct a
fiscal analysis (“fiscal screen”) of the preferred land use alternative. The analysis will evaluate the direct
fiscal impacts of the preferred land use alternative
to the City of Healdsburg based on current market
conditions, fiscal policies, and service expenditure
levels. It will include a forecast of stable‑year
operational impacts on General Fund accounts
and will assume a hypothetical buildout reflecting
the full development capacity of the Specific Plan
Area. This analysis will exclude enterprise funds and
special revenue funds.
Infrastructure Financing Strategy: LWC will
describe potential financing tools and other
strategies that could support the implementation
of the Specific Plan considering current financial
16 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
185 of 648
resources, funding sources, and long-term financial
sustainability. Funding strategies may include
the establishment of a special district such as an
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD)
or a Community Services District (CSD). It will also
identify relevant regional, state, or federal grants.
This content will be used in the infrastructure and
implementation chapters of the Specific Plan.
Task 6 Deliverables:
• Conceptual Infrastructure Development and
Services Plan Memo (PDF)
• Implementation + Financing Plan
Task 7 – Draft Station Area Specific
Plan
This task involves preparing a draft station
area specific plan that complies with California
Government Code and MTC’s TOC Policy,
integrating prior recommendations and policies
into zoning, land use, infrastructure, and objective
design standards. The consultant will produce an
administrative draft for staff review and a public
review draft for community input through meetings,
workshops, and online tools.
■ 7.1 Administrative Draft Station Area Specific
Plan
The project team will prepare a single Administrative
Draft Specific Plan as a visually compelling, userfriendly document that includes the vision, policies, and form-based zoning standards with objective
development criteria for buildings, streetscapes,
and site design. The Plan will integrate both
Downtown and the Waterfront to provide a cohesive
guiding vision and suite of zoning regulations. After
submitting the draft, Opticos will lead a working
session with City staff to review content, gather
feedback, and discuss any necessary edits. The
draft will cover key topics such as:
• Background: Relationship to the General Plan
and relevant policies
• Community Engagement: Summary of outreach
and feedback
• Goals and Design Principles: Includes equity
and environmental justice
• Plan Vision: Built form, land uses, placemaking,
public spaces, art, and greenery
• Housing: Typologies, compatibility, feasibility,
incentives, zoning
• Mobility + Connectivity: Multimodal networks,
street sections, traffic calming, parking analysis
• Infrastructure: Wet utilities (water and
wastewater systems), dry utilities (power,
telecommunications, and fiber), stormwater
management systems and low impact
development opportunities, and roadway
infrastructure
• Implementation: Programs, projects, phasing,
and high-level financing strategies
• Development Standards: Form-based standards
to support development
The plan will memorialize the community vision and
provide clear design direction through illustrative
diagrams, renderings, and implementation
guidance. Key content will be included in the main
document for clarity, with technical analyses in
appendices. Opticos will submit the draft as a
PDF and request consolidated, non-conflicting
comments from City staff.
■ 7.2 Public Draft Station Area Specific Plan
Based on feedback received on the Administrative
Draft, Opticos will coordinate with the project team
to prepare the Public Draft Specific Plan for public
circulation and comment at pop-up engagements
and via the project website.
■ 7.3 CAC Meeting
Agenda to include review or the Draft Plan and
solicitation of input.
■ 7.4 Community Meeting: Public Review Draft
Open House
Opticos will release the Public Review Draft of the
Specific Plan for community review and comment
at an openhouse event. A presentation will provide
an overview of the document, and both a recording
of the presentation and the draft plan will be
made available online with userfriendly options for
submitting digital comments. At the event, printed
copies of the draft and posters highlighting key
elements will be available for inperson review and
commenting via Post-It notes.
All workshop materials will be provided in both
English and Spanish, and a translator will be
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 17 Item 8.c
186 of 648
available throughout the event to support inclusive
participation for non-English speaking attendees
Event Objectives: Inform community about the draft
plan document and receive feedback needed to
finalize document.
Task 7 Deliverables:
• Administrative Draft Specific Plan (PDF)
• Public Draft Specific Plan (PDF)
• Agenda and Summary for CAC Meeting (PDF)
• Materials and Facilitation for Open House
Task 8 – General Plan + Zoning
Amendments
This task identifies necessary General Plan
amendments and prepares updated zoning
standards to ensure the Station Area Specific Plan is
fully supported and implementable through aligned
policy and regulatory frameworks.
■ 8.1 General Plan Amendment Identification
Opticos will identify necessary amendments to the
General Plan to maintain alignment with the Station
Area Specific Plan. Necessary amendments will be
cataloged in a memo.
■ 8.2 Zoning Amendments
Opticos and LWC will prepare and/or revise zoning
standards for specific land uses as necessary
to implement the Public Draft Specific Plan. The
specific scope of this task is flexible commensurate
with identified budget, and will be refined following
the creation of the Preferred Plan when the code
approach is determined. A targeted approach
could involve specific text amendments to existing
zoning, while a more holistic strategy could involve
a new overlay zone(s) for the Specific Plan area.
It is anticipated that form-based elements will
be incorporated into either strategy to promote
housing and infill development that is compatible
with the Plan vision and the existing Healdsburg
community.
Task 8 Deliverables:
• General Plan Amendments Memo (PDF)
• Zoning Amendments
Task 9 – Environmental Analysis
Environmental analysis will be conducted and, if
necessary, mitigations sufficient to eliminate the
need for project-specific review of development
proposals consistent with the Plan will be identified.
A comprehensive environmental analysis for CEQA
compliance and support projects aligned with the
Station Area Specific Plan will be performed. An
Initial Study to identify potential impacts of the
Draft Plan will determine the appropriate level of
CEQA review, utilizing prior work and the existing
applicable EIR documents to streamline the
process.
■ 9.1 CEQA Kickoff and Data Review/Initial Study
Rincon’s project manager will review project and
background information and prepare for and
attend a CEQA kickoff meeting with the project
team and City staff. Rincon will prepare an internal
review (Administrative) Draft Initial Study. All
environmental checklist findings will be supported
by data and analysis. Where applicable, impacts
will be quantified and compared to quantitative
significance thresholds. Rincon will respond to
one round of consolidated comments on the
Initial Study and prepare the final Initial Study for
publication with the NOP.
■ 9.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping
Rincon will draft the Notice of Preparation (NOP)
of a Draft EIR. We assume one round of review on
the NOP. Rincon will be responsible for circulation
of the to the State Clearinghouse and responsible
agencies as well as the required County Clerk filing.
The City will be responsible for any additional public
noticing, such as mailing to identified stakeholder
groups, placing of a newspaper ad or radius-label
mailings, though Rincon can assist with these tasks
as an option if needed. This scope of work also
assumes that Rincon will prepare a presentation for
and participate in one Scoping Meeting during the
NOP comment period.
■ 9.3 Draft EIR
Rincon Consultants will prepare an Administrative
Draft EIR which will include a detailed project
description, introduction and environmental
setting sections. an executive summary, analysis
of the environmental issue areas, a discussion of
18 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
187 of 648
up to three alternatives (including the “no project”
alternative), and other sections required by CEQA.
For the technical analysis, Rincon assumes that
impacts will be analyzed at a programmatic
level without field or survey work and up to 11
environmental topics will be analyzed in depth
in the EIR. Traffic impact analyses included in
Task 5 will inform the transportation section of
environmental documents. Only qualitative
additional transportation analyses are anticipated
in this task. Note that no quantitative evacuation
analysis is included in this scope as it is difficult to scope this effort until the development scale and
locations are better understood. We have budgeted
for two rounds of comments on the Administrative
Draft EIR. Rincon will then prepare the Public Review
Draft in Microsoft Word and PDF formats. Rincon will
draft the Notice of Availability of a Draft EIR (NOA)
and circulate the notice to the State Clearinghouse,
County Clerk, and responsible agencies.
■ 9.4 Final EIR
Upon receipt of public comments on the Public
Review Draft EIR, Rincon will prepare draft
responses to comments for City review. We assume
the Final EIR will be a standalone Responses to
Comments document that will include a list of Draft
EIR revisions and accompany the Draft EIR. This
scope of work assumes that comments received
can be adequately responded to in a maximum
of 30 Rincon professional staff hours. We have
assumed one round of review on the Responses to
Comments.
Task 9 Deliverables:
• Initial CEQA Study – Draft + Final (PDF)
• Participation in one (1) NOP Scoping Meeting
• Notice of Preparation
• Draft EIR (PDF)
• Final EIR (PDF)
Task 10 –Adoption of Final Specific
Plan
This task includes preparing the Final Draft DVSP
and supporting the public adoption process by
incorporating revisions, finalizing CEQA documents,
and assisting with staff reports, presentations, and
hearings to ensure informed decision-making.
■ 10.1 Planning Commission Hearing
Opticos will present to the Healdsburg Planning
Commission for review and approval. A staff report
and PowerPoint slid deck will be prepared and
presented at up to two (2) Planning Commission
meetings.
■ 10.2 City Council Hearings
Opticos will present the Station Area Specific Plan
to City Council for final approval. A staff report
and PowerPoint slide deck will be prepared and
presented at up to two (2) City Council meetings.
■ 10.3 Final Station Area Specific Plan
Following City Council adoption, the Opticos
team will prepare a final Station Area Specific Plan
document incorporating any text and diagram
changes directed by Healdsburg City Council.
Task 10 Deliverables:
• Presentation Materials and Attendance at two (2)
Planning Commission Hearings (one in-person,
one virtual)
• Presentation Materials and Attendance at two (2)
City Council Hearings (two in-person)
• Final Station Area Specific Plan document
Opticos was hired specifically
because of their expertise in community
engagement and form-based code
to draft a Specific Plan for the Vallco
area. Their comprehensive and
thoughtful engagement strategy and
ability to communicate alternatives
through design and visualization, were
invaluable to winning support. It was an
unprecedented process, and it was a real
pleasure to work with the Opticos team."
Aarti Shrivastava
Assistant City Manager/
Director of Community Development,
City of Cupertino, CA
Opticos is unlike any other
consultant I have worked
with. They have come up with
creative ideas that provide the
‘game changers’ that
Richmond needed.”
Richard Mitchell
Richmond Planning Director
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 19 Item 8.c
188 of 648
20 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324 TASK 1 PROJECT INITIATION +
MANAGEMENT
24 Months
1.1 Kick-Off Meeting + Site Visit
1.2 GIS Database + Project Basemap
1.3 On-Going Project Management +
MTC TOC Compliance
TASK 2 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 22 Months
2.1 Convene CAC + TAC
2.2 Community Engagment Strategy +
Project Branding
2.3 Stakeholder Interviews
2.4 Project Branding + Outreach Toolkit
2.5 Translation Services
2.6 Website Content
TASK 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 5 Months
3.1 Existing Conditions Report + Map
3.2 Community Assessment Memo
3.3 Market Demand Analysis
3.4 Affordable Housing and AntiDisplacement Strategy
3.5 CAC + TAC Meetings
3.6 Community Meeting: Existing
Conditions + Initial Visioning
TASK 4 LAND USE + CIRCULATION
ALTERNATIVES
5 Months
4.1 Building Prototype Testing +
Feasibility Analysis
4.2 CAC + TAC Meetings
4.3 Preparation of Alternatives
4.4 Popups: Hands-On Model Building
4.5 Community Workshop: Refined
Vision + Alternatives Testing
4.6 Alternatives Report
The Opticos team proposes to complete the project within 24 months, as shown below. This schedule assumes City review period of two weeks per deliverable.
Opticos will work with City staff to refine the schedule at project startup and provide updates throughout the duration of the project to complete the project within the proposed timeframe.
Our team has the capacity to deliver a consistent and high-quality project within the proposed timeline.
Project
Schedule
2 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg LEGEND Advisory Committee Meeting Community Workshop Deliverable Item 8.c
189 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 21 Month 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2324 TASK 5 LAND USE + CIRCULATION
ALTERNATIVES
5 Months
5.1 Preferred Plan Framework +
Working Session
5.2 CAC + TAC Meetings
5.3 Preferred Plan Report
5.4 Anti-Displacement Feasibility Study
5.5 Popup Engagement: Preferred Plan
5.6 Planning Commission + City
Council Meetings
TASK 6 INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING
+ IMPLEMENTATION
8 Months
6.1 Infrastructure and Service Needs +
Costs
6.2 Implementation + Financing Plan
TASK 7 DRAFT STATION AREA
SPECIFIC PLAN
8 Months
7.1 Administrative Draft Specific Plan
7.2 Public Draft Specific Plan
7.3 CAC Meeting
7.4 Community Meeting: Public Review
Draft Open House
TASK 8 GENERAL PLAN + ZONING
AMENDMENTS
4 Months
8.1 General Plan Amendment
Identification
8.2 Zoning Amendments
TASK 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 8 Months
9.1 CEQA Kickoff and Data Review/
Initial Study
9.2 NOP and Scoping
9.3 Draft EIR
9.4 Final EIR
TASK
10 ADOPTION OF FINAL SPECIFIC
PLAN
2 Mo.
10.1 Final Station Area Specific Plan
10.2 Planning Commission Hearing
10.3 City Council Hearings (up to 2)
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 3 Item 8.c
190 of 648
22 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
191 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 23 Images from past work in Healdsburg
and near SMART stations
Project Team
Qualifications
In this section
1 Opticos Design Qualifications | Project Experience
2 Lisa Wise Consulting Qualifications | Project Experience 3 Sherwood Engineering Qualifications | Project Experience 4 Fehr and Peers Qualifications | Project Experience
5 Rincon Qualifications | Project Experience
6 Plan to Place Qualifications | Project Experience
7 PlaceIt! Qualifications | Project Experience
Item 8.c
192 of 648
24 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos approaches each project with innovation
and creative problem solving in mind, we function
just as much as a think tank as a consulting firm.
To us, architecture and planning must play a role
in defining more sustainable, equitable, healthy,
compact patterns of development that improve
the quality of life for everyone. This starts with
revitalizing existing urban places, but also must
include the transformation of suburban places into
more urban ones and the creation of thoughtful,
new walkable urban communities.
As a group of like-minded designers looking to
make an impact in the world, we strive to integrate
social, environmental, and economic responsibility
into all that we do. Professionally, we’re one of
the first B Corporations and a founding California
Benefit Corporation, a revolutionary new kind of
business dedicated to a triple bottom line. Outside
of work, we shop locally, live small, and go car-free
whenever possible. The only parking issue we
experience in our office is a shortage of bike racks!
Our design solutions
emphasize the creation
of vibrant, sustainable
communities, comfortable
pedestrian environments, and
memorable places that will
withstand the test of time.”
Daniel Parolek
Principal, Opticos Design
25 150
projects across
+ 25
the United States
addressing
the increasing
demand for
walkable urban
places
years of business
One of the first B Corporations,
a business dedicated to a triple
bottom line
team members
working across
two offices
We are urban designers and architects
who believe in the transformative
power of beautiful, sustainable,
walkable communities for all.
WHO WE ARE
Opticos approaches each project with innovation
and creative problem solving in mind, we function
just as much as a think tank as a consulting firm.
To us, architecture and planning must play a role
in defining more sustainable, equitable, healthy,
compact patterns of development that improve
the quality of life for everyone. This starts with
revitalizing existing urban places, but also must
include the transformation of suburban places into
more urban ones and the creation of thoughtful,
new walkable urban communities.
As a group of like-minded designers looking to
make an impact in the world, we strive to integrate
social, environmental, and economic responsibility
into all that we do. Professionally, we’re one of
the first B Corporations and a founding California
Benefit Corporation, a revolutionary new kind of
business dedicated to a triple bottom line. Outside
of work, we shop locally, live small, and go car-free
whenever possible. The only parking issue we
experience in our office is a shortage of bike racks!
Our design solutions
emphasize the creation
of vibrant, sustainable
communities, comfortable
pedestrian environments, and
memorable places that will
withstand the test of time.”
Daniel Parolek
Principal, Opticos Design
25 150
projects across
+ 25
the United States
addressing
the increasing
demand for
walkable urban
places
years of business
One of the first B Corporations,
a business dedicated to a triple
bottom line
team members
working across
two offices
We are urban designers and architects
who believe in the transformative
power of beautiful, sustainable,
walkable communities for all.
WHO WE ARE
Item 8.c
193 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 25 Innovative. Passionate. Changemakers.
Our award-winning work at the architecture, neighborhood, and citywide scales follows the principles inherent in the Charter of the New Urbanism. This work includes a Gold Nugget-winning and LEED-ND Phase 1-Certified Hercules Waterfront District, CNU Charter Awardwinning Seaside Beachfront and Town Square Plan and L’Enfant Awardwinning master planning work in Gabon, Africa.
Our work spans across
the United States (and
beyond!), with offices in:
Berkeley, CA
Chicago, IL
Item 8.c
194 of 648
26 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Being a B Corporation
has helped us develop
a clear framework
upon which we found
our day-to-day and
long-term business
planning decisions. At
the end of the day, we
are excited about both
the work that we do
and the environment
we have created in our
office that we are all
committed to."
Karen Parolek
Principal, Opticos Design
Committed to a Triple Bottom Line
Since our founding in 2000, Opticos has been a different kind of company.
We believe business can be a power for good, to improve lives and sustain our planet. So, in 2007, Opticos became one of the 82 founding B Corporations.
What is a B Corporation?
A B Corporation (B Corp) is a certified business that meets verified standards for social and environmental performance, and committed to creating benefits for all stakeholders, not just shareholders.
Why We Became a B Corporation
If one business can make a difference, just imagine what a community of businesses can do. Opticos became a B Corporation to share our passion for sustainability and social responsibility with like-minded businesses.
Business Development with the
Triple Bottom Line in Mind
B CORPORATION
Learn more at bcorp.com
B. FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
Item 8.c
195 of 648
Business Development with the Triple Bottom Line in Mind The business decisions we make matter just as much as the design decisions we ask our clients to make. Our triple-bottom-line approach means we think about people, the planet, and profit in every project we take on. Choosing the right work is essential. We focus on projects that are socially responsible, environmentally sustainable, and economically sound, helping create vibrant, walkable, and diverse places.
Addressing Environmental Justice and Social Equity
Opticos Design has partnered with the nonprofit CivicWell (formerly Local Government Commission) to provide design and planning services to traditionally underserved communities, including unincorporated rural communities, Native American tribal populations, and small towns with large immigrant and farmworker populations. Most of these projects are funded by grants, allowing these communities to address planning and health-related issues that they might not otherwise be able to afford.
Influencing our Day-to-Day Business Operation Decisions Our status as a B Corporation influences our daily operations. We purchase our office supplies from Give Something Back, a local business and B Corporation that supports the community by donating an average of seventy-five percent of their profits to local nonprofit organizations. We also have a profit-sharing plan that designates a portion of our own profits to the Opticos staff and another portion to employee-selected charities.
We Practice What We Preach
At Opticos, we choose to live sustainably because we believe in it, not because it is the latest trend. Our office is located in Downtown Berkeley, easily accessible by transit and bicycle. The majority of Opticos staff take transit, walk, or bike to commute to work.
Item 8.c
196 of 648
28 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos Founder Daniel
Parolek authored the
book "Missing Middle
Housing: Thinking Big
and Building Small to
Respond to Today's
Housing Crisis."
Missing Middle Housing: A Tool to
Address the Housing Crisis
Opticos Design is well known as the architects of the
Missing Middle Housing movement. In 2010, Opticos
Principal Dan Parolek coined the term, in 2014 we
created the Missing Middle Housing diagram, and in
2015 the company launched a free online resource
for all: missingmiddlehousing.com. Hundreds of
thousands of visitors visit the website each year,
and it was voted one of Planetizen’s top 10 Planning
Websites of 2019.
We are driving a radical paradigm shift, urging
cities, elected officials, urban planners, architects
and builders to fundamentally rethink the way
they design, locate, regulate, and develop homes.
Americans want and need more diverse housing
choices in walkable neighborhoods; homes that are
attainable, sustainable, and beautifully designed.
Daniel and the Opticos team have given hundreds
of presentations and webinars on this topic. In
CREATORS OF A MOVEMENT
2017, Opticos was selected by AARP to educate AARP
members about the value of walkable living and Missing
Middle Housing choices. We are passionate about
educating communities about this topic.
Missing Middle Housing has become a movement that
is informing housing solutions across the county and
internationally.
B. FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
Item 8.c
197 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 29 Missing Middle Housing
provides homebuilders
with a practical way to
address changing market
and demographic trends—
diversifying their portfolios
and investing in communities
in the process.”
Amy Albert
Editor-in-Chief, Professional Builder
Public Sector Services
Opticos Design works with public agencies, including Cities and Counties, to remove barriers and enable Missing Middle Housing.
Specifically, we offer Missing Middle Scans™ to identify barriers in Comprehensive Plans, housing policies, Specific Plans, and area plan. We then suggest targeted zoning fixes or comprehensive updates to zoning codes and/ or plans for areas such as downtownadjacent neighborhoods, areas transitioning from Transit-Oriented Development, and corridors focused on enabling this range of housing choices.
Press: Podcasts & Radio:
Bungalows on the Lake at Prairie Queen (Papillion, Nebraska) Designers of the nation's first exclusively “missing middle” housing neighborhood Item 8.c
198 of 648
30 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 2008: Driehaus Form-Based Code
Award for the Downtown Benicia
Mixed-Use Master Plan & FBC
2008: Planetizen names FormBased Codes in the Top 10
planning books of 2008
1999 Tony Perez
writes his first FBC
2000: Opticos hired
as extension of city
staff to administer
California’s first FBC:
The Central Hercules
District
2000: Opticos
proposes the first
FBC for Santa Barbara
County, CA
2004: Karen and Daniel
Parolek are Founding Board
Members of the Form-Based
Codes Institute
2008: Released Form-Based Codes,
the first comprehensive book on the
subject
Accomplishments and Awards
Downtown
Plan and
FBC,
Benicia, CA
NEIGHBORHOOD
Diverse Scales of
FBCs by Opticos
Central
Petaluma
Smart Code,
Petaluma,
CA
Sonoma
Boulevard
Specific Plan
and FBC,
Vallejo, CA
Richmond Livable
Corridors
Plan and FBC,
Richmond, CA
Flagstaff Code
Update and FBC,
Flagstaff , AZ
Community
Development
Plans and FBC,
Kaua’i County, HI
O p t i c o s D e s i g n , I n c . • 1 2 8 5 G i l m a n S t r e e t • B e r k e l e y , C a l i f o r n i a 9 4 7 0 6 • 5 1 0 . 5 5 8 . 6 9 5 7 • o p t i c o s d e s i g n . c o m Downtown Master Plan and Form-Based Code Opticos Design, Inc.
Benicia, CA Winner of the 2008 Driehaus Form-Based Code Award Project: Urban design, planning,
and Form-Based Code for an 88-acre
historic downtown located along the
Carquinez Strait in Benicia, California.
Program: Opticos Design led a
multi-disciplinary team through a
6-month public process to produce a
Master Plan and Form-Based Code
for a historically contentious planning area. The process began with a 2-day community visioning workshop
designed to gather stakeholder input
and identify the most important planning issues. This was followed by an intense, week-long community design
charrette that produced vision plans for
the downtown area.
The Master Plan provides a set of design recommendations that seek to revitalize problematic areas and maintain the centrality of the First Street mixeduse district and link it physically and programmatically to the nearby artist
community in the Arsenal that has a
national draw. The Form-Based Code
amends existing zoning and provides
regulatory tools that aim to preserve
the City’s remaining historic building
fabric and ensure that new construction
is compatible in scale and form.
The Plan was formally adopted in September of 2007.
Client: The City of Benicia, California
BENICIA CITY LIMITS
BENICIA CITY LIMITS
BENICIA CITY LIMITS BENICIA CITY LIMITS
BENICIA CITY LIMITS
BENICIA CITY LIMITS
STRAIT
CARQUINEZ
MARINA
BENICIA
780
BAY
SOUTHAMPTON
GOLDENSLOPES
ST.CATHERINE'S
ST
E. 2ND ST
'P' ST
E. 5TH ST HILLCREST AVE
'W' ST
LINDA VISTA
'E' ST
'K' ST
ST
JACKSON
GRANT
ADAMS ST
POLK
ST
RD
1ST ST
'C' ST
'D' ST
E. 2ND ST
PT BENICIA
'B' ST
'E' ST
E. 5TH ST
E. 6TH ST
'J' ST
'I' ST
'H' ST
E. 7TH ST
'G' ST
JEFF ERS ON
GRA NT
ST
ST JEFFERSON ST
TYLER ST
LI NC OL N
BAYSHORE RD
WASH IN GTO N ST
BAYSHORE RD
CT SEMPLE
EAST
ST
W. 4TH ST
MILITARY MILITARY
EAST
BUCHANAN
OAK
ST
LINDO
VECINO
CASA GRANDA ST
VIEWMONT ST VIEWMONT ST
TIERRA
LINDO ST
AVE
'S' ST
ST
CT
RINCONADA
PACIFICA
CT
FRANCISCA
VARNI
AUGUSTINE
1ST ST
TAMARA
CT
RD
VIA ALTA
VIA MEDIA
GRANDE
LA
PRENDA
VIEW M ON T
CT
ST.FRANCIS CT ST.
AU GU STINE
CT
E. 2ND ST
INCLI NE
'O' ST
VISTA CT
RIVER HILL DR CI R
O' H ARA
D
R
'N' ST
DR
MARINA PL
'K' ST
'F' ST
'G' ST
1ST ST
'I' ST
'H' ST
W. 2ND ST W. 2ND ST
W. 3RD ST W. 3RD ST
'J' ST
WEST MILITARY
E. 3RD ST WY
'L' ST
'N' ST
E. 4TH ST
'N' ST
'O' ST RD
VILLAGE LN
PARK RD
BAYSHORE RD
FIR RD
CAMEL
ST
BU EN A
CASA
PL
'M'
'T' ST
'S'
DR
SHANN
CT
ON
DE BENEDETTI
CT
WY
SHERMAN
CT
ALMA
SOL DEL CORTE
CORTE
E. 3RD ST
DR DR
SUNRISE
DALE
GOLDENHILL
OLIVE BRANCH
RANKIN WY
SUISUN OLD HILLCREST AVE
SEAVIEW
CANYON
DR
ARBOR
HAVENHILL
ARDMORE
CT
PARK RD
E. 2ND ST
CLE ARV IE W CIR
W A R WICK DR
TEN NY
DR
SEAVIEW DR 1 ST ST BRA N DON
RD
LA
C R U Z
AVE
D O R A DO
EL BON IT O W Y
DE
CE
L
NT RO
RIVERVIEW TER
BA YVI E
KIM
CT
SHIRLEY DR
BRIDG
EV IEW
CT
DR
EDNA
CT
VALERIE
CT
E LL IE CT
SUSAN
CT
LORI
RAYMOND
VISTA CT
SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD
W
WY
CT
CT CT
CT
CT
PL
AVE
VISTA GRANDE
CT CT
ST
CT
DR
HARBOR
ST
PL
MOUNT VIEW
TER
HOSPITAL
E. 5TH ST
E. 3RD ST
BENICIA - MARTINEZ BRIDGE FREEWAY
BRIDGE
VIEW
PARK CEMETERY
OVERLOOK
PARK
CITY
PARK CITY HALL
POST
OFFICE
PARK
CIVIC
CENTER
YAC POOLROBERT
SEMPLE
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PARK
FITZGERALD
FIELD
MARIA FIELD
RIBERO FIELD
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
PRIORY
SCHOOL
SOLANO SQUARE
WASTE WATER
TREATMENT
PLANT
BENICIA
PARK
TURNBULL
CITY
CORP
YARD
ST. DOMINIC'S
CEMETERY
ARMORY
FRANCESCA
TERRACE
PARK
MILITARY
CEMETERY
COMMANDANT'S
HOUSE AND
CLOCKTOWER
MUSEUM
PORT OF BENICIA WHARF
LIBRARY
MARINA CONDOMIUMS
RESERVOIR
E. CHFirst St.
A Guide for Planners, Urban Designers,
Municipalities, and Developers
Form-Based Codes
Daniel G. Parolek, AIA • Karen Parolek • Paul C. Crawford, FAICP Forewords by Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk and Stefanos Polyzoides 2002: Pleasant Hill BART
Form-Based Code proforma Design Review
2000 2005
Leaders in Zoning Reform
and Form-Based Coding
Extensive expertise + thought leadership
PIONEERS IN PRACTICE
• Decades of form-based coding + happy clients:
With over 25+ years of experience and more than 75+
completed form-based code (FBC) projects, Opticos
Design has a long track record of delivering results for clients who seek us out for our unique expertise.
• Diverse project types and zoning solutions: The firm
has worked on projects ranging from downtowns and
neighborhoods to citywide, countywide, and multijurisdictional codes. This broad experience ensures we can handle projects of any scale.
• Pioneering + authoritative expertise: Opticos is one
of the original and most influential leaders in formbased coding. The firm's principals wrote the definitive book on the topic, co-founded the Form-Based Codes
Institute, and established many of the best practice
standards used by others today.
• Award-winning work: Opticos' FBCs have been
recognized with numerous national awards, including the Driehaus Form-Based Code Award, National APA Awards,
and the Congress for New Urbanism Charter Award.
B. FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
Item 8.c
199 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 31 2013: CNU Charter
Award for Richmond
Livable Corridors
2014: Opticos completes
its first international FBC
in Gabon, Africa, working
with the Prince’s Foundation
to implement a locallyand culturally-calibrated
sustainable growth strategy for
the capital city of Libreville
2012: Opticos rewrites
the country’s first
adopted SmartCode
for the Central
Petaluma District
2014: CNU Charter Award
Grand Prize for the Best
Planning Tool or Process:
Cincinnati Citywide FBC
2013: Daniel Parolek
Completes two-part
Zoning Practice issues on
misconceptions of FBCs
2011: Livermore Model
Hybrid Citywide Code wins
Driehaus FBC Award
Angondje New
Town Plan and
SmartCode,
Gabon, Africa
Citywide FBC and
Comp Plan Bridge,
Cincinnati, OH
Citywide Zoning Code
Update for Corridors,
Columbus, OH
Multi-jurisdictional
Land Development
Code and FBC,
Port Royal, Beaufort
County, SC
s
s
sh
t
ity
s
Akanda SmartCode | 2-9
Zones Regulating Plan
© Copyright 2010
Opticos Design, Inc.
1285 Gilman Street
Berkeley, CA 94706
Beaufort County Multi-Jurisdictional FBC
19th of July 2010
Prepared for:
Beaufort County
City of Beaufort
Town of Port Royal
Place Types Colored by Type
0 1 mile 2 miles
Map Legend
Rural Crossroad
Place Type Assembly
Corner Store
Hamlet Place Type Assembly
Village Place Type Assembly
Town Place Type Assembly
City Type Assembly
County Boundary
Municipality or
Community Plan Boundary
Water
Broad River
May River
Colleton River
Coosaw River
Morgan River
Trenchards River
Bull River
Combahee River
Beaufort River
Atlantic Ocean
Port Royal
Sound
Calibogue Sound
Saint Helena
Sound
Saint Helena
Island
Hilton Head
Island
Daufuskie
Island
Palmetto
Bluffs
Town of
Bluffton
Alljoy CP
Old Town
Buckwalter
Place
Pritchardville
Bull Island
Barataria
Island
Pinckney
Island
Daws
Island
Lemon
Island
Spring
Island
Bellinger
Neck
Callawassie
Island
Dale CP
Sheldon CP
Yemassee
Big Estates CP
ACE Basin
Seabrook CP
Clarendon
Plantation
Laurel Bay
Burton
Habersham
City of
Beaufort
Town
of Port
Royal
Mink
Point
USMC Air
Station
Lady's
Island
Parris Island
Coosaw
Island
Dataw
Island
Eddings
Point
Corners
Community
CP
Penn Center
Land's End
CP
Warsaw
Island
Shell Point
CP
Grays
Hill
Fripp Island
Harbour Island
Page Title Goes Here
Bridging Cincinnati’s Form-Based Code and the Comprehensive Plan Locate & Prioritize Walkable Urban Neighborhoods
LOCATE
WALKABLE
URBAN PLACES
MAKE THEM A
PRIORITY
DEFINE
THEIR UNIQUE
ASPECTS AND
FORM
UTILIZE THEM
AS A
FRAMEWORK -› -› -›
Walnut Hills
Oakley
Corryville
Roselawn
Hartwell
Northside
Carthage
Clifton
East Price Hill
Clifton Heights
College Hill
OTR Main Street
Madisonville
West End
OTRVine Street
Mt.Washington
EastWalnut Hills
West Price Hill (B)
Hyde Park
Westwood (A)
North Avondale
Mt.Airy
Pleasant Ridge
Evanston (B)
West Price Hill (A) Columbia Tusculum
Kennedy Heights
O'Bryonville
Hyde Park East
Mt. Lookout
Avondale (A)
Avondale (B)
Bond Hill
Evanston (A) CampWashington
Lower Price Hill
Mt.Adams
Westwood (B)
Downtown
I-75
I-71
I-74
SR 562
I-275
I-471 HIGHWAY RAMP
I-75 I-75
RIVER
READING
COLUMBIA
GLENWAY
KELLOGG
6TH
COLERAIN
CENTRAL
GILBERT
MONTGOMERY
NOTLI MAH
PADDOCK
EASTERN
7TH
9TH
SEYMOUR
ELM
LINWOOD
VINE
PETE ROSE
RIVERSIDE
BEECHMONT
MEHRING
CARTHAGE
3RD
EDWARDS
PLUM
STATE
SMITH
5TH
LUDLOW AVENUE
EDMONDSON
VINE
SMITH
VINE
BEECHMONT
READING
CENTRAL
VINE
ERIE
MADISON
8TH
QUEEN CITY
HARRISON
DANA
WINTON
MCMILLAN
DELTA
STATE
VICTORY
BEEKMAN
MITCHELL
5TH
SPRING GROVE
RIDGE
MONTANA
WILLIAM H TAFT
ROSS
DELHI
SEYMOUR
WESTWOOD NORTHERN
DALTON
3RD
RED BANK
LUDLOW
CLIFTON
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR
MAIN
HOPPLE
LANGDON FARM
WINCHELL
CARLL
SALEM
MARBURG
NORTH BEND
WEST FORK
GALBRAITH
WESTERN
TOWNSHIP
SYCAMORE
TORRENCE
9TH
WESTERN HILLS
FREEMAN
CUMMINS
CLEVESWARSAW
COLERAIN AVENUE
BANNING
CAMARGO
JEFFERSON
GALBRAITH
SPRING GROVE
NORTH BEND
HARRISON
GALBRAITH
SALEM
NORTH BEND
VINE
RIDGE
ESTE
8TH
KIRBY
GEST
WERK
HILLSIDE
BOUDINOT
EASTERN
WILMER
GRAY
4TH
BALTIMORE
DALY
CLIFTON
BURNET
FOREST
QUEBEC
MEHRING
WOOSTER
BRAMBLE
ROSS
GRAND
CENTER HILL
MCHENRY
RAPID RUN
RACE
CORBLY
WEST FORK
SUNSET
WARSAW
ERIE
LINCOLN
BROTHERTON
ROBERTSON
VICTORY
ARGUS
ANTHONYWAYNE
TENNESSEE
GROESBECK
LINN
SECTION
WHETSEL
NRUBUA
FOLEY
ELBERON
MCALPIN
EUCLID
ELMORE
PLAINVILLE
BURNEY
3RD
LOSANTIVILLE
SUMMIT
DALTON
MARKBREIT
WOODBURN
ASHTREE
TOWNE
WOOLPER
OVERLOOK
PEDRETTI
PARK
EDWARDS
JEFFERSON
MITCHELL
DUCK CREEK
STANLEY
KEMPER
SETTLE
MONTANA
SUTTON
RED BANK
EDEN PARK
JESSUP
SHEPHERD
ROSEMONT
ERKENBRECHER
PHYLLIS
FRANCIS
BERKSHIRE
SHEPHERD CREEK
FOLEY
LINN
EDEN PARK
DUCK CREEK
SUTTON
KEMPER
CLIFTON
SUMMIT
FOLEY
SUTTON SUTTON
Springfield Twp
St. Bernard
Elmwood
Place
Norwood
Anderson Twp
Arlington
Hts
Place Types Key (¼ mile Ped Shed)
Urban Center
Urban Neighborhood
Traditional Neighborhood
½
MILE ¼
Geographic Principles | 90
Walnut Hills
Oakley
Corryville
Roselawn
Hartwell
Northside
Carthage
Clifton
East Price Hill
Clifton Heights
College Hill
OTR Main Street
Madisonville
West End
OTR Vine Street
Mt. Washington
East Walnut Hills
West Price Hill (B)
Hyde Park
Westwood (A)
North Avondale
Mt. Airy
Pleasant Ridge
Evanston (B)
West Price Hill (A) Columbia Tusculum
Kennedy Heights
O'Bryonville
Hyde Park East
Mt. Lookout
Avondale (A) Avondale (B)
Bond Hill
Evanston (A) Camp Washington
Lower Price Hill
Mt. Adams
Westwood (B)
Downtown
I-75
I-71
I-74
SR 562
I-275
I-471 HIGHWAY RAMP
I-75 I-75
RIVER
READING
COLUMBIA
GLENWAY
KELLOGG
6TH
COLERAIN
CENTRAL
GILBERT
MONTGOMERY
HAMILTON
PADDOCK
EASTERN
7TH
9TH
SEYMOUR
ELM
LINWOOD
VINE
PETE ROSE
RIVERSIDE
BEECHMONT
MEHRING
CARTHAGE
3RD
EDWARDS
PLUM
STATE
SMITH
5TH
LUDLOW AVENUE
EDMONDSON
VINE
SMITH
VINE
BEECHMONT
READING
CENTRAL
VINE
ERIE
MADISON
8TH
QUEEN CITY
HARRISON
DANA
WINTON
MCMILLAN
DELTA
STATE
VICTORY
BEEKMAN
MITCHELL
5TH
SPRING GROVE
RIDGE
MONTANA
WILLIAM H TAFT
ROSS
DELHI
SEYMOUR
WESTWOOD NORTHERN
DALTON
3RD
RED BANK
LUDLOW
CLIFTON
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR
MAIN
HOPPLE
LANGDON FARM
WINCHELL
CARLL
SALEM
MARBURG
NORTH BEND
WEST FORK
GALBRAITH
WESTERN
TOWNSHIP
SYCAMORE
TORRENCE
9TH
WESTERN HILLS
FREEMAN
CUMMINS
CLEVES WARSAW
COLERAIN AVENUE
BANNING
CAMARGO
JEFFERSON
GALBRAITH
SPRING GROVE
NORTH BEND
HARRISON
GALBRAITH
SALEM
NORTH BEND
VINE
RIDGE
ESTE
8TH
KIRBY
GEST
WERK
HILLSIDE
BOUDINOT
EASTERN
WILMER
GRAY
4TH
BALTIMORE
DALY
CLIFTON
BURNET
FOREST
QUEBEC
MEHRING
WOOSTER
BRAMBLE
ROSS
GRAND
CENTER HILL
MCHENRY
RAPID RUN
RACE
CORBLY
WEST FORK
SUNSET
WARSAW
ERIE
LINCOLN
BROTHERTON
ROBERTSON
VICTORY
ARGUS
ANTHONY WAYNE
TENNESSEE
GROESBECK
LINN
SECTION
WHETSEL
AUBURN
FOLEY
ELBERON
MCALPIN
EUCLID
ELMORE
PLAINVILLE
BURNEY
3RD
LOSANTIVILLE
SUMMIT
DALTON
MARKBREIT
WOODBURN
ASHTREE
TOWNE
WOOLPER
OVERLOOK
PEDRETTI
PARK
EDWARDS
JEFFERSON
MITCHELL
DUCK CREEK
STANLEY
KEMPER
SETTLE
MONTANA
SUTTON
RED BANK
EDEN PARK
JESSUP
SHEPHERD
ROSEMONT
ERKENBRECHER
PHYLLIS
FRANCIS
BERKSHIRE
SHEPHERD CREEK
FOLEY
LINN
EDEN PARK
DUCK CREEK
SUTTON
KEMPER
CLIFTON
SUMMIT
FOLEY
SUTTON SUTTON
µ 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0.25
Miles
Legend
Neighborhood Centers
Urban Center*
Urban Neighborhood*
Traditional Neighborhood*
Springfield Twp
St. Bernard
Elmwood
Place
Norwood
Anderson Twp
Sayler Park
RIVER
HILLSIDE
OTR Main Street
OTR Vine Street
Downtown
I-71
I-75
HIGHWAY RAMP
I-75
7TH
9TH ELM
CENTRAL
PETE ROSE
MEHRING
GILBERT
3RD
6TH
PLUM
READING
SMITH
5TH
COLUMBIA
BROADWAY
EZZARD CHARLES
CENTRAL
PLUM
VINE
5TH
6TH
3RD
MAIN
SYCAMORE
LIBERTY
9TH
PETE ROSE
BROADWAY BROADWAY
5TH
4TH
RACE
WALNUT
EGGLESTON
MEHRING
PIKE
SYCAMORE
6TH
Arlington
Hts
For neighborhood centers that
need to Transform to become
more walkable:
• Structures do not address the
street in a consistent pattern
nor do they have a consistent
size or character, some
properties are set farther back
with parking in front.
• Parking location varies
throughout the district but
is mostly front yard parking.
There are no consolidated lots
or structures.
• Pedestrians are not buffered
from traffic and do not feel safe
walking due to curb cuts or
lack of a tree lawn, landscaping,
street furniture, or on-street
parking.
• There may be some
neighborhood services and
amenities but they may not
be sufficiently diverse or
comprehensive to meet daily
needs.
• There is no defined community
gathering space in the NBD.
• The NBD may be too large
to maintain its uses, has
vacancies, does not have visible
boundaries, and pedestrians are
not able to walk to end to end
without an unusual break in the
pattern due to either building
pattern, vacancies, and street
thoroughfare design.
The primary objective for the
Transform neighborhood centers
is to target major opportunities
for large-scale changes, such as
infill, redevelopment, and public
improvements. The character of
the area is intended to completely
change.
Cincinnati has 21 neighborhood
centers classified as areas to
Transform: Avondale (A), Avondale
(B), Bond Hill, Camp Washington,
Carthage, East Price Hill, Evanston
(A), Evanston (B), Hartwell,
Kennedy Heights, Lower Price
Hill, Madisonville, Mt. Washington,
North Avondale, Roselawn, Walnut
Hills, West End, West Price Hill (B),
Westwood (A), and Westwood (B).
1 Cincinnati’s Neighborhood Framework
2010: Tony
teaches first FBC
course at UCLA
2014: Cincinnati
wins 2014 APA
Daniel Burnham
Award
2015: Beaufort County
Multi-Jurisdiction Code
wins Driehaus Award
2019: Kaua'i wins
2019 APA Daniel
Burnham Award
REGION
2010 2015
Innovative, effective approach + proven process
• "Extract the DNA": Rather than applying a one-sizefits-all model, Opticos analyzes a community's unique physical characteristics—its "DNA"—to develop tailored
standards that reinforce local character.
• Focus on built results: We focus on creating usable,
graphic, and effective codes that lead to predictable
build-outs and deliver the intended outcomes for
communities.
• Code design testing(Test Fits): Once a code is
drafted, we use our design and experience with
developer clients to test the code in local conditions. • Locally-specific solutions: For example, Cincinnati’s code had slope standards and a Corner Store
Ordinance to enable the use of existing buildings that
had been zoned with a single family district in the past.
Noteworthy projects include
• Code Diagnoses for Denver, Oklahoma City, and Austin. • Flagstaff, AZ Land Development Code (LDC) Update.
This project created a model hybrid approach to the
LDC that replaced an overly complex performancebased system.
Item 8.c
200 of 648
32 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos Design brings its 25+ years of zoning and
form-based code experience across the U.S. to prepare
Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS)
for over a dozen cities. ODDS began in California to help communities reach their regional housing goals while
delivering buildings and designs that fit their context and location in a streamlined review process. It's a natural evolution of Form-Based Codes, optimizing the permit
and design process for projects that already align with a community's housing goals. We refine or replace existing zoning to improve housing yield, built form, and increase usability rather than adding another layer of regulations.
We customize your standards for your context
• Develop a menu of design and development standards
for you to choose from depending on your housing
goals and community expectations.
• Work with you upfront to understand what your
community wants the standards to make.
• Test the standards through the process to verify it
makes what’s expected and prevent what’s not wanted.
We begin with a Placetypes Analysis based on existing
built forms. Placetypes are identified and analyzed
according to characteristics such as height, setbacks, mix of uses, off-street parking location, and building types.
These placetypes are mapped across the jurisdiction to
specify where sets of objective standards would apply.
Streamline Implementation
with Objective Design
Standards
EVOLVING FORM-BASED CODES FOR IMPACT
Example of Placetypes Analysis
Residential
A cross-town connecting thoroughfare
with house-scale housing choices in
detached buildings setback from the
street.
Building Form:
House-Scale
Detached
House-Scale Building Types:
House, Apartment Building Medium
Building Front Setbacks: Mostly Deep
Building Height: One-to-Two Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Front, Side and Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Limited-to-No Mix of Uses
Physical Extent: Multiple Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Residential/Mixed-Use Small
A cross-town connecting thoroughfare
with various housing, shopping, civic
and/or employment uses in a mix of
house-scale and block-scale, detached
buildings mostly setback from the
street.
Building Form:
Mostly House-Scale
Detached
House-Scale Building Types: House
Block-Scale Building Types:
Commercial Building, Civic Building
Building Front Setbacks:
Mostly Medium-to-Deep,
Few Small-to-None
Building Height: One-to-Two Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Front, Side and Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Horizontal
Physical Extent: Five Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Residential/Mixed-Use Medium
A cross-town connecting thoroughfare
with various housing, shopping, and/
or employment uses in a mix of housescale and block-scale, mostly detached buildings near and setback from the
street.
Building Form:
Mix of House-Scale and Block-Scale
Mostly Detached
House-Scale Building Types:
House, Multiplex
Block-Scale Building Types:
Apartment Building Large, Commercial
Building, Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks: Small-to-Deep
Building Height: Mostly One Story,
Up to Two Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Front, Side and Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Horizontal
Physical Extent: Multiple Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Commercial/Mixed-Use Small
A cross-town connecting thoroughfare
with various housing, shopping, and/or
employment uses in detached, blockscale buildings setback from the street.
Building Form:
Block-Scale
Detached
Block-Scale Building Types:
Civic Building, Commercial Building
Building Front Setbacks:
Medium-to-Deep
Building Height: Mostly Two Stories,
Up to Three Stories
Off-Street Parking Location: Front and
Side of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Horizontal
Physical Extent: Two Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Commercial/Mixed-Use Medium
A cross-town connecting thoroughfare
with various housing, shopping, and/or
employment uses in a mix of attached
and detached house-scale and blockscale buildings at or near the street.
Building Form:
Mix of House Scale and Block-Scale
Attached and Detached
House-Scale Building Types: House,
Multiplex, Apartment Building Medium
Block-Scale Building Types: Apartment
Building Large, Commercial Building,
Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks: Mostly Small
Building Height:
Mostly One-to-Two Stories,
Up to Three Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Mostly Side and Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Horizontal
Physical Extent: Multiple Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Corridors
Place Types and Building Types Atlas for Marin County — April 21, 2020 Marin County Objective Design and Development Standards — Opticos Design, Inc. © 2020 7 Village Center
1 block of attached and detached
house-scale and block-scale buildings
at or near the sidewalk with a nonresidential ground floor and few buildings with a second story.
Building Form:
Mostly Block-Scale
Mostly Attached
House-Scale Building Types: House
Block-Scale Building Types:
Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks: None-to-Small
Building Height: Mostly One Story,
Up to Two Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Rear and Side of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Horizontal
Physical Extent: One Intersection
T3 T4 T5
Centers
Main Street 1 Small
Up to 3 blocks of attached and
detached house-scale and block-scale
buildings at or near the sidewalk with
a non-residential ground floor and few
buildings with a second story.
Building Form:
Mix of House-Scale and Block-Scale
Mostly Detached
House-Scale Building Types: House
Block-Scale Building Types:
Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks: Mostly
None-to-Small
Building Height: Mostly One Story,
Up to Two Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Side and Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Horizontal
Physical Extent: Up to 3 Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Main Street 1 Medium
Up to 3 blocks of attached and
detached medium block-scale buildings
at or near the sidewalk with a nonresidential ground floor and several buildings with a second story and few
with a third story.
Building Form:
Block-Scale
Mostly Attached
Block-Scale Building Types:
Commercial Building, Civic Building,
Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks:
None-to-Small
Building Height: Mix of One-to-Two
Stories, Up to Three Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Mostly Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Horizontal
Physical Extent: Up to 3 Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Main Street 2
3 or more blocks of mostly attached,
block-scale and few house-scale
buildings at or near the sidewalk with a
non-residential ground floor and several
buildings with a second story.
Building Form:
Mostly Block-Scale
Mostly Attached
House-Scale Building Types:
House
Block-Scale Building Types:
Commercial Building,
Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks: None
Building Height:
Mix of One-to-Two Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Mostly Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Vertical
Physical Extent: 3 or more Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Urban Center
Several blocks of mostly attached blockscale and few house-scale buildings at or near the sidewalk with a nonresidential ground floor and several buildings with a second story.
Building Form:
Mostly Block-Scale
Mostly Attached
House-Scale Building Types:
House, Multiplex
Block-Scale Building Types:
Commercial Building,
Main Street Building
Building Front Setbacks: None
Building Height:
Mix of One-to-Two Stories,
Up to Three Stories
Off-Street Parking Location:
Mostly Rear of Lot
Mix of Uses: Mostly Vertical
Physical Extent: Multiple Blocks
T3 T4 T5
Place Types and Building Types Atlas for Marin County — April 21, 2020 Marin County Objective Design and Development Standards — Opticos Design, Inc. © 2020 8 Item 8.c
201 of 648
25.02.080 Downtown Edge (DE)
General note: the illustrations above are intended to provide a brief overview of the zone and are descriptive in nature.
A. Intent
A walkable district of medium-to-large footprint, high intensity mixed-use buildings and housing choices, supporting retail, food, and services.
The following are allowed form elements in the zone.
House-Scale Buildings: Side Court,
Medium Courtyard
Block-Scale Buildings: Large Multiplex,
and Large Courtyard
Up to 4 Stories without Community
Benefit Project; Up to 6 stories with
Community Benefit Project
Primarily Attached Buildings Frontage Types: Forecourt and Gateway; Dooryard and Stoop on
Secondary Front; Maker Shopfront,
Shopfront, Terrace, Gallery, and
Arcade on Ground Floor Commercial
Frontages
Medium-to-Large Main Building
Footprint
None-to-Small Front Setbacks
None-to-Small Interior Setbacks
Public Review Draft – June 23, 2023 Santa Barbara Objective Design and Development Standards 35 Objective Design and
Development Standards
Santa Barbara, CA
June 2023
Zone Map
MONTECITO
DE LA VINA
CABRILLO
FIGUEROA
COTA
SANTA BARBARA
STATE
CASTILLO
LAS POSITAS
HWY 101
GUTIERREZ
DE LA GUERRA
HALEY
VICTORIA
SOLA
ANAPAMU
CANON PERDIDO
ORTEGA
CARRILLO
ANACAPA
MILPAS
CLIFF
YANONALI
CHAPALA
MISSION
FOOTHILL
COAST VILLAGE
Esri, DeLorme, NaturalVue
Legend
City Boundary
ODDS Zones
Downtown Core (DC)
Downtown Edge (DE)
Mixed-Use Corridor (MUC)
Neighborhood Large (N.L)
Neighborhood Medium (N.M)
Note:
Development projects located in Historic
Districts, Landmarks Districts, or
Potential Historic Districts are limited to
the architectural styles required for that
district, as described in either Chapter
30.57 (Landmark District and Historic
District Overlay Zone), or the City’s
Historic Resource Guidelines, as
applicable. If an architectural style is
required in a Historic District, Landmarks
District, or Potential Historic District, but
is not available in Chapter 6
(Architectural Design) of the ODDS, it is
not allowed to be approved under this
Title.
Title 25: Objective Design and
Development Standards
Public Review Draft
Prepared for:
Santa Barbara, California
June 23, 2023
Review Note:
References to certain
Chapters and Sections of the
Title 30 Zoning Ordinance
are pending adoption of
amendments to Title 30. All
applicable Municipal Code
references will be updated
prior to adoption of Title 25.
Marin County Objective Design Standards Toolkit. Opticos Design worked with Marin County and 10 jurisdictions to develop an Objective Design Standards Toolkit for multifamily and mixed-use residential development. The Toolkit provides zoning tools to deliver context-sensitive infill housing across a diverse range of communities by addressing the wide spectrum of physical characteristics found in these communities. It adapts existing multifamily and mixed-use residential zoning and design guidelines into form-based, objective design standards using a place-based approach to create standards that recognize the characteristics or 'DNA" that make each local context and its architectural styles.
Santa Barbara Citywide Objective Design
and Development Standards and Zoning.
Opticos guided the City through the creation
of new zoning districts and the replacement of
the comprehensive but sometimes subjective
existing architectural guidelines. To ensure the
new standards were place-based, the first step
was to analysis the diff erent neighborhoods
and their characteristics and categorize them
in a Neighborhood Atlas. The standards were
unanimously approved by City Council.
Architectural Style
Documentation
Marin County
Objective Design
and Development
Standards
August 21, 2020
Massing Elements: Roof
House-scale buildings generally have front-facing gables with moderate to steep pitches. Block-scale buildings generally have parapets.
Multiplex in Mill Valley
House in Larkspur
House in Larkspur
House in Ross
House in Ross
Main street building in Larkspur
House in Larkspur
House in Larkspur
4 Architectural Style Documentation Internal Draft — August 21, 2020 Massing Elements: Roof Chapter 1 — Victorian
Item 8.c
202 of 648
34 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Our reality-check process
Our test-fit process uses real building footprints and lot conditions to show how Missing Middle Housing (MMH) can fit into existing neighborhoods. By comparing theoretical zoning capacity with what can actually be built, it reveals key barriers and helps focus on the most impactful regulatory changes.
Why the Test Fit Process Is Important
• Reveals zoning barriers that block MMH—even on suitable sites • Demonstrates what “gentle density” actually looks like • Validates feasibility and attainability
• Produces a replicable basis for zoning reform
• Creates a shared visual language for decision-making
• Transparent testing of how new standards could produce better outcomes The process begins with
analyzing existing lots
to define lot categories.
Designing for typical
lots ensures the results
represent a repeatable
condition and findings
can be broad applied.
We apply the zoning district’s
minimum setbacks, maximum
height and density standards,
if any, to identify what is
hypothetically possible to build
on the lot. The result is a threedimensional "zoning envelope" within which new building must fit.
We then apply
development standards
that are required such
as parking, lot coverage,
open space, etc. to show
the yield and form that is
actually possible to build on
the lot. In many cases the
zoning envelope cannot
be reached, once these
additional requirements are
factored in.
OUR PROCESS - SITE VISUALIZATIONS
Visualize Barriers. Demonstrate Fit.
Enable Implementation.
LOT CATEGORY ANALYSIS MAX ZONING ENVELOPE
MAX. YIELD AND FORM
TEST FIT - OPPORTUNITY SITES
Missing Middle Housing can play
a role in the development of larger
projects such as large infill sites,
transformation of commercial sites
to mixed-use, redevelopment of
brownfield sites, and planned growth
areas. We test design concepts to
identify key principles that would
create a successful, connected
neighborhood that complements
existing conditions.
Item 8.c
203 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 35 Regardless of existing development standards, we test
which MMH Types fit on typical lots. We identify MMH
types that are a good fit for that environment based
on the built form characteristics of adjacent lots in the neighborhood (such as prevalent building heights,
setbacks, etc). The selected MMH types are then tested
on the lot to identify which development standards are
not met and must be changed to allow the selected
MMH types.
60'
140'
60'
140'
Test Fit Summary
Shown in
Test Fit
Existing R-1
Standards
No. of Units (du) 3 Primary
+ 2 ADUs
1 Primary
+ 2 ADUs
Height 29 ft 30 ft max.
Impervious
Surface
4,643 sf
(55%)
5,460 sf
(65% max.)
Avg Unit Size 660 sf Not regulated
Parking 5 sp 8 sp min.
Front Setback 15 ft 15 ft min.
Side Setback 0 ft 6 ft min.
Rear Setback 6 ft 6 ft min.
Lot Width 60 ft 60 ft min.
Lot Depth 140 ft Not regulated
Lot Area 8,400 sf 6,000 sf min.
Density 15.8 du/ac 7.26 du/ac max.
Bold text indicates not complying with
existing standards.
TEST FIT - TYPICAL L0TS
MISSING MIDDLE TEST FIT - TYPICAL L0TS
Aerial showing existing conditions
Illustrative Site Plan of an Opportunity Site
Item 8.c
204 of 648
36 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Our multi-step, micro-scale analysis process
This process is used to document and understand the subtle physical details that define a community's unique character. Why is this important? • Becomes the foundation for the form-based coding content • Critical for developing effective form-based codes that lead to contextsensitive development What data is collected?
The documentation focuses on recording specific micro-scale details such as:
• Lots and blocks: Size, configuration, and layout
• Buildings: Architectural form, types, placement on the lot, frontages, and use • Thoroughfares: Street design, width, materials, and pedestrian amenities • Civic Spaces: Defines a catalog of types, sizes, characteristics, and how they are used
• Any other physical characteristics and patterns unique to that sampling area or larger community
DEFINE
Study Areas and Samples
STEP 1
ORGANIZE
& ANALYZE
Data From Study Areas
STEP 3
APPLY LESSONS
Zoning Code Update
STEP 4
It is unrealistic to assume
that every micro-scale
condition can be
documented, nor is it
necessary. The best
approach is to sample
typical conditions
over a full spectrum of
walkable and transitional
neighborhoods.
Samples are taken through
on-site visits and map
analysis. This includes
gathering background
documentation of the
area, creating base maps,
and documenting samples
through photos, notes,
and site measurements.
Data is collected and
organized to be readable
and presentable. The
information is then
analyzed and summarized.
This summary becomes
the predraft of the content
of the code regulations.
By the end of this process
the data provides a
thorough understanding
of the physical parameters
of the community. This
represents a wealth
of information that is
representative of the
DNA of the community. It
becomes the foundation
for updates to the Code.
29 37
80 780
Code Update City of Livermore, CA 3
Opticos Design, Inc.
DRAFT 11.24.08
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
Location T3-A: S. J Street between 8th Street and Palm Avenue
COLLECT
Data From Study Areas
STEP 2
Micro-Scale Analysis, the
Foundation for a Place-Based Code
OUR PROCESS - COMMUNITY CHARACTER STUDY B. FIRM QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE Item 8.c
205 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 37 Low Intensity Neighborhoods
N
B St. & Benso
√
√
√
√
√
√
Limite
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
M
Lemon & Grant
√
√
√
√
√
√
2 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
L Capitol & Napa
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
2 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
K
Ohio & Shasta
√
√
√
√
√
√
3 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
J Tennessee & Maple
√
√
√
√
4+ blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
I Carolina & Hitlon
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
2 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
H
Idora & Cedar
√
√
√
√
√
√
3 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
G Ryder & Central
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
3 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
F Florida & Marin
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Ped
Comm
T4 Main Street
Linear Low Dens.
Res
T4 N
Medium Intensity Neighborhoods
E Lousiana & Sta. Clara
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Low Dens. Res
T4 N
D Capital & El Dorado
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Low Dens. Res
T4 N Neighborhood
Main Streets
C
Tennessee & Capitol
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Linear
Comm.
T4 Main
Street
Low Dens.
Res
T4 N
B Tennessee & Broadway
√
√
√
Ped Comm
T4 Main Street
A Georgia & Sonoma
√
√
Ped Comm
T5 Main Street
Environments
Study Area
Walkable Urban
Transitional
Small Medium Large
Compact House
House
Duplex
Triplex
Fourplex
Multiplex Small
Multiplex Large
Courtyard
Townhouse
Live work
Main Street
3-4
2-3
1-2
Common yard
Porch: Engaged
Porch: Projecting
Steep Yard
Stoop
Fore-court
Shop-front
Treelane
Trees
Adequate Sidewalk
Walking Distance from Retail
Existing
Recommended
Development
Patterns Lots Size House scale Building Scale Stories Frontages Zoning Buildings 6 | Community Character Documentation: Microscale Analysis Draft: January 2016 Summary of Analysis
Summary of Analysis
Lessons learned
The table graphically summarizes the fourteen study areas and begins to illustrate current patterns of development to inform which transects will replace the current zoning and where these transect zones may be applied. From the overall summary, it becomes apparent that a great amount of the City currently falls into the proposed T3 and T4 environments. For the in depth documentation and analysis of each study area, see the following pages.
Low Intensity Neighborhoods
N
B St. & Benson
√
√
√
√
√
√
Limited
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
M
Lemon & Grant
√
√
√
√
√
√
2 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
L Capitol & Napa
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
2 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
K
Ohio & Shasta
√
√
√
√
√
√
3 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
J Tennessee & Maple
√
√
√
√
4+ blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
I Carolina & Hitlon
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
2 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
H
Idora & Cedar
√
√
√
√
√
√
3 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
G Ryder & Central
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
3 blocks
Low Dens. Res
T3 N
F Florida & Marin
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Ped
Comm
T4 Main Street
Linear Low Dens.
Res
T4 N
Medium Intensity Neighborhoods
E Lousiana & Sta. Clara
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Low Dens. Res
T4 N
D Capital & El Dorado
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Low Dens. Res
T4 N Neighborhood
Main Streets
C
Tennessee & Capitol
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
1 block
Linear
Comm.
T4 Main
Street
Low Dens.
Res
T4 N
B Tennessee & Broadway
√
√
√
Ped Comm
T4 Main Street
A Georgia & Sonoma
√
√
Ped Comm
T5 Main Street
Environments
Study Area
Walkable Urban
Transitional
Small Medium Large
Compact House
House
Duplex
Triplex
Fourplex
Multiplex Small
Multiplex Large
Courtyard
Townhouse
Live work
Main Street
3-4
2-3
1-2
Common yard
Porch: Engaged
Porch: Projecting
Steep Yard
Stoop
Fore-court
Shop-front
Treelane
Trees
Adequate Sidewalk
Walking Distance from Retail
Existing
Recommended
Development
Patterns Lots Size House scale Building Scale Stories Frontages Zoning Buildings
Draft: January 2016 Community Character Documentation: Microscale Analysis | 7 Summary of Analysis
Sample Areas
Characteristics Documented
City of Vallejo
Community Character Documentation:
Microscale Analysis
Draft: January 2016
29 37
80 780
780
D Location: Capitol St. and El Dorado St.
This area captures a variety of building types and scales as it crosses El Dorado St. which acts a neighborhood
main street.
Top: Mix of building types supporting multifamily and
single-family houses. Above: Parking is not emphasized, allowing for attractive and varied frontages.
The study area is entirely within the Low Density
Residential zone and consists of a mix of single-family houses and duplexes, fourplexes, and some multiplex
small buildings. This mix represents a moderately
intense physical environment. Yet the physical
character is dominated by house scale buildings
despite their actual intensity. The area is toward the
middle of the Vallejo transect, in the T4 category and
fits into the Form Based zone of T4 neighborhood.
Format 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Typical
Mid-‐
block
Typical
Corner
Building
Placement
Lot Size
Width x’ 40 40 70 60 60 65 45 60 45 45 62.5
Depth x’ 145 65 65 60 85 145 145 145 130 130 115
Square Footage x sf 5800 2600 4550 3600 5100 9425 6525 8700 5850 5800 6900 Distance From ROW (R); Property Line (P);
Sidewalk Edge (S); Curb (C) s s s s s s s s s
Location of lot Mid-block (M);
Corner (C) M M C M C C M C M
If it is a corner lot, where does the building face? Primary Street (P); Secondary Street (S); Both (B) S P P S S P S S S
Front (Main Body of Building) x’ 20 10 10 15 20 10 20 25 25 Side Street (Main Body of Building) x’ na na 15 na 12 15 na 25 na Left Side, Main Building x’ 7 4 15 10 12 na 12 7 12
Right Side, Main Building x’ 10 7 12 20 20 na 7 25 7
Left Side, Ancillary Building x’ na na na na 39 na 4 0 27 Right Side, Ancillary Building x’ na na na na 2 na 0 15 0 Rear, Main Building x’ 70 5 5 10 13 7 65 65 65
Adjacent Use/Transect Level (fill in Use or T-level) Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Rear, Ancillary Building x’ na na na na 19 na 3 3 3
Width of Building/Lot Width (%)
Front % 90% 75% 54% 53% 50% 123% 80% 58% 71% 75% 56%
Side Street, Main Building % na na 80% na 53% 33% na 40% na 46% Side Street, Ancillary Building % na na na na 24% na na 30% na Miscellaneous
Number of Buildings on Lot x 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 2
Number of Main Buildings x 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1
Number of Ancillary Buildings x 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1
Distance between Main and Ancillary Buildings x’ na na na na 0 na 33 30 42 Vallejo
California
Capitol St.
El Dorado St.
Alameda St.
Carolina St.
24 | Community Character Documentation: Microscale Analysis Draft: January 2016 Medium Intensity Neighborhood Environments Capitol St. and El Dorado St. 0 100 300 600 ft
E Location: Lousiana St. and Sta. Clara St.
This area captures a historic neighborhood north of
downtown with significant terrain changes.
The study area is entirely in the Low Density
Residential zone and consists of a mix of single-family houses, duplexes, and fourplexes. This mix is in the
mid-range of physical intensity when compared to
other study areas in this grouping. As in other study
areas, the buildings are all house-scale buildings. This generates a physically compatible mix of different
buildings that still looks and feels like a single family neighborhood. The area is toward the middle of the
Vallejo transect in the T4 category and fits into the
form-based zone of T4 Neighborhood.
Raised yards and stairs mitigate the steep grade change on the Southern side of the street.
Mix of multifamily and single family residences
Format 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Typical
Mid-‐
block
Typical
Corner
Building
Placement
Lot Size
Width x’ 65 60 40 50 110 55 45 50 90 55 50 77.5
Depth x’ 85 70 145 145 145 120 120 145 110 110 132.5 115 Square Footage x sf 5525 4200 5800 7250 15950 6600 5400 7250 9900 6050 5925 8250 Distance From ROW (R); Property Line (P);
Sidewalk Edge (S); Curb (C) S S S S S S S S S S
Location of lot Mid-block (M);
Corner (C) C M M M C C M M C M
If it is a corner lot, where does the building face? Primary Street (P); Secondary Street (S); Both (B) P S P P B S S P P S
Front (Main Body of Building) x’ 22 25 25 28 13 20 27 27 10 16 Side Street (Main Body of Building) x’ 27 na na na 7 15 na na 7 na Left Side, Main Building x’ 8 23 6 3 11 10 7 11 8 5
Right Side, Main Building x’ 22 5 3 5 3 15 10 8 7 5
Left Side, Ancillary Building x’ na na 5 10 71 14 27 3 na 4 Right Side, Ancillary Building x’ na na 0 0 27 17 3 3 na 24 Rear, Main Building x’ 8 3 62 73 61? 41? 49 54 21 50
Adjacent Use/Transect Level (fill in Use or T-level) Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Res Rear, Ancillary Building x’ na na 3 26 28 2 18 6 na 7
Width of Building/Lot Width (%)
Front % 49% 53% 65% 102% 147% 55% 60% 54% 61% 75% 63% 58% Side Street, Main Building % 65% na na na 23% 50% na na 53% na 51% Side Street, Ancillary Building % na na na na na 10% na na na na Miscellaneous
Number of Buildings on Lot x 1 1 2 3 4 4 2 2 3 2
Number of Main Buildings x 1 1 1 2 2 3 1 1 3 1
Number of Ancillary Buildings x 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 1
Distance between Main and Ancillary Buildings x’ na na 34 30 27 na 10 41 na 22 Vallejo
California
Louisiana St.
Alabama St.
Branciforte St.
Sta. Clara St.
28 | Community Character Documentation: Microscale Analysis Draft: January 2016 Medium Intensity Neighborhood Environments Lousiana St. and Sta. Clara St. 0 100 300 600 ft
Item 8.c
206 of 648
38 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos Design has consistently led successful TransitOriented Development (TOD) projects by blending masterful placemaking, bold regulatory innovation, and human-first design. Our experience demonstrates a rare combination
of visionary planning, technical expertise, and realworld results.
Transit access and walkability have been a focus of our work for 25 years, so this is not new to us. What differentiates our experience is that we work with both public and private sector clients on TOD projects, so we know what cities
need to do to attract the right developers to deliver their TOD vision, and we often stick around to help ensure highquality implementaiton.
Our experience includes master planning/visioning,
formal TOD plan documents such as Specific Plans, and
new zoning, development standards, and sometimes
design guidelines for these sites.
• Pleasant HIll/Contra Costa Center TOD: Plan and
design review for the Pleasant HIll BART Station, one of the first TODs in the Bay Area. One of the key features was ensuring the large buildings looked like a series of smaller buildings to better fit into their suburban context.
• North Berkeley BART capacity study: Demonstrating
how to thoughtfully transition scale at edges as the TOD transitions into the existing single family neighborhood while still achieving state minimum densities.
• Petaluma SMART Station Plan + Form-Based Zoning
• Columbus, OH: Citywide zoning update focused on
transit corridors.
25 YEARS
High-Quality
Implementation
TOD
Success
Highlights
Connect Now to
Connect Later,
Transit Oriented
Development
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item 8.c
207 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 39 Hercules Bayfront
Master Plan + FBC
Creating a walkable & sustainable hub
Transformed a former dynamite-plant site
into a vibrant master-planned neighborhood.
Stretching 43 acres, it features three walkable
districts with ~1,392 residential units, plus
significant commercial and office space.
Oriented around a future Amtrak and ferry
multimodal transit hub, the project earned
LEED-ND Stage 1 Gold Certification.
Mesa Downtown
Form-Based Code
Capturing the value of transit investments
Downtown Mesa had not seen a single dollar of
private sector investment in over three decades.
The city realized the opportunity of the light
rail being extended through their downtown
and hired Opticos to create a plan and write
new zoning. The new Form-Based Code has
delivered over $600 million in private sector
investement since adoption and transformated
the downtown into a vibrant pace to live, work,
and visit.
PUBLIC PROJECT SPOTLIGHT
PRIVATE PROJECT SPOTLIGHT
Item 8.c
208 of 648
40 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Project Area + Context
Two mixed-use zones in
Downtown Healdsburg
Products
Recommendations Memo
Status
Completed 2024
Reference
Scott Duiven
Community Development
Director, City of Healdsburg
[email protected]
Highlights
1. Calibrated density recommendations through rigorous process of site testing and site visualizations centering on context-sensitive form and scale
2. Facilitated a public workshop to gather feedback on the initial site testing results and density outcomes
3. Built community support for the City to further study a density increase in two downtown zones
Proposing Solutions to Unlock Infill Housing Potential
Nestled in the heart of Sonoma County wine country, Healdsburg is a highly desirable place to live, yet a citywide density cap of 16 dwelling units per acre has stifled the production of virtually all housing downtown. The City hired Opticos to help illuminate the barriers to downtown infill housing production, propose solutions to lift these barriers, and estimate the resulting housing capacity. Opticos approached this challenge through site testing: studying options for development on real sites that would be consistent with the form and character of Downtown Healdsburg, and identifying the densities needed to achieve the City’s target unit mix. Through this site testing process and accompanying site visualizations, Opticos demonstrated to the community how much higher density numbers could fit seamlessly into their downtown and further strengthen downtown’s vitality as a place to work, play, and live. Opticos presented these recommendations to a receptive City Council in April 2024.
Downtown Housing
Capacity Study
Healdsburg, California
www.opticosdesign.com Opticos Design
Item 8.c
209 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 41 Above and right: Opticos studied
alternative development outcomes to
arrive at density recommendations.
Site A
Rite Aid
Address
525 Healdsburg Ave.
Targeted study area
Service Commercial Zone
Current site condition
Commercial uses with
supporting parking lot
Site dimensions
600 ft wide x 330 ft deep
(approx.)
Existing Conditions
This site is at the southwest corner of
Healdsburg Avenue and Grant Street
where the downtown transitions to
residential zones to the north. The site
consists of one-story strip retail buildings
with parking in front and it backs onto
the SMART railroad right-of-way and Foss
Creek.
Vision
The design concept for this site focuses
retail along Healdsburg Avenue, responds
to residential context to the north and
introduces a new pedestrian pathway
through the site. Healdsburg Avenue is
lined with three-story mixed-use buildings
with non-residential uses at the ground
floor and residential dwellings on the
upper floors. House-form multi-unit
buildings front onto Grant Street to
respond to residential context to the north.
Multi-unit corridor buildings front onto
an intimate pedestrian way, forming a
new address on this deep parcel. Surface
parking is placed behind buildings to
shield the view from Healdsburg Avenue.
All corridor and mixed-use buildings also
include tuck-under parking screened from
the public realm with active ground floor
uses.
• •• •• • • ••• ••• •• •• • ••• • • •••• • • • •••• •• •• •• •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Housing Capacity Study
Healdsburg, CA
October 2023
Aerial Basemap - Rite Aid
0 25 50
ft
Overview
Above: Example of corridor
buildings fronting onto a
pedestrian way
Healdsburg Ave.
Grant St.
12 Recommendations Memo Final Draft — March 29, 2024
2.1 Site Testing Chapter 2 — Opportunity Site Testing
Key Regulatory Barriers
Parking standards. Currently, the site requires 1.5 spaces per unit, and 1 guest space per 3 units. The design concept provides 1.1 spaces per unit. Commercial parking is also required (1 space per 150-300 sf, depending on specific use). The design concept does not include commercial parking.
Density. The prototype tested 45 du/acre, exceeding the current maximum of 16 du/acre.
Site Test Assumptions + Yields
# of Units (du) 189
# of Buildings 13
Bldg type Mixed-Use Multiplex Double-loaded
Corridor
Height (stories) 3 3 3
Bldg width (ft) 120-151 60 94
Bldg depth (ft) 60-95 60 60
Density (du/ac) 45
FAR 1.4
Parking spaces (sp) 211
Parking ratio (sp/du) 1.1
Parking type Surface and Tuck-under
Front setback (ft) 5
Lot width (ft) 600 (approx.)
Lot depth (ft) 330 (approx.)
Lot area (ac) 4.2
Design Concept + Site Testing Outcome
Image capture: Nov 2018 © 2024 Google
Nov 2018
Google Street View
Healdsburg, California
Above: Conceptual site plan. Arrows indicate
vantage point for perspective renderings.
Healdsburg Ave.
Above: Views of existing conditions and renderings depicting the design vision for this site.
Renderings and site plan are illustrative only. They represent hypothetical build-outs used to calculate potential new housing and do not represent an actual development proposal.
Existing Existing
Grant St.
Final Draft — March 29, 2024 Recommendations Memo 13
Chapter 2 — Opportunity Site Testing 2.1 Site Testing
Recommendations for Service Commercial (CS) and Downtown Commercial (CD) Zoning Districts Regulation Existing
Standard
Proposed
Standard
Implementation
Tool
Rationale
Density 16 du/acre
max.
CS Zone:
45 du/acre
max.
CD Zone:
65 du/acre
max.
General Plan
amendment or
Specific Plan
These recommended densities reflect the findings from the site testing analysis described in Chapter 2.
In the Service Commercial (CS) zone, 45 du/acre was the resultant density of the City's desired unit mix within the existing zoning envelope and achieving a 1 space/unit residential parking ratio. This density reflects an assumption of surface and tuck-under parking behind ground-floor retail.
In the Downtown Commercial (CD) zone, 65 du/acre was the resultant density of the City's desired unit mix within the existing zoning envelope and achieving a 1 space/unit residential parking ratio. This density reflects an assumption of one level of podium parking behind ground-floor retail.
This increased density can enable smaller, more attainable units on infill parcels where a developer's best options today are large luxury units or hotels.
Parking for
Multi-Unit
Dwellings
1.5 spaces
per unit
min.
1 space per
unit min.
Zoning code
update or
Specific Plan
This reduced parking ratio aims to make infill development at the desired density more financially feasible for developers. As parking is space-intensive and expensive, higher parking ratios will disincentivize developers from offering more units, discouraging residential development that approaches the new density maximum. 1 space per unit is a minimum parking requirement that has worked well in other places. This reduced parking ratio should be paired with alternative mobility strategies like onsite car-share.
See Section 3.4 (Right-Sizing Residential Parking) for more detail.
Parking for
Retail
1 space per
150 sf to
300 sf min.
(depending
on use)
No parking
required
Zoning code
update or
Specific Plan
Particularly on small infill sites, parking requirements make it difficult to realize development potential due not only to the cost of providing parking but also because of the physical constraints of the lot. The parking ratio for retail square footage is more demanding than the parking ratio for residential square footage and can be difficult to physically accomplish.
The City maintains public parking lots throughout the downtown which can serve visitors to new non-residential uses. It is also unlikely that each new infill use will generate a unique additional demand for parking, as opposed to visitors "parking once" and walking to a series of nearby shops or restaurants. Eliminating the parking requirement for small retail spaces, provided there is adequate parking on nearby parcels, can help enable mixed-use development on this corridor.
3.1 Zoning District Recommendations
28 Downtown Housing Capacity Study Recommendations Memo Final Draft — March 29, 2024
3.1 Zoning District Recommendations Chapter 3 — Recommendations Recommendations for Service Commercial (CS) and Downtown Commercial (CD) Zoning Districts Regulation Existing
Standard
Proposed
Standard
Implementation
Tool
Rationale
Adjacency
standards
10' height
reduction
for a lot
adjacent to
a residential
zone
10' height
reduction
for the
first 50 ft
adjacent
to a
residential
zone
Zoning code
update or
Specific Plan
Two of the opportunity sites tested in the CS zone (Rite Aid and Bank of America) were adjacent to lots with residential zoning. Because these opportunity sites are large parcels, or would likely undergo lot consolidation prior to redevelopment, this height reduction would apply over the entire large parcel. This reduces the development potential beyond what meaningfully impacts the adjacent parcel.
Establish an impacted distance from the triggering lot line, such as 50 feet, after which the height limit is no longer reduced.
Ground
floor nonresidential
uses
Groundfloor nonresidential
use
required in
CS and CD
zones
Eliminate
this
standard
in the CS
zone, if
supported
by a retail
study
Zoning code
update or
Specific Plan
Non-residential uses are currently required on the ground floor in both CS and CD zones. Evaluate in a retail study whether there is enough demand to support additional non-residential uses on opportunity sites in these zones. There was some public perception during the public engagement for this study that there is limited demand for additional retail space; this should be confirmed.
If this limited demand is confirmed through a retail study, eliminate the requirement for ground-floor retail in the CS zone since this covers a broader geography and is further from the downtown. Keep this requirement as it is in the CD zone since this is the heart of downtown.
Additional Strategies to Consider
Density
minimums
Consider density minimums that capture the City's housing goals for priority infill sites.
Unbundling
parking
Unbundling parking, i.e. offering tenants the option to lease a dwelling unit without also leasing a parking space, can help bring down unit costs for individual tenants and can reduce the number of parking spaces required in a development.
Massing
and
articulation
Consider requiring massing strategies such as upper-story stepbacks and facade articulation to reduce the perceived bulk of new development. These are currently captured in design guidelines, but could be included in objective design standards.
Final Draft — March 29, 2024 Downtown Housing Capacity Study Recommendations Memo 29 Chapter 3 — Recommendations 3.1 Zoning District Recommendations Above and left: Pages from the final deliverable, a highly
graphic Recommendations
Memo, summarizing site
testing results and zoning
district recommendations.
Opticos Design www.opticosdesign.com
Item 8.c
210 of 648
42 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Offering Community-Focused Courtyard Living
The objective with this project was to create a community unlike anything currently in the market, that proves that thoughtful site design, high-quality smaller home designs and places that foster a strong sense of community are in high demand. The site design for this 1.37 acre lot creates a Pocket Neighborhood or Cottage Court Community organized around a shared community green, facing the Russian River and several smaller public spaces that thoughtfully integrate existing heritage Redwood and fruit trees. Each home has a deep porch that engages the community and expands the living space. This project combines the benefits of a new home design and construction, with an old fashioned sense of community.
Highlights
1. Creative approach to siting cottages meets both minimum lot size and provides community green.
2. Organic arrangement of open space evolved around preserving the heritage trees.
3. A series of shared open spaces provides diverse experiences throughout the site.
4. Location and design of detached garages provides privacy between neighboring lots as well as additional storage and utility space for residents
5. The layering of outdoor spaces accommodates both private outdoor space for each cottage in addition to a shared community space.
2019 Gold
Nugget� Award
of Merit for On
the Boards Site
Plan
Project Site Area 1.37 ac
Unit Count 12
Density 8.8 du/ac
Residential Unit Sizes
8 Primary Cottages, 4 ADUs
Cottage A 1,250 gsf
Cottage B 1,750gsf
ADU 500 gsf
Parking Spaces
2-Car Garage 8
On-Site Spaces 6
Wine Country Pocket
Neighborhood | RiverHouse
Healdsburg, California
www.opticosdesign.com Opticos Design
Item 8.c
211 of 648
Opticos Design Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.opticosdesign.com43 Item 8.c
212 of 648
44 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Project Area + Context
265-acre historic Downtown
bisected by US-101
Degree of Change
Evolution with targeted
transformation
Products
Precise Plan, Form-Based Code,
Affordable Housing + AntiDisplacement Strategy
Status
Ongoing, Administrative Draft
Team
Consultants: economic, historic
preservation, transportation
Fun Fact
San Rafael is the oldest city in
Marin county, and the 20th of
the 21 missions in California.
Downtown Precise Plan +
Code
San Rafael, California
A Historic Downtown as a Transit-Rich, Mixed-Use Center A community-driven process has guided the 20-year vision for Downtown San Rafael, to successfully evolve from a commercial center into a vibrant, mixed-use destination for the city and region. It capitalizes on its transit-rich location and walkable setting to enhance connectivity, creates new housing opportunities at all income levels, and calibrates new development to strengthen Downtown's identity, history, and built heritage.
Highlights
1. Comprehensive public engagement including a Design Charrette, pop-up workshops, a Steering Committee and the Neighborland online platform.
2. Focused investment and mixed-use development at important nodes to strengthen downtown identity.
3. Historic preservation and contextual new development using form-based standards.
4. Greater housing access and choice with Missing Middle Housing and an Affordable Housing and Anti-Displacement strategy.
5. Robust public realm and street network redesign, prioritizing cycling, transit and pedestrians.
www.opticosdesign.com Opticos Design
Item 8.c
213 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 45 E. Maximum Envelope
Height Base Height Bonus1
Stories 4 max. 6 max.
Stepback
Front 10' min. at 5th Story
Side Street 10' min. at 5th Story
Rear 10' min. at 5th Story
1 See Section 14.16.190 (Height Bonus) for height bonus requirements.
F. Adjacency Standards
Historic Resource Adjacency
Where adjacent to a historic resource, Section 3.2.070
(Overview of Historic Resource Adjacency Standards) applies in addition to the standards of this zone.
Building Placement and Height
Setback Stepback
Where adjacent to T4N
Sides 5' min.
Rear 10' min at 4th Story
Where adjacent to MR2.5, R5, HR1
Sides 10' min.
House-Form Massing
Where adjacent to MR2.5, R5, HR1 house-form massing is
required within rear 1/3 of the lot.
Building Width
Required
Wing(s)
Wing Size (max.)
x Stories
< 75' None - -
> 75' - 100' 1 min. 25' x 35' 3 max.
>100' - 150' 2 min.; 3 max.
2 at 25' x 35
or 1 at 35' x 35'
and 1 at 35' x 65'
Maximum Envelope in Mid-Block and Corner Condition
Adjacent to T4N Adjacent to MR2.5, R5, HR1
Main Body
House-Form
Massing
Key
Wing Width
Wing Separation
Wing Depth
1 2
3 4
5 6
1 2
3 4
5 6
1 2
3 4 5
6 1
2 3
1 2
3 4
T5N
T4N
1 2
3 4
5 6 T5N
1/3 of lot
depth MR2.5, R5,
HR1
Max. Envelope
without Height
Bonus (Base)
Max. Envelope
with Height
Bonus
Street Centerline
Key
278 Downtown San Rafael Precise Plan Administrative Draft — April 2020 Division 2.2 Downtown Zones:
Section 2.2.050 T5 Neighborhood (T5N)
Chapter 9 - Downtown Form-Based Code
Visioning pop-up
Design charrette
New transit plaza
A Historic Shopping Street
The Plan reinforces Fourth Street, Downtown's
historic "Main Street" as a Shared Street to
promote safe bicycle access and foot traffic.
Several one-way streets are converted to two-way
to improve overall circulation and resolve conflicts
with highway-bound traffic.
A Sense of Place
The Precise Plan is implemented by
a form-based code that establishes
a visual hierarchy, reinforces
Downtown's eclectic built character,
and shapes new development to
be contextual to the existing built
fabric and historic resources.
Opticos Design www.opticosdesign.com
Item 8.c
214 of 648
46 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Creating a Series of “Theatrical
Events” to Link the New Station to
the Downtown Core
Funded through a Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) and
the Association of Bay Area Governments’
(ABAG) Station Area Planning Grant, this
plan and SmartCode seeks to increase
transit ridership by maximizing the
potential for Transit-Oriented Development
around current and future transit stations.
Opticos led a multidisciplinary team to
complete a Station Area Master Plan
(SAMP) for two planned station areas along
the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit Line
(SMART) within the City of Petaluma, CA.
The project included:
• Completion of two, three-day charrettes
• Incremental TOD strategy
• A detailed design/vision plan
• Macroscale mapping and analysis
• Rewrite of the SmartCode
• Creation of Station Area Plans
• Detailed microscale analysis of lot
conditions, lot size, building types, and
the Form-Based Code
Opticos is top-notch: Great public process, good project management, quality deliverables, and going beyond the work program to provide what is needed for a successful outcome.”
Scott M. Duiven
Senior Planner
City of Petaluma
SMART Stations Master Plan +
Form-Based Development Standards
Petaluma, California
Project Area + Context
SMART Station Area
Products
Station Master Plans, FormBased Code, Visioning
Status
Adopted 2013
Reference
Scott Duiven
Community Development
Director, City of Healdsburg
(Formerly Senior Planner, City of
Petaluma)
[email protected]
Award
2014 California APA Award of
Merit, Comprehensive Plan –
Small Jurisdiction
Opticos Design www.opticosdesign.com
Item 8.c
215 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 47 Phase I: Define the Public Realm Along Route to Station Phase II: Complete /Activate the Remaining Edges
Clockwise from top left: Vision of the urbanism in the station area engaging the waterfront where a strip mall currently resides; two views form the three-dimensional study model illustrating the linear park, new street, and proposed clock tower that physically and visually connect the station to the waterfront; Phasing plans; Public space framework plan, emphasizing the series of “theatrical events” to make the connection from the SMART station to downtown.
Opticos Design www.opticosdesign.com
Item 8.c
216 of 648
48 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg
4.80.140 - Main Street Building
A. Description
Main Street Building: This Building Type is a small- to medium-sized structure, typically attached, intended
to provide a vertical mix of uses with ground-floor
commercial, service, or retail uses and upper-floor
commercial, service, or residential uses. Smaller
versions of this Type include live/work and work/live
units. This Type makes up the primary component of a
neighborhood main street and portions of a downtown
main street, therefore being a key component to
providing walkability.
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 A three story main street mixed-use building Historic main street mixed-use buildings
A small mains street mixed-use building
84 Petaluma Station Area Master Plan
Section 4. Urban Standards
B. Lot
Lot Size
Width 25' min.; 150' max.
Depth 100' min.; 150' max.
C. Number of Units
Units 2 min.
D. Building Size and Massing
Height
Height 2 stories min.;
6 stories max.1
1 Height must also comply with Urban Standards (Table 4.10).
Main Body
Width 150' max.
Depth 65' max.
Secondary Wing(s)/Accessory Structure(s)
Width 100' max.
Depth 65' max.
Separation from Main Body 10' min.
A Secondary Wing/Accessory Structure shall have a
smaller footprint, a narrower width, and a depth not
greater than the Main Body.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
E. Allowed Frontages
Forecourt Dooryard
Shopfront Gallery
Terrace Arcade
F. Pedestrian Access
Upper floor units located in the Main Body shall be
accessed by a common entry along the front.
Ground floor units may have individual entries
along the front or side street.
On corner lots, units in a secondary wing/accessory
structure may front the side street.
G. Vehicle Access and Parking
Parking shall be accessed from a side street or alley.
Parking drives and access may be shared on adjacent lots.
On-site parking spaces may be enclosed or open.
Garages may be detached or tuck-under.
H. Private Open Space
No private open space requirement.
H
I
J
Front
Alley
Front
Alley
Side StreetSide Street
H I I H I
J
J
I
B
D
E
F
G
A C A C
ROW / Property Line
Setback Line
Building
Key
ROW / Property Line
Setback Line
Frontage
Private Open Space
Key
Petaluma Station Area Master Plan 85
Section 4. Urban Standards
Rooting the new zoning and decision making in the community-supported vision New Form-Based Zoning Districts and Standards
Petaluma Station Area Master Plan Draft: December 2012 13 Section 2. Regulating Plan
2.20 - Regulating Plan Downtown
Station Area Detail
Transect Zones
Urban Core (T6)
Urban Core - Open (T6-O)
Urban Center (T5)
Urban General (T4)
Historic Agricultural Services District (D1)
Railroad District (D2)
River Dependent Industrial District (D3)
Key
Corner Element Required
Public Structure
Special Building
Notes:
1. The Open overlay (T6-O) allows additional
ground floor uses. See Section 3 (Building Function Standards) for additional allowed uses. All other regulations shall be per the regulations of
the base zone (T6).
2. The dimensions shown on this plan indicate
the maximum and minimum distances from the
ROW where the transition between two adjacent
transect zones can occur.
Washington Street
New Riverfront Street
Grey Street
Baylis Street
Copeland Street
Copeland Street
Lakeville Street
New Station Access Street
Vertical Element
50’ tall min.
Future SMART
Platform
25’ min. corner
chamfer (x)
Public Meeting Hall
1,500sf min.;
5,000sf max.
Special Building
(Public/Restaurant/Cafe)
30’ min. clear to top of bank;
2,000sf min.; 5,000sf max.; 1 story max./25’ min. building height.
Weller Street
New Transverse Street
Washington Street
D Street
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
80’ max.
50’ min.;
150’ max.
x
x
x
x 25’ min. corner
chamfer (x)
Opticos Design www.opticosdesign.com
Item 8.c
217 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 49 Public Frontage Assembly
Frontage Type Commercial Street
Drainage Collection Type Curb and Gutter
Planter Type 4'x4' Tree Well
Landscape Type Trees at 30' o.c. avg.
Lighting Type Post, Column, or
Double Column
Walkway Type 15' sidewalk
Curb Type Square
H
Application
Transect Zones T4, T5
Movement Type Low
Design Speed 35 mph
Overall Widths
Right-of-Way (ROW) Width 100’
Pavement Width 29'
Public Frontage Width 15'
Lane Assembly
Traffic Lanes 4 Lanes
Inside Lanes 2@11'
Outside Lanes 2@11'
Bicycle Lanes None
Parking Lanes 2 @ 8', marked
Median/Turn Lane 10'
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Parking
30'-0" 10'-0"
Curb-to-curb
100'-0"
Right of way
8'-0" 11'-0"
Parking Travel
Median/Turn
15'-0"
Sidewalk
30'-0"
Curb-to-curb
11'-0" 8'-0"
Travel
15'-0"
Sidewalk
11'-0"
Travel
11'-0"
Travel
A
H F E D G D E F H
C B C
Table 5.10.070.A: East Washington Street CS-98-29-TR
126 Petaluma Station Area Master Plan
Section 5. Thoroughfare Standards
Linear Park
Right of way
11'-0" 11'-0"
12'-0"
11'-0"
36'-0"
Travel Parking
Planting/Sidewalk
22'-0"
104'-0"
11'-0"
12'-0"
Parking Travel
Planting/Sidewalk
6'-0" 6'-0" 6'-0" 6'-0"
Curb-to-curb
22'-0"
Public Frontage Assembly
Frontage Type Avenue
Drainage Collection Type Curb and Gutter
Planter Type 5' continuous planter
Landscape Type Trees at 30' o.c. avg.
Lighting Type Post, Pipe, Column, or
Double Column
Walkway Type 7' sidewalk
Curb Type
Along planter Square
Along median Rolled2
2 Median curbs must be mountable in order to meet
requirements for fire/emergency access.
G
H
Application
Movement Type Slow
Design Speed 25 mph
Overall Widths
Right-of-Way (ROW) Width 104'
Pavement Width 22'
Public Frontage Width 12'
Lane Assembly
Traffic Lanes 2 @ 11'
Bicycle Lanes None
Parking/Transit Stop Lanes 2 @ 11', marked1
Medians 36' min.
1 Parking/Transit Stop Lanes shall use decorative pavers or other treatment to define space and be separated
from Traffic lanes by a low rolled curb.
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
E D F D E
C B C
H G G H
B
Table 5.10.070.E: New Transverse Avenue w/Linear Park AV-104-22-TR Petaluma Station Area Master Plan 131
Section 5. Thoroughfare Standards
Petaluma Station Area Master Plan 137
Section 5. Thoroughfare Standards
5.10.080 - Thoroughfare Regulating
Plan Downtown Station
Area Detail
Thoroughfares
East Washington Street
(CS-98-29-TR)
East D Street
(CS-88-58-BL)
Copeland Street
(AV-78-44-TR)
New Station Access Commercial Street
(CS-78-44-TR)
New Transverse Commercial Street w/
Linear Park (CS-104-22-TR)
New Transverse Avenue w/ Linear Park
(AV-104-22-TR)
New Commercial Street Adjacent to Square
(CS/DR-52-28)
Weller Street/New Riverfront Commercial
Street Adjacent to Basin (CS/DR-60-36)
New Transverse Street
(ST-60-36)
Recommended Rear Alley
(RA-24-21)
Note: Should any conflicts arise between this
Regulating Plan and Section 5.10.100 (Thoroughfare Regulating Plan Central Petaluma Specific Plan Area), this Regulating Plan shall prevail.
Note: All frontages along the streets shown on
this regulating plan shall be principal frontages.
Washington Street
New Riverfront Street
Grey Street
Baylis Street
Copeland Street
Copeland Street
Lakeville Street
New Station Access Street
Weller Street
New Transverse Street
Washington Street
D Street
Ensuring a high-quality public realm
Thoroughfare Standards
Opticos Design www.opticosdesign.com
Item 8.c
218 of 648
50 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, SUITE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM
FIRM OVERVIEW
Lisa Wise Consulting Inc. (LWC) is an urban planning, economics, and finance firm that specializes in enabling vibrant, pedestrian, and transit-oriented neighborhoods, and facilitating sustainable, well-designed places to live, work, invest, and play.
LWC core services are aimed at feasible, measurable economic development, and fiscal strategies with an emphasis on quality employment, business attraction and retention, innovation and education, local and regional partnerships, and integrated land use policy. The LWC Team has a deep understanding of land use regulation and how development and market forces affect communities. LWC operates most effectively at the nexus of urban planning and land use economics.
LWC Core Services:
• Financial Feasibility Analysis, Market Studies, and Proforma Analysis • Development Codes, and Form-Based Codes
• Long-Range Planning, Specific Plans, TOD Plans, and Corridor Plans • Housing Policies and Programs
• Public Engagement and Community Outreach Plans
LWC’s resumes features large-scale market analysis, economic strategies, and financial feasibility engagements throughout California and the U.S. as well as urban code, zoning code updates and modeling for economic development projects in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
LWC was founded in 2006 and has grown to 20 employees with offices in San Luis Obispo, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.
CONTACT
San Luis Obispo
983 Osos Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 595-1345 | Office Main
San Francisco
870 Market Street, Suite 977
San Francisco, CA 94102
Los Angeles
939 South Broadway, Suite 611
Los Angeles, CA 90015
(805) 618-1924 | Office Direct
ECONOMICS PLANNING
Market Studies
Economic Analysis of Land Use
Revitalization Strategies
Pro Forma Analysis
Code Updates & Audits
Corridor & TOD Plans
Housing Policies & Programs
Community Outreach
Item 8.c
219 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 51 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM The City of Milpitas hired LWC to
conduct a Comprehensive Update
to the City’s Zoning Ordinance and
Zoning Map. The Zoning Ordinance
was last updated in 2008 and while
amended numerous times, it has not
kept pace with economic realities,
current land use and housing, and
needs organization and streamlining.
LWC worked closely with the City to
conduct an update that prioritizes
implementing the vision in the 2040
General Plan by modernizing the
Zoning Ordinance and making it more
user-friendly, ensuring consistency
across all applicable City documents,
and promoting more compact,
mixed-use, and transit-oriented
development types. The Zoning
Ordinance Update ensures legal
compliance, implements the 2023-
2031 Housing Element, and applies
clear, consistent, and user-friendly
graphics and formatting. Additionally,
LWC worked to ensure a more
transparent, predictable permitting
process to better enable attractive
and valuable design, accommodate
modern land uses, protect residential
neighborhood character, and support
a more vibrant economy.
To assure the community’s input
is evident in the Zoning Ordinance
Update, LWC held stakeholder
interviews with residents,
representatives from the business
community, special interest groups,
and civic leaders; developed a project
website (www.milpitaszoningupdate.
org); met with the Technical Advisory
Committee and Zoning Advisory
Group; conducted an online survey;
and facilitated workshops and study
sessions with the City Council and
Planning Commission.
The new code, which includes new
zoning districts, Housing Element
implementation amendments,
and an updated Zoning Map was
unanimously adopted in August 2025
by the Milpitas City Council.
STATUS:
Adopted August 2025
TIMEFRAME:
February 2023 - August 2025
BUDGET:
$879,515
REFERENCE:
Holly Pearson, AICP
Zoning Update Project Manager
City of Milpitas
455 E. Calaveras Blvd.
Milpitas, CA 95035
(408) 609-0072
[email protected]
PARTNERS:
FirstCarbon Solutions
CITY OF MILPITAS
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map Update
Item 8.c
220 of 648
52 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM 85 101
237
W El Camino Real
Grant Rd N Shoreline Blvd
S Springer Rd
E El Camino Real
S Shoreline Blvd
San Antonio Rd
85 R3 Zoning Update
Mountain View CA
R3 Zoning Parcels
0 0.25 0.5
Mile DATE: 6/9/2020 SCALE: 1 to 40,000 VERSION: Draft
Parcels Designated as R3 Zoning
City Boundary
Source: City of Mountain View CA
Roadways
City of Los Altos City of Sunnyvale
City of Palo Alto City of Mountain View
City
Location
CA
R3 Zoning Districts
Central Expy
STATUS:
Anticipated Adoption February 2026
TIMEFRAME:
March 2020 - Spring 2026
BUDGET:
$1.145M
REFERENCE:
Eric B. Anderson, AICP
Advanced Planning Manager
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street
Mountain View, CA 94039
(650) 903-6306
[email protected]
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW
Update R-3 Zoning, Financial Feasibility Analysis, and Anti-Displacement Strategy Mountain View R-3
parcels and districts
Thursday Night Live,
Downtown Mountain View
LWC was hired as part of a team
led by Opticos Design, Inc. to
provide development finance and fair
housing services to support the City
of Mountain View in updates to the
R-3 (Multifamily Residential) zone.
LWC is also responsible for an antidisplacement response strategy. The objective of the project is to increase
the quantity, diversity, and affordability
of housing through the incorporation
of form-based zoning standards and
the incentivization of stacked-flat and
higher-density development.
The City has experienced high
employment growth but fallen short
in housing development, further
exacerbating the pressures of the
housing market and rental and
ownership affordability.
In Phase 1, LWC tested the financial
feasibility of prototypical buildings
consistent with potential formbased building types to inform the development of various design
standards across R-3 subareas. The
analysis used a static pro forma model
to estimate the financial returns of a
range of building prototypes and relied
on industry standard metrics that
indicate the likelihood of development:
developer profit and return on cost.
In Phase 2, as part of a larger citywide
anti-displacement response strategy,
LWC conducted a replacement
analysis to model the impacts of SB
330 and ultimately a potential longterm unit replacement requirement for developments that demolish
existing rent-stabilized units. LWC
is also estimating the potential yield
of units given the proposed zones
and standards and developing
an illustrative parking analysis to
understand the cost and feasibility of
adding parking on a per-project and
per-unit basis.
Item 8.c
221 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 53 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM The City of Napa hired LWC to lead
a Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance
Update, including a complete
update to the Zoning Map to ensure
consistency with the 2040 General
Plan. The update also includes the
development of Objective Residential
Design Standards that support
and comply with recent changes in
State law.
The City adopted the existing Zoning
Ordinance in 2003. Consistent with
the General Plan, the update is
intended to promote infill within the
City and reflect Napa’s status as
a global destination dedicated to
sustaining agriculture, environmental
stewardship and provide leadership
and services to advance health,
safety, and economic well-being.
LWC is working closely with the City
to reduce inconsistencies, consolidate
existing zones and create new zones
to implement the General Plan, and
clarify land uses and definitions,
update parking policies, and ensure
that the code is consistent with
the community’s vision for specific
uses and topics such as food
trucks, artisan and small-scale
manufacturing, bed & breakfasts, sign
standards, amplified noise standards,
drive-through policies and regulations
on service stations.
Working closely with the City,
LWC is conducting a robust Public
Outreach Plan aimed to 1) promote
awareness and understanding, 2)
establish confidence and trust of
the Zoning Ordinance Update, and
3) ensure community priorities are
evident in findings and the final
Zoning Ordinance.
Outreach methods feature a Zoning
Ordinance Update Newsletter,
Project Webpage, Public Workshops,
Planning Commission Study
Sessions, Residential Objective
Design Standards (ODS) Advisory
Group meetings, Stakeholder
Interviews, a Community Feedback
Survey, and Adoption Hearings.
Anticipated adoption is Fall 2026.
STATUS:
In Progress
TIMEFRAME:
June 2024 - Fall 2026
BUDGET:
$743,336
REFERENCE:
Ryder Dilley
Interim Planning Manager
1600 First Street
Napa, CA 94559
(707) 257-9225
[email protected]
PARTNERS:
Stantec (CEQA)
CITY OF NAPA
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Update
Item 8.c
222 of 648
54 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM LWC was hired by the City of
Petaluma to create a Station Area
Master Plan to guide the development
of two planned SMART station areas
within the City. The Master Plan
provides a framework to guide future
development and redevelopment
to capitalize on rail transit, promote
walkable and livable environments
within the station areas, and improve
connectivity between the station sites
and existing adjacent commercial,
employment, and residential areas.
The planning process featured
stakeholder interviews, a two-day
community workshop, community
meetings, public hearings, and
regular meetings with a Citizens’
Advisory Committee and a Technical
Advisory Committee.
LWC focused on supporting the
development of the SmartCode which
incorporates zoning, subdivision
regulations, urban design, and basic
architectural standards into one
document. The SmartCode makes
development regulations more
accessible, easier to navigate, and
provides more surety for development
outcomes. LWC also focused on
crafting a strategy to facilitate housing
within the station areas, integrating
historic preservation into the Master
Plan standards and guidelines,
and developing an infrastructure
financing plan.
The Petaluma City Council adopted
the Petaluma SMART Rail Station
Areas: TOD Master Plan in
June 17, 2013.
STATUS:
Adopted June 2013
TIMEFRAME:
2011 - 2013
BUDGET:
$300,000
REFERENCE:
Scott Duiven
Senior Planner (Former)
City of Petaluma
Community Development Director (Current)
City of Healdsburg
(707) 431-3482
[email protected]
PARTNERS:
Opticos Design, Inc.
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting
Associates
CITY OF PETALUMA
Petaluma SMART Rail Stations Transit-Oriented Development Master Plan Central Petaluma Specific Plan Zoning Map
Item 8.c
223 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 55 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM CITY OF FOLSOM Market Analysis and
Financial Feasibility Analysis for Multi
Family, Residential and Mixed Use
Development
Status : Complete
Timeline: January 2022 - May 2022
Budget:$16,000
CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS Retail to
Rooftops Implementation
Status: Complete
Timeline: January 2022 - May 2022
Budget: $22,000
CITY OF WOODLAND Financial Feasibility
Analysis and Implementation Memo,
Neighborhood Framework Plan
Status: Complete
Timeline: April 2022 - August 2022
Budget:$19,000
CITY OF MODESTO Market, Financial
Feasibility and Constraints Analysis, and
Pro Housing Policies Housing Plan
Status: Complete
Timeline: October 2021 - August 2022
Budget:$70,000
Partners: Opticos Design, Inc. (Lead)
LWC was hired as part of a team
to calculate the financial feasibility
of housing types preferred by
the community and capable of
accommodating housing goals
identified in the General Plan in
Folsom, Citrus Heights, Modesto,
and Woodland. The objective of this
work was to assure that the proposed
housing types that have been enabled
and incentivized in the zoning code
and further refined on objective design
standards are financially feasible.
LWC developed a market analysis
aimed at a finer understanding of
the types of housing and mixed-use
developments that would attract the
highest demand and highest return.
This included analysis of trends in
demographics, housing tenure, and
local and regional economic and fiscal
performance.
LWC then worked closely with the
Cities and the Opticos Team to refine
a pro forma model to assess a range
of proposed development concepts
by considering land valuations,
development costs, permitting and
fees, potential yields (lease and sales
figures), comparable sales (comps) as
well as tax credits, housing assistance
programs or density bonuses based
on the affordable housing mix, and
community benefits packages.
LWC leveraged archival sources, RS
Means, CoStar, California Department
of Tax and Fee Administration,
US Economic Census as well as
conducting personal interviews with
City staff, elected and appointed
officials, real estate developers,
property brokers, affordable housing
service providers and representatives
from housing advocacy groups. LWC
facilitated interviews and surveys
to inform cost and market data and
provide more accurate outcomes in
the financial model.
LWC also developed implementation
plan strategies informed by the market
research and financial analysis that
identified sources of support for public
investment and private partnerships,
including State and Federal assistance
programs and local programs aimed at
accelerating housing production and
supporting the attraction and retention
of businesses and employment.
The projects were delivered on time
and within budget.
MIXED USE, MULT-FAMILY PROTOTYPE
FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
Design Alternatives, Financial Feasibility Analysis, Implementation Plans Item 8.c
224 of 648
56 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg SHERWOOD DESIGN ENGINEERS is a site civil engineering practice committed to the optimal integration of ecology, infrastructure, and design. We specialize in sustainable infrastructure design, innovation, and sound engineering to make big ideas possible at a building, neighborhood, and district scale. We have a proven track record of delivering projects from idea to implementation around the world. Sherwood works collaboratively with project teams to find ways to maximize efficiencies through an integrated and ecological approach that results in high-performance projects that are resilient, economical, and get approved and built.
Sherwood was founded in 2003 with 8 main offices in San Francisco, CA, Petaluma, CA, New York, NY, Atlanta, GA, Napa, CA, Santa Cruz, CA, Los Angeles, CA, and San Jose, Costa Rica. Studied in civil engineering, and urban planning, we are committed to helping clients and fellow design practitioners understand holistic system relationships:
watershed, ecosystem, and carbon/energy nexus. This greatly impacts the design and reach of a project and cultivates true sustainability. To help achieve these goals, Sherwood has developed an intimate understanding of California’s state policy and local county and city regulations. Our experience in the City of Petaluma and Sonoma County include General Plan Development, Sea Level Rise flood modeling support, Site Master Planning, Construction Documentation including Green Infrastructure for the City. This work involves close coordination with town, city and county agencies to help direct public and private clients through the planning, design and construction of their project.
Our services include entitlements support, overall system planning and documentation for the services below:
• Site Civil Engineering
• Sustainable Infrastructure Planning and Engineering
• Resilient Planning and Engineering
• Water Resources Planning and Engineering
• Ecological Systems Planning and Engineering
FIRM PROFILE
Awards
2025 Honor Award for Large
Scale Commercial Architecture
LUMCOM Blue Works
AIA New Orleans Design Awards
2025 Architectural Award
UC Santa Cruz Kresge College
Expansion
AIA National
2025 ACEC Certificate of
Commendation Award
China Beach Parking Area and
Beach Access
American Council of Engineering
Companies (ACEC) California
2024 Honor Award for Large
Scale Commercial Architecture
LUMCOM Blue Works
AIA New Orleans Design Awards
2024 ASLA Honor Award:
Analysis and Planning
The Resilient Campus: Historic
Ecology and Water Conservation
at UCLA
American Society of Landscape
Architects Professional Awards
2024 SCUP Excellence Award
Merit - Existing Campus
Georgia Institute of Technology
Comprehensive Campus Plan
Society of college and university
planning
2024 Honor Award: General
Design
Trees Atlanta Kendeda
TreeHouse
ASLA Atlanta
Item 8.c
225 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 57
LOCATION
Petaluma, California
CLIENT
City Of Petaluma
DESIGN PARTNERS
Raimi + Associates
SIZE
14.5 Sq miles
TIMELINE
In Process
REFERENCE
Gina Benedetti-Petnic, P.E.
Assistant Director Of Public
Works
City of Petaluma
[email protected]
707.778.4311
P E TA L U M A S E A L E V E L R I S E + C L I M AT E
CHANGE WHITE PAPER
Through the Petaluma General Plan Update process, Sherwood developed a White Paper summarizing the potential impacts of flooding and climate change on the City.
Using locally developed SLR models and California guidance documents, Sherwood provided an intuitive Risk-Based Matrix for designers to use when determining which flood scenarios to apply to development projects and city planning. The paper provides maps highlighting affected parcels and lays out existing critical infrastructure allowing the viewer to easily select the future date and level of risk avoidance they are concerned about. The paper also summarized FEMA storm flooding maps in the context of how current hydrological models do not sufficiently integrate climate change impacts to precipitation and Sea Level Rise.
The work effort leveraged analysis in existing local and regional reports and summarized relevant regulatory plans. It will be used through the General Plan Update process to advise planners on how this city straddling a tidal river will adapt to climate change.
Item 8.c
226 of 648
58 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg
PETALUMA GENERAL PLAN
Sherwood Design Engineers is supporting the City of Petaluma General Plan Update by providing expertise on infrastructure systems, stormwater management, and sea level rise and climate adaptation planning. Sherwood also participated in community engagement components of the project, including stakeholder interviews, agency coordination, and educational forums. The City is faced with challenges to mitigate against coastal and riverine flood vulnerability while protecting critical assets and preparing for an uncertain future.
An Existing Conditions report was developed detailing the City’s current and proposed infrastructure systems and their risks and opportunities to withstand future conditions.
Existing sustainability and climate action policies and actions were researched, coordinated and recommended, and flooding and infrastructure risk assessments were consolidated and integrated to inform concurrent stages of the General Plan Update.
A Sea Level Rise White Paper was developed, showcasing current and projected sea level rise scenarios and a variety of anticipated flood conditions through data analysis and visualization using GIS. To support enhanced stormwater management in coordination with natural resource conservation and anticipated future scenarios, green infrastructure opportunities and benefits and short- and long-term ecological interventions to strengthen the City against flood risks were proposed.
These efforts influenced the Alternatives Development, Policy Framework Development and drafting of the General Plan to ensure Petaluma is sustained in the long term on a path towards resilience during a period of rapid climate change. Infrastructure resilience, climate adaptation and flood risk mitigation components are integrated throughout the General Plan Update to develop a comprehensive framework supporting the implementation of multi-functional flooding and sea level rise solutions to sustain reliable infrastructure networks, promote ecology and provide public amenity into the future.
LOCATION
Petaluma, California
CLIENT
City Of Petaluma
DESIGN PARTNERS
Raimi + Associates
TIMELINE
2020-2025
PROJECT TYPE
Urban Planning
REFERENCE
Ron Whitmore
Raimi Associates
1900 Addison Street, Suite 200
Berkeley, CA 94704
[email protected]
808.936.7953
Item 8.c
227 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 59
LOCATION
Lindenville, South San Francisco,
California
CLIENT
City of South San Francisco
DESIGN PARTNERS
Raimi Associates
SERA Architects
Fehr and Peers
FirstCarbon Solutions
Strategic Economics
Lotus Water
SIZE
400 acres
TIMELINE
Completed 2023
PROJECT TYPE
Planning
REFERENCE
Billy Gross
City of South San Francisco
[email protected]
(650) 877-8535
Meghan McNulty
Raimi Associates
[email protected]
(510) 666-1010
LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN
Sherwood played the role of the civil engineer and summarized findings on civil infrastructure, including site topography, utility information (wet and dry), drainage, hydrology, pavements, and other civil related infrastructure. Sherwood also produced several analysis reports, including a Water Supply Assessment - to assess the existing supply of water for the future proposed Land Use Plan, Utility Master Plan - to develop master plans for water, sanitary sewer and stormwater systems to support the plan, Sea Level Rise and Adaptation Study - building on previous Sea Level Rise studies developing a qualitative analysis and providing recommendations on best practices, and Climate Adaptation Analysis - optimizing proposed designs through iterative modeling and quantify microclimate implications to elevate the decision process and human experience.
Item 8.c
228 of 648
60 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg
LOCATION
Hayward, California
SIZE
320 acres
TIMELINE
Completed 2019
PROJECT TYPE
City Planning
Civic/Government
REFERENCE
Jimmy Chen
Senior Engineer
City of Hayward
P: (951) 407-6619
D: (510) 588-4723
[email protected]
[email protected]
DOWNTOWN HAYWARD SPECIFIC PLAN
In Downtown Hayward, Sherwood worked closely with a team of designers to develop a comprehensive Specific Plan for the City’s downtown “Golden Strip”.
Sherwood evaluated the City’s existing infrastructure systems including domestic water, wastewater, and stormwater while analyzing the effects of future demand on these systems and identifying solutions for necessary infrastructure upgrades.
In addition, Sherwood developed an open space concept that incorporated San Lorenzo Creek in a more prominent way and established a framework for how LowImpact Development (LID) measures should be incorporated into the City’s urban design. Strategies for implementation included prioritizing various circulation and infrastructure upgrades with adjacent development opportunities to help achieve the most economical phasing plan possible.
Item 8.c
229 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 61
LOCATION
Moraga, California
CLIENT
City of Piedmont
DESIGN PARTNERS
JZMK Partners
Fehr & Peers
SIZE
20 + Acres
TIMELINE
Planning Stage
PROJECT TYPE
Specific Plan
REFERENCE
xxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxx
MORAGA CANYON SPECIFIC PLAN
Working closely with JZMK, Sherwood worked to support the development of the Specific Plan for Moraga Canyon in the City of Piedmont, California. The site development considerations included steep slopes, wet and dry utility access, stormwater management and LID design and the integration of passive and active recreation space. In addition to evaluating site conditions, Sherwood also reviewed sewer studies, capital improvements and met with city and local agencies to coordinate future utility routing, upgrades and capacity issues. The project team evaluated four (4) different site development scenarios for the project and developed an evaluation matrix that compared infrastructure costs and phasing considerations for each.
Item 8.c
230 of 648
62 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg
LOCATION
Napa County, California
CLIENT
City of Napa
DESIGN PARTNERS
MIG
SIZE
City Wide
TIMELINE
Completed 2012
PROJECT TYPE
City Planning
Civic/Government
REFERENCE
xxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxx
DOWNTOWN NAPA SPECIFIC PLAN
In historic Downtown Napa, Sherwood worked closely with a team of designers to develop a comprehensive Specific Plan for the City’s downtown district. Sherwood evaluated the City’s existing infrastructure systems including domestic water, wastewater, and stormwater while analyzing the effects of future demand on these systems and identifying solutions for necessary infrastructure upgrades. In addition, Sherwood developed a tool palette of Low-Impact Development (LID) measures to be incorporated into the City stormwater management design guidelines, including a conceptual master plan of potential LID projects to be instituted throughout the downtown area.
Item 8.c
231 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 63
LOCATION
Healdsburg, California
CLIENT
Replay Destinations, Inc.
DESIGN PARTNERS
Olsun Kundig
Vita Landscape Architects
SB Architects
SIZE
9.7 acres
TIMELINE
Design Review / Planning with
City
PROJECT TYPE
Mixed Use / Commercial
REFERENCE
David Hill
Replay Destinations, Inc.
Dir. 970.819.1734 | Bus.
707.314.0088
MILL DISTRICT
Sherwood provided site assessment, master planning, and concept design services for redevelopment of an old lumber mill site in the heart of Healdsburg, California. With a focus on sustainable infrastructure, Sherwood helped the developer and design team create a program that included a new hotel, housing, retail, circulation, and outdoor areas on the 10 acre site. Strategies explored include pedestrian friendly streets, low impact development to manage stormwater, capture and reuse of rainwater, and grading and land forming that minimizes earthwork and protects an existing redwood grove that anchors the site to the regional ecology.
Item 8.c
232 of 648
64 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg
LOCATION
Los Angeles, California
CLIENT
Friends of the Los Angeles River
The Mountains Recreation
Conservation Authority (MRCA)
DESIGN PARTNERS
Studio-MLA
The Water Institute of the Gulf
SIZE
4.5 miles
TIMELINE
Completed 2020
PROJECT TYPE
Ecological Restoration
Government
Parks / Open Spaces
Rivers
REFERENCE
Elysian Valley
Liliana Griego
Interim Executive Director
Friends of LA River
P: (323) 937-4270
[email protected]
L A R I V E R / E LY S I A N VA L L E Y
This project was a feasibility study that explored possible new ways to plan for the river by incorporating multi-scalar integrated solutions. This included:
• Reviewing and modeling LA River flood risk and channel capacity in Elysian Valley • Evaluating strategies to resolve the 100-yr flood event while expanding upon ecosystem benefits of the river and enhancing equity / public access • Proposing a community based kit of solutions for localized flood response and calculate their potential impact for future implementation in the urban river ecosystem
• Envisioning a regional watershed and civic infrastructure approach to improve flood risk management and prepare for climate change in a way that is resilient, adaptive, and regenerative
Item 8.c
233 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 65 RFI: Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan| 1
Request for Information
Firm Overview
Fehr & Peers is a transportation planning and
engineering firm with 24 offices and over 400
staff nationwide. Since 1985, the firm has
partnered with public and private clients to
design safer, more effective ways for people
and goods to move—creating spaces where
everyone can thrive, today and for generations
to come.
Bringing together data, technology, and the
lived experiences of the communities they
serve, the firm helps clients make confident,
well-informed decisions. Along the way, the
team has earned national recognition for
raising the bar on how transportation projects
are planned, designed, and delivered. Many of
the firm’s earliest clients continue to trust its
experts after decades of collaboration—a
testament to the strong partnerships built and
the innovative mindset brought to every
project.
Rather than simply following trends, the team
helps clients anticipate what’s next. With a
blend of multimodal expertise, national
perspective, and local insight fueled by our
strong and longstanding relationships, the firm
tailors solutions across a wide range of
services to meet each community’s unique
needs.
Relevant Experience
Sonoma Countywide &
Healdsburg Active
Transportation Plans | Sonoma
County, CA
Fehr & Peers developed the Countywide
Active Transportation Plan (ATP) for the
Sonoma County Transportation Authority
(SCTA) and its partner agencies. The
Countywide ATP identified regional routes and
priorities, along with policies, programs, and
funding opportunities to support active
transportation throughout Sonoma County. As
part of this effort, the team also prepared
jurisdiction-specific active transportation plans
for seven local agencies: the Unincorporated
County and the cities of Cloverdale, Cotati,
Healdsburg, Rohnert Park, Sebastopol, and
Sonoma.
The plan development included three phases
of community engagement designed to guide
project, policy, and program
recommendations. Engagement was closely
coordinated with SCTA, local jurisdictions, and
community-based organizations. Activities
included focus group discussions, pop-up
events, community meetings, advisory group
meetings, both virtual and in-person walking
and biking tours, as well as online surveys and
interactive maps.
In May 2024, community members reviewed
draft project recommendations and policy and
program ideas through an online forum and a
series of pop-up events and community
meetings across the County. The overall
project remained on schedule and on budget.
Dates: 2023 – 2025
Agency: SCTCA
Reference: Dana Turrey |
[email protected]
Vision Zero Supplemental
Planning | Sonoma County, CA
As part of the project team, Fehr & Peers is
providing SCTCA with a multi-faceted safety
study funded through Safe Streets and Roads
for All (SS4A) Supplemental Planning Grant.
The project comprises of four interconnected
efforts. (1) Safe Routes to School Planning:
Including a countywide prioritization,
development of a countermeasure toolbox,
Item 8.c
234 of 648
66 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg RFI: Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan| 2 and SRTS improvement plans at the City of
Healdsburg and at some of the highest need
locations countywide. (2) Speed Limit Study:
Includes evaluating posted speed limits in the
City of Healdsburg and developing
recommendations for reduction, as well as
developing a Local Agency Best Practice
Guidebook and hosting a capacity building
workshop for SCTA's agencies. (3) Lakeville
Corridor Multimodal Study: Includes reviewing
engineering plans and providing input. (4)
Vision Zero Dashboard (as needed): Includes
supporting SCTA will enhancing their existing
safety data dashboard and developing an
automated progress tracking process for
sharing safety metrics and progress.
Dates: 2024 – Ongoing
Agency: SCTCA
Reference: Margot Ocanas |
[email protected]
SMART Quality of Life &
Economic Study | Sonoma
County, CA
The SMART Quality of Life & Economic Study
will highlight how SMART’s rail and pathway
network contributes to a stronger, more
connected North Bay. By assessing SMART’s
impact across mobility, economic vitality, land
use, environmental benefits, public health,
safety, accessibility, and equity, the Study will
quantify the system’s value today while
illustrating the broader benefits that full
buildout could bring.
Anchored by robust technical analysis and
shaped through early engagement with
agency and community stakeholders, the
Study will translate complex data into clear,
visually compelling messages that resonate
with residents, business leaders, policymakers,
and funding partners. Drawing on Fehr &
Peers’ experience developing accessible,
visually rich materials for agencies like
Caltrain, BART, and VTA, the Study will serve
as an effective communication tool—
strengthening public understanding of
SMART’s role in the region and making a
compelling case for continued investment in
its future.
Dates: 2024 – Ongoing
Agency: SMART
Reference: Zoe Unruh |
[email protected]
Transit 2050+ | San Francisco
Bay Area, CA
Fehr & Peers led the Transit 2050+ project, a
long-range planning effort to create a
comprehensive regional transit network
concept for the nine-county Bay Area. Fehr &
Peers led and oversaw all facets of the study,
including an existing condition, needs, gaps,
and opportunities stage where we analyzed
the regional transit network to determine
frequency gaps and speed gaps (using CalITP, INRIX, and GTFS data) for all Bay Area transit agencies and identified new projects to
fill those gaps.
Through this, Fehr & Peers staff gained a
strong understanding of the data formats,
operational details, and analytical approaches
appropriate to each transit agency in the
region. Our staff also collaborated with Cal-ITP
to produce a custom product that would
better serve the analysis and learned more
about the process by which Cal-ITP prepares
transit speed data. Fehr & Peers has worked
closely with MTC staff to craft compelling
stakeholder engagement slide decks and
documentation, as well as coordinating
workshops to source strategic and tactical
input on key project deliverables and
decisions.
Dates: 2023 – Ongoing
Agency: MTC
Reference: Kara Vuicich |
[email protected]
Item 8.c
235 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 67 About Rincon
Rincon Consultants, Inc. is an award-winning multi-disciplinary environmental science, planning, and engineering consulting firm that provides quality professional services to government and industry. At Rincon we pride ourselves on the considerable depth of our staff, which includes certified urban and environmental planners, noise and air quality experts, sustainability and climate action planners, environmental scientists and engineers, geologists, biologists, and cultural and historical resource specialists. Our approach to every project is centered upon the design and development of innovative solutions that respond to our clients’ specific needs in a cost-effective manner.
Our breadth of expertise allows us to perform most of the tasks necessary for the preparation of environmental documents in-house.
Rincon has over 10 years of experience working in Sonoma County and has completed dozens of projects for cities within the County including Healdsburg, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Sebastopol, Cotati, and Windsor. We support Bay Area agencies and jurisdictions from our Oakland and Sacramento offices with statewide technical support as needed. Through this experience we have gained an understanding of the area’s environmental, political, and development settings. Rincon’s programmatic CEQA team complements the planning process by creating CEQA documents that provide for future tiering and streamlining opportunities for projects consistent with the long-range plan. As an example, Rincon specializes in developing prescriptive mitigation measures for addressing environmental impacts, providing clear guidance on the necessary steps for lead agency staff, responsible agencies, the public, and potential applicants to mitigate impacts on individual projects that may be implemented as part of tiering or streamlining under the long-range plan.
Services
We have categorized our environmental consulting services into six core areas:
• Environmental Sciences and Land Use Planning
• Cultural Resources
• Biological Resources
• Site Assessment and Remediation
• Water Resources
• Sustainability Services
We also maintain a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Graphics Communications group to enhance our documents and support our data analyses for projects addressing issues in these service areas.
Related Experience
Supporting transit-oriented development and long-range planning programs is a core service area for Rincon.
We have prepared dozens of CEQA documents for specific plans and area plans, including around transit stations, throughout the Bay Area and the state, including EIR addendums, CEQA streamlining documents, Initial Study-(Mitigated) Negative Declarations and award-winning comprehensive Environmental Impact Reports.
Rincon has performed numerous projects similar in nature to this project, including the following:
• Goleta Train Station Area Master Plan and EIR – City of Goleta • Ashby and North Berkeley BART Stations Transit-Oriented Development Zoning Project – City of Berkeley • Adeline Corridor Specific Plan EIR – City of Berkeley • Bay Fair BART Transit-Oriented Development Specific Plan EIR – City of San Leandro • San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan EIR Addendum –San Carlos Legal Name:
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Legal Form:
California “S” Corporation
Founded: 1994
Professional Staff: 450+
California Offices: 13,
including Oakland and
Sacramento
Core Values: Trusted, Fair,
Transparent, Accountable,
Disciplined, Entrepreneurial
Item 8.c
236 of 648
68 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg City of Goleta
Train Station Area Master Plan and EIR
Goleta, California
In 2019, Rincon prepared a Station Area Master Plan for the Goleta Train Depot to facilitate the development of a multimodal train station at the existing Amtrak platform. The longterm goal of this project is to increase rail ridership and reduce GHG emissions in the Santa Barbara region. The project
represents a portion of a 2018 Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program grant that was awarded to the Santa Barbara
Association of Governments and the City of Goleta.
The Master Plan focuses on the train station’s potential as a multi-modal hub and the accessibility and connection
improvements required to achieve this goal. First and last mile connections will be essential to the future success of the train station; future connections to the University of California, Santa Barbara and existing Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District bus routes were taken into consideration. Rincon’s work on this project included the development and implementation of a large-scale public engagement program to solicit input from community stakeholders and the general public on desired amenities, landscaping, and user’s travel patterns.
Rincon also prepared an EIR to analyze the environmental impacts resulting from future development of the revitalized train depot, as well as a Notice of Exemption to address impacts resulting from planned roadway improvements on South La Patera Lane, the main throughfare to and from the Train Depot. The EIR was certified in January 2022.
Reference Information:
Jaime Valdez, Neighborhood Services Director
City of Goleta
805-961-7501 | [email protected]
Dates: February 2019 to January 2022
Award Winner
The Goleta Train Depot Master Plan
received a 2020 Award of Merit from the
APA Central Coast Section in the Economic
and Development Planning Award
category.
Item 8.c
237 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 69 City of Berkeley
Ashby and North Berkeley BART Stations Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Zoning Project
Berkeley, California
Rincon prepared an EIR for Ashby and North Berkeley BART Station Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Zoning Project. California Assembly Bill (AB) 2923, passed in 2018, requires the adoption of TOD zoning standards for BART-owned properties within ½-mile of station entrances in Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco counties that establish specific local zoning requirements for height (7 stories or higher), density (75 units per acre or higher), floor area ratio (4.2 or higher), and parking. The proposed project involved General Plan amendments, zoning amendments, and development of zoning standards at the station sites to comply with AB 2923. The zoning primarily permits housing, but also permits other non-residential uses such as retail, community-serving uses and civic spaces. At the Ashby BART station, the EIR evaluated development of up to 1,200 dwelling units and 50,000 square feet of non-residential space that would be constructed, distributed between the 4.4-acre station site and the 1.9 acre surface parking lot east of the Ed Roberts campus. At the North Berkeley BART station, the EIR evaluated development of up to 1,200 dwelling units, as well as 25,000 square feet of nonresidential space, located on the main 8.1-acre station site. Key issues analyzed in the EIR included air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, cultural resources, and transportation.
Reference Information:
Justin Horner, Principal Planner
City of Berkeley
(510) 981-7476| [email protected]
Dates: June 2020 – March 2022
Item 8.c
238 of 648
70 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg City of Berkeley
Adeline Corridor Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report Berkeley, California
Rincon completed an EIR for the Adeline Corridor Specific Plan in the City of Berkeley. The Plan Area includes the Ashby BART station in the southern portion of the City of Berkeley and extends approximately 1.3 miles north from the Berkeley/Oakland border along Adeline Street and Shattuck Avenue to the intersection of Shattuck Avenue and Dwight Way. The Plan Area abuts Downtown Berkeley to the north and extends to the City of Oakland border to the south. The Adeline Corridor Specific Plan is intended to facilitate transit-oriented development around the Ashby BART station, direct changes in land uses and development in the corridor, and include right-of-way improvements to improve walkability, bikeability, and connectivity to transit. The vision for the Plan Area is to champion equitable, transit-oriented development that supports a thriving community and provide safe, “complete streets.” Key issues analyzed in the EIR include traffic/circulation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, and GHG emissions.
Reference Information:
Alisa Shen, Principal Planner
City of Berkeley
1947 Center Street, 2nd Floor
Berkeley, California 94704
510-981-7409 | [email protected]
Dates: January 2018 to December 2020
Item 8.c
239 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 71 City of San Leandro Community Development Department
San Leandro Bay Fair BART Transit Village Transit-Oriented Development Specific Plan EIR
San Leandro, California
Rincon completed the CEQA documentation for the Bay Fair BART Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan for the City of San Leandro as part of a larger planning team. The Specific Plan addresses a wide range of development, planning and economic issues. It identifies existing and future opportunities for transit-oriented mixed-use and residential development as well as transportation and infrastructure improvements to accommodate the selected land use alternative. Key
environmental issues in the CEQA document included
aesthetics; air quality/GHGs; historical resources, noise; hydrology/water quality; land use and planning; and
transportation/circulation.
Reference Information:
Tom Liao, Deputy Community Development Director
City of San Leandro
835 East 14th Street
San Leandro, California 94577
510-577-6003 | [email protected]
Dates: July 2015 to February 2018
Award Winner
The Bay Fair BART TOD Specific Plan
received a 2021 Award of Merit from the
APA Northern Section in the
Comprehensive Plan, Small Jurisdiction
Award category.
Item 8.c
240 of 648
72 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg WRT
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report Addendum
San Carlos, California
As a subconsultant to WRT, Rincon completed an Addendum to the City of San Carlos 2045 General Plan Reset EIR for the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP). The Plan Area encompasses approximately 67 acres in San Carlos’s downtown core adjacent to the San Carlos Caltrain station. The DTSP provides a unified blueprint for the Plan Area, organizing the area into distinctive character districts and establishing a clear framework for how land uses, building forms, and public spaces should evolve.
The DTSP envisions balancing new mixed-use development, combining housing, retail, offices, and community amenities, with enhancements to the public realm, including plazas, pocket parks, street trees, and coordinated street-furnishings, all designed to reinforce a cohesive downtown identity. Key issues analyzed in the EIR Addendum included traffic/circulation, noise, air quality, GHG emissions, utilities, and hazards.
Reference Information:
Lisa Porras, Planning Manager
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, California 94070
650-802-4264| [email protected]
Dates: April 2024 – December 2025
Item 8.c
241 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 73 www.plantoplace.com
FIRM PROFILE
ENGAGEMENT + COMMUNICATION + COLLABORATION
Our Approach to Community Engagement
We take a holistic approach to community engagement that integrates client and stakeholder input throughout the process. We design context-sensitive and inclusive engagement plans that reach broad and representative audiences using the following strategies:
• Designing compelling outreach campaigns via virtual technologies and in-person events; • Bringing engagement opportunities to the places where people already are - be that at the park or on their smartphone;
• Building consensus among diverse groups by establishing strong relationships of trust; • Cultivating community partnerships with local CBOs, and (whenever possible) employing locals to assist with project execution (e.g., event promotion, advisory groups, translation/interpretation).
Plan to Place is a community engagement and communications firm founded in 2016 and based in Marin County. At Plan to Place we value highly collaborative and inclusive community-based, neighborhood and urban planning efforts. As a full-service engagement firm, we are continually exploring and innovating new outreach tools that are tailored to meet the needs of our clients and the communities we work with. We implement an array of communication, facilitation and engagement in-person and digital platforms designed to provide access to a wide range of participants.
We specialize in:
• Comprehensive community engagement strategies
• Customized outreach tools that spark imagination and intrigue • Interactive and approachable visioning exercises
• Inclusive processes that prioritize equitable integration of all voices and aspirations • Genuine and active listening to and empowering of stakeholders • Creative community-facing design and branding
• Thoughtful translation of complex planning challenges into collaborative community-supported Item 8.c
242 of 648
74 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.plantoplace.com
Our Experience
Plan to Place has broad range of experience working primarily with communities throughout the Bay Area on challenging projects, facilitating conversations related to housing and displacement, adaptive reuse, accessibility and mobility, vital infrastructure improvements, climate resilience, and community benefits including essential services. Our strength lies in our ability to foster authentic conversations and collaboration through partnerships with community ambassadors/connectors and representatives of difficult to reach sub-populations throughout the jurisdictions we work within. Our objective is to ensure that all perspectives are represented in the final outcome of any project. We have lead outreach and engagement efforts for a host of General Plan and Housing Element Updates, Climate Adaptation and Reliance Planning particularly around Sea Level Rise Vulnerability, and Downtown Specific, Strategic, Corridor, Area, and Vision Plans. In each project our sole focus is on the publicfacing side of the project and crafting tailored and adaptable outreach strategies, preparing accessible and attractive communication materials and facilitating inclusive engagement activities.
Plan to Place has led all community outreach and engagement aspects including branding, messaging and communication tools; organizing and facilitating multilingual in-person and virtual stakeholder and community meetings; building relationships with local community based organizations and leaders to expand the capacity and reach of initiatives to ensure all sub-populations and perspectives are represented; and analyzing the effectiveness of outreach and engagement activities for planning efforts throughout the Bay Area. We enjoy supporting communities with targeted strategic plan efforts including award-winning design and planning efforts East Side Innovation District Plan and Northeast Area Specific Plan projects in San Carlos and the Downtown Specific Plan in San Mateo and Downtown Vision Plan in Los Altos.
Recent efforts include the Climate and Sea Level Rise Adaptation Engagement in Corte Madera – (following a Housing Element Update engagement process that was recognized with a State APA Award in Public Engagement); award-winning General Plan and EIRs in South San Francisco, Auburn and Petaluma; award-winning Marin Countywide Objective Development and Design Standards; Marin Countywide Housing Element Update engagement support; and the Google West/Diridon Station Area Plan project in San Jose.
Item 8.c
243 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 75 www.plantoplace.com
CLIENT
City of San Jose
SERVICES
Community Engagement Strategy
Advisory Group Facilitation
Branding/Communication Tools
Bi-Lingual Outreach
TIMELINE
2018 – 2021
TOTAL BUDGET
$341,845
REFERENCE
Lori Severino
Former Diridon Program Manager
City of San Jose
email: [email protected]
phone: 510.541.3215
“The Plan to Place team demonstrated
professionalism, patience, and empathy in
the face of protests and intense fears about
displacement. They conducted an inclusive,
transparent process that led to a set of
desired outcomes. Ultimately, the
thoughtful design and implementation of
the engagement process helped build broad
support for the outcomes. We highly
recommend Plan to Place.”
- Lori Severino, Diridon Program Manager
DIRIDON STATION AREA
CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
San Jose, CA
Plan to Place, in partnership with Raimi + Associates, collaborated with the City of San Jose on a civic engagement strategy to garner input on a high-profile transit hub in the heart of the Downtown San Jose, targeted by Google for a mixed-use campus. Outreach activities included regular meetings with a 38-person advisory group (representing perspectives ranging from the formerly homeless and housing advocates, to major business and development interests), focus/solution group meetings, pop-up/intercept and stakeholder meetings, walking tours, and regional workshops. Many meetings and workshops were held solely in Spanish and all meeting materials were translated in multiple languages, accessible by the diverse San Jose community. Surveys were also administered to provide convenient access to all, specifically targeted at segments of the community that are typically unable to attend meetings and workshops. Branding materials and digital tools including a custom project website (https://www.diridonsj.org/) have also been prepared to gather and share information through a transparent process.
KEY ELEMENTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
• Co-produced engagement strategies through an iterative and flexible stakeholder and community-led process, that led to approximately 70 community meetings.
• Facilitation of multiple perspectives and management of expectations represented through a large community advisory group.
• Branding materials that reinforce project identity and establish consistent communication templates, and preparation of a project website that reached close to 40,000 unique visitors.
• Messaging, training and capacity building with community ambassadors.
Item 8.c
244 of 648
76 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.plantoplace.com
CLIENT
City of Berkeley
SERVICES
Comprehensive Engagement Strategy
Advisory Group Facilitation
Visioning Exercises
TIMELINE
2020 – 2021
REFERENCE
Alisa Shen
Principal Planner, City of Berkeley
email: [email protected]
phone: (510) 981-7409
ASHBY + N. BERKELEY BART STATION PLANNING
Berkeley, California
In collaboration with the City of Berkeley, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and Van Meter Williams Pollak (VMWP), Plan to Place prepared and implemented a comprehensive engagement strategy to capture stakeholder and community aspirations into the preparation of the vision and priorities for the reimagining of Ashby and North Berkeley BART stations. Through online virtual engagement platforms and thoughtfully curated engagement activities, such as community advisory group (CAG) meetings, community workshops, surveys, and stakeholder meetings, Plan to Place effectively identified the community’s priorities related to affordable housing, the density/intensity of future development, supportive public or civic space, and parking and station access for the respective sites. The perspectives garnered through these activities were instrumental in the formation of the initial planning and zoning framework and priorities that will used to prepare the memorandum of agreement between the City of Berkeley and BART, and the RFQ to choose a developer to bring the project to life.
KEY ELEMENTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
• Facilitated complex advisory group meetings through virtual inclusive online engagement activities, accessible to target demographics. • Prepared digital tools and metrics that ensured the community and stakeholder goals and objectives were acknowledged in shared and distinct priorities for the respective stations.
Item 8.c
245 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 77 www.plantoplace.com
CLIENT
City of Los Altos
SERVICES
Comprehensive Engagement Strategy
Targeted Focus Group Meetings
Visioning Exercises
Branding/Communication Tools
TIMELINE
2017 - 2018
REFERENCE
Jon Biggs
Former, Community Development
Director - City of Los Altos
"It has been a pleasure to work with you
on the Downtown Los Altos Vision
project. Your guidance and expertise in
public outreach have truly helped the
effort be a successful one. All of the Los
Altos participants that helped form the
vision, we're able to do so because of
your great work!"
- Jon Biggs, Former Community
Development Director, City of Los Altos
DOWNTOWN VISIONPLAN
Los Altos, CA
The visioning effort for Downtown Los Altos included over 40 engagement activities to gather input on community aspirations and support for land use and circulation vision scenarios. Plan to Place lead the engagement process through intercept/“pop-up” workshops, walking tours, and focus group meetings. To elevate the perspective of traditionally under-represented community members, the team held targeted neighborhood meetings with Community and Minority Coalitions; Faith-Based organizations; PTAs; Little League, Soccer League commissions and Junior Olympics committees, High Schools and Senior groups. Hands-on interactive workshops were held throughout the downtown area, paired with a project website (losaltosca.gov) and online engagement tools and surveys (mailed to every household and business and administered through the City’s Open City Hall platform) that received over 1,500 responses.
KEY ELEMENTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
• Targeted meetings and strategies to elevate a range of community perspectives, particularly those are typically not included in the process. • Digital and in-person outreach strategies to meet the community where they were and provide convenient access to the project. • A Vision Plan that was unanimously approved by the City Council, and praised by both city leaders and community members as the most comprehensive and successful community engagement process the City has ever experienced.
Item 8.c
246 of 648
78 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.plantoplace.com
CLIENT
City of San Carlos
PROJECT ROLE
Engagement Strategy
Community Outreach Materials
Visioning Exercises
Lead Facilitation
Communication Tools
TIMELINE
2020 - 2021
REFERENCE
Al Savay
Community + Economic Development
Director
City of San Carlos
email: [email protected]
phone: (650) 802-4209
* APA Award winner in Economic
Planning and Development
EASTSIDE INNOVATIONDISTRICT
SAN CARLOS, CA
In partnership with the Perkins+Will, Plan to Place worked closely with community members and planning staff to establish a guiding vision for the preparation of San Carlos’ “East Side Innovation District” area.
Visioning activities include virtual community workshops, focus group meetings, surveys and thoughtful discussion with residents and property owners. The insights cultivated through these activities will be integral to advancing a comprehensive vision for the area that will inform development patterns and address the influx of jobs in industrial and commercial areas within the city’s Innovation District. In addition to facilitating visioning and engagement activities, a project website (https://www.sancarlosinnovation.org/) was prepared to share project and meeting information, obtain feedback on concepts presented at community workshops, and information on up-coming events.
KEY ELEMENTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
• Highly collaborative engagement and visioning strategy that effectively identified community perspectives and priorities pertaining to circulation, mix of uses, open space, and the environment.
• Educational and informative workshops to facilitate communication between planning staff, community members, property owners and other local stakeholders.
• Use of various adaptive, online engagement tools to obtain community in-put on vision concepts.
• Preparation of a project website and graphics that effectively communicated project goals and updates to community members.
Item 8.c
247 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 79 www.plantoplace.com
“Dave is by far the best project manager I
have worked with. His management of
our Downtown San Mateo Engagement
project was exceptional, and is still being
talked about as a model community
engagement strategy for the community
and beyond. I highly recommend Plan to
Place for any of your planning or project
management endeavors.”
- Marcus Clarke, Former Economic
Development Manager, City of San Mateo
CLIENT
City of San Mateo
SERVICES
Community Engagement Strategy
Forum Facilitation
Branding/Communication Tools
Stakeholder Outreach
Capacity Building
TIMELINE
2015 – 2018
REFERENCE
Marcus Clarke
Former Economic Development
Manager, City of San Mateo
email: [email protected]
DOWNTOWN ENGAGEMENT +
SPECIFIC PLAN
San Mateo, CA
The “Engage Downtown San Mateo” project kicked off in 2015 through a variety of digital and in-person outreach strategies to thoughtfully engage the community. Outreach included hands on and informed discussions with local stakeholders, regional experts and decision makers through “Taste and Task / Downtown Future Forums", surveys, walking tours, and pop-up workshops. The project culminated in an Assets and Opportunities Report which launched the Downtown Plan Update, that Plan to Place is currently collaborating with the City on. A project website (engagedowntownsanmateo.org) was prepared to host information on upcoming events, summaries and pictures/videos from events, and to link to the City’s social media outlets.
KEY ELEMENTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
• Multi-pronged outreach strategy designed to engage traditionally under-represented members of the community.
• Educational and engaging forums that brought regional experts together with the community to respectfully share insights on the latest land use, circulation and market trends impacting the area. • Use of various high-tech and high-touch hands-on engagement exercises to spark creativity and idea-generation.
• A project website and branding materials that created a recognizable identity for the project and connected the community to key events and resources.
• Set the foundation for the Downtown Specific Plan and provided a clear direction of objectives for future updates to Downtown San Mateo.
Item 8.c
248 of 648
Place It!
313 S. Cordova Street
Alhambra, CA 91801
626.437.4446
[email protected]
Place It! believes that everyone has something
to offer in the urban planning process. To these
ends, we have developed innovative planning
tools and strategies that incorporate elements of
model-building with found objects, storytelling,
art-making, and play. These tools and strategies are
accessible to everyday individuals, help to remove
barriers in engaging underserved audiences (such
as youth, women, immigrants, and people of color),
humanize the community visioning process, and
maximize public participation.
Working in laundromats, schools, parks, and other
places where people gather, Place It! successfully
integrates planning into everyday community life
to generate tangible planning outcomes – a more
accessible park, an activated and welcoming
downtown, improved public engagement across a
range of communities and backgrounds, or greater
understanding of the planning process and how
everyone can be involved. For the past 10 years,
we have conducted over 500 workshops and
trainings, and built over 100 interactive models.
Through these workshops and models, we have
tapped into people's creative problem-solving
skills, empathy, and capacity to collaborate, while
helping to improve people's civic literacy. As a
result, participants oftentimes continue to engage
in the planning process well after their participation
in our workshops.
We have conducted outreach and community
engagement on an extensive number of projects
related to neighborhood-scale urban design,
general and specific plans, active transportation,
park design, and public health.
Primary Services
Conducting hands-on and
sensory-based community
engagement
Translating feedback from
meetings into design
recommendation for design
teams and planning staff
Conducting trainings on
hands-on and sensory-based
community enggement
Creating larger, interactive
pop-up models of project
areas for community events
Documenting community
outreach events through
photos and words
Serving as an effective bridge
between communities of
all kinds and planners and
designers
80 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
249 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 81 Item 8.c
250 of 648
82 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Item 8.c
251 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 83 Images from past work in Healdsburg
and near SMART stations
Project
Personnel
In this section
Attachment 2 Proposer Information and Certification
Attachment 3 Proposer References and Resumes
1 Opticos Design Resumes
2 Lisa Wise Consulting Resumes
3 Sherwood Engineering Resumes
4 Fehr and Peers Resumes
5 Rincon Resumes
6 Plan to Place Resumes
7 PlaceIt! Resumes
Item 8.c
252 of 648
84 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Attachment 2
Proposer Information and Certifications
RFP-01-026 Attachment 2
City of Healdsburg Page 1 of 4 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan Proposer:
Name of person submitting proposal: __________________________ Email: __________________________ By: Title:
Dated this day of , 20___
1. ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS
By signing below, Proposer agrees to enter into an agreement with the City to provide the services specified in the attached Draft Contract (Attachment 4) according to the terms and conditions of the attached Draft Contract (Attachment 4). The City reserves the right to modify the terms and conditions prior to sending the agreement to the Contractor for signature.
2. NON-COLLUSION DECLARATION
The Proposer declares, by signing below that his or her proposal is not made in the interest of, or on behalf of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or corporation; that the proposal is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the Proposer has not directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other Proposer to put in a false or sham proposal, and has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any Proposer or anyone else to put in a sham proposal, or that anyone shall refrain from submitting a proposal; that the Proposer has not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or conference with anyone to fix the proposal price of the Proposer or any other Proposer, or to fix any overhead, profit, or cost element of the proposal price, or of that of any other Proposer, or to secure any advantage against the public body awarding the agreement of anyone interested in the proposed agreement; that all statements contained in the proposal are true; and, further, that the Proposer has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her proposal price or any breakdown thereof, or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham proposal.
Any person executing this declaration on behalf of a Proposer that is a corporation, partnership, joint venture, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, or any other entity, hereby represents that he or she has full power to execute, and does execute, this declaration on behalf of the Proposer.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration is executed on _______, at ___________, ______.
3. WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE CERTIFICATION
By submitting its proposal, the Proposer certifies as follows:
I am aware of the provisions of California Labor Code Section 3700, which require every employer to be insured against liability for workmen’s compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Labor Code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing performance of the work of this Contract.
Feb 18 26
Karen E. Parolek [email protected]
02/18/26 Berkeley CA
Item 8.c
253 of 648
Attachment 2
Proposer Information and Certifications
RFP-01-026 Attachment 2
City of Healdsburg Page 2 of 4 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan
4. DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION
By submitting its proposal, the Proposer certifies in accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 6109 that neither the Proposer nor any subcontractor included on the list of proposed subcontractors submitted with the proposal is ineligible to perform work on public works projects pursuant to California Labor Code Sections 1777.1 or 1777.7. In accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 6109, contractors and subcontractors who are ineligible to perform work on public works projects pursuant to California Labor Code Sections 1777.1 or 1777.7 may neither bid on, be awarded or perform as a subcontractor on public works projects.
I have read, understand and agree to comply with the Indemnity and Insurance requirements supplied with this notice to Proposers.
5. PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10285.1 STATEMENT
In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 10285.1 (Chapter 376, Stats, 1986), the Proposer hereby declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the Proposer has ___ , has not been convicted within the preceding three years of any offenses referred to in that section, including any charge of fraud, bribery, collusion, conspiracy, or any other act in violation of any state or federal antitrust law in connection with the bidding upon, award of, or performance of, any public works contract, as defined in Public Contract Code Section 1100, including the Regents of the University of California or the Trustees of the California State University. The term "Proposer" is understood to include any partner, member, officer, director, responsible managing officer, or responsible managing employee thereof, as referred to in Section 10285.1.
Note: The Proposer must place a check mark after "has" or "has not" in one of the blank spaces provided.
The above Statement is part of the Proposal. Signing the Contractor’s Proposal on the signature portion thereof shall also constitute signature of this Statement.
Proposers are cautioned that making false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution.
6. PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10162 QUESTIONNAIRE
In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 10162, the Proposer shall complete, under penalty of perjury, the following questionnaire:
Has the Proposer, any officer of the Proposer, or any employee of the Proposer who has a proprietary interest in the Proposer, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a violation of law or a safety regulation?
x
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 85 Item 8.c
254 of 648
86 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Attachment 2
Proposer Information and Certifications
RFP-01-026 Attachment 2
City of Healdsburg Page 3 of 4 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan Yes _____ No _____
If the answer is "Yes", explain the circumstances in the following space.
7. PUBLIC CONTRACT SECTION 10232 STATEMENT
In accordance with Public Contract Code Section 10232, the Proposer, hereby states under penalty of perjury, that no more than one final unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal court has been issued against the Proposer within the immediately preceding two year period because of the Proposer's failure to comply with an order of a federal court which orders the Proposer to comply with an order of the National Labor Relations Board.
8. PROPOSAL VALIDITY PERIOD
The Proposer agrees that its proposal and the content thereof are valid for 90 days following the submission deadline, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by both parties. The proposal will become part of the contract that is negotiated between the City and the successful Proposer. A proposal cannot be “timed” to expire on a specific date. For example, a statement such as the following is non-responsive to the solicitation: “This proposal and the cost estimate are valid for 60 days.”
9. RFP REQUIREMENTS
By signing below, the submission of the proposal shall be deemed a representation and certification by the Proposer that they have investigated all aspects of the RFP, that they are aware of the applicable facts pertaining to the RFP process, its procedures and requirements, and they have read and understand the RFP. No request for modification of the proposal shall be considered after its submission on the grounds that the Proposer was not fully informed as to any fact or condition.
1. By signing below, the Proposer confirms that the proposal is complete and includes the required documents below:
o Attachment 1 Cost Proposal Form (Requires Signature(s)) o Attachment 2 Proposer Information and Certifications (Requires Signature(s)) o Attachment 3 Proposer References
o Narrative proposal
x
Item 8.c
255 of 648
Attachment 2
Proposer Information and Certifications
RFP-01-026 Attachment 2
City of Healdsburg Page 4 of 4 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan Signature(s)
1. If Proposer is INDIVIDUAL, sign here:
Date: ________________
______________________________________________
Proposer Signature
______________________________________________
Proposer typed name and title
2. If Proposer is PARTNERSHIP or JOINT VENTURE, at least (2) Partners of each of the Joint Ventures shall sign here:
___________________________________________________________________________ Partnership or Joint Venture Name (type or print)
Date: ______________
______________________________________________
Member of the Partnership or Joint Venture signature
______________________________________________
Member’s typed name and title
Date: ______________
______________________________________________
Member of the Partnership or Joint Venture signature
______________________________________________
Member’s typed name and title
3. If the Proposer is a CORPORATION, the duly authorized officer shall sign as follows:
___________________________________________________________________________ Corporation Name (type or print)
Date: ________________
______________________________________________
Authorized Officer’s Signature
______________________________________________
Authorized Officer’s typed name and title
2/18/2026
Karen E. Parolek, Its CFO
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 87 Item 8.c
256 of 648
88 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Attachment 3
Proposer References and Resumes
RFP-01-026 Attachment 3
City of Healdsburg Page 1 of 1 Station Area Specific Plan Experience & References- Provide a listing of recent and successfully completed agreements/contracts (preferably with public agencies or public utility organizations) for the type of services described in scope of work. A minimum of three (3) references from other agencies for which the Proposer has recently provided the services described in this solicitation must be provided.
Agency or Firm Name Agreement Amount Agreement Date Contact/Reference (Name & Phone #) Resumes - Resumes of the key members of the proposed consultant team, including subconsultants, shall be provided on additional pages attached hereto. The resumes shall include relevant experience related to the work requested in this RFP.
Marin County $310,000 12/17/19 Jillian Zeiger, 415-473-7549 City of Modesto $210,000 6/10/19 Jalen French, 209-691-7400 City of San Rafael $410,000 1/31/19 Alicia Guidice, 707-799-7716 City of Davis $1,537,278 9/1/17 Mike Webb, 537-757-5602 Item 8.c
257 of 648
89 Lina Velasco
Community Development Director
City of Richmond
[email protected] | 510.620.6841
Projects: Richmond Bay Specific Plan, Richmond Livable Corridors Subconsultants: Sherwood Engineers, Fehr + Peers, Rincon The Richmond Bay Specific Plan established planning policies, regulations, and urban design guidelines to implement the City of Richmond’s vision to transform approximately 320 acres of their southern shoreline.
Ali Giudice
Former Community Development Director
City of San Rafael
Current City of Rohnert Park Director of Development Services [email protected] | 707.799.7716
Projects: Downtown San Rafael Specific Plan + Code
The 20-year Downtown San Rafael plan leverages a transit-oriented, walkable framework to integrate mixed-use development, expand housing across income levels, and implement context-sensitive design standards that reinforce historic character and urban identity.
Jillian Zeiger
Principal Planner
County of Marin
[email protected] | 415.473.7549
Project: Marin County ODDS, ABAG Toolkits
Opticos Design partnered with Marin County and 10 jurisdictions to convert existing multifamily and mixed-use guidelines into form-based, objective design standards that enable context-sensitive infill housing across diverse community character.
Mike Webb
Former City Manager
City of Davis
Current Yolo County Administrative Officer
[email protected] | 530.666.8150
Projects: Downtown Davis Specific Plan + Code
Subconsultants: Fehr + Peers
Opticos led a dynamic process with two week-long design charrettes, to bring together a concordant public dialogue and a coherent vision that celebrates Davis' unique identity as a leader in sustainability and the “bicycling capital” of the Western U.S.
References
Item 8.c
258 of 648
90www.opticosdesign.com Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos Design Education
Master of Urban Design
University of California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Architecture
Magna Cum Laude
University of Notre Dame
Licenses
California Licensed Architect
#C32904
Memberships
American Institute of Certified
Planners #020186
American Planning Association (APA)
Small Town and Rural (STAR)
Urban Design and Preservation (UDP)
Relevant Project
Experience
Rebuild Lahaina Plan
Lahaina, Maui, HI
Marin County Multi-jurisdictional
Objective Design and Development
Standards
Marin County, CA
Santa Barbara Multifamily and MixedUse Objective Design Standards Santa Barbara, CA
Midtown Master Plan and Code
Santa Fe, NM
Downtown San Rafael Precise Plan
and Code
San Rafael, CA
Housing Study for West, Central, and
South Maui
Maui County, HI
Principal
Stefan Pellegrini’s educational degrees and professional experience in both architecture and urban design make him an expert project leader at all building scales, from single-family homes to regional plans. He has extensive experience traveling and teaching workshops abroad, a roster of groundbreaking and awardwinning projects to his credit, and he is uniquely skilled at bringing diverse people and opinions together at the table to resolve conflicts and turn disagreements into productive projects. Adept at analyzing a place and drawing his ideas on paper, with a passion for traditional architecture, Stefan meticulously considers every aspect and angle of a project to create beautiful places and spaces that thrive.
His strong interest in revitalizing places, especially rural small towns and inner-city areas, comes from a childhood spent in the rust belt town of Muncie, Indiana, seeing first-hand the impact of declining industry. Before joining Opticos in 2002, Stefan brought this understanding to his work at the nationally renowned firm Urban Design Associates in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where he was a senior designer and project manager for over 50 urban design and architecture projects, including groundbreaking plans that redesigned public housing into mixed-income communities through the HOPE VI program in five states (one of which won an AIA Honor Award for Urban Design), and new housing developments in North Carolina and Alabama. He also played an instrumental role in UDA’s resurrection of Architectural Pattern Books.
Stefan brings an international perspective to the firm. The recipient of a number of fellowships, including the prestigious Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill Foundation Urban Design Traveling Fellowship, he has spent months studying architecture and planning all over the world, including Scandinavia, North Africa, and Southern Europe. In addition, Stefan is fluent in Italian.
Stefan Pellegrini, RA, AICP,
LEED AP
Item 8.c
259 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 91 Education
Master of Urban + Regional Planning
UCLA
Bachelor of Architecture
University of Texas at Austin
Bachelor of Arts in Urban Studies
University of Texas at Austin
Relevant Project Experience
Urban Design Guidelines
Memphis, TN
Accelerate Memphis Small Area
Plans, Memphis, TN
Memphis 3.0 Comprehensive Plan
Memphis, TN
Livable Corridors Form-Based
Code (FBC)
Richmond, CA
Downtown Specific Plan and FBC
Hayward, CA
CodeNEXT Citywide Code Update
Austin, TX
South County Community Plan
and FBC
Kauai County, HI
West County Community Plan
and FBC
Kauai County, HI
Countywide Comprehensive Plan
Kauai County, HI
Honolulu Primary Urban Center
Development Plan Update
Honolulu, HI
Senior Associate, Urban Design Team Lead
Drew Finke is a Senior Associate with 14 years of experience whose work combines architectural and planning expertise with a commitment to advancing design and policy strategies that preserve local culture and enhance each community’s distinct sense of place.
Drew specializes in form‑based codes, charrette facilitation, placemaking, and Missing Middle Housing design, planning and implementation, bringing deep technical expertise to complex, community‑centered projects. His practice is grounded in helping neighborhoods, main streets, and downtowns thrive— advancing walkability, equity, sustainability, and beauty across both urban and rural settings.
Since joining Opticos in 2013, Drew has led and contributed to impactful work nationwide, including an award‑winning comprehensive plan and implementation charrettes in Memphis, Tennessee; context‑sensitive form‑based codes for rural communities in Kaua’i County, Hawai’i; and a neighborhood plan for an affordable Missing Middle Housing community in Mammoth Lakes, California. His projects emphasize authentic community engagement and feasible, actionable implementation strategies that help communities navigate change with clarity and confidence.
Drew has presented widely on Missing Middle Housing, sharing insights on design, policy, and implementation at conferences and professional gatherings.
He has also served on final review panels for undergraduate and graduate architecture studios, contributing his interdisciplinary perspective to the academic design community.
Outside of work, Drew enjoys exploring local food cultures and can often be found at farmers’ markets and neighborhood institutions when visiting new places.
Drew Finke
Item 8.c
260 of 648
92 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos Design
Education
Master in Public Anthropology
Boston University
Master of Urban Design
University of California, Berkeley
Master and Bachelor in
Architectural Engineering
National Technical University
of Athens
Memberships
American Anthropological
Association (AAA)
American Planning Association (APA),
APA California
Association of Cultural Heritage
European Association of Social
Anthropologists
Relevant Project Experience
San Rafael Downtown Precise Plan
San Rafael, CA
Downtown Davis Specific Plan + Code
Davis, CA
Puget Sound Regional Missing Middle
Zoning Toolkit & Resources, Puget
Sound Region, WA
Sacramento Missing Middle Study,
Sacramento, CA
Memphis 3.0, Memphis, TN
Santa Fe Midtown
Santa Fe, NM
Honolulu General Plan
Honolulu, HI
www.opticosdesign.com
Associate I
Xenia is an architect, urban designer, and sociocultural anthropologist. Her crossdiscipline approach is rooted in her keen awareness of the cultural, social, and physical elements that shape urban environments. Since joining Opticos Design in 2017, she has drawn on her diverse educational background and extensive experience to contribute to a wide range of urban design and planning projects across communities in the United States.
Xenia dedicates her work to advancing urban places through the lenses of lived experiences, urban storytelling, place analysis, and community engagement. She specializes in integrating cultural and physical insights into comprehensive plans, master plans, form-based codes, and innovative design concepts, ensuring that each project is contextually sensitive and future-ready. Her role extends beyond design; she works with residents and city staff to define their visions via urban planning principles.
In addition to her work at Opticos, Xenia serves on the board of Mary Elizabeth Inn, a nonprofit organization in San Francisco dedicated to providing safe and supportive housing for women in need. When she is not in the design studio, Xenia can be found in Berkeley and San Francisco neighborhoods, hiking somewhere on the California coast, baking, or writing. Her most recent pieces include anthropological research on the emerging participatory planning in the Eastern Mediterranean, and migration patterns in the small isolated islands of the Aegean Archipelago.
Xenia Alygizou, AAA, AICP
Item 8.c
261 of 648
www.opticosdesign.com Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Opticos Design93 Education
Master of Urban Design. University of
California, Berkeley
Bachelor of Architecture.
Tecnologico de Monterrey, Campus
Monterrey
Relevant Project Experience
Sacramento Missing Middle Study
Sacramento, CA
Mixed Housing and Mixed-Use
Development Priority Area Map
Louisville, KY
Project Experience
Prior to Opticos
Oak for Climate Action
Oakland, CA
Central Park DistritoTec
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Urban Regeneration Plan
Tecnologico de Monterrey,
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Wellness Center DistritoTec
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Placemaking in DistritoTec
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Diagnosis Purisima-Alameda Plan
Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico
Senior Designer
Patricia Céspedes is an architect and urban designer who has a breadth of multicultural experience, living in nine different cities and in three different countries—Mexico, the United States, and Spain—all with vastly different traditions and cultures. The constantly changing environment provided her with a dream of learning how to create more walkable and sustainable cities. Her experience as a designer and project manager working with multidisciplinary teams facilitates innovative solutions to promote social integration through urban design.
Since joining Opticos Design in 2023, Patricia has contributed to projects with an international perspective for more walkable and sustainable communities. She has contributed to comprehensive plans, missing-middle housing analysis, analysis plans, and research and development for more sustainable communities. Her role also includes spatial analysis using GIS, graphic visualization, and creating design strategies and solutions for building walkable neighborhoods and communities.
Before coming to California, Patricia worked in Mexico on participatory design and community engagement projects that enabled the revitalization of marginalized zones with challenging social issues. Her thesis at UC Berkeley was focused on the creation of public spaces within neighborhoods that face challenging social issues, breaking paradigms of theoretical frameworks that could apply in different contexts and generating improved zoning for new public spaces. She participates in social projects that involve community engagement, contributes to community workshops and design toolkits. When she is not in the design studio, Patricia can be found exploring the city and nature, dancing Salsa, or painting in open spaces.
Patrica Céspedes
Item 8.c
262 of 648
94 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.opticosdesign.com Opticos Design
Education
B. Arch, The University of Notre
Dame
Project Experience
Lihue Civic Center Feasibility
Study - Phase 1 (Site Testing and
Development Economical Feasibility)
Lihue Town Core Feasibility Study -
Phase 2
East Kauai Community Plan
Bitter Root Site Plan, FBC and Design
Guidelines
Healdsburg Downtown Housing
Capacity Study (Site Testing and
Visualization)
Richmond ADU Toolkit (ADU
guidebook and pre-approved plans)
Delray Beach ADU Study
Ventura County ADU Guidebook
Designer I
Kiara Gutierrez is passionate about the environment, affordable housing, and walkable communities. Growing up in Managua, Nicaragua, where three in ten families lack dignified housing, she learned the impact of the built environment on promoting social change. She focused her academic studies on housing and its urban context through a sustainability lens. Her goal is to design buildings and urban spaces that are lovable, multi-use, and contextual. In her work, she makes sure to consider current and future use, physical and social context, and the voices of the people that the project will impact. She works closely with her team to provide holistic yet detail-oriented solutions to clients.
Kiara has ample experience in ADU projects, site visioning and testing, and housing policy review and recommendations. Her background in architecture provides a realistic lens to high level urban analysis and design. In her work, she makes sure to consider current and future use, physical and social context, and the voices of the people that the project will impact. She works closely with her team to provide holistic yet detail-oriented solutions to clients.
Outside of the studio you will find Kiara listening to audiobooks while on neighborhood walks, watching movies, or hosting an arts and crafts night.
Kiara Gutierrez
Item 8.c
263 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 95 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM
LISA WISE, AICP
President, CEO
As a planner and former Certified Public Accountant, Lisa has over 30 years of experience in land use economics, financial feasibility analysis, urban planning, and accounting. Lisa’s professional focus includes a commitment to a comprehensive approach to economic and fiscal strategies, development codes, long-range plans, affordable housing, and managing complex projects. Lisa is a part time lecturer at California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo, where she lectures on real estate finance and housing in the College of Architecture, Engineering, and Design.
From 1990 to 1999, Lisa was a Manager at PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in Chicago and New York City. She founded Lisa Wise Consulting, Inc. in 2006 and the firm has grown to 20 highly qualified and motivated staff.
Relevant Project Experience:
• Beverly Hills, CA | Economic Sustainability Plan
• Beaumont, CA | Market Report, Economic Development, Fiscal Elements • Burlingame, CA | Downtown Burlingame Preliminary Market Analysis • Hayward, CA | Downtown Specific Plan and Code
• Hermosa Beach, CA | Market and Economic Analysis for General Plan Update • Livermore, CA | Land Use Conversion Study Fiscal Impact Analysis • Long Beach, CA | Zoning Audit
• Long Beach, CA | ADU and SB 9 Local Ordinances
• Marin County, CA | Regulatory Improvements Advisory Committee (RIAC) • Marin County, CA | Development Code Amendments, Sign Code Audit • and Update
• Marin County, CA | Objective Design & Development Standards, Review Procedures, Architectural Styles, and Housing Feasibility Analysis • Marin County, CA | Short-Term Vacation Rentals Report • Malibu, CA | Zoning Code and Local Implementation Plan Update • Menlo Park, CA | Analysis of Initiative to Amend Camino Real Downtown Specific Plan
• Merced, CA | Bellevue Community Plan
• Morgan Hill, CA | Monterey Corridor Market and Land Use Capacity Study • Mountain View, CA | R3 Zoning Code Update, Financial Feasibility Analysis • Ojai, CA | Economic Diversification Element, Tourism Impact Report • Orinda, CA | Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
• Oxnard, CA | Comprehensive Local Coastal Program Amendment • Port San Luis Harbor District, CA | Development Feasibility Analysis and Entitlements
• Riverside County Transportation Commission, CA | Coachella Rail Station Feasibility
• San Luis Obispo, CA | Economic Development Strategic Plan • Santa Maria, CA | Economic Development Element and Fiscal Impact Analysis • Seaside, CA | Market Report, and Economic Development Element • Solano County, CA | Highway Interchange Economic and Zoning Study
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION
CERTIFICATIONS & MEMBERSHIPS
California Polytechnic State University
Part-time Faculty, San Luis Obispo, CA, 2002 – Present
Crawford, Multari & Clark Associates
Consultant, San Luis Obispo, CA, 2001 – 2006
San Luis Obispo County
Staff Planner, San Luis Obispo, CA, 2000 – 2001
Governor’s Office of Planning & Research
Intern, Sacramento, CA, 1999 – 2000
PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLC
California Polytechnic State University
M. of City & Regional Planning | San Luis Obispo, CA
DePaul University
M.S., Accountancy | Chicago, IL
University of Cincinnati
B.S., Business Administration in Marketing & Finance
American Planning Association (APA)
American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP)
California Planning Foundation
Treasurer, 2019 – Present
Dean’s Leadership Council
California Polytechnic State University, College of
Architecture & Environmental Design, 2018 – Present
Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU)
Board Member, 2025
Paul Crawford Award for Excellence in Planning, 2017
Form-Based Code Institute (FBCI)
Chair, 2015 – 2018 | Treasurer, 2014 – 2015
Certified Public Accountant, 1991 – 1999
Item 8.c
264 of 648
96 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM
DAVID BERGMAN
Director
With over 25 years of experience, David has focused on economic and market analysis, community development and urban planning projects with an emphasis on the formation and implementation of urban and regional development strategies, and public private-partnerships.
He has provided feasibility analysis and funding strategies across all major property sectors including arts and culture, residential, retail, office, industrial, and institutional.
David has strong public sector management and academic leadership experience.
He served as the Director of Planning and Building for the City of South Pasadena and Manager of Special Services for the City of Santa Cruz.
Relevant Project Experience:
• Beverly Hills, CA | Economic Sustainability Plan, Fiscal Impacts Special Events
• Citrus Heights, CA | Market and Financial Feasibility Analysis • Culver City, CA I General Plan Fiscal Impact Analysis • Cypress, CA I Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
• Folsom, CA | Multi-Family and Retail Development Feasibility Analysis • Fort Bragg, CA | Special Districts Analysis, Noyo Harbor • Huntington Beach, CA | Short Term Rental Program Feasibility Analysis • LA Convention Center Program Expansion Economic and Fiscal Impact Analysis
• Lompoc, CA I Housing Market Analysis and Housing Feasibility Study • Long Beach, CA | 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
• Marin County, CA | Objective Design & Development Standards, Review Procedures, Architectural Styles, and Housing Feasibility Analysis • Modesto, CA | Market, Financial Feasibility and Constraints Analysis • Mountain View, CA | R3 Zoning Code Update, Financial Feasibility Analysis • Norco, CA | Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and In-Lieu Fee • Ojai, CA | Economic Diversification Element, Tourism Impact Report • Orinda, CA I Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
• Oxnard, CA I Comprehensive Local Coastal Program Amendment, Fiscal Impact Report, and Cost Benefit Analysis
• Rancho Cucamonga, CA | Economic Development Strategic Plan • Riverside County Transportation Commission, CA | Rail Station Feasibility • Ridgecrest, CA I Housing Market Analysis
• San Luis Obispo, CA | Economic Development Plan
• Santa Maria, CA | Market Analysis, Fiscal Analysis, Economic Element, and Annexation Study
• Seal Beach, CA | Zoning Code Amendments and Objective Design Standards • Solano, CA I Highway Interchange Economic Potential and Code Analysis • Tucson, AZ I Underutilized Sites Analysis, Corridor Redevelopment • Woodland, CA I Financial Feasibility Analysis and Implementation
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION
ACADEMIC FACULTY EXPERIENCE
Metropolitan Research and Economics
Principal, Director and Owner
2009 – 2020
City of South Pasadena, CA
Director, Planning and Building
2018 – 2019
City of Santa Cruz
Manager of Special Projects
2014 – 2017
Economics Research Associates
Principal
1996 – 2009
University of California, Los Angeles
M. of Arts, Geography | Los Angeles, CA
University of Wisconsin
B.A., Geography and Classical History | Madison, WI
University of Southern California, School
of Architecture
Lecturer
2016 – 2019
Southern California Institute of Architecture
Faculty
2001 – 2016
University of Michigan, School of Architecture
Associate Director, Real Estate Program
2009 – 2010
Item 8.c
265 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 97 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM Jen has 20 years of economic, fiscal, urban planning, and project management experience. Jen combines public and private sector experience with an MBA to take a 360-degree approach to managing complex economic development, fiscal impact, and long-range planning projects, and assuring LWC’s deliverables exceed client expectations and are submitted on time and within budget.
Jen has been responsible for leading market study, financial analysis, fiscal impact, short-term rental policy, annexation, and code projects from kick-off to adoption including an Economic Sustainability Plan in Beverly Hills, CA, Market Analysis, Fiscal Analysis, Economic Element, and Annexation Study in Santa Maria, CA, and Commercial Capacity Study in Morgan Hill, CA.
She holds a Master of Business Administration from Indiana University and Bachelor of Arts degrees in Environmental Studies and Geography from University of California, Santa Barbara.
Relevant Project Experience:
• Beaumont, CA | Market Report, Fiscal Model, Economic Development and Fiscal Elements
• Beverly Hills, CA | Economic Sustainability Plan Update • Boulder City, NV I Code Diagnosis
• Chino, CA | Economic Assessment of Sphere of Influence Annexation Areas • Denver, CO I Development Regulatory Diagnostic and Solution Assessment • Fort Bragg | Special District Analysis, Noyo Harbor
• Guadalupe, CA | Mobility Revitalization Plan
• Hayward, CA | Market Analysis and Pro Forma Development for Downtown Specific Plan and Code
• Huntington Beach, CA | Short-Term Rental Analysis
• Livermore, CA | General Plan Land Use Conversion Study Fiscal Impact Analysis
• Lompoc, CA | Housing Market Analysis and Housing Feasibility Study • Long Beach, CA | Short Term Rental Housing Program and Regulations • Marin County, CA | Short-Term Vacation Rentals Report • Morgan Hill, CA | Monterey Corridor Market and Land Use Capacity Study • Oxnard, CA | Local Coastal Implementation Plan and Fiscal Impact Report • Park City, UT | Land Management Code Amendments
• Pismo, CA | Implementation Plan and Zoning Code Update • Rancho Cucamonga, CA | Market Study, Pro Forma Development, North Eastern Sphere Annexation Specific Plan Transfer Development Rights Analysis
• San Francisco State University | Infrastructure Master Plan Financial Analysis • Santa Maria, CA | General Plan Update, Fiscal Impact Analysis, Annexation Study, Economic Development Element, 6th Cycle Housing Element • Seaside, CA | Market Report, Economic Development Element • University of Hawaii | Infrastructure Master Plan Financial Analysis • Westerville, OH | Zoning Code Update
JEN MURILLO, AICP
Director
EDUCATION
CERTIFICATIONS & MEMBERSHIPS
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA, Part-time Faculty, 2018 - 2022
Town of Mammoth Lakes, CA
Senior Planner
March 2014 – August 2015
Town of Mammoth Lakes, CA
Associate Planner
December 2007 – February 2014
Town of Mammoth Lakes, CA
Assistant Planner
June 2006 – November 2007
Indiana University Bloomington
M. of Business Administration
University of California, Santa Barbara
B.A., Environmental Studies
B.A., Geography
American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP)
2015 – Present (#027972)
American Planning Association
Member, 2013 – Present
Association of Environmental Professionals
2013 – Present
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE
Item 8.c
266 of 648
98 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 983 OSOS STREET, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401 | 870 MARKET STREET, STE 977, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102 | 939 S BROADWAY, STE 611, LOS ANGELES, CA 90015 LISAWISECONSULTING.COM
CAL KURTZ, AIA
Lead Associate
With over five years of experience in the planning, urban design, and architecture fields, Cal’s focus has been code updates, code audits, form-based development regulations, design standards, and neighborhood plans. Her experience as a licensed architect in residential, commercial, office, and non-profit work informs her perspective on creating feasible regulations in tune with development realities.
Cal is a founding board member and the Executive Director of the Emerging New Urbanists and dedicated to more equitable, walkable, and people-centered communities.
As a Lead Associate, she focuses on creating draft and final development regulations, site testing, supporting community engagement efforts, assessing objective design standards relative to site feasibility and asthetic intent. Cal also supports the LWC team with her proficiency in InDesign, Illustrator, TestFit, SketchUp, ArcGIS, and Excel.
As a licensed architect in the state of California since March of 2025, Cal received her Bachelor of Architecture from the University of Notre Dame.
Relevant Project Experience:
• Alameda County, CA | Castro Valley General Plan Implementation, Zoning Code Update, and Specific Plan
• Arcata, CA | Zoning Code Update
• Columbus, OH | Zoning Code Update
• Greensboro, NC | Missing Middle Housing Scan and Deep Dive • Jackson, WY | Neighborhood Plan
• Lafayette, CA | Objective Design Standards
• Los Gatos, CA | Objective Design Standards
• Memphis, TN | Neighborhood Area Plans
• Millbrae, CA | Residential Design Standards
• Modesto, CA | Housing Plan
• Mountain View, CA | Objective Design Standards
• Napa, CA | Zoning Code Update and Objective Design Standards • Pittsburg, CA | Objective Design Standards
• Riverside County Transportation Commission, CA | Rail Station Feasibility • Sacramento, CA | Housing Plan
• Santa Fe Springs, CA | Zoning Code Update and Industrial Design Standards • Saratoga, CA | Village Design Standards
• Thousand Oaks, CA | Zoning Code Update and Sign Code
• Woodland, CA | Neighborhood Plan
PAST WORK EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION
CERTIFICATIONS & MEMBERSHIPS
API
Architect
March 2023 - June 2025
Opticos Design, Inc.
Urban Designer
August 2020 - March 2023
DPZ CoDesign
Intern
August 2019
Torti Gallas + Partners
Intern
June 2019 - July 2019
Moule & Polyzoides
Intern
June 2018 - August 2018
University of Notre Dame
B. of Arch. | South Bend, IN
ENU - Emerging New Urbanists - 501(c)(3)
Executive Director, Co-Founder
October 2021 - Present
American Institute Architects (AIA)
2025 – Present (License No C-41698)
LEED Green Associate
2023 - Present
CNU-Accreditation
2024 - Present
Item 8.c
267 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 99
D R E W N O R T O N
PRINCIPAL
Drew Norton serves as a Principal at Sherwood Design Engineers, Sonoma County.
Drew has extensive experience leading projects from planning to implementation. His experience also includes designing and managing improvement plans and construction for residential, institutional, hospitality, civic and public projects necessitating lotting, utilities, water systems, soil management, road design, grading, road improvements, and drainage. Drew manages several of Sherwood’s most collaborative and innovative projects spanning multiple teams. Drew has deep experience and a track record of expertise in the development of rural properties. This expertise encompasses integrated collaboration with various consultants and design standards associated with the various municipalities he works within.
Drew has notably worked in the historic Presidio Fort Scott area. He managed a team of designers and collaborated with several groups within the Presidio Trust to develop a comprehensive Green Infrastructure Plan which set the tone for future development and benchmarking. Instrumental to this study have been multiple development sites and trail work throughout the Presidio, including the award-winning Presidio Coastal Trail and GGB Overlook. Drew was tasked to reach consensus building between multiple stakeholder groups while assessing the most feasible and sustainable ways to approach circulation, stormwater, materials, potable and non-potable water sourcing, energy, and ecology.
Drew’s campus projects require a sensitive integration with the site’s existing fabric, a key component that drove the design parameters for the new facilities He is currently working on a number of academic and public institutions within the State of California, including DSA to address challenging accessibility conditions while supporting infrastructure solutions that meet immediate and future needs. These campus projects have proven to be ideal settings to integrate emerging technological solutions through holistic planning and phased implementation strategies.
An emphasis in expanding service offerings in the North Bay has been an emerging area of focus for Drew and his team. There has been a long history of working on private development in places like Napa and Sonoma, but the campus and institutional experience has proven itself valuable in larger planning projects within this region. Most notable Drew’s team is playing a key role on the Petaluma General Plan update. Through the development of white papers addressing the impacts of Sea Level Rise and Climate Change, we have deeply influenced the policy setting that will direct the City of Petaluma to be a more resilient city. This same thinking is now being carried out to multiple public and private campuses, such as Sonoma State and Sonoma Development Center.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
23 Years
EDUCATION
California State University,
Sacramento
B.S. in Civil Engineering
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS
American Society of Civil
Engineers, Member
Item 8.c
268 of 648
100 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg RYAN GREGORY P. E .
ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL
Ryan serves as an Associate Principal leading Sherwood’s office in the City of Napa.
Prior to this, he served for eight years on the Napa County Board of Supervisors. The Board is the primary governing body responsible for legislative, executive, and quasijudicial functions within the county. It enacts laws, creates programs, appoints officials, oversees land use and zoning in unincorporated areas, and manages the county’s $600 million budget. Ryan chose not to seek re-election and concluded his elected service at the end of 2024.
During his tenure on the Board, Ryan also operated KG Planning Partners (KGPP), a company he founded in 2017 after his initial election. KGPP specialized in assisting clients with due diligence, planning, and permitting, including the development of entitlement strategies.
Earlier in his career, Ryan worked at Riechers Spence & Associates (now RSA+) from 1998 to 2016. He progressed from design engineer to project manager and ultimately served as Vice President of the company. Ryan contributed to the design of both private and public projects, encompassing grading, utilities, drainage (including hydrology calculations), pipe systems (including hydraulic calculations), riverine analyses, and floodway studies. His responsibilities extended to planning, permitting, construction management, and construction staking.
Ryan has contributed to numerous projects in the North Bay region, including many notable developments in Napa and its downtown area.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Archer Hotel, Napa, CA
Riverfront Mixed-Use, Napa, CA
Napa Valley Vine Trail, Napa, CA
Justin-Siena Turf Field, Napa CA
NVTA Transit Center, Napa CA
Esmeralda Mixed-Use Residential, Cloverdale, CA
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
26 Years
EDUCATION
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
B.S. in Civil Engineering
PROFESSIONAL
REGISTRATION
Professional Engineer
Item 8.c
269 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 101
S E B A S T I A N B E R T S C H
PROJECT STRATEGIST
Sebastian serves as a Project Strategist out of Sherwood’s Petaluma Office with experience in water systems, rural land development and watershed stewardship for public and private clients. He has designed and managed the install of many residential and commercial rainwater harvesting projects in Sonoma County, including facilitating novel permits such as residential “Rainwater to toilet”.
Sebastian’s project experience includes: Harmony School rainwater harvesting and streamflow enhancement project, Net-Zero Groundwater plans for commercial cannabis permits in Sonoma County, the utility planning and Living Building Challenge strategy for a large event center in rural North Dakota, developing flood resilience strategies for developments and Cities, Wildfire Resilience planning, water resource management for large ranches and estates, Developing Rainwater Harvesting Curriculum for the Sonoma-Marin Saving Water Partnership, and many other rural development projects which provided net benefit to the surrounding watershed and ecology.
Sebastian has collaborated with many local government agencies, having been a member of the Santa Rosa Plain and Petaluma Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency Advisory Committees, Sonoma Alternate Water Sources Working Group and groups focused on supporting regenerative agriculture projects and policies.
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Petaluma General Plan Utilities Planning, Petaluma, CA
Petaluma Sea Level Rise Study, Petaluma, CA
Noyo Science Center, Fort Bragg, CA
Napa Community Wildfire Protection Plans, Napa County, CA Sonoma Vegetation Management Plan, Sonoma County, CA
Soda Springs Resort, Soda Springs, CA
Harmony School District, Occidental, CA
Aynuna Heritage Center, Saudi Arabia
Military Installation Resilience Review, Parris Island, SC Lindenville Specific Plan, South SF, CA
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
15 Years
EDUCATION
Hampshire College, Amherst,
Massachusetts
Permaculture Institute of Northern
California Permaculture Design
Certificate, Sebastopol
PROFESSIONAL
REGISTRATION
QWEL Certified Designer
Item 8.c
270 of 648
102 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Matthew Ridgway, AICP, PTP, RSP1
Principal | Principal-in-Charge
About
Matthew has been involved in many of the firm’s highest visibility and most complex projects.
Many years ago, he led the transportation analysis for the Sonoma-Marin Multimodal Transportation and Land Use Study that resulted in the SMART rail system in Marin and Sonoma counties, and he continues to serve SMART. He has worked on several station area plans and other large-area plans where movement of people by non-autos has been of foremost importance and was instrumental in the development of the layered networks philosophy, designed to make transit, walk and cycling more viable. He has significant experience designing station area access and circulation, especially as it relates to intermodal transfer areas and has worked on several studies contemplating atypical transit solutions including gondolas and water taxis. He is currently working on the Petaluma North Station Area Plan and has recently offered peer review services for the Mill District project in Healdsburg.
Relevant Project Experience
SMART Quality of Life & Economic Study (Sonoma County, CA) Fehr & Peers is examining the role of SMART’s rail and pathway construction and operation in driving outcomes for key quality of life indicators, including mobility, the economy, land use, the environment, public health, safety, accessibility, and equity. The study quantifies and contextualizes SMART’s contribution to North Bay to date and analyzes the potential scale of impact that would result from securing funding to fully build out and operate SMART in the future. Matthew is serving as the Principal-in-Charge for this effort.
SCTCA Vision Zero Supplemental Planning (Sonoma County, CA) Fehr & Peers is supporting SCTCA through an SS4A-funded, multi-component safety initiative that integrates Safe Routes to School planning, a citywide speed limit evaluation and best-practice guidance, and enhancements to SCTCA’s Vision Zero dashboard. Work includes countywide SRTS prioritization, development of countermeasure tools, improvement plans for Healdsburg and other high-need locations, recommendations for speed limit reduction, and creation of an automated safety-metrics tracking process. Matthew serves as Principal-in-Charge, overseeing coordination across all technical tasks.
Sonoma Countywide & Healdsburg Active Transportation Plan (Sonoma County, CA)
Fehr & Peers developed the Countywide Active Transportation Plan for SCTCA, establishing regional priorities, policies, programs, and funding strategies, along with seven jurisdiction-specific ATPs, including Healdsburg. The project included a three-phase engagement process—coordinated with SCTA, local agencies, and community-based organizations—using focus groups, pop-ups, community meetings, advisory groups, and online tools. In May 2024, community members reviewed draft project, policy, and program recommendations through online forums and in-person events. Matthew served as Technical Advisor & Local Expert.
Education
B.A., Urban Studies, San Francisco
State University, 1990
Affiliations
Transportation Research Board
(TRB): Bicycle Transportation
Committee Past Chair
American Planning Association
(APA): National Capital Chapter
Member
Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE): Pedestrian &
Bicycle Council Executive
Committee Member
Association of Pedestrian & Bicycle
Professionals (APBP): Member
Honors & Awards
ITE Coordinating Council Best
Project Award: Design Guidelines to
Accommodate Pedestrians and
Bicycles at Interchanges
ITE Bicycle & Pedestrian Council
Best Technical Project - Utah DPH
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
Handbook
ITE Planning Council and APA Best
Practice: Guide for Conducting
Pedestrian Safety Assessments in
California
ITE Coordinating Council Award for
authoring Innovative Bicycle
Treatments
Item 8.c
271 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 103 Andy Kosinski, PE
Senior Associate | Station Access Advisor
About
As leader of Fehr & Peers’ Oakland office, Andy serves as project manager and senior advisor on challenging transit planning projects, recognizing that the public is the ultimate client. Andy works collaboratively with clients to create inclusive workflows that yield easy-to-digest recommendations. This client-service approach carefully constructs pragmatic solutions with narratives tailored to secure buy-in from diverse stakeholders. Andy specializes in projects that combine land use development with transit planning and access. Andy leverages the latest research in travel patterns, ridership trends, and transit rider preferences to help cities and transit agencies plan and execute new transit services, parking policies, and multimodal transit access projects. A licensed civil engineer and contributor to the NACTO Transit Street Design Guide, Andy transforms technical findings into compelling visual narratives that effectively communicate solutions to clients and stakeholders.
Relevant Project Experience
MTC Transit 2050+ (San Francisco Bay Area, CA)
Fehr & Peers developed a transit network consisting of over $70B of specific projects plus broader programmatic investments for inclusion in Plan Bay Area 2050+, ensuring that the network reflected a more constrained funding picture compared with the previous iteration of the regional plan, and incorporated connected network principles. Andy managed the effort, overseeing existing conditions and needs assessment, identification of new projects to fill identified gaps, Project Performance Assessment, cost estimating, and network development.
As Project Manager, Andy oversaw development of decks, workshops, and other engagement to utilize stakeholder input in ensuring that the outcomes of the study reflected the diverse needs and priorities of agencies and riders throughout the region, resulting in a network that was well-received at the MTC committee and commission levels.
BART Role in the Region (San Francisco Bay Area, CA)
As Project Manager, Andy led the development of the Role in the Region report which converts a robust data analysis into succinct story-points that have become indispensable for BART communications staff’s ongoing efforts to build buy-in at local, regional, and state levels for a new permanent source of funding. BART’s ridership has reset at levels around 40% of pre-pandemic and is rebounding more slowly than automobile travel. Andy led analysis of travel patterns and land use trend data to describe how BART’s role in the Bay Area is evolving and makes the case for funding this new role. The final report, a highly readable InDesigncrafted report ties together the effect of external forces and trends, BART’s own internal efforts, a comprehensive economic analysis, and a “what if” analysis of a world without BART, grounded in forecasting techniques.
Education
M.C.P., City & Regional Planning,
University of California at Berkeley,
2010
M.S., Transportation Engineering,
University of California at Berkeley,
2009
M.Eng., Civil Engineering, Imperial
College London, 2007
Registrations
Civil Engineer, State of California
(81472)
Affiliations
Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE): Member
Presentations
Making Sense of Urban Ridehailing
and Ridesharing Markets –
California APA Conference (2018)
Accommodating Buses and Bicycles
Together on the Streets of L.A.
County – APTA Bus & Paratransit
Conference (2018)
Item 8.c
272 of 648
104 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Kelly Bond
Senior Transportation Planner | Project Manager
About
Kelly is a Senior Transportation Planner in the Fehr & Peers Petaluma office focused on creating safe, sustainable, and healthy communities through active transportation and community-driven initiatives. She builds strong partnerships across the Bay Area to advance safety projects and policies that support walkable, bikeable, people-centered places. Drawing on prior roles as a Public Policy Advocate for the Blue Zones Project in Upper Napa Valley and Population Health Project Manager at the Redwood Community Health Coalition, she continues to collaborate with CBOs, stakeholders, and elected officials to develop equitable transportation solutions that improve quality of life. Her Master of Public Health and service on the Petaluma Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee, including as Chair, ground her holistic, public-health-informed approach to planning and design.
Relevant Project Experience
Petaluma North Station Specific Plan (Petaluma, CA)
Fehr & Peers is leading the transportation and parking planning for the Petaluma North SMART Station Specific Plan. Work includes documenting existing multimodal conditions, preparing technical analyses for the Specific Plan and EIR, and supporting the development of circulation concepts, land use alternatives, and transportation policies. The team’s efforts will guide future growth, station access, and connectivity in this evolving area. Kelly serves as Project Manager.
Petaluma SMART Quality of Life & Economic Study (Sonoma County, CA) This study evaluates SMART’s impacts on mobility, land use, environmental outcomes, public health, accessibility, safety, equity, and the regional economy. The team assesses historic and future scenarios to quantify SMART’s contributions and the potential benefits associated with full buildout and long-term operations. Findings will help regional partners better understand system value and inform future investment decisions. Kelly serves as Project Planner.
Vision Zero Supplemental Planning (Sonoma County, CA)
This SS4A-funded effort includes Safe Routes to School planning and project prioritization, a Speed Limit Study with reduction recommendations and a best-practice guidebook, technical input for the Lakeville Corridor Multi-Modal Study, and enhancements to the countywide Vision Zero data dashboard. Together, these tasks strengthen local safety planning and expand capacity-building tools for partner agencies. Kelly serves as Project Planner for the first two tasks.
Sonoma Countywide Active Transportation Plan (Sonoma County, CA) Fehr & Peers prepared a Countywide Active Transportation Plan identifying regional priorities and updating ATPs for ten partner agencies. The project combined extensive community engagement with data-driven analysis to develop coordinated recommendations that improve walking, biking, and connectivity across the region. The final plan strengthens local planning efforts while supporting broader countywide mobility goals. Kelly served as Project Planner.
Education
M.P.H., Nutrition, Tulane University
at New Orleans, 2015
B.S., Nutrition & Food Science
(Dietetics) Montclair State
University, 2013
Affiliations
Petaluma Pedestrian & Bicycle
Advisory Committee: Member &
Former Chairperson
Expertise
Transit-Oriented Development
Bicycle & Pedestrian Access and
Comfort
Public Advocacy & Policy
Engagement & Outreach
Grant Funding
Equity
Item 8.c
273 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 105 Neil Smolen, AICP
Associate | Traffic Operations Advisor
About
Neil has over a decade of experience in transportation and land use planning across Northern California, advising clients on sustainable growth and navigating the complex transportation landscape. He has a deep understanding of traffic operations allowing him to balance the needs to vehicular traffic with safety, accessibility and comfort adjectives in and around transit stations. He will advise on traffic operations for this project.
Relevant Project Experience
Petaluma Downtown SMART Station Mixed-Use Development (Petaluma, CA) Fehr & Peers prepared a Transportation Impact Assessment for a proposed Petaluma Station mixed-use development located adjacent to the Petaluma Downtown SMART station. Our work included evaluating the project’s travel characteristics using MXD+, analyzing projectgenerated VMT with the SCTCA travel demand model, and providing recommendations to enhance the site plan’s circulation and overall multimodal access. Neil contributed to this project as a Technical Advisor.
Sonoma Developmental Center EIR (Sonoma, CA)
As Project Manager, Neil leads Fehr & Peers’ ongoing transportation analysis for the Sonoma Developmental Center (SDC) Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in unincorporated Sonoma County, CA. His work includes managing multi-scenario evacuation travel time analyses and directing CEQA transportation impact evaluations that support the SDC’s redevelopment into a mixed-use community.
South Santa Rosa Specific Plan (Santa Rosa, CA)
As Project Manager & Associate-in-Charge, Neil oversaw Fehr & Peers’ preparation of an existing conditions and opportunities analysis for the South Santa Rosa Specific Plan area. The team developed up to three land use and circulation alternatives and conducted LOS and VMT analyses to support plan development. The Specific Plan document established transportation development standards, site design standards, and a comprehensive circulation network diagram. The project also included a wildfire evacuation analysis that evaluated two evacuation sub-scenarios using the 2019 base year and 2040 SCTCA Travel Demand Model.
Sonoma County General Plan Update (Sonoma County, CA)
Fehr & Peers is supporting the ongoing update of the Sonoma County General Plan by providing comprehensive transportation planning services. With Neil as Project Manager, the team is guiding updates to transportation policies with a focus on consistency with evolving state legislation. The effort also includes preparing the transportation components of the CEQA Environmental Impact Report and conducting an in-depth evacuation analysis to help the county strengthen its long-term resilience and emergency preparedness.
Education
M.S., Civil Engineering, University of
California at Irvine, 2014
M.U.R.P., University of California at
Irvine, 2014
B.S., Environmental Studies,
University of California at Santa
Barbara, 2011
Registrations
American Institute of Certified
Planners (029430)
Affiliations
Urban Land Institute (ULI): Member
American Planning Association
(APA): Member
Item 8.c
274 of 648
106 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers
EDUCATION
BA, English and Environmental
Studies, University of
California at Santa Barbara
CERTIFICATIONS/
REGISTRATIONS
Professional Certificate in
Land Use and Environmental
Planning, UCSB Extension
American Institute of Certified
Planners, Certified
Environmental Planner
(no. 021413)
YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE
25 Abe Leider, AICP CEP
Principal Planner
Mr. Leider is a Principal in Rincon’s Environmental Sciences and Planning group. He is responsible for management and preparation of planning and environmental documents and specialized technical studies. Mr. Leider has over 25 years of experience in the planning field and has managed or primarily authored successful planning and environmental documents on subjects ranging from regional resource management and land use regulation to complex public and private development projects. He is proficient at interpreting state and federal planning and environmental regulations and guidelines as well as developing thorough and clear environmental documentation. Mr. Leider has overseen Rincon’s CEQA practice in the greater Bay Area since 2012.
SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Principal-in-Charge, City of Sonoma – Multiple Projects Mr. Leider has overseen Rincon’s CEQA services in the City of Sonoma for nearly a decade. Projects have included:
• CEQA for the Macarthur Place Hotel complex
• 20540 Broadway Residential Annexation and Development Project • Multiple Categorical Exemption Reports
Principal-in-Charge, City of San Leandro (subconsultant to Raimi & Associates) – Bay Fair BART TOD Specific Plan EIR, San Leandro
Rincon prepared a programmatic EIR for the Bay Fair BART Transit Oriented Development Specific Plan for the City of San Leandro as part of the Raimi & Associates team. The Specific Plan addressed a wide range of development, planning and economic issues, including identifying existing and future opportunities for transit-oriented mixed-use and residential development within the study area and transportation and infrastructure improvements to accommodate a preferred land use alternative. Mr. Leider’s role included overall management of the CEQA document and process for the project.
Principal-in-Charge, Napa Valley Transportation Authority Vine Transit Bus Maintenance Facility Environmental Due Diligence, Conceptual Design and EIR Rincon assisted NVTA with environmental studies, conceptual design and CEQA and NEPA compliance for a new bus maintenance, washing and storage facility designed to accommodate approximately 93 Vine Transit buses.
Principal-in-Charge, City of Berkeley (subconsultant to Raimi & Associates) – Adeline Corridor Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report, Berkeley Rincon completed an EIR for the proposed Adeline Corridor Specific Plan adjacent to the Ashby BART Station in the City of Berkeley. The Plan Area is in the southern portion of the City of Berkeley and extends approximately 1.3 miles north from the Berkeley/Oakland border along Adeline Street and Shattuck Avenue to the intersection of Shattuck Avenue and Dwight Way. The Plan Area abuts Downtown Berkeley to the north and extends to the City of Oakland border to the south. The Adeline Corridor Specific Plan is intended to direct changes in land uses and development and right-of-way improvements for the Plan Area. The vision for the Plan Area is to champion equitable, transit-oriented development that supports a thriving community and provide safe, “complete streets.” Key issues analyzed in the EIR include traffic/circulation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, and GHG emissions.
Item 8.c
275 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 107 Abe Leider, AICP CEP, Page 2
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers
Principal-in-Charge, City of Orinda – Downtown Precise Plan and 6th Cycle Housing Element Update Environmental Impact Report, Orinda
Mr. Leider was the Principal-in-Charge of Rincon’s contract with Orinda to prepare a Program EIR for the City’s Downtown Precise Plan. The EIR also covered the City 6th Cycle Housing Element. Key issues included development densities and heights and impacts related to biological resources, wildfire, and vehicle miles traveled.
Principal-in-Charge, Town of Moraga – Comprehensive Advanced Planning Initiative Environmental Impact Report, Moraga
Mr. Leider was the Principal-in-Charge of Rincon’s contract with Moraga to prepare a Program EIR for the City’s Comprehensive Advanced Planning Initiative. The Comprehensive Advanced Planning Initiative involved adoption of the Town’s 2023-2031 Housing Element, rezoning of key sites within the Town’s jurisdiction including the Moraga Center Specific Plan and Rheem Park areas, along with objective design standards for Rheem Park, conforming amendments to the Moraga 2002 General Plan , amendments to the 2002 General Plan Safety and Conservation Elements to comply with new State laws, and replacement of the “Study” General Plan and zoning designations for Bollinger Canyon with new designations. Key issues included impacts related to biological resources, wildfire and vehicle miles traveled.
Principal-in-Charge, City of Belmont – 6th Cycle Housing Element Update Environmental Impact Report, Belmont Mr. Leider was the Principal-in-Charge of Rincon’s contract with the City of Belmont to prepare a Program EIR for the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element. The project was an update the City's Housing Element in compliance with State law. Rincon assisted the City with initial outreach, provided an interactive map for public input, and prepared the EIR.
Principal-in-Charge, City of Palo Alto – Housing Incentive Program Expansion and 788-796 San Antonio Road Mixed Use Project Environmental Impact Report, Palo Alto Mr. Leider is serving as the Principal-in-Charge. Mr. Leider’s role includes overall management of the CEQA document and process for the project. Rincon is currently preparing an Environmental Impact Report for the City’s proposed effort to expand their Housing Inventive Program to a portion of the San Antonio Road corridor. This involves increasing the allowed residential density on some parcels to encourage and inventive housing. One proposed project, the 788 San Antonio Road Mixed Use project, would be allowed under the proposed program expansion. The EIR covers both the programmatic zoning code changes and the project-level impacts associated with the individual 788 San Antonio Road project. This project involves demolition of an eligible historic resource.
Key issues analyzed in the EIR include historical resources, air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation.
Principal-in-Charge, City of Redwood City – Mixed-Use: Live/Work and Emergency Shelter Zoning Amendment Project Addendum Environmental Impact Report, Redwood City Mr. Leider served as the Principal-in-Charge for an Addendum Environmental Impact Report for Redwood City’s Mixed-Use: Live/Work and Emergency Shelter Zoning Amendment Project. The proposed project involved amendments to the mixed-use live/work zoning district and the mixed-use emergency shelter combining district on 30 blocks totaling 37.5 acres. Rincon prepared the Addendum to the previously certified A New General Plan for Redwood City Final EIR. The zoning amendment would alter the required floor area ratios, density, stories and height on mixed-use live/work zoning district and the mixed-use emergency shelter zoning district and provide intensity bonuses for developments which include certain qualifying community benefits.
Item 8.c
276 of 648
108 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers
EDUCATION
MESM, Emphasis in Energy
and Climate, Bren School of
Environmental Science &
Management, University of
California, Santa Barbara
BS, Environmental Policy
Analysis and Planning,
University of California, Davis
CERTIFICATIONS/
REGISTRATIONS
AEP Spring 2025 CEQA
Advanced Workshop
AFFILIATIONS
Board Member, Association of
Environmental Professionals,
SF Bay Area Chapter
YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE
20+ years of environmental
experience
13+ years of CEQA experience
Karly Kaufman
Supervising Environmental Planner/Project Manager
Karly serves as a Supervising Environmental Planner/Project Manager within Rincon’s Environmental Science and Planning group. Karly has over 20 years of experience in the environmental field and 13 years of CEQA experience. She is involved in managing CEQA and NEPA documentation and technical air quality, greenhouse gas, and noise impact analyses for a variety of clients throughout the state. Karly specializes in advising on and managing programmatic CEQA documentation for long-range plans and zoning programs such as for General Plans, Specific Plans, and zoning ordinance amendments. She also manages CEQA documentation for residential and commercial development projects and for largescale energy projects. She has prepared and managed Environmental Impact Reports, Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, and Categorical Exemptions, and also prepares CEQA guidance, training, and templates for key clients.
SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Project Manager, City of Berkeley (subconsultant to VMWP) – Ashby and North Berkeley BART Stations Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Zoning EIR, Berkeley
Rincon prepared an EIR this project which involved General Plan amendments, zoning amendments, and development of zoning standards at the station sites to comply with Assembly Bill 2923. At the Ashby BART station, the EIR evaluated development of up to 1,200 dwelling units and 50,000 square feet of nonresidential space that would be constructed, distributed between the 4.4-acre station site and the 1.9 acre surface parking lot east of the Ed Roberts campus. At the North Berkeley BART station, the EIR evaluated development of up to 1,200 dwelling units, as well as 25,000 square feet of non-residential space, located on the main 8.1-acre station site. Key issues analyzed in the EIR included air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, cultural resources, and transportation.
Project Manager, City of Berkeley (subconsultant to Raimi & Associates – Adeline Corridor Specific Plan EIR, Berkeley
Rincon completed an EIR for the proposed Adeline Corridor Specific Plan in the City of Berkeley. The Plan Area is in the southern portion of the City of Berkeley and extends approximately 1.3 miles north from the Berkeley/Oakland border along Adeline Street and Shattuck Avenue to the intersection of Shattuck Avenue and Dwight Way. The Plan Area abuts Downtown Berkeley to the north and extends to the City of Oakland border to the south. The Adeline Corridor Specific Plan is intended to direct changes in land uses and development and right-of-way improvements for the Plan Area. The vision for the Plan Area is to champion equitable, transit-oriented development that supports a thriving community and provide safe, “complete streets.” Key issues analyzed in the EIR include traffic/circulation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, and GHG emissions.
Project Manager, City of Piedmont – Piedmont Housing Element EIR and IS-ND, Piedmont
Rincon prepared an Initial Study-Negative Declaration for the Piedmont 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and is currently preparing a Program EIR for implementation of Housing Element. Key issues analyzed to be analyzed in the EIR include transportation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, GHG emissions, and wildfire.
Item 8.c
277 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 109 Karly Kaufman, Page 2
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers
Project Manager, City of Berkeley (subconsultant to Raimi & Associates) – 2023-2031 Housing Element EIR, Berkeley
Rincon prepared an EIR for the Berkeley 2023-2031 Housing Element. The EIR analyzed implementation of the policies and programs in the Housing Element to facilitate the development of housing in accordance with the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation as well as implementation of other rezone programs to facilitate “missing middle” housing and student housing development. Key issues analyzed in the EIR include transportation, cultural resources, population and housing, noise, air quality, GHG emissions, and wildfire.
Project Manager, City of Palo Alto – Housing Incentive Expansion Program and 788 San Antonio Road MixedUse Project EIR, Palo Alto Rincon Consultants prepared an EIR for the City’s proposed effort to expand their Housing Inventive Program to a portion of the San Antonio Road corridor. This involves increasing the allowed residential density on some parcels to encourage and inventive housing. One proposed project, the 788 San Antonio Road Mixed Use project, would be allowed under the proposed program expansion. The EIR covers both the programmatic zoning code changes and the project-level impacts associated with the individual 788 San Antonio Road project. This project involves demolition of an eligible historic resource. Key issues analyzed in the EIR include historical resources, air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation.
Project Manager, County of Alameda – Ashland Cherryland Business District Specific Plan EIR, Alameda County Karly served as the Rincon team Project Manager for preparation of CEQA documentation for the update to the Ashland Cherryland Business City Specific Plan (ACBDSP). The ACBDSP area encompasses two corridors in Ashland and Cherryland, two unincorporated communities within the County of Alameda. The project emphasized economic revitalization through place-making, innovative implementation strategies, creative marketing, branding, public improvement programs, robust community outreach; and a form-based code. In 2016, the American Planning Association (APA) Northern Section presented the County of Alameda with the “Excellence in Economic Planning and Development” award for the Ashland and Cherryland Business District Specific Plan and Code.
Project Manager, City of San Leandro – Bay Fair BART Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan EIR, San Leandro
Karly served as the Rincon team Project Manager for the Bay Fair BART Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan for the City of San Leandro as part of a larger planning team. The Specific Plan addresses a wide range of development, planning and economic issues. It identifies existing and future opportunities for transit-oriented mixeduse and residential development as well as transportation and infrastructure improvements to accommodate the selected land use alternative. Key environmental issues in the CEQA document included aesthetics; air quality/GHGs; historical resources, noise; hydrology/water quality; land use and planning; and transportation/circulation. The project was the recipient of the American Planning Association, California Chapter, Northern Section 2019 Award of Merit, Comprehensive Plan, Small Jurisdiction.
Project Manager, Barry Miller Consulting/County of Alameda – Fairview Specific Plan Update IS-MND, Alameda County
Karly served as the project manager for the Fairview Specific Plan Update IS-MND. Focused on Fairview, a semirural community in unincorporated Alameda County, the Plan centered on community driven policies to protect natural resources (e.g. natural landforms, riparian areas/creeks) while creating a set of development standards. As the team’s environmental consultant, Rincon prepared an IS-MND to satisfy the CEQA requirement for the project.
Due to the programmatic nature of the project, the IS-MND was tailored specifically to analyze all aspects of the Specific Plan at a broad, program level to provide a comprehensive impact assessment and to facilitate streamlining of future CEQA processes.
Project Manager, City of Richmond (subconsultant to Opticos Design, Inc.) – Livable Corridors Based Code Project EIR and CEQA, Richmond
Rincon assisted Opticos Design, Inc. with the preparation of an Addendum to the Richmond General Plan EIR for the Proposed Form Based Code Project. The EIR Addendum evaluated how zoning changes would have different environmental impacts or a different degree of impact than those presented in the General Plan EIR. Although the discussion addressed all issue areas discussed in the EIR, the key issue areas for analysis in the Addendum included aesthetics, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards, land use, noise, and traffic.
Item 8.c
278 of 648
110 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.plantoplace.com Dave has over 20 years of experience leading a diverse range of award-winning community-based planning efforts. Dave’s experience as a project manager on vision, corridor, strategic, specific plan and resilient placemaking projects has provided invaluable insight on the opportunities and the challenges of balancing client objectives while meeting community expectations. By implementing a range of engagement and communication platforms, Dave has forged relationships with key community leaders to establish partnerships and a common dialogue that has led to successful policy outcomes.
EXPERIENCE
PLAN TO PLACE
Founder + Principal, 2016 – present
M-GROUP
Principal Planner + Designer, 2013 – 2016
PMC
Senior Urban Planner, 2011 – 2013
MIG INC.
Project Manager, 2009 – 2011
RRM DESIGN GROUP
Senior Planner, 2004 – 2009
EDUCATION
MASTER OF ARTS
City and Regional Planning
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA
BACHELOR OF ARTS
Urban Studies and Planning,
Visual Arts Minor
University of California, San Diego
San Diego, CA
PRESENTATIONS
“Retooling the Outreach Toolkit”
CCAPA Conference, Oakland, CA
“Achieving Sustainable Results: Public
and Private Efforts & Coordination”
CCAPA Conference, Hollywood, CA
"The Planner’s Guide to Implementing
Green Principles”
CCAPA Conference, San José, CA
MEMBERSHIPS +
ACCREDITATIONS
City and Regional Planning Advisory
Council (CiRPAC), Cal Poly SLO
American Institute of Certified Planners
(AICP)
Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design Accredited Professional (LEED AP)
San Francisco Bay Area Planning and
Urban Research (SPUR)
DAVE JAVID, AICP, LEED AP
Founder + Principal
FEATURED PROJECTS
EASTSIDE INNOVATION DISTRICT AND NORTHEAST AREA PLANS | SAN
CARLOS, CA
In partnership with Perkins + Will, recently spearheaded the outreach and engagement efforts for two sites planned for mixed use in San Carlos. The engagement activities included a range of informational community forums, interactive virtual workshops, neighborhood and stakeholder meetings, popup events and online/mobile interactive feedback forms. Input gathered informed land use and circulation design standards and implementation action actions.
ASHBY + N. BERKELEY BART STATION ZONING | BERKELY, CA
Led the outreach and engagement in collaboration with BART and VMWP.
Facilitated meetings to capture stakeholder and community aspirations to prepare the vision and priorities for reimagining of Ashby and North Berkeley BART stations. Led conversations regularly with a Community Advisory Group held virtual community workshops, surveys, and stakeholder and neighborhood CBO meetings to identify the community’s priorities related to affordable housing, the density/intensity of future development, supportive public or civic space, and parking and station access for the respective sites.
DIRIDON STATION AREA COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT | SAN JOSE, CA Led a comprehensive engagement strategy teaming with Raimi + Associates, through collaboration with City staff to facilitate a range of community and passionate stakeholder input related to the transformation of a transit hub in the heart of the downtown, targeted by Google for a mixed-use campus.
Outreach includes monthly meetings with a 38-person advisory group, stakeholder meetings, pop-up events, surveys, digital tools and a custom project website. Creative solutions have been implemented to ensure all community members have an equal opportunity to share their perspectives, while navigating large protests that often occur during community meetings.
ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS
NORTH SMART STATION AREA PLAN | Petaluma, CA
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN + REIMAGINE HILLSDALE MALL | San Mateo, CA MULTI-FAMILY OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS | Marin County and Brisbane, CA DOWNTOWN VISION PLAN | Los Altos, CA
MTC REGIONAL “PLANNING INNOVATIONS” FORUMS | Bay Area, CA Item 8.c
279 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 111 www.plantoplace.com
Jessie has over 20 years of experience leading organizations, convening practicioners across sectors, facilitating workshops and driving projects forward focused on sustainable and equitable cities and communities. She has worked on dozens of projects and programs including the 4th Regional Plan, the Tri-State Regional Solar Energy Policy Framework, the internal and external sustainability plan for the City of Portland, Treasure Island’s master plan, and designed and led workshops and meetings for thousands of leaders across the US and globally focused on sustainable and resilient cities.
EXPERIENCE
PLAN TO PLACE
Senior Engagement Specialist
2025 - Present
ENRICHMENT.KIDS
Head of Partnerships
2023 – Present
URBANFOOTPRINT
Director of Business
Development 2022-2024
MEETING OF THE MINDS
Executive Director
2012 – 2022
REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION
Senior Planner
2010 – 2012
ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS
GROUP
Cluster Consultant & Research
Associate 2007 – 2008
SMWM (ACQUIRED BY PERKINS +
WILL)
Junior Urban Planner
2005 – 2006
EDUCATION
MASTERS
Environment and Development
Studies
London School of Economics and
Political Science
London, England
BACHELOR OF ARTS
Urban Studies and Hispanic Studies
Vassar College
Poughkeepsie, NY
JESSIE FELLER
Senior Engagement Specialist
FEATURED WORK
MEETING OF THE MINDS | CITIES ACROSS THE US
Leading the engagement strategy in a different US city each year, cofacilitating meetings with local stakeholders including non-profits, city and county elected and appointed officials, foundations, corporate leaders, startup founders, CBO’s, and local community organizations.
Prepared interactive brainstorming formats for in-person meetings, workshops, roundtables, pop-ups, and large conferences. Created, curated and maintained online platform to continue the dialogue and discussion throughout the year through a blog, monthly webinar series, magazine, and 20 in-person events a year around North America. Built Meeting of the Minds into an international network of more than 60,000 urban practitioners.
REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION | NEW YORK, NEW YORK
Designed, developed, and launched Regional Energy Policy Program focused on clean energy research, planning and advocacy in tri-state region.
Identified key research and policy levers through extensive policy analysis to scale up clean energy in NY-NJ-CT ranging from renewables to regional capand-trade. Recruited, formed, and led cross-sector Regional Energy Leadership Council made up of tri-state public, private, and non-profit sector stakeholders. Served as the advocacy and policy lead to comment and testify in public hearings and state and city plans including PlaNYC. Contributed to the early drafts of the 4th Regional Plan.
ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS GROUP | MARIN COUNTY, CA
Served as cluster development consultant for economic development and competitiveness consulting firm. Projects and clients included:
• Marin County Supervisors: Developed recommendations for a new countywide economic sustainability organization in Marin County, CA. Built consensus between stakeholder groups in preparation for new organization and cluster.
• Competitiveness Agenda for Southeast Anatolia Region and Roadmaps for Select Clusters: Sustainable Development Agenda for poorest region in Turkey, approved by the Turkish Deputy Prime Minister and Kemal Dervis, UNDP Administrator.
• Competitiveness and Development Program for the Province of Mendoza, Argentina: Consulting services in the context of the Inter-American Development Bank–sponsored Mendoza Productiva project focused on adventure tourism, rural tourism, and cleantech clusters.
Item 8.c
280 of 648
112 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg www.plantoplace.com
QUENTIN FREEMAN
OUTREACH SPECIALIST + GRAPHIC DESIGNER
Quentin’s multidisciplinary work spans community-based research, visual arts, and place-based analysis and design to imagine and enact futures rooted in climate resilience and equity. A recent graduate from UC Berkeley’s Urban Studies program with emphasis on landscape architecture and socio-ecological sustainability, she is working to build connections between people and place, and believes wholly in a design process grounded in authentic and empowering participation at every step.
FEATURED PROJECTS
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE + EIR | PETALUMA, CA
Prepared branding templates and project logo, a dedicated project website, and messaging and outreach collateral to be shared through co-facilitated virtual citywide workshops, pop-up events, and focus group meetings. Co-leading coordination and outreach to under-represented members of the community through targeted engagement as part of the Environmental Justice Element.
HARBOR INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | BELMONT, CA
Collaboratively creating high-level engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, and co-facilitating virtual and in-person pop ups, community workshops, and stakeholder meetings to empower the Belmont community to shape the future of the HIA. Ongoing creation of new, interactive engagement strategies.
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | SAN CARLOS, CA
Crafting high-level engagement strategies, designing virtual engagement materials, and co-facilitating virtual engagement events to give San Carlos residents a platform to shape the future of the Northeast Area.
CLIMATE ADAPTATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN | CORTE MADERA, CA Analyzing community needs and sentiments to craft effective engagement strategies, designing outreach materials, website, and project graphics to make the planning process as transparent and equitable as possible.
LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN | SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA
Worked with Raimi+Associates to prepare outreach materials in four languages, facilitate pop-up events and community workshops, and synthesize feedback from the community for incorporation into the Lindenville Specific Plan.
ADDITIONAL RELEVANT PROJECTS
NORTH SMART STATION AREA PLAN | Petaluma, CA
EASTSIDE INNOVATION DISTRICT | San Carlos, CA
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE + EIR | Ranch Cordova, CA
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE + EIR | Auburn, CA
MULTI-FAMILY OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS | Marin County and Brisbane, CA
EXPERIENCE
PLAN TO PLACE
Outreach Specialist + Graphic Designer,
2023-present
LEXICON OF SUSTAINABILITY
Graphic Designer + Storytelling Intern,
2022
CENTER FOR CITIES + SCHOOLS
Youth Planning Mentor, 2022
GROUNDWORK
Environmental Fellow, 2021
SANTA CRUZ MUSEUM OF ARTS +
HISTORY
Youth Arts Coordinator, 2015-2019
FREELANCE ARTIST + ILLUSTRATOR
2020 - present
EDUCATION
BA Urban Studies
University of California, Berkeley, 2019-
2023
Item 8.c
281 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 113 Item 8.c
282 of 648
114 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg compliance; oversaw design review boards and historical preservation overlay zones; wrote and proofread technical documents such as letters of determination.
City of Beverly Hills, Department of City Planning, Planning Intern June 2004 to January 2005
Conducted on-site research on proposed mixed-use overlay zone along Wilshire Boulevard; compiled geo-coded data for proposed historic preservation overlay zones in multi-family zones in Beverly Hills; reviewed site plans.
SELECTED PROJECTS
- Pasadena 710 Master Plan, Pasadena, CA
Hands-on and sensory-based community engagement on reimagining the 710 freeway stub and what the stub could become
Role: Co-led (with James Rojas) hands-on model-building workshops, documented outcomes; translating outcomes into design/policy recommendations - FROG Park Climatescape, Oakland, CA
Hands-on model-building workshop on reimagining and transforming a derelict park space Role: Co-led (with James Rojas) hands-on model-bulding workshop, translated outcomes of workshop into a design; installed design
- Reimagining the Napa River
Hans-on and sensory-based community engagement on reimagining the Napa River as the Napa Riverline, a linear park through downtown Napa
Role: Co-led (with James Rojas) hands-on model-buliding workshop with community members in Napa; translated workshop outcomes into design and policy recommendations for the City - Reimagining the Pomona Fairplex: Hands-on community engagement for the Fairplex Specific Plan, Pomona, CA
Model-building workshops and pop-up models that engaged residents in reimagining a redesigning the Fairplex of the future
Role: Crafted engagement strategy; co-led hands-on model-building workshops with James Rojas; created final document for landscape architect and Fairplex staff explaining and illustrating the ideas, values, and dreams of the residents/fairgoers Item 8.c
283 of 648
Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg 115 Item 8.c
284 of 648
116 Healdsburg Station Area Specific Plan | City of Healdsburg Project Manager III, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (Metro), Los Angeles, CA, 1997-2010.
Planned, implemented, and managed programs promoting urban design, and pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly communities. Analyzed and made recommendations regarding deployment of $40 – 50 million in urban design projects for LA County. Managed over 100 projects from planning to implementation.