Tuesday, October 25, 2022
7:00 PM
City of Hercules
111 Civic Drive
Hercules, CA 94547
City Council
Mayor Dion Bailey
Vice Mayor Alexander Walker-Griffin
Council Member Dan Romero
Council Member Chris Kelley
Council Member Tiffany Grimsley
Dante Hall, City Manager
Patrick Tang, City Attorney
Lauren Berges, City Clerk
Meeting Agenda
In-Person in Council Chambers or
Zoom ID: 826 8753 2164
Zoom Phone Number: 1-669-444-9171
Zoom Passcode: 626188
1 October 25, 2022City Council Meeting Agenda
See last pages of agenda for information regarding meeting procedures To view webcast of meetings, live or on demand, go to the City's website at www.ci.hercules.ca.us I. SPECIAL MEETING - CLOSED SESSION – 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL - NONE.
II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
III. CONVENE INTO CLOSED SESSION
The Hercules City Council will meet in Closed Session regarding the following:
IV. REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL V. REPORT ON ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
VII. MOMENT OF SILENCE
VIII. INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS/COMMISSION REPORTS
1. 22-336
Introduction of New Police Chief Joseph Vasquez
IX. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
X. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
This time is reserved for members of the public to address issues not included in the agenda. In accordance with the Brown Act, Council will refer to staff any matters brought before them at this time, and those matters may be placed on a future agenda.
The public may log into the Zoom meeting (refer to agenda cover for Zoom login information) and provide their public comment (3 minute time limit). If attending in-person, please fill out a speaker card and provide to the City Clerk.
When the public comment period is open for the item you wish to speak on, use the "raise hand" feature in Zoom (or press *9 if connecting via phone audio only) at the time the Mayor calls for public comment. Please wait your turn and once you are brought into the meeting, state your name and city of residence for the record.
For additional alternatives to providing public comments please refer to the Notice of Important Instructions on how to Participate and Watch the Hercules City Council Meeting on the back pages of the agenda.
All public comments are allowed up to 3 minutes to relay their message or concern. A limit of 30 minutes will be devoted to taking public comment at this point in the agenda. If any speakers remain at the conclusion of the initial 30 minute period, time will be reserved at the conclusion of the meeting to take the remaining comments.
2 October 25, 2022City Council Meeting Agenda
XI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. 22-330 Conditional Use Permit (CUP 22-01) for Recycling Center; Design Review Permit (DRP 22-02); Parking Exception
Recommendation: That the City Council: 1. Request planning staff present the staff report; 2. Open the public hearing; 3. Invite the applicant to make a presentation or statement; 4. Receive comments from the public; 5. Offer the applicant or their consultant team the opportunity to answer questions; 6.
Close the public hearing; 7. Request clarification from staff or the applicant on any issues related to the project; 8. Adopt Resolution affirming, modifying with determinations and conclusions, or reversing the Planning Commission decision.
Staff Report - CUP 22-01 - Recycling Facility 1511-1551 Sycamore Avenue Attach 1 - Council Resolution CUP 22-01 - Recycling Facility - 1511 Sycamore Ave Attach 2 - CalRecycle - Certification of Recycling Center Attach 3 - 1511 Sycamore Ave Hercules Site Plan (8.29.22) Attach 4 - Applicant Letter
Attach 5 - 2007 Parking Study
Attach 6 - Confirmation of Franchise Agreement Compliance Attach 7 - PC Resolution_22-10_CUP 22-01-Recycling Facility-1511 Sycamore Ave Staff Presentation - CUP 22-01 Recycling Facility 1511 - 1551 Sycamore Avenue Attachments:
XII. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. 22-335 Meeting Minutes of October 11, 2022
Meeting Minutes October 11, 2022Attachments:
2. 22-334 Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling LLP to recover PCB cleanup costs
Recomendation: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling LLP to recover PCB cleanup costs.
Staff Report - to Counsel authorizing legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP related to PCB litigation Attach 1 - Resolution Monsanto PCB Sher Edling
PCB Legal services agreement - City of Hercules
Attachments:
3 October 25, 2022City Council Meeting Agenda
XIII. DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION ITEMS
1. 22-331 Update on Regional Intermodal Transportation Center Project Recommendation: Receive presentation, discuss, and provide feedback and direction, if any.
Staff Report - 2022-10-25_Hercules RITC Project Update
Attach 1 - 2022-10-25_Hercules RITC- Presentation
Attachments:
2. 22-333 City Manager's Employment Agreement Amendment Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution Approving an Amendment to City Manager Dante Hall's employment Agreement to Increase the Cost of Living Adjustment ("COLA") from 3% to 4.5% for Fiscal Years 2022-3 and 2023-4.
Staff Report - CM COLA increase 221025 (1)
Attach 1 - Resolution amending Dante Hall Agreement COLA 221025 Attach 2 - Amendment No. 1 Cm Hall Agreement 221025
Attachments:
XIV. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
This time is reserved for members of the public who were unavailable to attend the Public Communications period during Section X of the meeting, or were unable to speak due to lack of time. The public speaker requirements specified in Section X of this Agenda apply to this Section.
XV. CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY ANNOUNCEMENTS,
COMMITTEE, SUB-COMMITTEE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE REPORTS
AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
This is the time for brief announcements on issues of interest to the community. In accordance with the provisions of the Brown Act, matters which do not appear on this agenda but require City Council discussion may be either (a) referred to staff or other resources for factual information or (b) placed on a future meeting agenda.
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
The next Meeting of the City Council will be a special meeting held on Tuesday, November 9, 2022 at 7:00p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Agendas are posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or Section 54956.
Members of the public can view electronic agendas and staff reports by accessing the City website at www.ci.hercules.ca.us and can receive e-mail notification of agenda and staff report postings by signing up to receive an enotice from the City’s homepage. Agendas and staff reports may also be obtained by contacting the Administrative Services Department at (510) 799-8215 (Posted: October 20, 2022)
4 October 25, 2022City Council Meeting Agenda
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO PARTICIPATE AND WATCH THE HERCULES CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING
COMMISSION HYBRID MEETINGS
Attend in Person: Hercules City Council Chambers – 111 Civic Drive, Hercules, CA 94547 Attend via Zoom Teleconference: Details provided below and zoom webinar login, passcode and phone numbers provided on the agenda cover.
Please note: Updated COVID-19 safety protocols will be posted outside the City Council Chambers. Please review this information before entering the Council Chambers.
How to Submit Public Comments
In Person: Attend meeting at the Hercules City Council Chambers, fill out a public speaker card located on the side table and submit it to the City Clerk.
Via Zoom: Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing.
Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here or go to: https://www.zoom.us/join. Zoom also allows you to join by phone at +1-669-900-6833 or +1-929-205-6099 or +1-253-215-8782. • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this information is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be allowed up to 3 minutes to speak and provide comment. A limit of 30 minutes will be devoted to taking public comment during the first public comment period on the agenda. If any speaker comments have not been accommodated prior to the initial 30 minute period, time will be reserved at the conclusion of the meeting for the remaining public comments. • Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment.
When the Mayor opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute.
Written Comments Submitted Electronically: All comments received before 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting will be provided to the City Council prior to the meeting and posted to the City’s agenda website and located by clicking on the “meeting details” tab. Written comments received after 3:00 p.m. will be provided to City Council and posted to the agenda website the following day. Written comments will not be read aloud during the meeting. Email comments to [email protected]. Please indicate which item on the agenda you are commenting on in the subject line of your email.
Written comments submitted in person or via mail: Additional ways to provide your public comment is to either drop off your comment in person to the front desk receptionist located in the City Hall lobby or to mail your comment to City of Hercules, ATTN: City Clerk – Public Comment (Meeting Date), 111 Civic Drive, Hercules, CA 94547 in time to reach the City Clerk no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting or you can submit your comment by telephone by calling (510) 799-8215 no later than 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date.
If you need assistance with public comment, please contact: Lauren Berges, City Clerk at [email protected] or by calling (510) 799-8215.
All public comments will become part of the official meeting record. The City cannot guarantee that its network and/or the website will not be uninterrupted. To ensure that the City Council receives your written comments, you are strongly encouraged to submit your comments in writing in advance of the meeting by 3:00 p.m. on the day of the Council or Commission meeting.
5 October 25, 2022City Council Meeting Agenda
OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
Live on Channel 28: City Council meetings will replay the following Thursday at 7:00 p.m. and Saturday at 1:00 p.m.
Planning Commission meetings will replay the following Wednesday at 7:00 p.m. and Saturday at 9:00 a.m.
Video Streamed Live on the City’s Website:
To view City Council and Planning Commission meeting videos online go to: Hercules Meeting Videos.
Instructions to view Live or On-Demand Videos from the City’s website:
1. Go to: Hercules Meeting Videos or https://hercules.legistar.com/calendar.aspx.
2. Locate the desired meeting and date.
3. Click the associated “Video” link (Video status is as follows):
Video = Video is available for on demand viewing.
In Progress = Video is available for viewing during live recording.
Not Available = Video is either unavailable or has not been recorded.
6 October 25, 2022City Council Meeting Agenda
THE HERCULES CITY COUNCIL ADHERES TO THE FOLLOWING POLICIES,
PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS REGARDING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
1. SPECIAL ACCOMODATIONS: In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you require special accommodations to participate at a City Council meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 510-799-8215 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
2. AGENDA ITEMS: Persons wishing to add an item to an agenda must submit the final written documentation 12 calendar days prior to the meeting. The City retains the discretion whether to add items to the agenda. Persons wishing to address the City Council otherwise may make comments during the Public Communication period of the meeting.
3. AGENDA POSTING: Agendas of regular City Council meetings are posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting at City Hall, the Hercules Swim Center, Ohlone Child Care Center, Hercules Post Office, and on the City’s website (www.ci.hercules.ca.us),
4. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION: Persons who wish to address the City Council should complete the speaker form prior to the Council's consideration of the item on the agenda.
Anyone who wishes to address the Council on a topic that is not on the agenda and is relevant to the Council should complete the speaker form prior to the start of the meeting. Speakers will be called upon during the Public Communication portion of the meeting. In accordance with the Brown Act, the City Council may not take action on items not listed on the agenda. The Council may refer to staff any matters brought before them at this time and those matters may be placed on a future agenda.
In the interests of conducting an orderly and efficient meeting, speakers will be limited to three (3) minutes.
Anyone may also submit written comments at any time before or during the meeting.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR: All matters listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless requested by a member of the Council or a member of the public prior to the time the City Council votes on the motion to adopt.
6. LEGAL CHALLENGES: If you challenge a decision of the City Council in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the meeting or in written correspondence delivered at, or prior to, the meeting. Actions challenging City Council decisions shall be subject to the time limitations contained in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
7 CITY OF HERCULES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
TO: Mayor Bailey and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: Timothy Rood AICP, Community Development Director Larissa Alchin, M-Group Consultant Planner
MEETING DATE: October 25, 2022
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit (CUP 22-01) for Recycling Center; Design Review Permit (DRP 22-02); Parking Exception
APPLICANT: Joel Lopez
LOCATION 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council:
1. Request planning staff present the staff report;
2. Open the public hearing;
3. Invite the applicant to make a presentation or statement;
4. Receive comments from the public;
5. Offer the applicant or their consultant team the opportunity to answer questions;
6. Close the public hearing;
7. Request clarification from staff or the applicant on any issues related to the project;
8. Adopt Resolution affirming, modifying with determinations and conclusions, or reversing the Planning Commission decision
At its October 12, 2022 meeting, the City Council called up the subject project for review following its approval by the Planning Commission on October 3, 2022 (Attachment 1). The Council cited concerns about franchise agreement compliance and noticing procedures.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Applicant Joel Lopez of J.L. Recycling Co., which is a CalRecycle Certified Recycling Center, is proposing to operate out of an approximately 320-square foot, 8-foot-tall metal structure, providing recycling services within the existing rear parking lot at 1511 &1551 Sycamore Avenue, behind Big Lots in the Creekside Shopping Center. The site is zoned Community Commercial (CC), which allows Recycling Center uses with a conditional use permit. Pursuant to Hercules Municipal Code Sec. 13-35.310 and Calif ornia Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act (Public Resource Code Section 14500-14599), recycling centers may be permitted as a conditional use on private property located in a commercial district. 8 The City’s franchise hauler, Republic Services, confirmed that the proposed operation complies with the City’s franchise agreement (Attachment 6). The metal structure is not affixed to the ground and shall be removed if the recycling center discontinues operations. (Attachment 2).
The recycling center will occupy approximately five parking spaces at the rear parking lot area of Creekside Shopping Center (Figure 1) , and no changes are proposed to circulation. Parking is addressed through the center -wide shared parking agreement. The Citywide parking utilization study prepared in 2007 (see Attachment 5) indicated that the center provides substanti ally more parking than is actually needed; recent observations of the shopping center confirm that the 2007 study’s findings still hold true. With the approval of the proposed parking exception, the project will comply with the City’s parking requirements. The parking exception is discussed later in this staff report.
The applicant proposes to operate the center with one employee, Monday through Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The recycling center will collect certain types of beverage containers made from aluminum, glass, and plastic , such as containers for sodas, water, beer, and juice. All containers must be labeled with California Refund Value (CRV). No scrap metal, cardboard, or anything not labeled with CRV will be accepted. The recycling facility, in conjunction with the property owner CS Creekside Hercules, LL C, will keep the area clean of any spills, trash, and shopping carts . All recyclables and garbage will be collected by the employee daily Monday through Saturday and brought to a central sorting facility in Sacramento for processing.
Figure 1- Vicinity Map
9 Figure 2- Site Map
Figure 3- Parking Lot View
10 PROCESS
The Hercules Municipal Code, Chapter 13 -44, “Hearings, Appeals and Judicial Review” allows the City Council, by majority vote, to call up any Planning Commission or Community Development Director decision for review. The Council shall hear and determine a decision that is called up for review in the same manner as an appeal hearing. The appeal shall suspend the effective date of the contested action until the appeal is decided by the City Council. The Planning Commission’s decision may be reversed, affirmed in whole or in part, or modified with determinations and conditions as the facts warrant. The Council may refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for further consideration, in which case the referral shall be investigated as advisable and conclusions reported back to the Council. Any action shall be consistent with the General Plan and with the required standards, regulations and findings of the Zoning Ordinance.
Decisions made by the Council on appeal shall be final and conclusive.
The Hercules Municipal Code, Chapter 13-50, “Use Permits,” defines the purpose of all types of “Use” permits. Under the Ordinance, “conditional use permits will usually include conditions of approval, mandatory review periods, and expiration periods as required at the discretion of the Planning Commission. In granting conditional approval, the Planning Commission may impose requirements and conditions with respect to location, siting, construction, maintenance, operation, duration, and overall development as deemed reas onable and necessary for the protection of adjacent properties and the public interest.”
Section 13-35.320 of the Zoning Ordinance states “[t]he operation of mobile recycling units and reverse vending machines may be permitted as a conditional use on private property located in a Commercial District if the facilities are certified as a recycling location pursuant to the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act (“Act”), Public Resources Code Section 14500.” Thus, this project requires a conditional use permit.
Section 13-35.310(4) of the Municipal Code states that applications for recycling centers are also subject to design review. As designed, the project will result in a reduction in parking below the amount required by the Municipal Code, so the project will also require a Parking Exception under Section 13-32.500.
Because the request to operate a recycling center is subject to these discretionary approvals, Section 13-40.700 of the Municipal Code states that the City shall notify all property owners within 300 feet of the property of the use permit hearing. Additionally, p er Municipal Code Section 13-
44.200, “Hearings, Appeals, and Judicial Review,” applications shall be reviewed and processed consistent with the provisions of the California Government Code Section 65090 et seq. Therefore, on October 13, 2022, the City mailed public hearing notices to property owners within 300 feet of the project site; the City also published a public hearing notice in the October 15, 2022 edition of the West County Times.
In response to Council concerns regarding notification, City staff also hand-delivered notices to each of the individual businesses in the Creekside Center on October 12, 2022.
11 PARKING EXCEPTION
Per Hercules Municipal Code Table 13 -32.1: Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements, a shopping center with 100,000 to 500,000 square feet of building area is required to provide 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of Gross Leasable Area (GLA). The initial Home Depot site was approved by the Planning Commission through Resolution #02-11 on May 20, 2002, with the City Council upholding the Commission’s decision and conditions in whole through their Resolution No. 02-083 on July 9, 2002. Per site plans, the total parking for the entire shopping center was 858 parking spaces for 190,567 square feet of building area in the entire center, which complies with code.
The original approval for Home Depot was for a 94,984 square -foot commercial warehouse and 24,301-square-foot attached garden center on a 12.67-acre site in the Creekside Shopping Center, with 524 parking spaces. The Home Depot store plus garden center contain approximately 119,285 sq. ft. Based on the above standard, the Home Depot facility requires 537 parking spaces but provides 524 spaces, or a deficit of 13 spaces. After construction of the Home Depot project and demolition of other structures on the site , the entire center has about 190,567 sq. ft. of building area. Based on the code parking standard, at the time of approval of Home Depot, 858 parking spaces were required by ordinance, and 873 spaces were provided, a surplus of 15 spaces over the code requirement.
Since the 2002 approval of the Home Depot property, there have been three additional modifications to the site. The first was the 2006 approval of a cellular telecommunications facility (including necessary ground-based equipment) on the northerly portion of the site. The second was in 2015 for the Bloom Box system in the parking lot south of the building. These two changes to the original project approval resulted in the loss of five parking spaces. The third modification was the America’s Tire project, which was approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in January 2021 but is not yet built . America’s Tire necessitated a modification of the approved parking plan for the center and included a P arking Exception per Hercules Municipal Code to reduce the required number of spaces for Home Depot, and thus for the center as a whole.
The 2007 Carl Walker parking assessment (Attachment 5) indicated that the Creekside Center had a surplus of parking with an observed utilization rate of 38.2% of the Effective Parking Supply.
As indicated below, the parking assessment indicated that in 2007, the center had 464 “extra” parking spaces that were not being regularly utilized.
Spaces required by HMC 858
Total Parking Supply 834
Effective Parking Supply (90% of Total) 751
Utilized Parking Spaces (observed) 287
“Extra” Parking Spaces 464
Existing development and currently approved projects that have converted parking to other uses have resulted in a total supply of 709 spaces for the entire Creekside Center, which the proposed recycling center would reduce to 704 spaces. Based upon a conservatively increased utilization factor of 50% of the Effective Supply , the America’s Tire approval documents found that 12 Creekside Center had 314 “extra” parking spaces, which the recycling center would reduce to 309 “extra” parking spaces that are currently underutilized . Again, the Hercules Municipal Code required 858 spaces for the Creekside Center, which currently has a supply of 709 spaces. This project would reduce that total by 5 spaces to 704 and would thus require a Parking Exception.
Parking Exceptions are regulated by Section 13-32.500 of the Hercules Municipal Code. This section states that the City may reduce or completely waive the number of parking spaces required based on quantitative information provided by the project applicant that documents the need for fewer parking spaces. Prior to recommending approval of a parking exception for the proposed recycling center, the City Council must find that the granting of the Parking Exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the project. The 2007 parking analysis demonstrated that the Creekside Center has considerable “extra” parking spaces. Based upon staff’s analysis, the approval of the recycling center project would not eliminate these “extra” parking spaces. There would continue to be ample available parking and allowing the 5-space exception would not be detrimental to health, safety, or welfare or injurious to the project or improvements in the vicinity. As a result, staff recommends that the Commission approve the Parking Exception for the recycling center.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project involves only an approximately 320-square foot 8-foot-tall metal structure, providing recycling services within an existing parking lot. The project is therefore Categorically Exempt according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures” which is a Class 1 Exemption “consist[ing] of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures.”
PROJECT ANALYSIS/ REQUIRED FINDINGS
Section 13-50.300 of the Municipal Code allows the Planning Commission , or the Council on appeal, to grant an application for a use permit only if certain findings (listed below) are made with supporting facts:
Finding #1: The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan.
Facts: The proposed recycling center use within an existing parking lot is consistent with the General Plan. The project will help implement the Economic Development Element of the General Plan by providing a new revenue source to residents who recycle materials at the center. The project furthers the following General Plan objectives and policies and improves the local economics with additional indirect sales tax revenue -generating activity:
“Develop non-residential Land Use Categories which reduce the need for residents to leave the community by providing a variety of shopping and service opportunities.” Land Use Element Policy 2B, page II-12
“Encourage uses that bring additional revenues (retail sales, property taxes) either directly or indirectly to the City.”
Land Use Element Policy 4B, page II-15
13 Finding #2: The proposed location of the use conforms with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the purposes of th e district in which the site is located and will comply with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
Facts: The City of Hercules Land Use and Zoning Map designates the entire Creekside Center as “Community Commercial” (CC). This land use designation is “to accommodate commercial development including retail, office, and service uses that serve residents and employees within the City.”
As part of the Creekside Center, the proposed Conditional Use Permit would help meet other specific purposes of Commercial Districts (Municipal Code Section 13-8.100), which include:
A. Reserve appropriately located areas for a full range of retail commercial, service commercial and professional and administrative offices consistent with the General Plan.
i. The proposed use will contribute to the full range of commercial services in the shopping center.
B. Provide an opportunity for retail stores and offices to concentrate for the convenience of the public in a mutually beneficial relationship to each other an d to provide commodities and services that will meet the needs of the community and neighborhood areas they serve.
i. The proposed use will contribute to services provided within Creekside Shopping Center and help meet the needs of the community and neighborhood.
C. Give favorable consideration to new retail development that would generate substantial new sales, for businesses that would provide substantial employment, high growth technical businesses (particularly bio-tech, flex office and incubator uses), health care services, restaurants and innovative mixed-use development proposals. Encourage uses that bring additional revenues (retail sales, property tax) either directly or indirectly to the City.
i. The proposed use will occupy existing underutilized parking area within the shopping center and bring additional revenue to the city by returning money to local customers that can in turn be re-spent locally.
D. Create a strong and successful focus or center for business and activities that would provide services, shopping opportunities which would attract employees, clients, and patrons from a regional area, while not disturbing existing residential and community- oriented areas. Where appropriate, allow limited commercial uses in residential areas to promote access to services.
i. The proposed use will provide a service that is currently not being provided in Hercules.
14 E. Encourage local and regional commercial uses that can benefit from substantial regional traffic on I-80, SR-4, and San Pablo Avenue.
i. The proposed use will primarily serve the community and neighborhoods of Hercules.
To achieve the above purposes, Sec. 13-35.310 of the Zoning Ordinance states “[t]he operation of mobile recycling units and reverse vending machines may be permitted as a conditional use o n private property located in a Commercial District if the facilities are certified as a recycling location pursuant to the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act (“Act”), Public Resources Code Section 14500.”
J.L. Recycling is certified as a Recycling Center by CalRecycle (Attachment 2). These uses are subject to a use permit with conditions that are not inconsistent with Public Resources Code Sections 14570 and 14571 and “[t]he City may deny a conditional use permit upon specific findings made that the operation will have a detrimental effect on public health, safety or general welfare. Where application is made for installation of a reverse vending machine as an accessory use to an existing business an administrative use permit shall be required.”
Finding #3: The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be compatible in design, scale, coverage, and density with existing and anticipated adjacent uses.
Facts: The building s at the Creekside Center were designed and built to the design requirements of the district and the building codes in force at the time of their construction.
The proposed 340 -square-feet metal structure meets the requirements for an accessory structure within the CC zoned area. The conditional use permit does not propose any physical changes to the exterior of the existing building s and will be contained within a mobile structure and shall be removed when the recycling center discontinues operation.
The zoning and uses surrounding Creekside Center include:
Zone Land Use
North New Town Center Vacant land
South Community Commercial Lucky Shopping Center
East Public City City Hall
West State (Caltrans) Interstate 80 Freeway
Finding #4: There is adequate access, traffic, public utility, and public service capacity for the proposed use and surrounding existing and anticipated uses.
Facts: The commercial buildings at 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue already have access, utilities, and services needed by the business to operate. The project site is fully served with underground utilities, including existing water, sanitary sewer, gas, and electrical services, and no additional services are required to be provided. Vehicular and pedestrian access to the site is from Sycamore Avenue, which is a fully improved, signalized street 15 with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and landscaped medians. Two driveways along Sycamore Avenue provide ingress and egress for the commercial center.
Furthermore, following review of the proposed use by Chief of Police William Imboden , the applicant provided a description of the operations and plan to mitigate the accumulation of garbage and shopping carts. (Attachment 4)
Finding #5: There are no potential, significant adverse environmental impacts that could not be feasibly mitigated and monitored.
Facts: The proposed business has been determined to be Categorically Exempt according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 1 5303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures ” which is a Class 1 Exemption “consist[ing] of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures .” The appropriate language has been added to the draft resolution t o incorporate this CEQA determination.
Design Review Findings
Section 13 -35.310(4) of the Municipal Code states that applications for recycling centers are subject to design review. Prior to approving a design review plan, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings, supported with facts:
Finding #1: The approval of the design review plan is in compliance with all provisions of this Chapter, pertinent provisions of Zoning Ordinance and applicable zoning and land use regulations, including but not limited to the Hercules General Plan as amended and any specific plan.
Facts: The proposed project will not interfe re with the General Plan intended goal of Community Commercial land use to accommodate commercial development, including retail, office and service uses that would serve residents and employees within the City.
The Community Commercial (CC) zoning district requires a 0 ft. minimum rear setback.
The location of the proposed recycling structure will be set back approximately 44 ft from the rear property line. The project is consistent with all other development regulation s within the CC zone district, including setbacks and height.
Finding #2: The approval of the design review plan is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare.
Facts: The installation of an approximately 320-square foot, 8-foot-tall metal structure to provide re cycling services to the City is an efficient , low-impact use of the existing underutilized parking area within the Creekside Center. The proposed recycling facility is consistent with the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act purpose to “create and maintain a marketplace where it is profitable to establish sufficient 16 recycling centers and locations to provide consumers with convenient recycling opportunities”.
Finding #3: General site considerations, including site layout, open space and topography, orientation and location of buildings, vehicular access, circulation and parking, setbacks, height, walls, fences, public safety and similar elements have been designed to provide a desirable environment for the development.
Facts: The site provides a desirable location for a recycling facility. In general, people coming to the facility consist of employees and local customers. As previously noted, the buildings at the Creekside Center were designed and built to the design requirements of the district and the building codes in force at the time of their construction. The proposed 340- square-feet metal structure meets the requirements for an accessory structure within the CC zoned area. The project does not propose any physical changes to the exterior of the existing buildings and will be contained within a mobile structure and shall be removed when the recycling facility discontinues operation.
Finding #4: General architectural considerations, including the character, scale, and quali ty of the design, the architectural relationship with the site and other buildings, building materials, colors, screening of exterior appurtenances, exterior lighting and signing, and similar elements have been incorporated in order to insure the compatibi lity of this development with its design concept and the character of adjacent buildings.
Facts: The proposed 340 -square-feet metal structure will be painted to match existing buildings within the Creekside Center. Existing exterior lighting within the parking lot and along the rear of existing buildings provides sufficient lighting for operation of the facility between 9:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m.
Finding #5: General landscape considerations, including the location, type, size, color, texture and coverage of plant materials at the time of planting and after a 5-year growth period, provision for irrigation, maintenance and protection of landscaped areas and similar elements have been 17 considered to insure visual relief, to complement buildings and structures, a nd to provide an attractive environment for the enjoyment of the public.
Facts: No new landscaping is proposed, and no existing landscaping will be affected by locating a recycling center structure within the existing parking lot.
Parking Exception Findings
Parking Exceptions are regulated by Section 13-32.500 of the Hercules Municipal Code. Prior to recommending approval of a parking exception for the proposed recycling center, the Planning Commission shall make the following findings supported with facts:
Finding #1 – Avoidance of Parking Problems: That the granting of the parking exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the project.
Facts: The 2007 assessment of parking citywide prepared by Carl Walker, Inc. (Attachment 5) indicated that the Creekside Center had abundant available parking. The Creekside Center was labelled “Zone 8” in the parking assessment. Based upon the survey and analysis conducted at the time and using a conservative ly assumed Effective Parking Supply of 90% of the provided parking spaces (834 – 83 = 751), at peak periods, there were over 464 unoccupied “extra” parking spaces at Creekside Center, for a utilization factor of approximately 34.4% at peak occupancy. Using a more conservative 50% utilization factor, the reduction in the amount of parking from the subject permit as well as the previously approved permits on the site would still retain over three hundred “extra ” parking spaces from the Home Depot side of the Center and would avoid any parking problem.
CONCLUSIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS
The City Council should consider if allowing a recycling center is in keeping with the existing Creekside Center, the Community Commercial zoning, Municipal Code Sec. 13-35.310 Recycling Centers, and surrounding uses. Based on the above report, staff has prepared a draft resolution (Attachment 1) with conditions of approval for the City Council’s consideration.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft City Council Resolution including Conditions of Approval
2. CalRecycle - Certification of Recycling Center
3. Project Site Plan
4. Applicant Letter
5. 2007 Parking Study (Carl Walker, Inc)
6. Confirmation from Republic Services of Franchise Agreement Compliance
7. Signed Planning Commission Resolution 22-10
18 City Council Resolution 22-__ Page 1 of 3
Conditional Use Permit #22-01 – Recycling Facility @ 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue RESOLUTION #22-__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERCULES APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #22-01 WITH DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT #22-02 AND PARKING EXCEPTION ALLOWING A RECYCLING FACILITY, AT 1511 AND 1551 SYCAMORE AVENUE, LOCATED WITHIN THE CREEKSIDE CENTER IN HERCULES, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hercules has considered the submittal requirements for Conditional Use Permit No. 22-01 filed by applicant Joel Lopez , of J.L .
Recycling, in accordance with the Hercules Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed operation of an approximately 320-square foot 8-foot-tall metal structure, providing recycling services within the existing rear parking lot at 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue is Categorically Exempt according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures” which is a Class 1 Exemption “consist[ing] of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures”; and
WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the project applications and considered the staff report, supporting documents, public testimony, and all appropriate information submitted regarding the project (the “Record”); and
WHEREAS, based on the entire Record, the City Council hereby finds as follows:
a. That the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan; b. That the proposed design and location of the use conforms with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located, and will comply with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance;
c. That the proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, welfare, and public interest of the City.
d. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be compatible in design, scale, coverage, and density with existing and anticipated adjacent uses;
e. There is adequate access, traffic, public utility, and public service capacity for the proposed use and surrounding existing and anticipated uses;
f. There is no potential, significant adverse environmental impacts that could not be feasibly mitigated and monitored;
19 City Council Resolution 22-__ Page 2 of 3
Conditional Use Permit #22-01 – Recycling Facility @ 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue g. That the approval of a parking exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the applicant agrees with the necessity of and accepts all elements, requirements, and conditions of this resolution as being a reasonable manner of preserving, protecting, providing for, and fostering the health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry in general and the persons who work at or visit this development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hercules hereby determines that the project is Categorically Exempt from CEQA per Section 1530 3 and hereby approves Conditional Use Permit #22-01 with Design Review Permit #22-02 and Parking Exception allowing operation of an approximately 320 -square foot 8 -foot-tall metal structure, providing recycling services within the existing rear parking lot at 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue, subject to the following Conditions of Approval:
1. Conditional Use Permit 22-01 is approved for operation Monday thru Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
2. No exterior storage shall be permitted.
3. If the approved tenant for Conditional Use Permit #22-01, J.L Recycling, ceases operation, or if the use is abandoned, or discontinued for a period of 6 months, then Conditional Use Permit #22-01 shall be considered abandoned and shall no longer be valid. Conditional Use Permit #22-01 is transferable to another tenant at the same site upon application to the City and approval by the Community Development Director.
4. If the approved tenant for Conditional Use Permit #22-01, J.L Recycling, ceases operation, the recycling facility structure shall be removed, and site shall be returned to its previous condition.
5. Applicant shall ensure all waste and debris generated are properly disposed and the area is clean upon commencement and conclusion of operations each day.
6. Abandoned shopping carts shall be returned to their rightful location on a daily basis, Monday through Saturday.
7. The project is subject to revocation by the Planning Commission or City Council as applicable, as outlined in Sections 13-50.700 and 13 -44.800 of the Municipal Code , if it has been determined that the applicant or successor(s) failed to abide by any conditions set forth in these Conditions of Approval or applicable laws of the City of Hercules.
8. Applicant agrees as a condition of approval to indemnify the City, its agents, officers , and employees and to defend at developer’s own expense against and from any claim, action, or proceeding brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this resol ution. City shall promptly notify developer of such claim, action, or proceeding of which City receives notice, and City will fully cooperate with developer in the defense therefor. Developer/applicant shall 20 City Council Resolution 22-__ Page 3 of 3
Conditional Use Permit #22-01 – Recycling Facility @ 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue reimburse the City for any court costs and attor ney’s fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any such action. City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve the developer of the obligations of this condition.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Hercules on this 25th day of October 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES: none
ABSENT: none
ABSTAIN: none
______________________________
Dion Bailey, Mayor
Lauren Berges
City Clerk
21 22
Fire Hydrant
Sign
Proposed 8'x40'
Recycling Facility
J.L. Recycling Facility
Owner:
Joel Lopez
1432 Santa Ana Ave.
Sacramento, Ca.
95838
916) 459 0814
June 2022
A1
Site Plan
1" = 10'-0"
40' x 8' Recycling Facility
If required will be fencing
Paint to match existing building
8'-0" Height
Pre manufactured container
Circulation
Circulation
Circulation
Existing Building
J.L. Recycling Facility
1511-1611 Sycamore Ave
Hercules, Ca. 94547
APN 406-140-012
Operation :
Monday thru Saturday
from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
No material shall be left
out of the collection
receptacle.
No construction is
proposed at this time
Description:
We will place a storage unit 40’ long, 8’ in width and 8’ tall which shall be used as a small recycling facility. Provided is the Site Plan with the proposed location of the unit, however, we are open to any, and all, suggestions on the size, color, and location of the above mentioned storage unit.
As a recycling center, we would collect, from the public, certain types of beverage containers made from Aluminum, Glass, and Plastic (#1-7) such as sodas, water, beer, and juice. All containers must be labeled with California Refund Value (CRV). We do not accept any scrap metal, cardboard, or anything other than Aluminum, Glass, and Plastic (#1-7) due to the fact that they do not have the CRV labeling.
Once approved,our recycling center will be open Monday thru Saturday from 9:30am to 5:30 pm and would be attended by a well-trained employee at all times while open. Our employee would be responsible for helping customers unload their CRV material into our bins, weighing all material using a scale ( which will remain within the bin all the time) that is certified and inspected regularly by the Department of Weights and Measurements, filling out all necessary paperwork (such as the Daily Log which summarizes how much material we have bought that day), and paying customers, in cash, on site using a small cash box we would have inside the container.
Also, in conjunction with the host business, we will keep the area clean of any spills, trash, dirt, or any other nuisance at all times.
We will keep all the materials inside the storage unit and would empty it on a regular basis.
We strive to exceed your standards and expectations by:
Using low profile, low noise non-electrical equipment Keeping the storage unit and the surrounding areas very clean and well maintained Keeping our activities inside the container to increase customer parking We would have well trained, kind, employees on the premises at all hours of operation.
Some benefits of having a recycling center are:
We fulfill the State mandate of having a recycling service for the nearby supermarket and other businesses in the shopping center
We help reduce the cost of garbage collection for residences and businesses We are a great and convenient avenue for citizens to reclaim the money they have paid into the California Redemption Fund (CRV) when they purchased beverages. Our presence helps create community awareness of energy and resource conservation. We actively help the environment.
Parking Lot
Parking
Lot
Landscape
Landscape
Parking
Lot
Parking
Lot
Existing Building
96.22' P.L.
147.07' P.L.
LandscapeLandscape
Landscape
Landscape
Parking Lot
Light Pole
Existing Light
Existing LightExisting Light
Existing Light
Existing Light
Existing Light
Existing Light
Existing Light Existing Light
Existing lights are on at night
No new lights will be installed
23 24
25 Carl Walker, Inc. 950 West Elliot Road, Suite 116 Tempe, AZ 85284 Phone (480) 505-0088 Fax (480) 505-0090 Atlanta Charlotte Chicago Dallas Denver Indianapolis Kalamazoo Philadelphia Phoenix Tampa www.carlwalker.com
January 15, 2007
Mr. Steve Lawton
Community Development Director
City of Hercules
111 Civic Drive
Hercules, California 94547
Re: Task One Summary Report – DRAFT
Dear Mr. Lawton,
In September 2006, the City of Hercules retained
Carl Walker, Inc. (Carl Walker) to provide a parking
management study for Central Hercules. This parking study was divided into six specific tasks, including a review of existing and future parking conditions, development of parking management strategies and parking standards, development of a parking demand management ordinance, and the organization of a Central Hercules parking district. Background parking system data was provided by the City of Hercules.
Additional input was solicited from designated stakeholders during three study meetings that included city staff, project developers, and area transit administrators/planners.
This report represents the first deliverable for this project. This summary report addresses the scope items noted in Task 1 of the parking study, which included:
• Reviewing any pertinent studies/reports concerning parking or traffic in the study area.
• Reviewing and evaluating development plans and other parking demand variables, including the identification of potential new sources of parking demand and supply that may impact parking operations/management.
• Confirming the inventory of existing parking spaces in the study area.
• Conducting parking occupancy counts on one typical peak weekday. Vehicle, bicycle, mass transit and pedestrian circulation patterns were reviewed during the parking occupancy counts.
• Determining current and future parking surpluses and deficits by location/zone.
• Conducting meetings/interviews with primary stakeholders to gain their perspectives concerning parking in the study area. (Completed on November 16, 2006).
26 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
2 The study area is roughly bounded by John Muir Parkway to the north, Sycamore Avenue to the south and east (including all of the Waterfront Development), and the San Pablo Bay to the west. Some areas outside of these streets were also included. The following figure illustrates the study area (study area shaded in gray).
Summary of Current Parking Supply and Demand
Carl Walker conducted an initial field review and an inventory of parking spaces located within the Central Hercules study area on November 15 and 16, 2006. The parking spaces were classified into two primary categories, on-street and off-street. For this study, on-street spaces refer to spaces located on a roadway, adjacent to a block, oriented parallel or angled to the curb. Off-street spaces refer to spaces located within a block, and within the curb face. Generally, all on-street parking spaces were available for public parking while the majority of off-street spaces were reserved for a particular group (e.g., specific customers, reserved parking) The majority of the on-street parking spaces in the study area are located in residential areas. In this report, public parking will refer to parking that is unreserved, and therefore available to all user groups. Private parking will refer to parking owned privately and designated for a specific business or user group.
The Central Hercules study area currently has a total parking supply of 2,353 parking spaces. Of these, 1,310 parking spaces (56%) are in off-street parking areas and 1,043 spaces (44%) are located on-street.
The on-street parking inventory includes both marked parking spaces and locations where on-street parking is possible but not currently marked. The amount of on-street parking was estimated by Carl
Walker based on block face lengths and street widths.
27 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
3 Some parking areas could not be accurately inventoried, as they lacked parking stripes or existing stripes were not visible. In these situations, inventories were estimated based on the size of the parking area.
Off-street residential parking areas, including apartment complexes and private driveways were not counted in the parking inventory as they would not contribute to any shared parking opportunities.
The study area was divided into ten separate parking zones. These zones were delineated to better analyze the parking characteristics of each portion of Central Hercules. The following graphic illustrates the locations of each of the zones (outlined in red), and the number identifier for each zone. The zone numbers shown in graphic will identify each zone throughout this study.
The specific boundaries for each parking zone were:
1. Zone 1 – Bayfront Boulevard to the north, Sycamore Avenue to the south, Taraya Terrace to the east, and the commercial development west of Railroad Avenue to the west.
2. Zone 2 – Sycamore Avenue to the north, Promenade Street to the south and east, and Railroad Avenue to the west.
3. Zone 3 – Sanderling Drive to the north, Sycamore Avenue to the south, Willet Street to the east, and Taraya Terrace to the west.
10 8
4 3
2 1
6 7
9 Parking Zones
1 - Waterfront North
2 - Waterfront South
3 - Baywood Residential
4 - Bayside Residential
5 - “Riverview” Residential
6 - San Pablo Commercial
7 - Park and Ride Lot
8 - Creekside Center
9 - City Hall
10 - Sycamore Villas
5 28
City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
4 4. Zone 4 – Front Street to the north, east, and west, and Sycamore Avenue to the south.
5. Zone 5 – Sycamore Avenue to the north, San Pablo Avenue to the south, Tsushima Street to the east, and Crestridge Court to the west.
6. Zone 6 – The parking contained in the commercial development only (no on-street).
7. Zone 7 – The park and ride lot only (no on-street).
8. Zone 8 – The parking contained in the commercial development only (no on-street).
9. Zone 9 – The public parking and employee parking for the City Hall building only (does not include the parking associated with the new library and the senior apartments).
10. Zone 10 – The parking located within the Sycamore Villas development only.
The following two subsections summarize the current parking supply by type (off-street versus on-street).
Off-Street Parking Supply
The study area contained an approximate total of 1,310 off-street parking spaces. There are currently 47 public off-street parking spaces (north of City Hall) and 1,263 private parking spaces. Most of the off-street parking spaces are located in the commercial center on San Pablo (Zone 6), the Park and Ride Lot (Zone 7), and the Creekside Center (Zone 8). Based on current parking space inventories, the city controls approximately 6% of the total off-street parking supply. The relatively low number of off-street public parking spaces is not unusual, as most privately built parking lots are intended to serve a specific development only. The publicly owned off-street spaces are currently controlled using time-limits and signage, and do not employee any other management method such as parking meters, parking permits, exit cashiering, etc. Of the remaining 1,263 off-street parking spaces, the vast majority are reserved for employees and visitors of specific businesses or buildings.
On-Street Parking Supply
The study area contains approximately 1,043 on-street spaces, all of which are controlled by the city.
The on-street parking is available to the public on a first-come-first-serve basis, and there are currently no time restrictions or parking technologies (e.g. parking meters, etc.) utilized.
Approximately 93% of the on-street parking spaces are located in neighborhoods. While these spaces are theoretically available to the public, some are utilized by residents on a regular basis as they are conveniently located to their homes. Parallel parking is provided on many streets, and approximately 74 angled parking spaces are provided on Sycamore Avenue (in Zone 4).
The following table illustrates the off-street and on-street parking inventory for each parking zone.
29 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
5 Off-Street Supply On-street Supply
Zone 1 34 240
Zone 2 0 200
Zone 3 0 130
Zone 4 0 350
Zone 5 0 64
Zone 6 118 0
Zone 7 248 0
Zone 8 834 0
Zone 9 76 0
Zone 10 0 59
Totals 1,310 1,043
After the parking inventory was completed, Carl Walker conducted an occupancy survey to determine how many parking spaces were utilized during a typical peak parking period. The completed survey provided a “snapshot” of parking occupancy, and did not attempt to determine the absolute peak parking period. Based on other similar municipal parking occupancy studies conducted by Carl Walker, it was determined that the surveys would be conducted every two hours between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (starting at 6:00 a.m. in Zone 6), with additional counts in the residential areas between 7:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. The occupancy surveys were conducted on Wednesday, October 25 and Thursday, October 26, 2006.
The parking occupancy surveys looked at two basic categories of parking, on-street and off-street. The intent of the survey was to determine the overall level of parking utilization in each zone, as well as the entire study area. The results of the surveys will serve as a baseline for determining future parking expansion needs and management options.
The overall peak period of parking occupancy occurred at 12:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 26, 2006.
During this period, a total of 982 parking spaces were occupied. This level of usage translates into 41.73% of the total parking supply. During the peak period of parking occupancy approximately 31.4% of the on- street parking supply and 50% of the off-street parking supply was occupied. Zone by zone parking occupancy statistics for each day will be provided in the final study report.
The following table illustrates the total observed occupancy levels for all zones in the study area.
30 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
6 Occupancy Survey Summary - October 26, 2006
Parking Type 8am 10am 12pm 2pm 4pm
Off-Street Occ. 480 591 655 640 551
On-Street Occ. 372 362 327 301 308
Off-Street Supply 1, 310 1,310 1,310 1,310 1,310
Space Available 830 719 655 670 759
% Occupied 36.64% 45.11% 50.00% 48.85% 42.06%
On-Street Supply 1, 043 1,043 1,043 1,043 1,043
Space Available 671 681 716 742 735
% Occupied 35.67% 34.71% 31.35% 28.86% 29.53%
Total Supply 2,353 2,353 2,353 2,353 2,353
Space Available 1,501 1,400 1,371 1,412 1,494
% Occupied 36.21% 40.50% 41.73% 39.99% 36.51%
The following table provides a summary of off-street and on-street parking occupancies, by zone, observed during the individual peak period of parking demand for that zone. The highest concentrations of parking occupancy occurred in Zones 6, 7, and 10. The peak period of parking in residential areas occurred during Wednesday evening. The parking in Zone 7 (the Park and Ride Lot) was full by approximately 6:00 a.m. on Thursday.
Zone 1 274 79 28.8% Wed. - 8:00 p.m.
Zone 2 200 94 47.0% Wed. - 8:00 p.m.
Zone 3 130 50 38.5% Wed. - 8:00 p.m.
Zone 4 350 158 45.1% Wed. - 8:00 p.m.
Zone 5 64 19 29.7% Wed. - 8:00 p.m.
Zone 6 118 91 77.1% Thur. - 2:00 p.m.
Zone 7 248 248 100.0% Thur. - 6:00 a.m.
Zone 8 834 287 34.4% Thur. - 12:00 pm
Zone 9 76 29 38.2% Thur. - 12:00 pm
Zone 10 59 37 62.7% Wed. - 8:00 p.m.
Overall 2,353 982 41.7% Thur. - 12:00 p.m.
Peak Period
% Occupied at
Peak
Total Parking
Supply
Peak Parking
Occupancy
In determining the current parking adequacy for each zone, it is important to define two terms typically used in analyzing parking adequacy: Effective Supply and Design Day Conditions. When a parking area’s occupancy reaches 85-90% of the total capacity, depending on the user group, the area becomes effectively full. When parking lot occupancy exceeds effective capacity, users become frustrated as it becomes increasingly difficult to find an available parking space. Users will begin to either park illegally in the lot or leave the lot altogether and search for parking elsewhere. When faced with significant parking difficulties in a downtown environment, visitors can choose to avoid the downtown altogether and shop in the suburbs. The effective supply percentage for parking in each of the parking zones has been estimated at 90%. This 10% “cushion” of spaces is used to accommodate spaces lost temporarily due to construction, improper or illegal parking, and provides for shorter searches for available parking.
31 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
7 Design day parking conditions attempt to represent typical peak activity that may be exceeded only occasionally during the year. Due to the limited nature of the occupancy study for this project, as well as the time of the year the surveys were completed, design day adjustments will not be factored into the adequacy model. The occupancy survey that was conducted provided an adequate “snapshot” of parking conditions during a typical peak parking period.
The following table illustrates the observed parking adequacy for each zone, based on the peak period of parking occupancy. Overall, there is a substantial surplus of parking available in Central Hercules.
Zone 1 274 247 79 168
Zone 2 200 180 94 86
Zone 3 130 117 50 67
Zone 4 350 315 158 157
Zone 5 6 45 81 9 3 9
Zone 6 118 106 91 15
Zone 7 248 223 248 -25
Zone 8 834 751 287 464
Zone 9 7 66 82 9 3 9
Zone 10 59 53 37 16
Overall 2,353 2,118 982 1,136
Total Parking
Supply
Effective Parking
Supply (90%)
Occupied Spaces
at Peak
Estimated Parking
Adequacy
Based on the effective parking supply of the study area, there is currently an overall parking surplus of approximately 1,136 parking spaces, or approximately 54% of the effective supply. The only zone with an estimated parking deficit is Zone 7 (the Park and Ride Lot). The actual parking deficit is probably much larger, as many people were observed parking on John Muir Parkway and walking to the Park and Ride Lot. Approximately 75 vehicles were parked on John Muir Parkway by 12:00 pm on Thursday. Therefore, the actual parking deficit for Zone 7 may be 100 spaces or more.
Current land use data for the study area by building square footage was not provided for this report. So, parking adequacy is based solely on observed parking demand. As vacancy rates for both commercial and residential land uses are not currently quantified, observed parking demand may be lower than the demand that would be calculated for the downtown land uses.
It is important to note that while a significant parking surplus exists in all areas, a substantial portion of the parking is private and use is restricted. Of the total off-street and on-street parking supply in the study area, approximately 46% (or 1,090 spaces) is public parking, with the remaining 54% (or 1,263 spaces) of the parking supply restricted to a specific user group (e.g. city employees, business employees, specific customers only, etc.) At the overall peak parking period (Thursday at 12:00 p.m.), approximately 33% of the public parking supply and 50% of the private parking supply was utilized. It is also important to note that a significant portion of the public parking is located on-street in residential areas. This parking will most likely not be available to support future commercial parking needs.
32 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
8 The utilization of available parking supplies was low to moderate in most zones. However, parking utilization was moderately high in Zone 6 and effectively full in Zone 7. The parking demand for Zone 6 peaked between 12:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, as people visited the restaurants contained in the development. While the available parking in Zone 6 never filled, the vehicle traffic inside the parking lot created delays in finding open parking spaces and entering/exiting the lot.
The parking lot in Zone 7 provides parking for people using mass transit to get to surrounding cities as well as for carpoolers. As stated previously, the Park and Ride Lot (Zone 7) was completely full by approximately 6:00 a.m. Assuming an effective supply of 90%, the parking deficit in this zone could be 100 or more spaces. As this zone currently has the highest level of utilization, additional time was spent observing parking conditions in the Park and Ride Lot. The following observations were made in the Park and Ride Lot during the parking occupancy counts.
• The parking lot contains a small carpool staging area on the south side of the lot. This staging area is not large enough to support the current level of carpool demand. The total number of vehicles waiting for carpoolers reached approximately 20 vehicles at peak. The existing staging area can support approximately six vehicles. Some carpool vehicles (approximately five to six vehicles at a time) parked in the southern bus pullout area. The vehicles parking in the pullout used approximately one-half of the available pullout space. Only two buses used the pullout area during the peak period of carpool activity (for approximately 10-15 minutes).
• Vehicles began periodically backing-up onto Sycamore
Avenue by 6:00 a.m. While periodic traffic back-ups were noted, they were generally short. The single entry/exit point on Sycamore Avenue began backing-up due to:
o a high volume of entering vehicles;
o a high volume of exiting vehicles (carpoolers);
o pedestrians crossing the entry/exit point to reach
vehicles parked in the southern bus pullout
(carpoolers);
o the movement of carpool vehicles from the staging area to the southern bus pullout.
While traffic occasionally backed-up on Sycamore Avenue, it appeared that the back-up was due more to general traffic volumes, as well as the spacing and timing of the traffic lights, than the Park and Ride Lot.
• After the parking lot filled, vehicles continued to enter the parking lot looking for parking. There is currently no “Lot Full” sign or counting system in the lot. While vehicles did continue to enter the parking lot, the volume of vehicles entering the lot did not cause significant internal traffic issues.
• A large number of the vehicles parking in the lot appeared to belong to carpoolers, opposed to transit riders. During the observation period, the large majority of parkers were catching carpools 33 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
9 and few were seen entering buses. Additional studies may be necessary to quantify the number of carpool parkers using the lot.
• Carpool pick-up activity was active through approximately 9:00 a.m.
Several alternatives exist to improve the parking situation in the Park and Ride Lot. Options to improve parking conditions could include:
• To reduce carpool parking challenges in the lot, underutilized parking in the study area could be used to provide alternative carpool parking. For example, the underutilized parking located at the Creekside Center or at the church on the eastern edge of the study area could provide carpool parking.
Obviously, this would require the approval of the land owner.
Sufficient steps would need to be taken to ensure carpool parking could be provided without adversely impact existing parking operations. Also, some carpoolers return to their vehicles in the afternoon using public transit. Therefore, any relocated carpool parking will need address this issue.
• The institution of parking fees may work to limit parking demand.
• Lot counting systems, with variable message signs, could be installed to alert drivers that the parking lot is full. Signage could also be located on freeway exits to direct drivers to other parking options if the lot is full.
• The bus pullout located on the southeast edge of the lot could become carpool staging. Currently, one-half of the pullout is used for carpool pick-up. Based on observing traffic in the lot, the whole pullout could be used for carpool staging – providing space for approximately six additional carpool vehicles.
• The southern entry/exit point could be designated for buses only. This would force all passenger vehicles to the northern entrance. As the parking lot is fairly small and fills early, a single entry exit point may be adequate. Enforcement of this option may be difficult.
Preliminary Projection of Future Conditions
Currently, the City of Hercules has a number of possible future development projects in the planning stages that will impact parking in the study area. These projects include transit, residential, retail, restaurant, and office projects. As of November 2006, the potential developments were estimated as follows:
34 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
10 1. Penterra Development – This development is currently projected to include up to approximately 55,000 square feet (s.f.) of retail space and up to 120 residential units. The development would be located south of Sycamore Avenue, adjacent to Zone 5.
2. Masonic Development – This development would be located adjacent to Zone 2, on San Pablo Bay. The development is projected to include five single-family homes, a small business office building, and a Masonic Lodge (including 4,000 s.f. of restaurant space and five apartments).
3. Bayfront Development – This development would be located adjacent to Zone 1, on San Pablo Bay. The Bayfront
development is anticipated to include 18 live/work units, with approximately 90,000 s.f. of space, and 20,000 s.f. of
commercial/office space.
4. New Town Center (West Portion) – New Town Center is a conceptual plan for the development of a significant amount of new residential, commercial, and structured parking on the site of the existing Park and Ride Lot.
This development is still highly conceptual, and is anticipated to be fully built-out in 10 or more years. The western portion of the development (anticipated for Zone 7) would include approximately 200 to 300 residential units, 96,000 s.f. of commercial space, and approximately 900 structure parking spaces.
5. New Town Center (East Portion) – This portion of the New Town Center development, anticipated for north of Willow Avenue (east of Interstate 80), would include approximately 1,500 to 2,200 residential units, 150,000 to 250,000 s.f. of commercial/retail space, 300,000 s.f. of office space, and as many as 6,100 structure parking spaces (with up to 500 parking spaces for transit users/carpoolers). As with the West Portion, this development is still conceptual.
6. Waterfront Development – This development would be
located north of Zones 1, 2, and 3. The development is
anticipated to include up to 1,500 residential units, 80 senior housing units, 100 hotel rooms, 60,000 s.f. of
hotel conference space, 100,000 s.f of office, 25,000 s.f. of retail spaces (in addition to the 20,000 s.f. included in the Bayfront development), and 53,000 s.f. of flexible
commercial space. This project is still under
development, with a more detailed project description
scheduled to be completed in mid-January. It is not yet clear exactly how much parking may be provided with
the project.
35 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
11 7. Bio-Rad Development – Bio-Rad is anticipating adding an additional 200,000 s.f. of lab, office, and manufacturing space north of Zone 3 (just outside the study area). This additional space will increase the parking demand for employees in the area, and may impact parking in nearby developments and residential areas.
8. Sycamore Downtown - This development would be located north of Sycamore Avenue, within Zone 4. This development is currently projected to include up to approximately 30,140 s.f. of retail space and up to 104 residential units.
The following figure illustrates the location of each of the anticipated development projects. The projects are identified by number.
Each of the aforementioned development projects will impact existing parking supplies and demand. To project future parking adequacy, the anticipated parking demands for each development project were estimated (where possible). Potential future parking demands were estimated using existing city parking requirements, as well as the ULI Shared Parking Model. Finally, the estimated parking demand was compared to the available parking within the area each development is located. The following table illustrates the projected parking supply and demand impact of each projected development project. 1 2
3 5
4 6
7 8
36 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
12 Project
Estimated Parking
Required per City
Requirements
Projected Parking
Demand per ULI Shared
Parking
Parking Supply
Included with
Project
Projected Parking Surplus/Deficit Comments
1. Penterra Development 433 spaces 383 spaces TBD
Surplus/deficit will depend on how many parking
spaces are provided with the project. Some on-
street parking on Sycamore may be available
(depending on the Sycamore Downtown project).
2. Masonic Development There is currently very little surplus parking available nearby (primarily on Railroad Ave.)
3. Bayfront Development
Surplus parking may be available on Bayfront Blvd.,
depending on the impact of the Waterfront
Development.
4. New Town Center (West) 984 spaces# 870 spaces Approx. 900 spaces The amount of parking needed for this
development will depend on the final design.
However, the estimated need for 900 spaces
appears close to the demand that Carl Walker
would project.
5. New Town Center (East)* Low Est. = 5,300 spaces;
High Est. = 7,100 spaces
Low Est. = 3,570 spaces;
High Est. = 6,000 spaces
As many as 6,100
spaces
The amount of parking needed for this
development will depend on the final design.
However, the estimated need for 6,100 spaces
appears close to the demand that Carl Walker
would project.
6. Waterfront Development
3,980 spaces (not including
the hotel conference
space, which is not
addressed in the code).
4,003 spaces, including the
hotel conference space.
Without the conference
space, 3,184 would be
estimated.
TBD
The amount of parking needed for this
development will depend on the final design.
According to preliminary designs, a significant
amount of on-street spaces will be created. The
estimated parking shown does not include parking
for transit users.
7. Bio-Rad Development
This development will increase the need for long-
term employee parking. Sufficient parking will
need to be provided to minimize impacts on
neighborhoods.
8. Sycamore Downtown 331 spaces 273 spaces 194 spaces (surface and structure)
Surplus on-street parking is available on Sycamore
Avenue (as many as 74 spaces). The Penterra
development may impact how many spaces on
Sycamore are available (and vice-versa).
* = The parking needed for the 150,000 s.f. to 250,000 s.f. of commercial space is estimated at 4/1000 s.f. Estimates include 500 spaces for transit parkers.
Notes:
# = The parking needed for the 96,000 s.f. of commercial space is estimated at 4/1000 s.f. 300 residential units were assumed.
TBD - Parking demand will depend on the square footage of the Masonic Lodge.
TBD - Will depend on the division of space in the live/work units and the final square footage of provided retail space.
TBD - Parking demand will depend on the square footage of each land use (e.g. lab, office, manufacturing, etc.)
Please note that the projection of future parking conditions does not include any adjustments relative to the impact of captive market conditions or the use of alternative modes of transportation. These adjustments could reduce the amount of parking required for applicable developments. At present, these adjustments would probably be modest in Hercules, although future changes in transportation and pedestrian/bicycle connections could reduce parking demand.
37 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
13 Clearly, all of the anticipated developments will have an impact on parking in the study area. Projects 2, 3, and 7 will need further definition to project parking demands, but they can obviously impact parking in the zones adjacent to the developments. Projects 4, 5, and 8 appear to be providing an amount of parking that is close to the estimated need. This is particularly important for the Sycamore Downtown and New Town Center (West) projects, as they will need to minimize or eliminate the potential impact on parking in nearby neighborhoods. The final two projects, the Penterra Development and the Bio-Rad development do not currently have projections on how much parking will be provided with new construction.
However, sufficient parking will need to be provided to minimize impacts on surrounding neighborhoods.
In addition to the development projects previously noted, there are other transit related issues that will impact parking in the study area. These issues include:
• Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) is considering charging for parking in the existing Park and Ride Lot. Monthly parking permits ($63 per mo.) and daily parking ($3 per day) will be provided. A parking fee reduction may be provided to people who park in the lot and then use mass transit (no parking fee reduction for carpoolers). Daily parking fees will be collected using automated cashiering equipment, and parking enforcement will be provided by BART. It is anticipated that the parking fees will be in place within the next six months.
The collection of parking fees in other BART parking facilities have created some parking vacancies, as parkers move to other parking options. As a large number of the people using the parking lot may be carpoolers, parking fees may lead some to look for parking elsewhere. This could have a profound impact on nearby parking supplies (e.g., on-street spaces, neighborhoods).
• The Water Transit Authority (WTA) is currently in the process of developing a ferry landing on San Pablo Bay (adjacent to, or perhaps part of, the Waterfront development). The potential parking need is still not clear, as design work is ongoing and the project timeframe is quite long (construction beginning in 2013). However, the parking needed to support ferry services could be significant. Based on information from a 2004 parking study for the ferry service in Vallejo, California, the parking needed to support ferry customers was projected at between .375 and .41 parking spaces per daily rider. Reviewing parking occupancy for the Vallejo ferry stop, over 1,100- 1,200 parking spaces are fully utilized for a daily ridership of approximately 3,000.
• Rail service may be provided in the area in the future (Capital Corridor Rail Station), with construction anticipated to begin in 2008. It is currently anticipated that the service would include approximately 16 to 18 stops at the Hercules station each day (in each direction of travel). While ridership data was not available for this report, it has been estimated by the rail operator that approximately 300 parking spaces will be required for rail station patrons. Additional analysis will be required once ridership data is available.
Preliminary Options and Recommendations
The current vision for Central Hercules includes many elements. The area is planned to become a more important social and commercial center, with the development of new residential, restaurant, retail, and 38 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
14 office space as central focal points. This vision will result in higher parking demands, and denser land uses, than the current environment. To support the current development vision, the city desires to create a more pedestrian friendly environment with sufficient parking. With this in mind, and after reviewing existing conditions, Carl Walker offers the following preliminary issues, options, and recommendations related to providing parking in Central Hercules (some of which may be detailed further in the remaining tasks of this study):
• While there is currently a substantial surplus of parking located in Central Hercules, most of the parking is
located in private parking lots or residential areas.
Therefore, new parking supplies will be needed in the
future to support the anticipated developments. In
order to address future parking needs,
Carl Walker
recommends the following methodology:
o Ensure the land use information for the area is
current. This will provide additional insight
into existing parking demands. The land use
data should be updated as new developments
occur.
o The first step in planning for future parking needs is to determine typical parking demands.
This is usually achieved by completing a parking supply and demand survey. As was completed as part of this study, this would entail maintaining current parking space inventories and conducting parking occupancy counts. This will provide a baseline of demand data from which to project future parking needs. These surveys will also help determine the correct mix of short-term and long-term parking (based on the utilization of each type of parking).
o Project the parking needs of each proposed development using city parking codes. Ideally, the code would be updated to address some of the issues noted in this report. Determine how parking demand for the new development will fluctuate during the day by using a shared parking model (a sample model will be provided by Carl Walker as part of this
study, based on Urban Land Institute data). Determine how parking demand for the proposed development will impact parking supplies during the period of greatest parking demand. Adjustments for reductions in parking demand can also be made, due to captive market effects, the utilization of alternative modes of transportation, and various parking management strategies.
o Once parking demands have been projected, determine how the development will impact existing conditions. If the development creates a parking deficit within the area in which it is located (the area would typically be a one to two-block radius surrounding the development), additional parking supplies may be necessary.
39 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
15 o While the parking demand for many land uses can be spread over greater distances, the creation of residential space in the downtown should include sufficient adjacent parking.
Sufficient parking generally means enough parking to meet projected demands. Residential developments that lack sufficient parking can be difficult to effectively market, and conflicts could arise should a significant use of public parking spaces be required to support commercial projects. This is not to say that two parking spaces per unit should be required, as many factors may reduce parking demand (e.g. transit availability, parking prices, availability of services – such as markets, personal services, etc. – within acceptable walking distances).
o Future downtown developments should include sufficient ADA accessible parking on-site.
The city should require developments to provide a suitable portion of their required parking on-site (or directly adjacent to the site) to ensure enough accessible parking is provided. This parking could be provided in a city parking facility adjacent to the development. Sometimes, parking demand for accessible parking may be larger than the minimum requirements. In order to ensure sufficient space is provided, periodic reviews of accessible parking demand should be part of larger parking inventory and occupancy surveys. Through periodic occupancy studies, and community input, the city will be in position to ensure sufficient accessible parking is provided.
• The existing parking zoning code, while providing a significant amount of guidance on parking issues, could limit flexibility in meeting future needs and addressing community development goals.
Carl Walker would recommend that the city consider updating the parking zoning code to better address the following issues:
o Shared Parking – The current city
parking code does not appear to allow
for the calculation of parking demand
using a shared parking methodology.
The lack of a shared parking
methodology can lead to the creation
of too much parking in the study area.
Shared parking is defined as parking
that can serve more than one single
land use, without conflict. Shared
parking is generally applied to mixed-
use developments, or downtown
developments composed of several
different land uses (e.g. retail, office,
theater) that are significantly integrated. Using the shared parking model reduces the amount of parking needed for a mixed-use development (or other groupings of adjacent land uses), as the effect of sharing parking requires fewer spaces than the sum of the parking needed for the individual land uses. It is recommended that the zoning code be updated to utilize the latest Urban Land Institute shared parking model (2005). A shared 40 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
16 parking methodology and electronic model (based on the Urban Land Institute model) will be provided to the city as part of this report.
o Flexibility in Meeting Parking Requirements – The existing city code does not provide much flexibility in determining parking demands for a potential development, nor alternatives for meeting parking demands. Adding flexibility in calculating and meeting parking requirements can ensure sufficient parking is provided without creating unnecessary parking supplies or sacrificing community development standards. Flexibility can be added through shared parking concepts (as noted in the previous bullet point), allowing development specific parking studies to set demand, the use of parking in-lieu fees, etc.
Many zoning codes require that the parking provided for a specific land use be located relatively close to the structure that the parking will support. This would include setting maximum distances (in feet) from the building, as well as restrictions on providing parking across streets and alleys (if any are set). It is common for small community zoning codes to require parking lots be located either on the same parcel as the primary parking demand generator or within 300 feet of the building they serve. Setting this limit will allow developers to determine if underutilized parking resources exists within an acceptable walking distance. If developments will be allowed to use the parking contained within another property, and owned by another individual or group, it is important that sufficient documentation be provided that guarantees the parking will be available for the anticipated lifespan of the development. This documentation could be provided by way of a written parking agreement or property covenant. Additional provisions could be included in the agreement requiring the developer to either construct the necessary parking, or pay an in- lieu fee to the city, should the off-site/shared parking become unavailable.
Parking demand for a development can vary greatly from published parking demand ratios.
Therefore, it is often a good practice to allow developers to conduct site specific parking demand studies to determine parking needs. This would allow developers and property owners to more accurately determine parking demand using either a shared parking model or a detailed parking supply and demand study. Shared parking could also be applied to developments that incorporate residential land uses as well.
Finally, developers and property owners should be provided the option of using alternatives to constructing parking to meet parking demands. This is commonly accomplished through parking in-lieu fees or special development assessments. The current city code does not include a provision for parking in-lieu fees. An in-lieu fee would allow developers to pay the city for the right to not construct a portion or all of the parking required by the development. The funds raised through parking in-lieu fees would help fund future public parking facilities constructed by the city. This could be a specific development fee or an in-lieu fee.
The use of parking fees like in-lieu can have several advantages:
41 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
17 o Offering parking in-lieu fees provide developers with an option to providing expensive on-site parking. The cost of purchasing land and funding lot construction is typically more expensive for developers than paying the in-lieu fees.
o Parking in-lieu fees can encourage shared parking. As developers stop constructing small private parking facilities, parking is consolidated into larger public parking supplies. This can result in a more efficient use of available land, the creation of fewer parking spaces, and conditions that encourage pedestrian movement between developments.
o The city would have more control over where parking resources are located and how they are operated and managed.
o Constructing public parking facilities provides the city with more control over how the facilities are designed.
While the use of developer parking fees can provide a lot of benefits to the city, there are also some potential drawbacks:
o Parking may be located less conveniently to primary destinations. As parking is consolidated into fewer locations, some primary destinations will be located further away than if they provided their own parking.
o As the city creates more public parking facilities, the city will have to cover annual operating, maintenance and management costs.
o As shared parking would be used, fewer parking spaces would be created. This could mean more traffic and frustration during unusually high periods of parking demand, such as during special events.
o The use of these fees could discourage development of the downtown in favor of suburban locations with space for surface parking.
o Depending on how the construction of the parking facility is financed, the city could be limited in how the facility is used to provide parking for private developments.
o The in-lieu fees collected must be held for parking construction only. If the fees collected are allocated elsewhere in the city government, funds may not be available to construct necessary parking facilities. This will obviously anger those that paid the fees in the anticipation of future public parking facilities.
o The timing of parking facility construction needs may not occur at the same time sufficient funds exist.
42 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
18 The fees charged to developers are typically determined by either the cost of land or the typical construction cost of parking per parking space. The construction cost per space could be set at the cost to provide surface or structured parking. For example, a municipality may decide to charge the current typical construction cost of a structure parking space at $18,500 per space. A development that would typically be required to provide 50 parking spaces would therefore be charged $925,000 in-lieu of providing the necessary parking. This fee could be converted into an impact fee of “X” dollars per square foot by dividing the total calculated parking in-lieu fee by the gross square footage of the development. Carl Walker would recommend setting development fees or in-lieu fees at a minimum of providing structured parking to help fund future parking construction. This fee would not be a requirement, but would be another option that developers could use to provide parking for their projects.
o Shopping Center Parking Requirements – The current city code provides a parking requirement for shopping centers as a single land use. This can result in inaccurate parking demand calculations as shopping centers
contain varying land uses. For example, a
shopping center with a significant amount of
restaurant space will have a higher parking
demand than a shopping center that contains
purely retail land uses. Therefore, it is
recommended that the city consider
eliminating the shopping center parking
requirement, and instead calculate the parking
needed for shopping centers based on the
individual land uses using a shared parking
methodology.
o Bicycle Parking Requirements – Some municipalities include requirements for bicycle parking in their parking zoning codes. This is done to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation and to reduce the likelihood of people chaining bicycles to street signs, benches, etc. Bicycle parking requirements are typically based on a percentage of the parking that is required to be provided or the square footage of the land use. The city could start with a small requirement, perhaps a minimum of two bicycle parking spaces per land use, and then monitor usage to determine if a higher requirement would be warranted.
o Parking Space and Facility Design Standards – While the stall size described in the code is similar to parking industry standards (currently nine feet wide by eighteen feet long), the lack of more detailed dimensions should be addressed. The code should include all parking design standards so that developers, architects, etc. can better prepare the necessary parking site plans.
Carl Walker typically recommends the following parking
design standards:
43 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
19 In addition to space dimension standards, additional clarification is needed for facility design standards. First, are tandem parking spaces permitted in Hercules? Tandem parking spaces are spaces placed end to end with the potential that one parked vehicle could block another parked vehicle. Tandem parking spaces are typically found in residential developments (usually where one household owns both vehicles using tandem spaces) or in situations where valets are parking vehicles. The city should define the situations where tandem parking will be permitted, if it is permitted at all.
A second issue is the design of parking structures. The existing city code does not currently address design standards for structured parking facilities. Generally, downtown design standards would provide additional parking location and design requirements.
Issues such as parking structure façade treatments, screening and landscaping, location of 44 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
20 on-site parking and set backs would be addressed, as well as adjustments in parking space requirements. However, the current zoning code does not address parking facility design beyond basic surface lot issues. Design requirements such as acceptable ramp slopes, drainage issues, parking access drives, adjustments for angled parking spaces and one-way traffic flows, turning radii, sight distances, signage requirements, etc. should be defined and included. For example, the code does not specify any ramp slope requirements for parking facilities. Ideally, maximum parkable ramp slopes (ramps that have parking spaces on them) should be set at 5-6% and maximum non-parkable ramp slopes (such as access drive aisles) should be set at 12% (with the requirement of transition slopes at the top and bottom of ramps with slopes greater than 10%).
Finally, parking facility lighting is another item only minimally addressed in the existing zoning code. Parking lot lighting requirements should include photo-cell regulated lighting with a minimum requirement of 2 footcandles to meet current Illuminating Engineering Society of America recommendations for downtown parking facilities.
o Accessible Parking Requirements - The current city code includes a provision that requires a minimum amount of accessible parking for each development. The accessible parking required is based on building square footage, and not on the number of parking spaces provided. The current zoning code does not meet current ADA accessibility guidelines related to parking, does not provide requirements for van accessible parking, and does not specify parking design requirements. The city needs to update accessible parking requirements as soon as possible to meet current requirements. Basic parking requirements are calculated based on the number of parking spaces provided (by lot/facility) as follows:
Total Parking Provided in
Lot
Required Minimum Number of
Accessible Spaces*
1 to 25 spaces 1
26 to 50 spaces 2
51 to 75 spaces 3
76 to 100 spaces 4
101 to 150 spaces 5
151 to 200 spaces 6
201 to 300 spaces 7
301 to 400 spaces 8
401 to 500 spaces 9
501 to 1,000 spaces 2% of the total parking provided
1,001 spaces and over 20 plus 1 space for each 100 spaces provided over 1,000
* = Fractions are rounded up to the next whole number.
45 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
21 Parking stall size requirements are typically set at 8’ wide with either a 5’ or 8’ access aisle (with the larger access aisle for van accessible spaces). An accessible space and access aisle cannot be placed at a location with a running or cross slope greater than 1:50 (2%).
It is also recommended that the city update the current ADA accessibility parking requirements to include higher parking requirements for certain medical facilities. The amount of accessible parking provided for hospital/medical office land uses that provide outpatient units and facilities should equal 10% of the total parking provided. Medical land uses specializing in the treatment of mobility impairments should provide 20% of the total parking provided as accessible parking.
ADA parking requirements may change in the near future, and the city will need to update this section of the code in the future.
o Valet Parking – The current city code does not provide a provision for valet parking.
While there may not be an existing need for a valet parking provision, this may become necessary in the future. The zoning code should address the issue of valet parking by requiring city review and approval of all valet parking plans, proper use of on-street parking for valet staging/parking (if permitted), insurance requirements, vehicle cueing space, etc.
• To support community development goals, future parking lots and structures should be located within developments and parking structures should incorporate ground-level commercial space.
Surface parking lots should include landscaping that can provide shade to parked vehicles. This can be accomplished through the use of fast growing, low water shade trees. These trees can be planted around parking lots and in internal landscaped islands. Pedestrian paths to/from parking facilities could also provide shade in a similar fashion. This will help make the off-street parking facilities more attractive to downtown parkers. Parking facilities should also include standard Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Standards (CPTED), such as adequate lighting, active and/or passive security features, elimination of “hiding” places, etc.
• When planning for parking there is a built in conflict to which all municipalities can easily relate. The conflict revolves around three primary factors: Cost, Convenience and Supply. Unfortunately, usually you can have only two of the three. Given this basic problem, keeping all
customers satisfied is an on-going challenge. Having well- defined parking principles is one way of addressing the policy decisions required by this inherent conflict.
Guiding principles add value in two primary areas. First, the establishment of a set of approved operating guidelines helps define the role and relationships of parking within the larger organizational structure. Secondly, guiding principles can emphasize the importance of planning for parking. They are not intended to replace policies and procedures. In general, the parking principles should be kept short and concise, a maximum of one or two typed pages. Some of the 46 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
22 items typically incorporated in such a document by other municipalities include mission/vision, funding strategies, approved uses of parking revenues, parking allocation strategies, departmental relationships, enforcement and maintenance responsibilities, etc.
A set of guiding principles will be developed in later phases of this study.
• As many of the projected future development projects
will be occurring close to neighborhoods, a provision
for neighborhood permit programs may be necessary.
Ideally, sufficient parking will be provided with each
development so that neighborhood parking is not
attractive to development visitors. However, the reality is that on-street parking is tempting for short-term
parkers. Add to that the institution of pay parking in the Park and Ride Lot, and residential parking
restrictions may be unavoidable. Possible
neighborhood parking strategies will be detailed in later phases of this study.
• Parking system management will become more important as Central Hercules continues to develop. Communities the size of Hercules rarely have designated parking departments within city government or quasi-governmental organizations responsible for parking (e.g. parking authorities, downtown development organizations). However, parking management responsibilities do exist.
For example, some person or department must be responsible for issues like parking system maintenance, planning for future developments, special event planning, handling parking related complaints/concerns, communicating parking issues to the public, etc. Also, additional responsibilities could arise in the future, such as parking enforcement or parking revenue collections.
While a parking specific department is not currently recommended, the city should consider designating one department as responsible for parking related issues. This department would coordinate parking maintenance, participate in planning for future parking needs, provide assistance with
planning for special event parking, deal with parking
complaints/concerns, etc. This department need not
directly provide all of these services, as these
responsibilities could be distributed horizontally
throughout the existing city department structure. For example, parking maintenance could be provided by
Public Works and parking enforcement could be
provided by the Police Department. However, the
community should have a single city contact for all of its parking related concerns.
47 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
23 As the downtown grows in the future, the need for a parking-specific department could arise.
Municipal parking services tend to evolve over time. At first, parking is largely unregulated.
During this stage most off-street parking is privately owned, and the largest supply of public parking is located on-street. The initial formation of parking system management typically begins as a small component of an existing city department, such as Public Works or the Police Department.
As a downtown becomes more densely developed, parking tends to combine into larger facilities or structures. At this point, paid parking is established to pay for the growing infrastructure and parking enforcement is instituted. As structures tend to be publicly owned, the need arises for an organization to operate and manage the parking supply. Ideally, once the system has reached a significant size, parking responsibilities would be vertically integrated within a single department or organization to improve overall parking system management.
There are typically three approaches commonly used to address the need for parking system operations and management. First, an internal city parking services department could be created.
This department could stand alone, or be a sub-department of another department (e.g. a division of Public Works, Economic Development, etc.) The operation of the system could be completely in-house, or the department could receive services from another city department or private parking operator. Second, the city could create a parking authority. This authority would consist of an executive director and a board composed of members of the downtown community. Board members could include members of other organizations (e.g. the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Association), downtown business owners, members of the general public, and city staff. Finally, the city could contract with an outside organization to provide parking system operations and management. For example, the city could contract with a downtown business organization or a private parking operator to provide parking system management.
It is important to note that whatever the parking management approach taken by the City of Hercules, several concepts are always necessary. First, the management of parking resources requires the input and involvement of the private business stakeholders and local residents. They must remain a part of the parking planning process, and they can offer real world options based on their experience. Also, lines of communication must remain open between those responsible for parking within the city and downtown stakeholders. Second, parking policies and regulations must be consistently applied. Once the system guiding principles have been established, they must be adhered to, or they will lose their importance. Third, the parking system must be properly maintained and provide a safe parking environment. Finally, the parking system must be promoted effectively to ensure both visitors and business owners understand the system.
The challenges of parking system management, as well as more detailed management alternatives, will be explored further in later phases of this study.
• Continue encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation. The community has several different programs in place that can help reduce single occupancy vehicle trips, including: transit incentives; carpool matching and guaranteed ride home; employer education programs, etc. 48 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
24 Involving community transit coordinators in the early stages of development planning can help reduce parking demands and ensure support is in place for encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation.
Some community development standards encourage the utilization of alternative modes of transportation by providing parking requirement reductions for incorporating transportation alternatives. For example, a developer may be allowed to construct less parking if they include bicycle racks and shower facilities, locate bus stops nearby, provide pedestrian paths and amenities, subsidize employee transit programs, etc.
• The concept of integrating transportation and parking elements as part of the larger strategic vision for Central Hercules supports the adoption of a “Park Once – Pedestrian First” planning concept.
This concept encourages employees and visitors to park their vehicles in one location and then use another form of transportation to move around the area with excellent pedestrian, transit, parking, and bicycle facilities. This concept will become very important as the downtown develops.
Three key elements are needed to achieve this vision:
o Ensure streets and sidewalks adequately serve the needs of pedestrians, transit users, bicyclists and vehicles with the focus on serving pedestrians first. This issue can be supported by:
The creation of safe, attractive, shaded, and inviting pedestrian linkages to connect downtown destinations and parking facilities.
Ensuring pedestrian crossings across major streets provide sufficient time for people to cross the street. For example, this will be important for people crossing San Pablo Avenue.
Where necessary, using traffic calming strategies such as speed humps, lower speed, limits, on-street parking, etc.
Where possible, including bicycle paths on roadways.
Providing amenities such as improved lighting, signage, street furniture, landscaping, etc. in public right-of-ways to support and encourage pedestrian activity.
Bicycle racks, lockers, or other bicycle-friendly facilities should be provided throughout Central Hercules.
o Developing, managing and operating parking as an essential civic infrastructure and reducing overall parking ratios over time to create a “Park Once” environment. This issue can be supported by:
The usage of in-lieu parking assessments for developments planned in the area to support the future funding of strategically-located parking resources. Encouraging the “Park-Once” strategy through shared parking for both public and private parking resources.
49 City of Hercules
Parking Management Study - Task One Summary Report
January 15, 2007
25 Ensuring all public parking resources are efficiently and effectively designed and managed. Encourage efficient design and management in private parking resources as well.
Maximizing on-street parking throughout Central Hercules and monitoring vehicle duration and turnover. Encourage the turnover of on-street parking through monitoring, communication with downtown business owners and, if necessary, other means such as parking enforcement, parking meters, etc. Where possible, locating long-term parking facilities on the perimeter of the area and locating short-term parking throughout the area. Ensure the proper mix of parking through periodic parking occupancy counts.
Incorporating ground floor commercial activity into designs (where appropriate), should a parking structure be developed in the future.
Where necessary, improving existing surface parking lots in the downtown (e.g. paving, landscaping, lighting, identification signage)
o Modifying the identity of Central Hercules to make it more understandable and attractive to infrequent users. This can be supported by:
Actively promoting new attractions and developments, including parking availability/locations and alternative transportation options. This can be done using printed materials, as well as the city website.
Developing and implementing a downtown informational and directional (wayfinding) signage program with a special emphasis on available parking resources.
Thank you very much for providing
Carl Walker with this opportunity to be of service. I would like to also extend a sincere thank you to you, and your staff, for all of the assistance in completing the Task 1 report.
Sincerely,
Matthew Q. Inman
Senior Planner
50 This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
From: Moberg, Shawn
To: Mike Roberts
Cc: Larissa Alchin; Nuti, Peter; Moore, Bielle
Subject: RE: Application for 20x8 ft Recycling Container Center Behind Hercules Box Store Date: Friday, July 8, 2022 11:52:15 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Mike,
I appreciate checking in with us on this new operation. No violation on the Collection franchise agreement
Thanks,
Shawn
From:
Mike Roberts <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 7, 2022 3:51 PM
To: Moberg, Shawn <[email protected]>
Cc: Moore, Bielle <[email protected]>; Larissa Alchin <[email protected]> Subject: Application for 20x8 ft Recycling Container Center Behind Hercules Box Store
Hi Shawn – I know we discussed a similar application previously, I want to double check that your understanding is this micro recycling center with one employee will not violate the franchise agreement between the City and Republic. ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Hi Shawn – I know we discussed a similar application previously, I want to double check that your understanding is this micro recycling center with one employee will not violate the franchise agreement between the City and Republic.
Hope all is well.
Mike
Michael Roberts, PE
Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Hercules
(
(510)799-8241
Please be advised City offices are closed on Fridays.
51 Planning Commission Resolution 22-10 Page 1 of 3
Conditional Use Permit #22-01 – Recycling Facility @ 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue
HERCULES PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 22-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERCULES APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #22-01 WITH DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT #22-02 AND PARKING EXCEPTION ALLOWING A RECYCLING FACILITY, AT 1511 AND 1551 SYCAMORE AVENUE, LOCATED WITHIN THE CREEKSIDE CENTER IN HERCULES, CALIFORNIA.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Hercules has considered the submittal requirements for Conditional Use Permit No. 22-01 filed by applicant Joel Lopez, of J.L.
Recycling, in accordance with the Hercules Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed operation of an approximately 320-square foot 8-foot-tall metal structure, providing recycling services within the existing rear parking lot at 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue is Categorically Exempt according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15303, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures” which is a Class 1 Exemption “consist[ing] of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures”; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the project applications and considered the staff report, supporting documents, public testimony, and all appropriate information submitted regarding the project (the “Record”); and
WHEREAS, based on the entire Record, the Planning Commission hereby finds as follows:
a. That the proposed use is consistent with the General Plan; b. That the proposed design and location of the use conforms with the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the district in which the site is located, and will comply with the applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance;
c. That the proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, welfare, and public interest of the City.
d. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use will be compatible in design, scale, coverage, and density with existing and anticipated adjacent uses;
e. There is adequate access, traffic, public utility, and public service capacity for the proposed use and surrounding existing and anticipated uses;
f. There is no potential, significant adverse environmental impacts that could not be feasibly mitigated and monitored;
DocuSign Envelope ID: F1753BEB-D5CD-4A85-BD66-583F0962BFD1 52 Planning Commission Resolution 22-10 Page 2 of 3
Conditional Use Permit #22-01 – Recycling Facility @ 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue g. That the approval of a parking exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties o r improvements in the vicinity of the project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the applicant agrees with the necessity of and accepts all elements, requirements, and conditions of this resolution as being a reasonable manner of preserving, protecting, providing for, and fostering the health, safety, and welfare of the citizenry in general and the persons who work at or visit this development.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hercules hereby determines that the project is Categorically Exempt from CEQA per Section 15303 and hereby approves Conditional Use Permit #22-01 with Design Review Permit #22-02 and Parking Exception allowing operation of an approximately 320 -square foot 8-foot-tall metal structure, providing recycling services within the existing rear parking lot at 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue, subject to the following Conditions of Approval:
1. Conditional Use Permit 22-01 is approved for operation Monday thru Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
2. No exterior storage shall be permitted.
3. If the approved tenant for Conditional Use Permit #22-01, J.L Recycling, ceases operation, or if the use is ab andoned, or discontinued, Conditional Use Permit #22-01 shall be considered abandoned and shall no longer be valid. Conditional Use Permit #22-01 is not transferable to another property or tenant.
4. If the approved tenant for Conditional Use Permit #22-01, J.L Recycling, ceases operation, the recycling facility structure shall be removed, and site shall be returned to its previous condition.
5. Applicant shall ensure all waste and debris generated are properly disposed and the area is clean upon commencement and conclusion of operations each day.
6. Abandoned shopping carts shall be returned to their rightful location on a daily basis, Monday through Saturday.
7. The project is subject to revocation by the Planning Commission, as outlined in Sections 13-
50.400 and 13-50.500 of the Municipal Code, if it has been determined that the applicant or successor(s) failed to abide by any conditions set forth in these Conditions of Approval or applicable laws of the City of Hercules.
8. Applicant agrees as a condition of approval to indemnify the City, its agents, officers , and employees and to defend at developer’s own expense against and from any claim, action, or proceeding brought within the time period provided for in Section 66499.37 of the Government Code to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this resol ution. City shall promptly notify developer of such claim, action, or proceeding of which City receives notice, and City will fully cooperate with developer in the defense therefor. Developer/applicant shall reimburse the City for any court costs and attor ney’s fees which the City may be required to DocuSign Envelope ID: F1753BEB-D5CD-4A85-BD66-583F0962BFD1 53 Planning Commission Resolution 22-10 Page 3 of 3
Conditional Use Permit #22-01 – Recycling Facility @ 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue pay as a result of any such action. City may, in its sole discretion, participate in the defense of any such claim, action, or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve the developer of the obligations of this condition.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Hercules on this 3rd day of October 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: Rubio, Morrison, Sacramento, Schaufenbil
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
______________________________
Hector Rubio, Planning Commission Chair
ATTEST:
Tim Rood, AICP
Community Development Director
DocuSign Envelope ID: F1753BEB-D5CD-4A85-BD66-583F0962BFD1 54 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 22-01&
Design Review Permit (DRP) 22-02
J.L. Recycling Center
1511 & 1551 Sycamore Avenue
Creekside Shopping Center
CITY OF HERCULES CITY COUNCIL MEETING
OCTOBER 25, 2022
55 J.L. Recycling
Creekside
Shopping
Center
Existing parking area behind Big Lots
Recycling Center within a 340-sqft
structure
Hours of operation
Monday thru Saturday from 9:30 a.m.
to 5:30 p.m.
8 hours per day.
Employees – 1
56 Existing lighting
Existing lighting
57 58
CUP Findings:
1. Consistent with General Plan
• Land Use Designation of Community Commercial
• Predominant uses include g eneral retail and services.
2. Conforms to Zoning Ordinance
• CC zone allows Recycling Center uses with an approved conditional use permit.
3. Proposed use and structure are compatible with adjacent uses • Meets standards of an accessory structure and provides a service to the community
4. Adequate access and services exist
• Site already ha s all access, utilities, and services needed by the business.
5. No significant adverse environmental impacts
• Categorically Exempt per CEQA
59 Design Review Findings:
1. Consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
2. Public Welfare - P roject is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare. • Efficient, low-i mpact use of the existing underutilized parking area within the Creekside Center.
• Provides a service not currently available in the city • Consistent with the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act.
3. Site - The site provides a desirable location for a recycling facility and site has all access, utilities, and services needed by the business.
4. Design - R ecycling center structure will be painted to match existing buildings within the Creekside Center and sighted to minimize visual impact.
5. Landscaping - N o new landscaping is proposed, and no existing landscaping will be disturbed.
Parking Exception Finding: Granting of the parking exception will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity of the project.
60 Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of CUP 22-01 & DRP 22-02 to allow Recycling Center use at 1511 & 1551 Sycamore Ave., within the Creekside Shopping Center, Zoned Community Commercial.
61 111 Civic Drive
Hercules, CA 94547City of Hercules
Meeting Minutes
City Council
Mayor Dion Bailey
Vice Mayor Alexander Walker-Griffin
Council Member Dan Romero
Council Member Chris Kelley
Council Member Tiffany Grimsley
Dante Hall, City Manager
Patrick Tang, City Attorney
Lauren Berges, City Clerk
6:00 PMTuesday, October 11, 2022
In-Person In Council Chambers or
Zoom ID: 826 6073 2401
Zoom Phone Number: 1-669-900-6833
Zoom Passcode: 808446
To view webcast of meetings, live or on demand, go to the City's website at www.ci.hercules.ca.us I. SPECIAL MEETING - CLOSED SESSION – 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley
Present: 5 -
II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATION - CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
No public comment.
III. CONVENE INTO CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Bailey adjourned the meeting into closed session.
The Hercules City Council will meet in Closed Session regarding the following:
22-3121. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - Title: City Manager
22-3152. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b) PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - Title: City Attorney
62 October 11, 2022City Council Meeting Minutes
IV. REGULAR MEETING – 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley
Present: 5 -
V. REPORT ON ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Tang announced that Vice-Mayor Walker-Griffin was able to attend the closed session. Vice Mayor Walker-Griffin's status changed from absent to present. Mayor Bailey reported that the City Council completed the City Manager's evaluation and will be bringing their findings to a future regular meeting. No further reportable actions.
VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Councilmember Kelley led the Pledge of Allegiance.
VII. MOMENT OF SILENCE
Mayor Bailey requested a moment of silence for the victims of the ongoing war in Ukraine.
VIII. INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS/COMMISSION REPORTS
1. 22-316
Red Ribbon Week Proclamation
No action taken.
2. 22-318 National Filipino-American History Month Proclamation Mayor Bailey read the proclamation into the record. Councilmembers provided comment. Henry Torres and unknown female provided comment.
3. 22-314
Chief William Imboden Retirement Proclamation
Mayor Bailey read the proclamation into the record. Councilmembers provided comment. Chief Imboden provided comment. Public Speakers:
Chief's Advisory Board Members Tanya Little, Ken Torres, Margaret Short, Bill Henderson, Mike Dhanjal; Susan Dunlap of PHREED with members Susan Keefe, Margaret Short, and Tanya Little; HPD Ofc. Luis Montenegro Meeting went into Recess for a brief reception.
RECEPTION
IX. AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
City Manager Hall had no additions or deletions for the agenda.
63 October 11, 2022City Council Meeting Minutes
X. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Public Speakers: Mary Beth Bykowsky; Sarah Creeley
XI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
XII. CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Romero, seconded by Council Member Kelley, to adopt the Consent Calendar . The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley 5 -
1. 22-298
Emergency Declaration
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution authorizing virtual city council, commission and committee meetings during a declared state of emergency pursuant to government code 54953 (AB 361).
Approved.
2. 22-310 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of September 27, 2022.
Approved.
3. 22-305 Acceptance of the Baywood Tree Replacement Project Recommendation: Adopt a resolution accepting the Baywood Tree Replacement Project with Desert Parks Landscaping as complete for a total amount of $140,000 and authorizing the filing of the Notice of Completion with the Contra Costa County Recorder’s Office.
Approved.
4. 22-307
Conflict of Interest Code Biennial Review
Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution amending the City’s Conflict of Interest Code for designated employees, consultants, boards, committees and commissions for the City of Hercules.
Approved.
5. 22-308 Zoning Text Amendment to Section 13.48 of the Municipal Code Recommendation: Conduct the second reading of an Ordinance approving a Zoning Text Amendment to change text in Section 13.48 (Planned Development Plans) of the Municipal Code to alter the allowed deviations permitted with a Planned Development, by eliminating the
64 October 11, 2022City Council Meeting Minutes
limitations on the amount of a deviation.
Approved.
6. 22-309 Parcel Map MS 476-22 for America’s Tire Store at 1625 Sycamore Avenue (Creekside Center)
Recommendation: To adopt a resolution approving Parcel Map MS 476-22 for America’s Tire store at 1625 Sycamore Avenue (Creekside Center).
Approved.
XIII. DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION ITEMS
1. 22-313
Police Vehicle Acquisition
Recommendation: Authorize the Police Department to contract with Folsom Chevrolet to purchase three new Chevy Tahoe Patrol Vehicles at a cost not to exceed $182,371.20, and to outfit these vehicles with equipment purchased and installed through LEHR Pursuit Vehicles of Pittsburg at a cost not to exceed $65,000 for a total cost not to exceed $247,371.20.
Presentation by Chief Imboden. Councilmembers provided comment.
Public Speakers: William Henderson
MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Kelley, seconded by Council Member Grimsley, to adopt Resolution 2022-088. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley 5 -
2. 22-301
Adoption of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Revenue & Cost Specialist (RCS) in an amount not to exceed $75,400 to prepare a Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study, and approving a budget amendment to increase the FY 22-23 General Fund budget by $75,400
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Revenue & Cost Specialist (RCS) to prepare a Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Development Impact Fee Study, and approving a budget amendment to increase the FY 22-23 General Fund budget by $75,400 Presentation by Director of Finance Edwin Gato. Councilmembers provided comment. No public comment.
MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Grimsley, seconded by Council Member Kelley, to adopt Resolution 2022-089. The motion carried by the following vote:
65 October 11, 2022City Council Meeting Minutes
Aye: Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley 5 -
3. 22-306 Award of a Sole Source Construction Contract to Ross Recreation Equipment to Furnish and Install an All Abilities Swing in Refugio Park in the Amount of $86,727, and up to a 10% Contingency of $8,673 for a not to exceed Total Contract Amount of $95,400 Recommendation: Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a sole source contract with Ross Recreation Equipment to furnish and install a We-Go-Swing, a swing for people with disabilities, in Refugio Park in the amount of $86,727, and up to a 10% contingency of $8,673 for a not to exceed total contract amount of $95,400.
Presentation by Parks and Recreation Director, Christopher Roke.
Councilmembers provided comment. Public Speakers: Tanya Little MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Kelley, seconded by Council Member Grimsley, to adopt Resolution 2022-090. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley 5 -
4. 22-299
Cancellation of November 8, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting and Scheduling a Replacement Special City Council Meeting
Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council adopt a motion to cancel the regular City Council meeting of November 8, 2022 and schedule a special City Council meeting in its place.
Presentation by City Manager Dante Hall. Councilmembers provided comment. Public Speakers: Cordell Hindler
MOTION: A motion was made by Council Member Kelley, seconded by Council Member Romero, to approve the cancellation of the regular City Council meeting on November 8, 2022 and to schedule a special City Council meeting on November 9, 2022; Motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: Council Member T. Grimsley, Council Member D. Romero, Vice Mayor A.
Walker-Griffin, Mayor D. Bailey, and Council Member C. Kelley 5 -
XIV. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Public Speakers: Cordell Hindler
This time is reserved for members of the public who were unavailable to attend the Public Communications period during Section X of the meeting, or were unable to speak due to lack of time. The public speaker requirements specified in Section X of this Agenda apply to this Section.
66 October 11, 2022City Council Meeting Minutes
XV. CITY COUNCIL/CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY ANNOUNCEMENTS,
COMMITTEE, SUB-COMMITTEE AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE REPORTS
AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Director of Public Works Mike Roberts provided an update on the upcoming Sycamore Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation Project.
Councilmembers reported out on local and regional meetings and events.
Councilmember Romero requested a future agenda item to call up and discuss the Planning Commission's passing of Condition Use Permit (CUP 22-01) and Design Review Permit (DRP 22-02) regarding concerns of debris removal and the noticing of surrounding businesses of the new recycling center. Community Development Director Timothy Rood provided comment. City Attorney Tang provided comment. Councilmembers agreed to bring the item to Council for discussion.
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Bailey adjourned the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
_________________________________
Dion Bailey, Mayor
Attest:
_______________________________
Lauren Berges, CMC
City Clerk
67 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of October 25, 2022
TO: Mayor Bailey and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: J. Patrick Tang, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling LLP
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide authority to the City Manager to enter into a legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP to pursue recovery of PCB clean-up costs from Monsanto Corporation
BACKGROUND:
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a human-made chemical that was used for a wide range of commercial, household, and industrial uses starting in the 1920s and ending in 1977 after PCBs were banned in the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Monsanto produced nearly 99 percent of all PCBs used in the United States.
PCBs are known or suspected to cause a wide range of cancers including non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma, breast cancer, liver cancer, gallbladder cancer, gastrointestinal cancers, pancreatic cancer, and skin cancer. They are also implicated in numerous non-cancer health problems including cardiovascular, endocrine, gastrointestinal, hepatic (liver), immune, neonatal, neurological, ocular, and reproductive harm.
DISCUSSION:
PCB contamination is widespread across the Bay Area. Water and sediment containing PCBs end up in wastewater and stormwater systems, which eventually make their way into San Francisco Bay. In order to comply with stringent regulations to prevent further contamination and implement PCB load reduction measures, cities and counties will be required to implement a wide range of actions, including some or all of the following:
• Testing and monitoring;
• The installation of “green infrastructure” to capture PCBs in runoff; • Measures to control PCB discharges when structures with PCBs are demolished; 68 • Identification and abatement of PCB-contaminated sites; • More frequent street sweeping;
• Trash capture devices that capture particles carried in runoff; and • Ongoing maintenance of green infrastructure such as capture devices.
In 2016, the City of Long Beach filed a lawsuit against Monsanto, to recover costs associated with removing PCBs from the environment. On March 14, 2022, the court approved a Class Action Settlement that would provide Contra Costa County permittees approximately $9.3 million dollars to fund PCB cleanup efforts. The share for Hercules per the proposed settlement would be $312,976. However, an independent analysis undertaken by Geosyntec concludes that the cleanup costs for Hercules will likely be from $5-$9 million, far in excess of the proposed settlement amount.
Based on the Geosyntec report , information provided by the City Attorney, and the recommendation from Public Works Director Mike Roberts, the Council on July 12, 2022 voted unanimously to reject the settlement offer and, like the majority of cities in Contra Costa County, pursue litigation against Monsanto to recover the anticipated actual cost of cleanup.
Many of the cities in San Mateo and Contra Costa County, and the Board of Supervisors on behalf of the County, have retained Sher Edling LLP, an environmental law firm in San Francisco, as their counsel for PCB litigation. Under the proposed retention terms, if Sher Edling were retained to represent Hercules, the matter would be taken on a contingency basis. This means that the City would not pay any legal fees until and unless there was a recovery, in which case Sher Edling would receive a percentage of the award. Details regarding the fee arrangement are provided in the attached legal services agreement.
ACTION:
Consider adoption of a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP to pursue recovery of anticipated PCB related cleanup costs from Monsanto Corporation.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to enter into a legal services agreement with Sher Edling LLP
2. Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling LLP
69 HERCULES CITY
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
NO. 22-____
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERCULES
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A LEGAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERCULES & SHER EDLING LLP
REGARDING PCB LITIGATION
WHEREAS, the San Francisco Bay, Contra Costa County, and the Municipalities within the County including the City of Hercules , have been polluted by polychlorinated biphenyls (“PCBs”), a group of human -made chemical contaminants that are detected in human, animal, and plant tissue around the world; and
WHEREAS, PCBs have been used for a wide range of commercial, household, and industrial uses starting in the 1920s and ending in 1977 after PCBs were banned in the Toxic Substances Control Act; and
WHEREAS, PCBs are known or suspected to cause a wide range of cancers including non- Hodgkin’s lymphoma, breast cancer, liver cancer, gallbladder cancer, gastrointestinal cancers, pancreatic cancer, and skin cancer and are also implicated in numerous non-cancer health problems including cardiovascular, endocrine, gastrointestinal, hepatic (liver), immune, neonatal, neurological, ocular, and reproductive harm; and
WHEREAS, the chemical company Monsanto produced nearly 99 percent of all PCBs used in the United States; and
WHEREAS, in 2016, litigation was initiated in the matter of City of Long Beach v. Monsanto (Case No. 2:16 CV-03493-FMO-AS in the US District Court for the Central District of CA) , to recover costs associated with removing PCBs from the environment; and
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2022, the court approved a Class Action Settlement that would provide Contra Costa County permittees approximately $9.3 million dollars to fund PCB cleanup efforts, with the City of Hercules designated to receive $312,976 per the proposed settlement; and
WHEREAS , the settlement amount offered plaintiffs is considered by independent analysts to be insufficient to cover the true long term cost of PCB cleanup , estimated to be $5 to $9 million for the City of Hercules ; and
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting closed session dated July 12, 2022, the Council voted unanimously to join other cities across the state and in Contra Costa County that have opted-out of the class action settlement related to Monsanto Company’s manufacture and sale of PCBs and instead to initiate direct litigation; and
70 WHEREAS, prior to the opt out deadline of July 25th, a formal opt out notification was submitted on the City of Hercules’ behalf notifying the court of the decision to opt out; and
WHEREAS, at the Council meeting of July 12 , 2022, the City Council further authorized retaining the law firm of Sher Edling LLP to represent the City in direct litigation; and
WHEREAS, Sher Edling will represent the City with respect to the following matters:
a. Contamination related to (i) polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); and/or (ii) other contaminants of concern identified by Client and approved by Attorney (collectively, the “Contaminants”).
b. Claims and/or actions seeking equitable and legal relief, including but not limited to an abatement fund, and/for damages sustained by the City as a result of actual or threatened contamination, and the past, present, and any future cost incurr ed to remove the Contaminants.
WHEREAS, the compensation that Sher Edling will receive for the legal services to be provided under this Agreement will consist of a contingent fee, as more fully described in Attachment A; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling is appropriate and warranted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hercules that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a Legal Services Agreement with Sher Edling LLLP in substantially the same form as provided in Attachment A to this resolution.
The foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hercules held on the 25th day of October 2022, by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Dion Bailey, Mayor
ATTEST:
Lauren Berges, CMC
City Clerk
71 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
1 LEGAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF HERCULES & SHER EDLING LLP
REGARDING PCB LITIGATION
1. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTIES. This Agreement is made between Sher Edling LLP (hereafter referred to as “Attorney”) and the City of Hercules , California (hereafter referred to as “Client”).
This Agreement is required by California Business and Professions Code section 6147 and is intended to fulfill the requirements of that section.
2. RETENTION OF FIRM RATHER THAN PARTICULAR ATTORNEY.
Client is retaining the law firm of Sher Edling LLP, not any particular attorney, and attorney services to be provided to Client will not necessarily be performed by any particular attorney.
3. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF CLIENT. Client designates J. Patrick Tang, City Attorney, and Mike Roberts, Public Works Director, as the authorized representatives to direct Attorney and to be the primary individuals to communicate with Attorney regarding the subject matter of Attorney’s representation of Client under this Agreement. This designation is intended to establish a clear line of authority between Client and Attorney but not to preclude communication between Attorney and other representatives of Client.
4. LEGAL SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED. The legal services to be provided by Attorney to Client are as follows: Representation of Client with respect to the following matters (collectively, the “PCB Action”):
a. Contamination related to (i) polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); and/or (ii) other contaminants of concern identified by Client and approved by Attorney (collectively, the “Contaminants”).
b. Claims and/or actions seeking equitable and legal relief, including but not limited to an abatement fund, and/for damages sustained by Client as a result of actual or threatened contamination , and the past, present, and any future cost incurred to remove the Contaminants, including all writs and appeals related thereto.
5. LEGAL SERVICES SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED. It is the intent of the parties that Attorney will represent Client in a civil action or actions seeking equitable and legal relief, including but not limited to an abatement fund, damages , and/or injunctive relief in t he appropriate court or courts of the State of California and/or the United States District Court, as well as, if requested by Client and agreed to by Attorney (such agreement not to be unreasonably withheld), in any proceeding by writ or appeal related to that action. Legal services that are not to be provided by Attorney under this Agreement specifically include, but are not limited to, the following:
a. Proceedings before any state or federal administrative or governmental 72 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
2 agency, department, or board. However, with Client’s permission Attorney may elect to appear at administrative proceedings to protect Client’s rights in this litigation, without Client being assessed any additional attorney’s fee in connection with such appearance. This exclusion would not apply to any proceeding determined necessary to exhaust administrative remedies.
b. Defending any legal action(s) against Client or its employees commenced by any person , with the exception of any cross complaints or counter claims filed in the PCB Action described in Paragraph 4. This exclusion would not apply to any legal action filed against Client or Client’s employees arising out of the PCB Action.
c. Execution proceedings on any judgment.
d. Any action with respect to any dispute arising under or concerning this Agreement.
If Client wishes to retain Attorney to provide any legal services for matters excluded from this Agreement, a separate written agreement between Attorney and Client may be required which may require compensation to Attorney in addition to that set forth in Paragraph 8. Alternatively, Client would always have the option to engage other counsel to provide such legal services.
6. RESPONSIBILITIES OF ATTORNEY AND CLIENT. Attorney will perform the legal services called for under this Agreement, keep Client informed of material progress and developments, and respond to Client’s inquiries and communications.
Attorney will work at all times under the direction and control of the City Attorney, which shall have the power to control and supervise the litigation. As the Client’s chief legal officer, and subject to the review and approval, to the extent required, by the City Council, the City Attorney shall retain complete and final authority and control over all aspects of the PCB Action, including specifically (but not limited to) the following:
Decisions regarding settlement of the case are reserved exclusively to the discretion of Client and City Attorney;
Any defendant in th e PCB Action may contact City Attorney directly, without having to confer with Attorney;
City Attorney will retain complete control over the course and conduct of the PCB Action;
City Attorney retains a veto power over any decisions made by Attorney; and Attorneys from the City Attorney’s office with supervisory authority shall be personally involved in overseeing the litigation at all times.
Client will be truthful and cooperative with Attorney and keep Attorney informed of developments. Attorney will present status reports to Client as events reasonably warrant or at the reasonable request of Client. Attorney and Client mutually acknowledge that Attorney needs to be informed about Client’s plans and anticipated decisions that may materially affect the PCB Action.
Attorney and Client mutually acknowledge that nothing in this Agreement is intended to interfere with Client’s decisions or judgments concerning the design, operation, or maintenance of its 73 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
3 remediation decisions. Accordingly, Attorney and Clien t will work to assure that each keeps the other fully and timely informed about matters that affect the other. Attorney and Client will work to assure that each keeps the other fully and timely informed about matters that affect the other and Attorney shal l consult in advance with and obtain the prior approval of the City Attorney concerning all substantive aspects of the PCB Action. Additionally, Attorney shall not make or distribute any press releases without the express permission and consent of the City Attorney.
7. CLIENT RETENTION OF DOCUMENTS. Client acknowledges its responsibility to undertake all necessary effort s to identify, preserve, and retain documents concerning potential claims or defenses related to the PCB Action. Additionally, Client will suspend all document destruction policies and implement a litigation hold as necessary to ensure the preservation of relevant documents as advised by Attorney. This litigation hold applies to hard- copy documents; electronically stored data, including backup tapes, legacy systems, and metadata; calendars and planners; and data from text messaging, blogs , and social networking sites. This includes preserving all relevant data, regardless of whether it is contained on business or personal computers, personal digital assistants, cell phones etc. The documents need to be preserved in the form in which they currently exist. Client represents that it has not altered or destroyed any relevant documents relating to the subject matter of the litigation since the time it first suspected that litigation on its behalf was likely. Client shall cooperate with Attorney in locating, preserving, and reproducing its records which may be material to the investigation, discovery, prosecution, and trial in the PCB Action.
8. ATTORNEY’S FEES. The compensation that Attorney will receive for the legal services to be provided under this Agreement will consist of a contingent fee.
a. The Contingent Fee.
Attorney will receive the following contingent fee from any Net Recovery (as defined below):
(i) Seven- and one-half percent (7.5%) of the Net Recovery if a settlement is obtained within 6 months of filing the complaint;
(ii) Fifteen percent (15%) of the Net Recovery if such Net Recovery is obtained before the first formal designation of exchange of expert witness es.
Attorney will provide Client with reasonable notice of the date on which formal designation will be required in the case; or
(iii) Eighteen percent (18%) of any Net Recovery obtained thereafter.
Attorney’s Contingency Fee = Contingency Percentage * Net Recovery
b. Definition of Net Recovery.
“Net Recovery” means the total present value of any Recovery (as defined in paragraph 8(c) of this Agreement, whether by settlement, arbitration award, or court judgment) and after the 74 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
4 deduction of “Costs” (as defined in Paragraph 10 of this Agreement) at the Conclusion of Services as defined in Paragraph 16. “Net Recovery” shall not include any court awarded costs or attorney’s fees received by Client from any third party, except as otherwise provided in Paragraph 8(g) below.
The Net Recovery is multiplied by the appropriate percentages set forth in Paragraph 8(a) to calculate the contingent fee.
Net Recovery = Cash Recovery + Value of Non-Cash Recovery – Costs
c. Definition of Recovery.
“Recovery” means the sum of any “Cash Recovery” plus any “Non -Cash Recovery” (as those terms are defined herein) without reduction or adjustment for “Costs” (as defined in Paragraph 10 of this Agreement). For purposes of this Agreement, “Contested Judgment” refers to any final (including conclusion of any appeals) contested court order or judgment or contested arbitration award; “Settlement” refers to Recoveries obtained pursuant to any voluntary agreement, whether by settlement, mediation, or court stipulation.
d. Cash Recovery.
“Cash Recovery” means, without limitation, the total monetary amount received (whether by Contested Judgment or Settlement) as a result of the PCB Action. This definition specifically contemplates an abatement fund, funded by defendant(s) , arising out of an equitable judgment or settlement.
(i) “Partial Cash Recovery” means a ny Cash Recovery obtained prior to the complete resolution of the PCB Action, which recovery shall be used, first, to pay unreimbursed Costs advanced up to the dat e of such Partial Cash Recovery and, second, to pay any fees that Client owes to Attorney up to the date of such Partial Cash Recovery. Unless Attorney and Client agree otherwise in writing, any remaining Partial Cash Recovery received prior to the final r esolution of the PCB Action shall be placed in a trust account administered by Attorney for the benefit of Client. The funds in this trust account may be drawn upon by Attorney to pay for any future Costs incurred in the PCB Action and/or for any future fe es owed by Client to Attorney.
e. Non-Cash Recoveries.
(i) “Non-Cash Recovery” means, without limitation, the fair market value of any property delivered or potentially to be delivered to Client, services provided or potentially to be provided for Client’s benefit, and any other non-cash benefit including but not limited to injunctive and/or equitable relief (other than an abatement fund which is defined as a “Cash Recovery” above), conferred on Client as a result of the PCB Action. Client understands that a resolution of the PCB Action may involve defendants agreeing to provide Client with one or more non -monetary goods and 75 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
5 services, for example (by way solely of illustration) an agreement to build green infrastructure, provide consulting services, or to provide other goods and/or services. The terms of a Contested Judgment or Settlement may be that such non-monetary goods and services are only to be delivered to Client in the event that certain circumstances come to pass (e.g., the Contaminants exceed certain minimum thresholds). However, even if there is no certainty about whether or not the non -monetary goods and services will ever be delivered, Client understands that any agreement or requirement for defendants to provide such non -monetary goods and servic es has value to Client (analogous to an insurance contract) and that Attorney will be entitled to a contingent fee on that value.
(ii) Before the acceptance of any settlement offer that involves a Non -Cash Recovery, Attorney agrees to provide Client with an es timate of the value of the settlement offer and a calculation of the fee due on the settlement offer. Client will respond in writing, indicating whether or not Client accepts Attorney’s estimate of the value of the settlement of the offer and the calculation of the fee due. If Client wishes to pursue the settlement offer further but chooses not to accept the provided estimate and calculation of the fee due, the parties shall proceed as set forth in Paragraph 8( i) (“Disagreements Concerning Value of Recoveries”).
f. Payments Outside of Net Recovery
Recovery is intended to alleviate and offset the Client’s anticipated regulatory and remediation costs related to PCBs, which would otherwise be paid from public funds . However, even with a net fiscal benefit, payment from public funds may present logistical challenges. This provision is intended to address those concerns. This scenario only arises if Attorneys’ fees cannot be paid directly from the Recovery.
In the event that any judgment and interpretation of this Agreement results in the Client having to pay a Contingent Fee from its own funds, rather than out of the Net Recovery and Client’s Contingent Fee is greater than either $10 million dollars in any given year or $20 million dollars in total, then Attor ney and Client will meet in good faith to reach an agreement that minimizes the financial burden on Client while ensuring Attorney receives the fee provided by this Agreement. Should the parties fail to reach an agreement Attorney and Client agree to media tion pursuant to Paragraph 8(h) before resorting to litigation or any other dispute resolution procedure.
Should Recovery be secured in aggregate for the group of plaintiffs , Attorney will not be involved in the allocation of Recovery among co -permittees. To the extent the Contingent Fee must be paid from Client’s own funds on a portion of an aggregate recovery (rather than collected from the Net Recovery itself prior to disbursement to co-permittees), Client and co-permittees will agree on the allocation of funds within six (6) months of settlement or judgment and provide such allocation in writing to Attorney so the corresponding Contingent Fee(s) may be determined.
g. Fees on Future Recovery following Contested Judgment. 76 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
6 Should Recovery following a contested judgment (whether Cash, Non -Cash, or a combination of the two) provide for payment or performance in the future (which may consist of one or several payments or performance over a period of time) , Client shall select one of the following options for payment of Attorney Fees . Client shall make this s election in writing. If Client fails to elect an option, the lump sum provision (subparagraph (i) of this paragraph) will apply. Fees paid on Recovery resulting from settlement or arbitration , rather th an contested judgment, will be paid pursuant to Paragraph 16.
For purposes of calculating the net present value (“NPV”) of any Cash Recovery or Non- Cash Recovery under this Agreement the discount rate shall be the interest rate of the ninety -one (91) day treasury bill as reported by the United States Federal Reserve in the weekly Federal Reserve Statistical Release closest in time to the date of the Recovery for which the NPV is being calculated.
(i) Lump Sum: Client will pay attorney’s fees in a lump su m, based on the present value of the Recovery, at the applicable contingency fee rate.
Lump sum payment = (Contingency Fee ) * ( NPV of Cash Recovery + NPV of Non-Cash Recovery – Costs)
(ii) Annual Installments Over Three Years: Client will pay attorney’s fees in three (3) annual installments , each comprising a third of the total fees due in accordance with Paragraph 8(a). The Parties may mutually agree on a different payout term in writing.
Annual payment over three years = [Contingency Fee * ( NPV of Cash Recovery + NPV Value of Non-Cash Recovery – Costs)] ÷ 3
(iii) Payment on Periodic Recovery with Ten Year Due Date: If Recovery is structured as a series of annual or other periodic awards to Client, Client will pay attorney’s fees at the time the periodic awards, either Cash or Non- Cash, are received. Periodic payments shall be (30%) of the value of the periodic award when received by Client and shall be paid until attorney’s fees are paid in full.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Client’s deadline to pay Attorney’s fees in full is ten (10) years from the date Attorney’s services conclude pursuant to Paragraph 16. If the total attorney fees are not paid by year 10, the final payment (i.e., the payment due at Year 10) shall incorporate all remaining fees due (“Remainder Payment”).
Each year, the parties will agree upon and confirm, in writing, the value of all Recovery received, all Recovery remaining, and the total attorney’s fees paid and outstanding.
77 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
7 Periodic payment = 30% * (Periodic Cash Recovery + Value of Periodic Non-Cash Recovery)
Remainder Payment = [Contingency Percentage * (Value of Cash and Non-Cash Recovery Received + NPV of Remaining Cash and Non -Cash Recovery – Costs)] – Attorney’s Fees Paid To Date
h. Reasonable Fee if Contingent Fee Unenforceable.
In the event the contingent fee portion of this Agreement is determined to be unenforceable for any reason or Attorney is prevented from representing Client on a contingent fee basis, Client shall pay a reasonable fee for the services rendered. The parties shall use best efforts to negotiate a reasonable fee. If they cannot do so, the fee shall be determined by mediation proceedings before the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (JAMS), with any costs of such proceedings born equally by the Client and Attorney, or, if mediation proves unsuccessful, by appropriate court action in accordance with Paragraph 26. Such reasonable fee shall take into account, among other things, the specific expertise of Attorney with regard to the PCB Action as well as the risk that Attorney took on by agreeing to represent Client and advance a ll litigation Costs in return for a contingency fee.
i. Disagreements Concerning Value of Recoveries.
In the event the parties disagree with respect to the value of any Cash or Non -Cash Recovery they shall proceed as follows: Each party shall within 45 days select an appraiser qualified to conduct an appraisal of the value of the Recovery or settlement offer. Each party’s selected appraiser shall then confer and within 30 days select a third qualified appraiser, who shall determine the value of the Recovery within 90 days. The third appraiser’s valuation shall be final and binding on the parties regardless of the fact that such valuation may be an estimate or may be subject to further refinement or analysis. Client and Attorney shall each bear the expense of its own selected appraiser, and Client and Attorney shall share equally the expenses of the third appraiser.
j. Court-Awarded Attorneys’ Fees.
Client may obtain an award from the court of attorneys’ fees and/or Costs in the PCB Action. For example, certain claims may arise under statutes that provide for an award of attorneys’ fees. Attorney agrees that if such an award is allowed for under the law then it will endeavor to pursue such an award from the Court on behalf of Client and defend Client against any claims that it owes defendants’ attorney fees. Any order awarding fees and/or Costs shall not affect Client’s obligation to pay contingency fees in accordance with this Agreement.
Any attorney’s fee awarded by the court in connection with the PCB Action shall not be considered part of the “Net Recovery” for purposes of calculating Attorney’s contingent fee. Any Court-awarded Costs shall also not be considered part of the “ Net Recovery” for purposes of calculating Attorney’s contingent fee. Any cour t award of fees received by Attorney shall be applied as a credit against Client’s obligation to pay Attorney’s contingent fee under this 78 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
8 Agreement, and any court award of Costs to Attorney shall be applied as a credit against Client’s obligation to reimburse Attorney for Costs under this Agreement. If the court-awarded fees exceed the fee to which Attorney would otherwise be entitled, Attorney’s fee shall be the amount of the court-awarded fee.
k. Negotiated Fee.
Client understands that the attorney’s fee set forth in this Agreement is not set by law but rather is negotiable between Attorney and Client.
9. DIVISION OF ATTORNEY’S FEES / CO-COUNSEL.
a. Attorney may decide to retain another attorney or law firm as associate counsel. Such other attorney or law firm may be compensated by Attorney for the reasonable value of the services performed such as on an hourly or per diem basis and not necessarily on a contingency basis; such payment shall be the sole responsibility of Attorney and shall not be charged bac k to Client as a Cost or otherwise. Client understands that, under the Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California, such a division may be made only with Client’s written consent after a full disclosure to Client in writing that a division of fees will be made and of the terms of such division.
A decision by Attorney to retain associate counsel shall be subject to Client’s approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.
b. Client has the authority to retain additional outside consulta nts, including additional legal counsel, to assist the City Attorney with the PCB Action. Any such retention shall be at Client’s sole expense and shall not be considered “Costs” as defined in paragraph 10.
10. COSTS.
a. Attorney to advance costs. Attorney will advance the Costs (as defined in this paragraph 10) incurred in connection with Attorney’s representation of Client under this Agreement.
b. Authorized costs. The Client authorizes Attorney to incur reasonable Costs and to retain consultants or expert witnesses reasonably necessary in Attorney’s and City Attorney’s judgment. Such Costs include, but are not limited to, court filing fees, deposition costs, expert, consultant, and investigator fees and expenses, investigation costs, transportation, meals and lodging for out of town travel, messenger service fees, photocopying expenses, and process server fees. Costs shall not include full or part -time employees (e.g. paralegal s and law clerks) Instead, Costs shall be specific and confined to representation of Client. Costs shall be accounted for as they are incurred by Attorney. There shall be no mark -up attached. As such, Attorney and Client are jointly incentivized to keep Co sts to a minimum. Items that are not to be considered Costs, and that must be paid by Client without being either advanced or contributed to by Attorney, include, but are not limited to, Client’s expense incurred in providing information to counsel or defendants and damages claimed by others in the litigation and other parties’ costs, if any, that 79 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
9 Client is ultimately required to pay.
Regarding expert costs, Attorney and Client shall meet and confer regarding selection and retention of experts in the PCB A ction and Client shall be informed of the persons chosen and their charges. Client shall not unreasonably withhold approval of selection and retention of such experts.
c. In the event of Recovery for Client, Client will reimburse Costs. In the event Client obtains Recovery (whether by settlement, arbitration, judgment or otherwise) and pursuant to Paragraph 16 (Conclusion of Services) , Client shall pay Costs within sixty (60) days of a final accounting provided by Attorney unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in writing. Any Client funds in the Attorney trust account may be put towards any unpaid balance of Costs.
d. In the event of judgment for defendants, Attorney bears risk of costs .
To the extent permitted by law and to the extent not based on the conduc t of Client or City Attorney, Attorney will bear the risk of any defense costs taxed against Client in the event of a n adverse ruling (such as sanctions for spoliation of evidence) or Contested Judgment for defendants in the PCB Action. As used in this section, “conduct” means the (1) failure to perform the terms of this Agreement; or (2) any intentional, reckless, or negligent conduct which diverges from the Attorney’s recommended course of action and which results in either an adverse ruling or a Contested Judgment for defendants. The application of this provision as to a discrete adverse ruling does not necessarily implicate this provision as to a Contested Judgment.
e. Periodic statements of costs. Attorney will provide Client with periodic statements of Costs incurred in the PCB Action at approximately quarterly intervals or at such other frequency as mutually agreed between Client and Attorney. At any time, Client may communicate with Attorney regarding Attorney’s estimates with regard to Costs that ma y be incurred in the future.
f. Client expenses. Expenses incurred by Client in connection with retention of additional consultants, including outside counsel and/or experts, shall be paid for by Client and shall not be considered Costs for purposes of this Agreement.
11. REPRESENTATION OF ADVERSE INTERESTS. If Attorney had a relationship with another party involved in the PCB Action, or with someone who would be substantially affected by the PCB Action, the Rules of Professional Conduct would require Attorney to disclose that to Client so that Client could evaluate whether that relationship causes Client to have any concerns over Attorney’s loyalty, objectivity or ability to protect Client’s confidential information.
Client understands that currently, and from time to time, Attorney represents other municipalities, governmental agencies, governmental subdivisions, or other public or private individuals and/or entities in other actions or similar litigation where the defendants may be the same or similar to the defendants in the PCB Action, and that such work is a focus of Attorney’s practice. Client understands that Attorney would not take on this engagement if it required Attorney to forego representations like those described above. However, Client understands that 80 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
10 damages collected from one or more of the same defendants in other suits prosecuted by Attorney could, theoretically, reduce the amount of money available from these same defendants in the PCB Action. Client was given an opportunity to confer with its own separate and independent counsel about this matter and has determined that it is in its own best interests to waive any and all potential or actual conflicts of interest which may occur as the result of Attorney’s current a nd continuing representation of cities and other public and/or private entities in similar litigations, because it enables Client to obtain the benefits of Attorney’s expertise. Therefore, Client consents that Attorney may continue to handle such work, and may take on similar new clients and matters, without disclosing each such new matter to Client or seeking the consent of Client while representing Client. Attorney would not, of course, take on such other work if it required Attorney to be directly adverse to Client while Attorney was still representing Client in the PCB Action. In the event that Attorney represents other plaintiffs in similar litigation, costs that are incurred for the joint benefit of several plaintiffs shall be allocated, if possible, between the cases pro rata based on each plaintiff’s share of the recovery, or if such pro rata cost sharing based on recovery is not possible, then on a reasonable pro rata basis agreed upon between Client and Attorney.
12. SETTLEMENT. Decisions regarding settlement of the case are reserved exclusively to the discretion of Client and City Attorney. Attorney will not settle Client’s claim without the approval of Client, who will have the absolute right to accept or reject any settlement.
Attorney will notify Client of the terms of any settlement offer received by Attorney.
13. ORDER OR AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT OF ATTORNEY’S FEES OR COSTS BY ANOTHER PARTY. The court may order, or the parties to the dispute may agree, that another party will pay s ome or all of Client’s attorney’s fees, costs, or both. Any such order or agreement will not affect Client’s obligation to pay contingency fees and Costs under this Agreement. However, subject to Paragraph 8 (contingent fee), any such amounts actually received by Attorney will be credited against Attorney’s fees or Costs, respectively, incurred by Client.
14. DISCHARGE OF ATTORNEY. Client may discharge Attorney at any time by written notice effective when received by Attorney. Unless specifically agreed by Att orney and Client, Attorney will provide no further services and advance no further Costs on Client’s behalf after receipt of the notice. If Attorney is Client’s attorney of record in any proceeding, Client will execute and return a substitution-of-attorney form immediately on its receipt from Attorney.
In the event Attorney is discharged without cause before the termination of the litigation, Client shall (1) reimburse Attorney for any and all Costs advanced by Attorney not later than thirty (30) days from receipt of a final cost accounting from Attorney, and (2) upon termination of the litigation, pay Attorney a fee consisting of the reasonable value of Attorney’s services performed up to the point of the discharge. Nothing herein shall be construed to lim it Client’s rights and remedies in the event of a discharge of Attorney for cause.
15. WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY. Attorney may withdraw from representation of Client: (a) with Client’s consent, (b) upon court approval, or (c) if no court action is filed, for good cause upon reasonable notice to Client. Good cause includes, but is not limited to, Client’s breach of this Agreement, Client’s refusal to cooperate with Attorney, or any other fact or circumstance that would render Attorney’s continuing representation u nlawful or unethical. 81 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
11 Notwithstanding Attorney’s withdrawal for cause, Client will remain obligated to pay Attorney out of the Recovery a reasonable Attorney’s fee for all services provided, and to reimburse Attorney for all reasonable Costs advanced before the withdrawal.
Attorney may terminate this Agreement at any time, without cause, by giving to Client not less than sixty (60) days prior written notice of termination, said notice to specify the effective date of the termination. Where Attorney terminates this Agreement without cause, Attorney shall not be entitled to the recovery of any Attorney fee or Costs, regardless of the status of the PCB Action, and regardless of whether or not any amounts of Recovery have been or are subsequently received by Client.
16. CONCLUSION OF SERVICES. When Attorney’s services conclude, whether by completing the terms of this Agreement or by discharge (under Paragraph 14) or withdrawal (under paragraph 15), all unpaid charges (including fees under Paragraph 8 and Costs under Paragraph 10) will immediately become due and payable , unless o therwise provided herein . Attorney will notify Client in writing of the conclusion of services and provide an accounting of costs, fees, and other charges due. Attorney is authorized to apply any Client funds held in Attorney’s client trust account to pay unreimbursed advanced Costs. Nothing in this Paragraph shall be construed as inconsistent with the other provisions of this Agreement, including but not limited to Paragraphs 8 and 10.
17. LIEN. Except in situations where Attorney withdraws or is discharged, such situations being governed by Sections 14 and 15, Client hereby grant Attorney a lien on any and all claims or causes of action that are the subject of Attorney’s fee and/or Costs advanced under this Agreement. Attorney’s lien will be for any sums owi ng to Attorney for any unpaid Costs (under Paragraph 10) or fees (under Paragraph 8) at the conclusion of Attorney’s services. The lien will attach to any Recovery Client may obtain, whether by arbitration award, judgment, settlement or otherwise.
18. RELEASE OF CLIENT’S PAPERS AND PROPERTY. At the termination of services under this Agreement, Attorney will release to Client on request all of Client’s papers and property. Client’s papers and property include correspondence, deposition transcripts, exhibits, experts’ reports, legal documents, physical evidence, and other items in possession of Attorney reasonably necessary to Client’s representation.
19. CONFIDENTIALITY. This Agreement establishes the relation of attorney-client between the parties hereto. Attorney shall hold all money and property of Client in trust for Client’s benefit, with all funds deposited and managed in Attorney’s client trust account as required by law, shall not divulge Client’s confidences, and shall be entitled to the candid cooperation of all Client’s employees in all matters related to the assigned files and any related actions. This Agreement shall be privileged and confidential subject to Business and Professions Code section 6149 and Evidence Code section 952 and 954.
20. DISCLAIMER OF GUARANTEE. Although Attorney may offer an opinion about possible results regarding the subject matter of this Agreement, Attorney cannot guarantee any particular result. Client acknowledges that Attorney has made no promises about the outcome 82 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
12 and that any opinion offered by Attorney in the future will not constitute a guaranty.
21. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties. No other agreement, statement, or promise made on or before the effective date of this Agreement will be binding on the parties.
22. SEVERABILITY IN EVENT OF PARTIAL INVALIDITY. If any provision of this Agreement is held in whole or in part to be unenforceable for any reason, the remainder of that provision and of the entire agreement will be severable and remain in effect.
23. MODIFICATION BY SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENT. This Agreement may be modified by subsequent agreement of the parties only by an instrument in writing, approved and executed in the same manner as the initial Agreement.
24. MEDIATION CLAUSE. If a dispute arises out of or relating to any aspect of this Agreement between Client and Attorney, or the breach thereof, and if the dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, Attorney and Client agree to mediation pursuant to Paragraph 8( g) before resorting to litigation, or any other dispute resolution procedure.
25. NO AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES OR COSTS IN ACTION ON
AGREEMENT. Each party shall bear its own attorney’s fees and costs incurred in any action or proceeding concerning or arising out of this Agreement, or efforts to negotiate the matter, and the parties shall share equally the costs of any arbitrator, mediator, or other decision maker in any forum.
26. GOVERNING LAW. The terms and provisions of this Agreement and the performance of the parties hereunder shall be interpreted in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the State of California. Any action to enforce this agreement will be venued in the Superior Court in and for the County of Contra Costa.
27. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement shall be effective on the date last executed below. Once effective, this Agreement will, however, apply to services provided by Attorney on this matter before its effective date.
28. AUTHORITY OF PARTIES. Each of the signatories to this Agreement warrants that he or she has the authority to enter into and execute this Agreement and to bind the entity or entities on whose behalf each signs.
29. EXECUTION. This Agreement may be executed in duplicate counterparts. This Agreement and future documents relating to this Agreement may be digitally signed in accordance with California law. Any party to this Agreement may revoke such agreement to permit digital signatures at any time by providing written notice to the other party.
The foregoing is agreed to by:
83 City of Hercules
PCB Legal Services Agreement
13 CITY OF HERCULES (Client)
Dated: By
[name]
[title]
SHER EDLING LLP (Attorney)
Dated: By
Matthew K. Edling
Partner
84 STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of October 25, 2022
TO: Members of the City Council
VIA: Dante Hall, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Michael Roberts, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Update on Regional Intermodal Transportation Center Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive presentation, discuss, and provide feedback and direction, if any
FISCAL IMPACT OF RECOMMENDATION:
None as a result of this item.
DISCUSSION:
Background
As one of the City’s top priorities, the Hercules Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (RITC) is designed to achieve the vision of the Hercules Bayfront as a model transit-oriented community.
The project has NEPA and CEQA app rovals and the City has completed the first three phases of construction. In 2019, the City and the Gray-Bowen-Scott team succeeded in advancing the Let’s Get I-80 Moving initiative, which resulted in the Capital Corridor Joint Powers Authority’s decision to grant Candidate Station Status to the RITC in Hercules. In 2020, the City completed the interim bus improvements on Bayfront Boulevard to allow buses to serve the area.
The next three phases to be implemented to allow the train to stop are the utility relocations, followed by the track and platform improvements, and lastly the station work. There is currently a unique window of opportunity to pursue grant funding for the completion of the RITC as an unprecedented amount of federal and state grant funding for pandemic relief, economic stimulus, and infrastructure investment is becoming available on a competitive basis.
Having received approximately $46M to date, the RITC is highly competitive, and continues to score exceptionally well on grant criteria. The Project relieves congestion on I-80 and reduces greenhouse gases. It is the cornerstone of a transit-oriented development that includes over 400 new apartments with another 325 slated for construction in the coming months and is an easy sub-10-minute bike ride on the Bay Trail from Rodeo, a community of concern.
In August 2022, the City hired Gray-Bowen-Scott for continued services to advance the RITC for grant funding and project readiness. This staff report and presentation will provide an update on progress to date.
85 Progress to Date
The team arranged a meeting with long standing MTC Commissioners Amy Worth and Federal Glover and MTC executive leadership. A key outcome of the meeting was that MTC staff agreed to support the City in both developing and executing a competitive funding plan for the remaining project phases. The team has scheduled a follow-up meeting with MTC staff to further refine applicable Federal, State, and Regional grants for which the project would be competitive. An update of these discussions will be presented at the meeting tonight. The team has arranged a meeting with CCJPA Managing Director Rob Padgette on October 24, 2022. Key out comes of this meeting are to garner agreement on near-term funding opportunities and to formalize a partnership structure to steer the project though the remainder of design delivery. An update of these discussions will be presented at the meeting tonight. The team has rebranded the project name to The Hercules Hub and updated the project messaging to highlight its alignment with the Bay Area’s focus on investing in transit-oriented communities. The messaging captures the realized and potential housing and employment development at the site, communicating the benefits and features of the project to gain support from elected officials, commission members, opinion leaders, and the general community.
Updated project messaging tracks include the creation of a ffordable housing, a model for Transit-Oriented Development, reduction of traffic congestion, and connectivity to transit and active transportation. The updated messaging is included in the presentation, and we look forward to your feedback.
To support the funding plan development, the team reviewed and updated the project cost estimate and schedule. As part of this effort, the team developed a Risk Register to incorporate the costs of any remaining project delivery uncertainties . Funding agencies view the consideration of project risks as an important factor in funding applications because it increases confidence that the project costs will be fully covered. The Risk Register will also be used to identify and implement risk mitigation strategies throughout project delivery.
Next Steps:
The following key activities are anticipated over the next few months:
The team will finalize the funding plan in collaboration with MTC staff. This effort is vital to the continued advancement of this project. The team will work with City staff to confirm the City’s contribution commitment, and the final funding plan will be presented to Council at a future update.
Following the CCJPA meeting, the team will formalize the partnership with CCJPA and initiate regular coordination to ensure a cohesive vision in pursuing funding opportunities. The team will finalize and present the updated public outreach materials that will be used to garner support from stakeholders and community members. Project exhibits, brochures, and website updates will be presented at the next council update. The team will determine an approach to maintain project momentum while the project waits for grant awards and will begin development of initial grant funding applications.
City staff and our Project Managers from GBS will be making a presentation on progress to date and the next steps.
ATTACHMENTS:
86 1. PowerPoint Presentation
87 The Hercules RITC –
Regional Housing and
Transportation Center
88 Status
Update
Overview
Hercules RITC
1. Funding Partner &
St
akeholder Meetings
2. Messaging
3. Cost
4. Schedule
5. Communications
89 Funding and
Stakeholder
Meetings
Hercules RITC
90 Hercules RITC
Recent Funding and Stakeholder Meetings
MTC Commissioners and Executive Staff Meeting –
September 29
Secured assistance from MTC to develop funding plan
CCJPA Executive Director Meeting –October 24
Discuss funding opportunities
Define project roles and communication preferences
MTC Staff Meeting – October 25
Funding Plan development working meeting
91 Updated
Project
Messaging
Hercules RITC
Goals:
• Gain support from the target audience of
e
lected officials, commission members, and
opinion leaders to help fund the project
• Inform the community of the benefit of the
Hu
b
Message Tracks:
• Creating Multi-F
amily Housing
• Regional Model
• Reducing Traffic Congestion
• Environmental Impact
• Connecting transit
92 Core
Messaging
Hercules RITC
The Hercules Hub is a regional, state-of-
the-art housing and transportation
development. It will connect thousands of
housing units with a new train stop along
the Capitol Corridor, bicycle and pedestrian
pathways, bus routes, carpool options, and
potential future ferry service.
The Hub has all the components of the
ideal regional housing and transit center. It
will be a model for successful transit-
oriented communities throughout the Bay
Area.
93 Taglines
Hercules RITC
The Hub: a model of transit-
oriented development
• Building a better housing and
tr
ansit future
• Connecting housing and transit
• A regional model for transit-
or
iented development
94 Hercules RITC
Updated Project Cost (By Phase)
Phase Cost
Planning, Specifications, & Estimates (PS&E) $9.5
Right of Way (ROW)/Utilities $23.5
Construction $64.4
TOTAL $97.4
Project Completion Funds in 2022 Dollars
95 Related
Projects
Hercules RITC
• Bay Trail completion (including
b
ridge over Refugio Creek)
• Creekside Park (from Transit Loop)
• Promenade (for Bay Trail)
• Railroad Plaza
• Ferry Station
96 Hercules RITC
Preliminary Funding Plan
97 Project
Schedule
Hercules RITC
98 Hercules RITC
Project Schedule
TASK NAME ### 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 DESIGN
PHASE 1: Construct Utility Relocations
PHASE 2: Construct Track, Structures, Platform
PHASE 3: Construct Transit Center
aggressive
conservative
99 Project
Communications
Hercules RITC
100
Hercules RITC
Project Communications
101
Next Steps
Hercules RITC
• Finalize funding plan and present to the
Co
uncil
• Determine the City’s contribution
(
action on future meeting)
• Formalize partnership with CCJPA
• Finalize and roll out project education
ma
terials
• Determine how to carry forward in 2023 while
w
e pursue funding
• Begin grant applications such as Transit and
I
ntercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) and
OBAG 3 Regional
102
Question &
Answers
Hercules RITC
THANK YOU!!
103
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of October 25, 2022
TO: Mayor Bailey and Members of the City Council
SUBMITTED BY: J. Patrick Tang, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Proposed Resolution to Amend City Manager Hall’s Employment Agreement to Increase his Cost of Living Adjustment (“COLA”) from 3% to 4.5% for Fiscal Years 2022-23 and 2023-24
RECOMMENDATION:
Discuss and consider adoption of a resolution to increase City Manager Dante Hall’s cost of living adjustment (“COLA”) for FY 20 22-23 and FY 2023 -24 in line with adjustments previously approved by Council for Senior Management Employees.
BACKGROUND:
On July 27, 2021 , the City Council approved a five-year Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services (hereinafter “Original Agreement”) to employ Dante Hall as the City Manager of the City of Hercules . The Original Agreement provides for, among other matters, an annual performance review, an annual cost of living adjustment (“COLA”) of 3%, and benefits on the same terms and conditions as other Senior Management Employees.
DISCUSSION:
Over the course of several council meetings in September and October, the City Council conducted the annual performance review of the City Manager pursuant to the requirements of the Original Agreement. In concluding the City M anager’s review, the Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a resolution for Council consideration to amend the Original Agreement to increase the City Manager’s COLA to 4.5% for fiscal years 202 2-23 and 2023-24, consistent with the COLA previously approved by the Council for the Senior Management Group.
A draft resolution to amend the Original Agreement pursuant to Council’s direction is provided as Attachment 1 to this report.
ACTION:
Discuss and consider adoption of a resolution increasing the City Manager’s COLA for FY 2022- 23 and 2023-24 to 4.5%, in line with the increase for the senior management group previously approved by Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution Increasing City Manager COLA for FY 2022-23 and 2023-24
2. Amendment No. 1 to City Manager Original Agreement
104
RESOLUTION NO. ___
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITYOF HERCULES APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CITY MANAGER DANTE HALL’S EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT TO INCREASE HIS COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT (“COLA”) FROM 3% TO 4.5% FOR FISCAL YEARS 2022-23 AND 2023-24
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2021, the City Council approved a five-year Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services (hereinafter “Agreement”) to employ Dante Hall as the City Manager of the City of Hercules; and
WHEREAS, the Agreement provides for, among other matters, an annual performance review, an annual cost of living adjustment (“COLA”) of 3%, and benefits on the same terms and conditions as received by the Senior Management Employees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted the annual performance review of the City Manager pursuant to the requirements of the Agreement over the course of several meetings in September and October 2022; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the City Manager’s annual review, the Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a resolution for Council consideration to increase the City Manager’s COLA to 4.5% for fiscal years 2022-23 and 2023-24, consistent with the COLA previously approved by the Council for the Senior Management Group; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed Regular City Council meeting convened on October 25, 2022, the Council discussed and considered the proposal to increase the City Manager’s COLA to 4.5% for FY 2022-23 and 2023-24.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE D by the City Council of the City of Hercules that the Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services is hereby amended to provide for an increase in the City Manager’s COLA for fiscal years 2022-23 and 2023-24 to 4.5%, consistent with the amount approved for the Senior Management Group pursuant to prior Council action.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Amended Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services, shall be on file in the City Clerk’s Office, and the Mayor is authorized to execute said amendment to the Original Employment Agreement on behalf of the City of Hercules.
105
The foregoing Resolution was duly an d regularly adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hercules held on the 25th day of October 2022, by the following vote of the Council:
AYES:
NOES:
___________________
Dion Bailey, Mayor
___________________________________
Lauren Berges, City Clerk
106
Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Dante Hall for City
Manager/Executive Director Services
This Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services is made and entered into by and between the City of Hercules, a California municipal corporation, and the City of Hercules as Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency (hereinafter “City”), and Dante Hall (“Hall”), City Manager/Executive Director.
Purpose. This Amendment No. 1 is being entered into to amend the existing Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services that was approved by the City Council of the City of Hercules on July 27, 2021. Said Agreement with Dante Hall for City Manager/Executive Director Services shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Original Agreement" and is incorporated herein by reference.
Original Agreement Provisions. The parties hereto agree to continue to abide by those terms and conditions of the Original Agreement which are unaffected by this Amendment No. 1.
Amendment. This Amendment No. 1 is intended to amend Section 6 of the Original Agreement to provide as follows:
6. Compensation.
A. Salary. The City agrees to pay Hall for the perfo rmance of his duties and functions an annual salary of $240,000, less legally required deductions, subject to an annual cost of living adjustment of 3% per year. Salary will be paid in installments at the same time that other employees of the City are paid . Any adjustment to Hall’s salary besides the annual 3% cost of living adjustment must be pursuant to a resolution of the Council. Hall shall not be entitled to receive payment or credit for, and City shall not pay or credit Hall for, overtime, compensated time off in lieu of overtime, or other compensation except as expressly provided in this Agreement. Hall acknowledges that the position of City Manager is exempt from the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Pursuant to Resolution ______ of the City Council, the annual cost of living adjustment for Hall shall be 4.5% for fiscal years 2022-23 and 2023-24.
Adjustments shall be effective July 1, 2022 and July 1, 2023, respectively.
Amendment Approval: This Amendment No. 1 has been approved by the City Council by Resolution No. _____ , adopted by the City Council at the duly noticed regular Council meeting of October 25th, 2022, and is effective on the date of approval.
107
Counterparts. This Amendment No. 1 may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which, taken together, shall constitute one and the same document.
Signatures. These signatures attest the parties' agreement hereto:
On Behalf of the City Council City Manager
By: ________________ _______________
Dion Bailey, Mayor Dante Hall
ATTEST:
_________________
Lauren Berges
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________
J. Patrick Tang
City Attorney
108