Agenda packet — Livermore City Council, February 24, 2025 (part 1 of 3)

CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2025
REGULAR MEETING –
7:00 PM
CLOSED SESSION 6:30 PM

MEETING PARTICIPATION INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND AT THE END OF THE AGENDA

CIVIC CENTER MEETING HALL

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1016 S. LIVERMORE AVENUE
CITY OF LIVERMORE YOUTUBE CHANNEL:
https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofLivermoreCalifornia
TV29:

Comcast TV Channel 29
tv29live.org
John P Marchand, Mayor
Evan Branning, Vice Mayor
Ben
Barrientos, Council Member
Steven Dunbar, Council Member
Kristie Wang, Council Member
Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

1 1.

CLOSED SESSION - 6:30 PM

Roll Call
Opportunity for the the Public to Address City Council Regarding Closed Session Items Adjourn to Closed Session
Note: This Closed Session my be continued to the end of the Regular Meeting.

1.1 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation. To meet with legal counsel pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1) to discuss litigation that has been formally initiated. (One Case)

Hinderliter, de Llamas and Associates v. City of Livermore, Alameda County Superior Court Case No. 25CV109909.

2. CALL TO ORDER

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.1 Proclamation declaring February 2025 as American Heart Month, presented to Padmaja Vasireddy, Community Impact Manager for Health Strategies and Lisa Bellini, Senior Community Impact Director for Health Strategies American Heart Association.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends City Council declare February 2025 as American Heart Month.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Proclamation

4. OPEN FORUM

In conformance with the Brown Act, no City Council action can occur on items presented during Open Forum.

To provide public comment in person, please submit a speaker card. When your name is called, walk to the lectern to address City Council.

Comments are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person, per item. The Mayor may reduce the amount of time based on the number of persons wishing to speak.

Comments are limited to one comment per person per item regardless of format or time

ROLL CALL

Council Member Ben Barrientos
Council Member Steven Dunbar
Council Member Kristie Wang
Vice Mayor Evan Branning
Mayor John Marchand

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

REPORT OF ACTION TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

2 submitted (this includes email and e-comment submissions prior to the meeting as well as live comments during the meeting).

Open Forum will conclude after 30 minutes; however, if there are additional speakers, Open Forum will reconvene before the meeting adjourns.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR

Consent Calendar items are considered routine and are acted upon by the City Council with a single action. Members of the audience wishing to provide public input must submit a speaker card found at the entrance of the Council Chambers. A speaker is limited to a single comment with a maximum of three minutes for the entire Consent Calendar. If Consent Calendar items are pulled for discussion by the City Council, a speaker will be allowed one comment per item on the items pulled for discussion and a separate comment for the remaining Consent Calendar. The one comment limit applies regardless of format or time submitted (this includes email and e-comment submissions prior to the meeting as well as live comments during the meeting).

5.1 Approval of draft minutes - February 10, 2025 Regular Meeting

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the draft minutes.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. DRAFT 2025-02-10

5.2 Adopt an ordinance amending Livermore Municipal Code Chapter 13.35 Sewer Service and Use Charges Section 13.36.050 Rater per Service Unit

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council
adopt an ordinance
amending Livermore Municipal Code
Chapter 13.36 Sewer Service and Use Charges, Section 13.36.050 Rates per Service Unit to streamline the rate setting process and for consistency in language with the other rate setting chapters of Title 13 Public Services.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Ordinance

5.3 Adopt an ordinance establishing a permanent Building Appeals Board by adding new chapter

15.90 to the Livermore Municipal Code and amending sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100,

15.20.110, and 15.20.120.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council
adopt an ordinance

establishing a Permanent Building
Appeals Board by adding new chapter 15.90 to the Livermore Municipal Code and amending sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120
for consistency with the new Appeals
Board. Staff also recommends Council officially appoint the Interim Board members as permanent members.

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

3 Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Ordinance

2. Exhibit A - Chapter 15.90 Building Appeals Board

3. Exhibit B - Amendments to LMC Sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120

5.4 Resolution authorizing a supplemental appropriation of Measure BB-Local Streets and Roads, Fund 830, in the amount of $150,000 in FY 2024-25 and awarding a construction contract with Devaney Engineering, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $646,011 for the construction of the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution for the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14:
1 .

Authorizing a supplemental appropriation from Measure BB-Local Streets and Roads (Fund 830) in the amount of $150,000 in FY 2024-25 to fund project 2023-14; 2 .

Awarding a construction contract to Devaney Engineering, Inc., in an amount not-to- exceed $646,011, and authorizing the City Manager to sign the contract (Exhibit A); 3 .

Rejecting all other bids or proposals; and
4 .

Authorizing the City Manager to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution including approving minor changes to the proposed agreement for the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-

14. Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Vicinity Map

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - Agreement

5.5 Resolution authorizing execution of a second amendment to the agreement with Chrisp Company to continue providing on-call pavement striping and traffic sign installation services, increasing the not-to-exceed agreement amount from $200,000 to $400,000 and extending the term of the agreement from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a second amendment to the agreement with Chrisp Company to continue providing on-call pavement striping and traffic sign installation services, increasing the not-to-exceed agreement amount from $200,000 to $400,000 and extending the term of the agreement from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - Second Amendment

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

4 5.6
Resolution authorizing additional appropriations and execution of consultant amendments for the Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage Construction Project DR586003.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the following actions for the Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage Construction Project DR586003:
1 .

Authorize a supplemental appropriation of $3,040,000 from 2022 COPs Construction Fund (Fund 540) to fund project DR586003.
2 .

Execute a fifth amendment to the agreement with Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP, increasing the amount of the agreement by $660,000 to a total not-to-exceed amount of $2,751,800 for additional engineering services during construction; 3 .

Execute a second amendment to the agreement with Gannett Fleming Inc., increasing the amount of the agreement by $1,250,000 to a total not-to-exceed amount of $3,302,000 for additional construction management services during construction; 4 .

Execute a second amendment to the agreement with Consolidated Engineering Laboratories, increasing the amount of the agreement by $150,000 to a total not-to- exceed amount of $624,000 for additional inspection services during construction; 5 .

Authorize a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 from the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services in FY 2024-25; and 6 .

Authorize the City Manager to sign the above amendments and to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution, including approving minor changes to the proposed agreements.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Site Plan

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - Fifth Amendment to Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP

4. Exhibit B - Second Amendment to Gannett Fleming Inc.

5. Exhibit C - Second Amendment to Consolidated Engineering Laboratories

5.7 Resolution a
uthorizing execution of a first amendment to the agreement with David L. Gates & Associates, Inc. for
additional
landscape
design and construction support services for the
Flagpole Plaza Project 2022-25, increasing the not-to-exceed contract amount from $280,528
to $320,528, with a term ending May 1, 2026
.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution:
1 .

Authorizing the City Manager to execute a first amendment to the agreement with David L. Gates & Associates, Inc. for additional landscape design and construction support services for the Flagpole Plaza Project 2022-25, increasing the not-to-exceed contract amount from $280,528 to $320,528; and
2 .

Authorizing the City Manager to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution including approving minor changes to the proposed agreement.

Staff Report

Attachments:

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

5 1. Project Location

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - First Amendment

5.8 Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with SVA Architects Inc., in an amount not- to-exceed $553,000 and a term ending April 30, 2028, to provide design and construction support services for the Fleet Shop Expansion Project 2022-12 at the Maintenance Service Center.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with SVA Architects Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $553,000 and a term ending April 30, 2028, to provide design and construction support services for the Fleet Shop Expansion Project 2022-12.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Vicinity Map

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - Agreement

5.9 Resolution authorizing a first amendment to the agreement with Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District (LVJUSD) to include the requirements of insurance coverage for Horizons Family Counseling who provide school-based services at LVJUSD school sites, in the amount of $304,500 for Horizons Family Counseling for the period of July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the first amendment to the agreement with Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District (LVJUSD) to include the requirements of insurance coverage.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - First Amendment

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS

Comments are limited to one comment per person per item regardless of format or time submitted (this includes email and e-comment submissions prior to the meeting as well as live comments during the meeting).

6.1 Hearing to consider a request for a Municipal Code Amendment, Development Code Amendment, Conditional Use Permit Modification, Development Agreement, Site Plan Design Review, and Site Plan Design Review Modification for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project and citywide cardroom operations.

Recommendation:

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

6 The Planning Commission and staff recommend the City Council:
1 .

Adopt a resolution approving the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project, which includes city-wide Municipal Code and Development Code Amendments, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
2 .

Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24-001, Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24-010 and Site Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24-024;
3 .

Introduce an ordinance
and waive the first reading, approving Municipal Code
Amendment (MUNI) 24-002 and Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24-004; and, 4 .

Introduce an ordinance
and waive the first reading, authorizing execution of
Development Agreement (DA) 24-003.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Site Map

2. Planning Commission Staff Report

3. Planning Commission Draft Minutes 1-7-25

4. Parkwest Casino 580 Development Plans

5. DOJ Bureau of Gambling Control Letters

6. Resolution - CEQA

7. Exhibit A - Planning Commission CEQA Resolution 01-25

8. Exhibit B - Initial Study/Mitigation Negative Declaration

9. Exhibit C - Caltrans Comments

10. Exhibit D - Response to Comments

11. Exhibit E - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progam

12. Resolution - Project

13. Exhibit A - Planning Commission Project Reso 02-25

14. Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval

15. Ordinance for Municipal Code Amendment and Development Code Amendment

16. Exhibit A - Municipal Code Amendment

17. Exhibit B - Livermore Development Code Text Amendment

18. Ordinance Adopting Development Agreement 24-003

19. Exhibit A - Development Agreement

6.2 Hearing to authorize negotiation of a Development Agreement with the Adventus Corporation to secure community benefits associated with requested land use designation changes to be considered as part of the proposed General Plan Update. Location: 3658 Las Colinas Road.

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing staff to proceed with negotiating terms for a Development Agreement (DA24-004) with the Adventus Corporation to secure community benefits associated with requested land use designation changes to be considered by the City Council at a later date as part of the proposed General Plan Update.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Location Map

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

7 2. Resolution

7. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

7.1 2045 Comprehensive General Plan Update – 2045 Draft General Plan Land Use Map

Recommendation:

Staff recommends the City Council receive an update on 2045 Draft General Plan Land Use Map.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. 2045 Draft General Plan Land Use Map

2. Summary of Council Direction on Land Use Focus Areas, June 10, 2024

3. Summary of Non-Focus Areas Land Use Changes

4. Draft 2045 General Plan Landuse Use Designations

5. Draft Residential Land Use Designations Comparison Graphic

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY

MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS

9. ADJOURNMENT

To a Special City Council meeting Monday, March 3, 2025 at 5:00 pm Civic Center Meeting Hall, William H. Mendenhall Room, 1016 S. Livermore Avenue, and a Regular City Council meeting on Monday, March 10, 2025 at 7:00 pm, Civic Center Meeting Hall, City Council Chambers, 1016 S. Livermore Avenue.

10. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS

10.1 REVISED
Supplemental materials received prior to the meeting.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Revised Supplemental Materials

10.2 Supplemental materials received at the meeting.

Staff Report

Attachments:

1. Items Received at the Meeting

11. HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN YOUR CITY COUNCIL MEETING

You can participate in the meeting in a number of ways:

Open Forum
is an opportunity for the public to speak regarding items not listed on the agenda. Speakers are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person. To address the City

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

8 Council in person, you must submit a speaker card to the City Clerk prior to the start of that item. Please note that the City Council is prohibited by State law from taking action on any items that are not listed on the agenda. However, if your item requires action, the City Council may place it on a future agenda or direct staff to work with you and/or report to the City Council on the issue.

Public Hearings
- The topic of the hearing is typically summarized by staff, followed by a presentation by the applicant, and questions from the City Council. The Mayor will then open the hearing to the public and offer an opportunity for public comments. Speakers are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person. To address the City Council in person, you must submit a speaker card to the City Clerk prior to the start of the presentation of the item.

Other Agenda Items
are also open for public input including Consent Calendar or Matters for Consideration items. These comments are also subject to the 3-minute limit.

Special Meetings, Workshops
- The public will have the opportunity to address the City Council regarding the item that is the subject of the special meeting or workshop. Public comments are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person.

Platforms to Participate in Meetings:

Submission of Comments Prior to the Meeting:

Email Comments
may be submitted by the public to the City Clerk’s Office (
[email protected]
). Items received no later than 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be provided to the City Council and available on the City website prior to the meeting. These items will NOT be read into the record.

eComments
may be submitted by the public using the eComment link
here
. Comments may
be up to 1000 characters in length and will be accepted up until 4:00 pm the day of the meeting. These items will NOT be read into the record and are viewable by the City Council and the public upon submittal.

Submission of Comments During the Meeting:

Speakers are limited to a maximum of 3 minutes per person. To submit a comment you must complete a speaker card for each item. Speaker cards are available in the Civic Center Meeting Hall lobby. Indicate on the card the item number you wish to comment on and submit the card directly to the City Clerk prior to the start of the item. Please note that the City Council is prohibited by State law from taking action on any items that are not listed on the agenda.

However, if your item requires action, the City Council may place it on a future agenda or direct staff to work with you and/or report to the City Council on the issue.

The City will be using YouTube and TV29 as two tools to provide the public access to view City Council meetings. No public comment will be accepted via YouTube.

TV29:
tv29live.org
Comcast Cable 29
Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

9 YouTube:
http://youtube.com/c/CityofLivermoreCalifornia

If you would like to deliver written materials to the City Council as part of your public comment, please provide 10 copies to the City Clerk with your speaker card.

The
City Council Agenda and Agenda Reports
are prepared by City staff and are available
for public review on Tuesday evening, six days prior to the City Council meeting in the Civic Center Library, 1188 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, and at the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore. The Agenda is also available on the City’s website, http://LivermoreCA.gov/agenda
.

Under Government Code §54957.5, any
supplemental material
distributed to the members
of the City Council after the posting of this agenda will be available for public review in the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 South Livermore Avenue, Livermore, and included in the agenda packet available on the City’s web site at
http://LivermoreCA.gov/agenda
.

PURSUANT TO TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (CODIFIED AT 42 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 12101 AND 28 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 35), AND SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973, THE CITY OF

LIVERMORE DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF RACE, COLOR, RELIGION,

NATIONAL ORIGIN, ANCESTRY, SEX, DISABILITY, AGE OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION IN THE PROVISION OF ANY SERVICES, PROGRAMS, OR ACTIVITIES. TO ARRANGE AN

ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PUBLIC MEETING, PLEASE

CONTACT THE ADA COORDINATOR AT
[email protected]
OR
CALL (925) 960-4170 (VOICE) OR (925) 960- 4104 (TDD) AT LEAST THREE (3) BUSINESS DAYS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING.

Livermore City Council Agenda
February 24, 2025

10 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 3.1

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Marianna Marysheva, City Manager
SUBJECT:

Proclamation declaring February 2025 as American Heart Month, presented to Padmaja Vasireddy, Community Impact Manager for Health Strategies and Lisa Bellini, Senior Community Impact Director for Health Strategies American Heart Association.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends City Council declare February 2025 as American Heart Month.

SUMMARY

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

1. Proclamation

Prepared by: Stephanie Egidio
Assistant to the City Manager

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
11 12

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.1

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Marianna Marysheva, City Manager
SUBJECT:

Approval of draft minutes - February 10, 2025 Regular Meeting

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council approve the draft minutes.

SUMMARY

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

1. DRAFT 2025-02-10

Prepared by: Debbie Elam
City Clerk

TY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 10, 2025
________________________________________________________________

REGULAR MEETING

1. C

LOSED SESSION - NONE

2. CAL
L TO ORDER – T he meeting of the City Council was called to order by Mayor John Marchand at 7:00 pm, held in person at 1016 S. Livermore Avenue.

RO
LL CALL – Present: Mayor John Marchand, Vice Mayor Evan Branning, Council Members Ben Barrientos, Steven Dunbar, and Kristie Wang.

EDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS – NO NE
M
ayor Marchand reordered the agenda moving Item 4. Open Forum after Item

7.1. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Ma
yor Marchand opened the public comment period.

I
tem 5.1 David McGuigan began a comment.

M
ayor Marchand excused Speaker McGuigan to the end of the list of speakers for public comment due to disruptive comments.

I
tem 5.2 Greg Scott provided a comment.

I
tem 5.1 David McGuigan began a comment.

M
ayor Marchand excused Speaker McGuigan due to disruptive comments.

T
here were no more speakers, and the public comment period was closed.

THE MOTION OF VICE MAYOR BRANNING, SECONDED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER DUNBAR AND CARRIED ON A 5 -0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

5.1 Approval of draft minutes - January 27, 2025 Regular Meeting.

ATTACHMENT 1
14 CM/75/ Minutes FEBRUARY 10, 2025

5.2 Introduce an ordinance and waive the first reading amending Livermore Municipal Code Section 13.36.050 Rates Per Service Unit to streamline the rate setting process and improve consistency with the water rate setting process.

Ordinance introduced amending Livermore Municipal Code Section

13.36.050 Rates Per Service Unit to streamline the rate setting process and improve consistency with the water rate setting process.

5.3 Introduce an ordinance and waive the first reading establishing a permanent Building Appeals Board by adding new chapter 15.90 to the Livermore Municipal Code and amending sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120.

Ordinance introduced establishing a permanent Building Appeals Board by adding new chapter 15.90 to the Livermore Municipal Code and amending sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120.

5.4 Resolution 2025-015 authorizing execution of a fourth amendment to the agreement with Ruggeri -Jensen-Azar for on -call engineering design services, increasing the not-to-exceed amount from $1,800,000 to $2,400,000 with a term ending December 31, 2026.

5.5 Resolution 2025-016 authorizing execution of a fourth amendment to the agreement with JR Structural Engineering, Inc. for project management services for various capital improvement projects, increasing the not -to-exceed contract amount from $910,000 to $1,510,000 with a term ending December 31, 2026.

5.6 Resolution 2025-017 authorizing a supplemental appropriation of Traffic Impact Fee Fund 510 in the amount of $200,000 to complete the analysis for the Traffic Impact Fee Nexus Study.

5.7 Resolution 2025 -018 accepting the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and Other Audit Reports for the Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2024.

5.8 Resolution 2025-019 amending the City of Livermore Salary Plan dated February 2025 in accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5 and establish a new classification of Supervising Crime and Intelligence Analyst (Class Code 4152) and assign it to the Association of Livermore Employees salary schedule.

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS

6.1 Hearing to consider a r esolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Renewable Energy & Storage Power Purchase Agreement with Ava Community Energy and determining that the agreement is in the City’s best interest.

Recommendation: Staff recommended the City Council adopt two resolutions:

ATTACHMENT 1
15 FEBRUARY 10, 2025 Minutes CM/75/

1. Determining the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is consistent with California Public Resources Code section 21080.35, which provides that solar energy systems installed on the roof of an existing building or on an existing parking lot, meeting certain characteristics, are exempt from CEQA.

2. Auth
orizing the City Manager to execute a Renewable Energy & Storage Power Purchase Agreement between the City and Ava Community Energy in substantially the same form as the draft agreement, subject to the City Attorney's approvals as to form, pursuant to the California Government Code (sections 4217.10 through 4217.18), and determining pursuant to California Government Code section 4217.12 that the agreement is in the City’s best interest because the anticipated energy costs will be less than the marginal cost the City would otherwise pay for the consumed energy, which savings will also offset any potential revenue from Ava to place its equipment on City facilities.

Sust
ainability Program Manager Tricia Pontau presented the staff report.

J.P. R
oss Vice President of Local Development, Electronification and Innovation, Ava Community Energy provided a comment.

Mayo
r Marchand opened the public hearing.

Dav
id McGuigan provided a comment.

Gre
g Scott provided a comment.

Tris
h Munro provided a comment.

There w
ere no more speakers, and the hearing was closed.

ON TH

E MOTION OF COUNCIL MEMBER BARRIENTOS , SECONDED BY
COUNCIL MEMBER WANG AND CARRIED ON A 5 -0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS:

Res
olution 2025 -020 finding that the Cornerstone project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Res
olution 2025-021 approving the vesting tentative tract map (VTTM) 8669 – subdivision (SUB) 22- 0006, site plan design review (SPDR) 22- 004, and conditional use permit (CUP) 24- 009, and find no net loss for the Cornerstone project.

7. MATT

ERS FOR CONSIDERATION

7.1 Res
olution adopting 180 -day wait period exception to hire retired annuitant, Michael Pato, former Senior Management Analyst, in accordance with Government Code section 7522.56 of the Public Employees' Retirement ATTACHMENT 1
16 CM/75/ Minutes FEBRUARY 10, 2025
Law.

Rec
ommendation: Staff recommend ed that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the hiring of retired annuitant, Michael Pato, former Senior Management Analyst, in accordance with Government Code section 7522.56 of the Public Employees' Retirement Law.

Huma
n Resources Manager Kristen Hilton presented the staff report.

Mayo
r Marchand opened the public comment period.

There w
ere no speakers, and the public comment period was closed.

ON TH

E MOTION OF COUNCIL MEMBER BARRIENTOS, SECONDED BY VICE MAYOR BRANNING AND CARRIED ON A 5 -0 VOTE, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION:

Res
olution 2025 -022 adopting 180- day wait period exception to hire retired annuitant, Michael Pato, former Senior Management Analyst, in accordance with Government Code section 7522.56 of the Public Employees' Retirement Law.

8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MATTERS INITIATED BY CITY MANAGE

R, CITY ATTORNEY, STAFF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
THE M

AYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PROVIDED A SUMMARY OF

RECENTLY ATTENDED EVENTS AND MEETINGS IN ADDITION TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET. COUNCIL

MEMBERS WHO DID NOT PROVIDE A SUMMARY IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET ARE INCLUDED BELOW.

Islam
ic Center of Livermore (ICL) Council Member Dunbar noted his attendance at the opening of the new Masjid on February 1, 2025.

Live
rmore Lion’s Club C ouncil Member Barrientos noted his attendance at the crab feed on February 8, 2025.

Live
rmore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA) Vice Mayor Branning noted his attendance at the Board Meeting on February 3, 2025.

Mayor
Marchand called for Item 4. Open Forum.

4. OPEN FORUM
Mayor
Marchand opened the public comment period.

David
McGuigan provided a comment.

ATTACHMENT 1
17 FEBRUARY 10, 2025 Minutes CM/75/
Greg Scott provided a comment.

Suzy prov
ided a comment.

Ca
rol Silva provided a comment.

Ther
e were no more speakers, and the public comment period was closed.

9. ADJOURNMENT – at 7 :42 pm to a Regular City Council Meeting on Monday, February 24, 2025, at 7:00 pm, Civic Center Meeting Hall, City Council Chambers, 1016 S. Livermore Avenue.

APPRO
VED: __________________________
JOHN P. MARCHAND, MAYOR
ATTE
ST: ___________________________
DEBORAH L. ELAM, CITY CLERK
ATTACHMENT 1
18 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.2

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Judy Erlandson, Acting Public Works Director
SUBJECT:

Adopt an ordinance amending Livermore Municipal Code Chapter 13.35 Sewer Service and Use Charges Section 13.36.050 Rater per Service Unit

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council
adopt an ordinance
amending Livermore Municipal Code Chapter

13.36 Sewer Service and Use Charges, Section 13.36.050 Rates per Service Unit to streamline the rate setting process and for consistency in language with the other rate setting chapters of Title 13 Public Services.

SUMMARY

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance

Prepared by: Laura Mayate-DeAndreis
Management Analyst II

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
19 1 ORDINANCE NO.

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 13.36 SEWER SERVICE AND USE CHARGES SECTION 13.36.050

RATES PER SERVICE UNIT

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Amendment. The Livermore Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as shown below. The deletions are shown using a strikethrough, and the added language is shown with an underline, but the stricken language and underlines themselves shall not be codified in the Municipal Code, which publication shall only reflect the final language.

13.36.050 Rates per service unit.

Periodically, the City Council may restudy and recalculate fees. The residential, commercial and institutional user charges for each month of sewer service shall be established by resolution uncodified ordinance of the City Council.

Section 2. Environmental. This amendment to the Livermore Municipal Code is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15378 and therefore, is not subject to environmental review.

The adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the common sense exemption set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) in that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, it is not subject to CEQA.

Section 3. Severability. If any part of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining parts.

Section 4. Publication. This ordinance shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the city of Livermore within fifteen days after its adoption.

Section 5. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its adoption.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced at the meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore held on February 10, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
20 2 ORDINANCE NO.

The ordinance was adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council held on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
________________________________
Mayor, City of Livermore
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________ /s/ Tara Mazzanti__________________ Deborah L. Elam Tara Mazzanti
City Clerk Senior Assistant City Attorney
21 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.3

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Adopt an ordinance establishing a permanent Building Appeals Board by adding new chapter 15.90 to the Livermore Municipal Code and amending sections 8.15.125,

15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council
adopt an ordinance

establishing a Permanent Building Appeals
Board by adding new chapter 15.90 to the Livermore Municipal Code and amending sections 8.15.125,

15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120
for consistency with the new Appeals Board. Staff also
recommends Council officially appoint the Interim Board members as permanent members.

SUMMARY

DISCUSSION

ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance

2. Exhibit A - Chapter 15.90 Building Appeals Board

3. Exhibit B - Amendments to LMC Sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, and 15.20.120

Prepared by: Franc Moufarrej
Chief Building Official

22 Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
23 1 ORDINANCE NO.

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A BUILDING APPEALS BOARD BY ADDING NEW CHAPTER 15.90 TO THE LIVERMORE MUNICIPAL CODE AND AMENDING SECTIONS 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, AND 15.20.120 FOR CONSISTENCY

WITH THE NEW BOARD
On March 6, 2024, the California Court of Appeal clarified that local jurisdictions must comply with the appeals processes outlined in the California Building Code for all appeals involving state and local building code violations and any public nuisance determinations based on those violations. Section 1.8.8 of the California Building Code requires local jurisdictions to establish a process to hear and decide administrative appeals of orders, decisions, and determinations made by the local jurisdiction relative to the application and interpretation of the California Building Code and other regulations governing construction, use, maintenance, and change of occupancy. Said appeals must be heard by the City Council, but the Building Code permits local jurisdictions to establish an appeals board comprised of individuals knowledgeable in applicable building codes, regulations, and ordinances to hear and decide these appeals.

On May 16, 2024, the City Council adopted resolution 2024-076 establishing an Interim Appeals Board after receiving an appeal to a notice and order to abate certain violations to the Livermore Municipal Code and the California Building Code. The resolution also directed staff to prepare an ordinance establishing a permanent Appeals Board. This ordinance establishes said Appeals Board.

On February 24, 2025, the City Council appointed the members of the Interim Appeals Board to the new permanent Building Appeals Board.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Addition to the Code. A new Chapter 15.90 Building Appeals Board, is hereby added to Title 15 Buildings and Construction in the Livermore Municipal Code, as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto.

Section 2. Amendment. C hapter 8. 15 Procedure for Abatement of Public Nuisances Section 8.15.125 Appeal of Building Code Violations , and Chapter 15.20 Dangerous Buildings Sections 15.20.100 Administrative Hearing , 15.20.110 Written Decision and Order , and 15.20.120 Appeal to City Council are hereby amended and restated as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto. In Exhibit B, the deletions are shown using a strikethrough, and the added language is shown with an underline, but the stricken language and underlines themselves shall not be codified in the Municipal Code, which publication shall only reflect the final language.

Section 3. Environmental. The passage of this ordinance is not a project according to the definition in the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, is not subject to the provisions requiring environmental review. 24 2 ORDINANCE NO.

Section 4. Severability. If any part of this ordinance is declared invalid by a court, such invalidity shall not affect any of the remaining parts.

Section 5. Publication. This ordinance shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation of the city of Livermore within fifteen days after its adoption.

Section 6. Effective date. This Ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its adoption.

The foregoing ordinance was introduced at the meeting of the City Council of the City of Livermore held on February 10, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

The ordinance was adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council held on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
________________________________
Mayor, City of Livermore
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________ /s/ Katherine Mirassou __________ Deborah L. Elam Katherine Mirassou
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Chapter 15.90 Building Appeals Board
Exhibit B – Amendments to LMC Sections 8.15.125, 15.20.100, 15.20.110, and

15.20.120
25 EXHIBIT A
Chapter 15.90
Building Appeals Board
Sections:

15.90.010 – Purpose

15.90.020 - Definitions

15.90.030 - Organization and Membership

15.90.040 - Limitation on Appeals

15.90.050 - Appeal Filing Timeline

15.90.060 - Appeal Procedure

15.90.070 - Powers and Duties

15.90.010 - Purpose
The Building Appeals Board is established to review and adjudicate appeals of orders, decisions, and determinations made by City staff regarding the application and interpretation of the California Building Code and other regulations and uniform codes governing construction, use, maintenance, and change of occupancy, as specified in Section 1.8.8 of the California Building Code and as adopted by the City in LMC Title 15, Buildings and Construction.

15.90.020 - Definitions
As used in this chapter:

A. "Board" means the Building Appeals Board.

B. "Building Official" means the Chief Building Official or their designee.

C. "Member" means a member of the Building Appeals Board.

D. "The Code" means the California Building Code, LMC Title 15, and other applicable construction regulations.

E. "Appeal" means a formal request to review a decision made by the Building Official or City staff.

F. "Appellant" means a person or entity filing an appeal under this chapter. 26 EXHIBIT A
G. "Decision" means any determination, ruling, or interpretation made by City staff subject to appeal under this chapter.

15.90.030 - Organization and Membership
A. Appointment and Removal: The Board shall be appointed by the City Council and serve at its pleasure. Board members shall be appointed from a list of interested and qualified candidates maintained by the City Clerk. Board members may be removed by a vote of the majority of the City Council with or without cause.

B. Composition: The Board shall consist of three members who are not employees of the City.

C. Qualifications: Members shall be knowledgeable about applicable building codes, regulations, and ordinances. They shall have experience and training in building construction, such as licensed contractors, engineers, and architects. A member need not be a resident of the City. A member may not have any interest in property which is the subject of the appeal to the Board.

D. Term: Board members shall serve staggered terms of four years, with vacancies filled by the City Council for the remainder of the unexpired term.

E. Meetings: The Board of Appeals shall have no regular meetings, and all meetings shall be special meetings noticed pursuant to Government Code Section 54956. The board shall be considered a “standing committee” with a continuing subject matter jurisdiction. The board shall meet when an appeal is filed pursuant to this chapter.

15.90.040 - Limitation on Appeals
A. An application for appeal must be based on a claim that:

1. The true intent of the applicable code or related regulations has been incorrectly interpreted.

2. The provisions of the applicable code do not fully apply.

3. An equally good or better form of construction is proposed.

B. Appeals must relate to orders, decisions, or determinations governed by Title 15 of the Livermore Municipal Code.

15.90.050 - Appeal Filing Timeline
A. All appeals shall be submitted in writing to the Building Official within 10 calendar days of the appellant’s receipt of written notice of the decision being appealed.

B. Failure to file a timely and complete request for an appeal shall constitute a waiver of all rights to an appeal.

C. An appeal must contain the information in LMC 8.15.090(B). 27 EXHIBIT A
D. Upon receiving a written appeal, the Building Official shall within 10 days set a hearing date, time, and location for within 60 days from the date of the City’s receipt of the appeal. Written notice of the hearing shall be served to the appellant at least 10 days prior to the hearing via personal service or certified mail.

E. If the filing deadline falls on a weekend or holiday, the deadline shall be extended to the next business day.

F. Except for orders issued by the Building Official because of conditions that represent an imminent threat to life or safety of the public or adjacent properties, enforcement of the notice and order of the Building Official shall be stayed during the pendency of an appeal of that order properly and timely filed.

15.90.060 - Appeal Procedure
A. Hearing Procedures: Hearings shall follow the procedures established in LMC 8.15.

The Board shall comply with 8.15 as if it were the “hearing officer” but only to the extent

8.15 is consistent with the California Building Code or other applicable law governing administrative appeals of violations of the building code.

B. Secretary: The Chief Building Official or their designee shall serve as the ex officio Secretary of the Board but shall not vote.

C. Decision: The Board shall issue a written decision, including findings of fact and reasons for the decision, within fifteen (15) days after the hearing’s conclusion. Copies of the decision shall be provided to the appellant and the Building Official. The Board’s decisions are binding.

15.90.070 - Powers and Duties
A. The Board shall hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions, and determinations made by City staff regarding the application and interpretation of the California Building Code and other regulations under Title 15 of the Livermore Municipal Code.

B. The Board shall have no authority to waive requirements of any code. (California Building Code Section 113.2.)
C. The Board’s written decisions shall include findings of fact and the rationale for the decision. Decisions shall approve, approve with modifications, or deny appeals, specifying any conditions or limitations imposed.

D. Within fifteen (15) days of the decision, the Secretary shall provide copies of the decision to the appellant and maintain a permanent record in the Board’s files.

E. Decisions of the Board are final and conclusive for the City. 28 EXHIBIT B
Amended sections:

8.15.125 Appeal of building code violations

15. 20.100 Administrative hearing

15. 20. 110 Written decision and order

15. 20.120 Appeal to City Council

8.15.125 Appeal of building code violations.

When a notice and order to abate includes a public nuisance as defined in LMC 8.14.040(M) and (N) for a violation of the California Building Code and other uniform codes adopted by the City in LMC Title 15, Buildings and Construction, the written decision of the administrative hearing officer after hearing with respect to those specific code violations may be appealed by a responsible party to the City Council as set forth in LMC 15.20.120. (Ord. 2105 § 5, 2020) an appeal of the notice and order will be heard by the Building Appeals Board pursuant to LMC 15.90. Appeals heard by the Building Appeals Board shall comply with the procedures of Chapter 8.15 as if the Board were the “hearing officer”, but only to the extent Chapter 8.15 is consistent with the California Building Code or other applicable law governing administrative appeals of violations of the California Building Code.

15.20.100 Administrative hearing.

The administrative hearing shall be conducted in the same manner as set forth in LMC 8.15.100 and 8.15.110 with the following modifications:

A. Appointment. The Community Development Director shall appoint a hearing officer direct the Building Appeals Board pursuant to LMC 15.90 to conduct an administrative hearing upon issuance of a notice and order to demolish a dangerous building.

B. Notice of Hearing. The building division will send out the notice of hearing date to all responsible parties of interest, including any tenants, the hearing officer Building Appeals Board, building official, Community Development Director, City Manager and City Attorney.

C. Burden of Proof. The City has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the dangerous conditions exist and constitute a violation of the code and that demolition of the building is the only economically feasible alternative. The notice and order to demolish a dangerous building and any reports submitted by the building official or designee shall constitute prima facie evidence of the respective facts contained in those documents. The City shall present evidence of the following:
29 EXHIBIT B

1. The dangerous condition of the building;

2. That it is not economically feasible for the building to be repaired and made safe;

3. The economic cost of repair in comparison to demolition or removal and/or any other evidence to show that demolition is the only reasonable or viable alternative; and

4. The history of attempts to gain the responsible party’s compliance to correct the condition of the building.

A responsible party may contest the building official’s determination by providing evidence or expert testimony about the building’s condition, and by providing evidence of the responsible party’s willingness and economic capability to complete the necessary repairs to make the building safe and bring it into compliance in a timely manner, regardless of cost.

D. Inspection of Building. The hearing officer Building Appeals Board may inspect the building, to the extent it is determined safe by the building official to do so, as part of the hearing process; provided, that the parties mutually agree, and the owner for the subject property consents to the inspection. The hearing officer Building Appeals Board must give written notice to the parties of the date and time of the inspection, and the parties are permitted to be present during the hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board’s inspection. The City may request all parties to sign a waiver of liability to be present during the inspection. When the hearing resumes after the inspection, the hearing officer Building Appeals Board shall state for the record the material facts observed during the inspection. The parties shall be afforded an opportunity to rebut or explain the material facts stated by the hearing officer Building Appeals Board.

E. Failure to Appear. The failure to appear at the hearing by the responsible party shall constitute a failure to exhaust administrative remedies and a waiver of all rights to maintain an action to appeal, modify, or set aside a building official’s notice and order to demolish a dangerous building, and any subsequent City abatement action. Despite the failure to appear, the hearing officer Building Appeals Board is directed to hear the City’s case in the responsible party’s absence and issue a written decision based upon the City’s evidence.

15.20.110 Written decision and order.

After the administrative hearing, the hearing officer Building Appeals Board shall issue a written decision and order as set forth in LMC 8.15.120 with the following modifications:

A. Notice Upheld or Modified.

1. If the hearing officer Building Appeals Board upholds the building official’s determination that the building is dangerous and should be demolished, the decision 30 EXHIBIT B
must include a demolition order that provides a reasonable schedule for the responsible party to obtain a City demolition permit and to take all necessary steps to demolish or remove the building. In no event shall the demolition date be less than 90 days from the date the decision is mailed.

2. If the hearing officer Building Appeals Board determines that the responsible party may repair the dangerous building, rather than demolish it, the decision must include an abatement order that provides a reasonable and feasible schedule for expeditious repair, including obtaining all necessary City permits, providing required architectural and engineering plans or other needed studies, and completing the work. Except under unusual or extenuating circumstances, the date of completion should not exceed 180 days from the date the decision is issued. The building official may extend the date of completion as needed to accommodate reasonable good faith progress by the responsible party to eliminate the dangerous conditions.

3. If the hearing officer Building Appeals Board determines that the nuisance is likely to recur after abatement, the hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board’s written decision may order the person to take adequate precautions for a period of time not to exceed 12 months so that the nuisance will not recur.

4. The written determination shall further state that if the building is not demolished, or if the nuisance is not abated, by the date specified in the order, then the City is ordered and authorized to demolish the building, or abate the nuisance, and to recover the administrative charges, costs and expenses to abate the nuisance from the responsible party as set forth herein and in LMC 8.15.150.

B. Finality of Decision – Judicial Review of Non-Building Code Violations. For any public nuisance violations and associated consolidated hearing issues pursuant to LMC 8.15.100 that are not violations of a building code, the hearing officer’s decision is final and conclusive for the City. The written decision and order shall contain a statement of the right to seek judicial review of that portion of the hearing officer’s decision by filing a petition within 90 days with a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6.

C. Appeal to City Council – Building Code Violations. For any public nuisance violations that are violations of a building code, the written decision and order shall contain a statement that the Building Appeals Board’s decision is final.

The responsible party may appeal to the City Council pursuant to LMC 15.20.120 that portion of the hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board’s decision pertaining only to orders requiring the demolition of dangerous buildings by filing a written request to the City Clerk requesting an appeal of the hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board’s decision and paying an appeal fee set by City Council resolution within 10 calendar days of the date of the decision.
31 EXHIBIT B

15.20.120 Appeal to City Council.

A. A decision by the Building Appeals Board may be appealed to the City Council only if the decision by the Building Appeals Board would require the demolition of a dangerous building. If the responsible person attended the administrative hearing, he or she may appeal the hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board’s decision by filing a written request to the City Clerk requesting an appeal hearing within 10 calendar days of the date of the hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board’s decision. An appeal fee as set by City Council resolution must be paid within the same 10-calendar-day period for the appeal application to be complete.

B. Within 30 calendar days of receipt of a complete and timely appeal, the hearing before the City Council will be scheduled to take place within 60 days of the date the appeal is received, or as soon thereafter as possible. The City Clerk shall inform the appellant of the date and time of the appeal hearing.

C. The appeal hearing shall be de novo and shall observe the following procedures:

1. The City Council shall receive and consider all relevant testimony, evidence, objections, or protests presented.

2. The person requesting the hearing may represent themselves or may be represented by the person of their choice.

3. The formal rules of evidence and discovery will not apply to the appeal hearing, but the person requesting the hearing, and the building official, shall have the following rights:
a. To appear and present testimony and evidence relevant to any activity or condition identified in the hearing officer’s decision or the notice and order to demolish a dangerous building that is being contested. Hearsay evidence may be presented for the purpose of supplementing or explaining any direct evidence, but shall not be sufficient in itself to support a finding unless it would be admissible over objection in civil actions in courts of competent jurisdiction in California. Relevant evidence may be admitted if it is the type of evidence that is competent and may be relied upon by reasonable persons to make a decision, provided the evidence is more than speculation or conjecture.

Irrelevant and unduly repetitious evidence shall be excluded. b. To produce and examine witnesses on any matter relevant to the condition of the premises constituting a nuisance.
c. To introduce documentary and physical evidence.
d. To cross-examine opposing witnesses on any matter relevant to the issues of the hearing.
e. To impeach any witness, regardless of which party first called that witness to testify. f. To rebut the evidence.
32 EXHIBIT B
g. The proceedings at the hearing shall be recorded.

4. The person requesting the hearing, or the building official, may use a certified shorthand or stenographic reporter to maintain a written record of the proceedings at the party’s own expense. When a certified shorthand or stenographic reporter is used, the preparation of a record of the proceeding shall be governed by California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1904.6, as it is amended from time to time.

5. The building official’s enforcement file, including the notice and order to demolish a dangerous building and the written decision of the administrative hearing officer’s Building Appeals Board, shall constitute prima facie evidence that the public nuisance exists, that the building is dangerous, and that the administrative charge assessed is appropriate, and shall be deemed evidence of sufficient substantiality to shift the burden of proof to the person contesting the notice and written decision to show cause why the dangerous condition does not exist or should not be abated, or why the administrative charge should not be assessed. The person requesting the hearing has the burden of proving there is a substantial conflict of evidence, or that different conclusions must be drawn from the building official’s evidence, that warrants modifying or setting aside the contested portion of the notice and order to demolish a dangerous building. The building official has the ultimate burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the activity or condition identified in the notice and order to abate exists, and establishing that the administrative charge should be assessed.

6. The City Council may request additional information from the building official or the person requesting the appeal hearing, or conduct an inspection of the activity or condition that is being contested, at any time before issuing a written decision.

7. The failure of any person requesting the appeal to appear at the appeal hearing shall constitute a waiver of all rights to a hearing and a waiver of all rights to maintain an action to modify or set aside the building official’s notice and order to demolish a dangerous building. The failure to appear shall also constitute a failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and the City Council shall issue a written decision and order upholding the notice and order to demolish a dangerous building as to that party.

D. Upon the completion of such hearing, the City Council shall, by resolution, declare its findings and its decision to uphold, modify, or set aside the building official’s notice of demolition of a dangerous building for the building code violation and shall follow the form set forth in LMC 8.15.120 for a written decision.

E. Judicial Review. The City Council’s decision after appeal is final and conclusive for the City. The resolution shall contain a statement of the right to seek judicial review of the hearing officer’s decision by filing a petition within 90 days with a court of competent jurisdiction pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6. 33 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.4

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing a supplemental appropriation of Measure BB-Local Streets and Roads, Fund 830, in the amount of $150,000 in FY 2024-25 and awarding a construction contract with Devaney Engineering, Inc. in an amount not-to-exceed $646,011 for the construction of the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends City Council adopt a resolution for the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14:
1 .

Authorizing a supplemental appropriation from Measure BB-Local Streets and Roads (Fund 830) in the amount of $150,000 in FY 2024-25 to fund project 2023-14; 2 .

Awarding a construction contract to Devaney Engineering, Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $646,011, and authorizing the City Manager to sign the contract (Exhibit A); 3 .

Rejecting all other bids or proposals; and
4 .

SUMMARY
The Springtown Water Service Replacement Project (2023-14) will replace 68 water lateral services within the area seen in Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map. This project will replace the failing polybutylene pipe water services and replace them with durable polyethylene pipe services, reducing the need for future emergency repairs. The project will also slurry seal the roadways in the entire neighborhood for a cost of $300,000. Half of the cost of the slurry seal work is required to repair the water service lateral trenches and will be funded with Water Replacement Funds; the remaining cost of the slurry seal work, $150,000, needs to be appropriated to the project from roadway funds, Measure BB-Local Streets and Roads
(Fund 830).

Twelve bids were received for this project on December 11, 2024. Staff recommends the City Council award and authorize a construction contract with Devaney Engineering I nc., the lowest responsible and
34 responsive bidder, and authorize the City Manager to sign the construction contract.

DISCUSSION
Polybutylene water service lines installed in certain areas of the Springtown neighborhood in the 1980's have experienced a significantly higher failure rate than surrounding areas with similar characteristics. To lower water loss, reduce emergency replacements, and minimize overall cost, the Water Resources Division proposed to proactively replace the 68 service lines. The Springtown Water Service Replacement Project will replace the polybutylene lines with more durable polyethylene lines. The roadway will be slurry sealed and restriped after all of the services have been replaced in order to restore the appearance and condition of the roads post-construction.

Staff advertised the project on November 18, 2024, for a bid opening of December 11, 2024. The City received 12 bids for the project. The lowest responsible and responsive bidder was Devaney Engineering Inc. based in San Francisco, California and the company has worked on various public utility replacement projects for Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. Staff has checked references for Devaney Engineering, Inc. and has found them satisfactory. In accordance with Livermore Municipal Code Section 2.68.590, a cumulative Change Order authorization of $200,000 is allowed.

Contractor
Location
Amount
Devaney Engineering, Inc.

San Francisco
$647,011.00
Platinum General Engineering
LLC
Modesto
$744,800.00
Golden State Construction &
Utility, Inc.

San Francisco
$834,000.00
WestRock Engineering
San Francisco
$835,170.00
A3 Pipeline
San Francisco
$902,812.00
Golden Bay Construction, Inc.

Hayward
$921,635.00
C2R Engineering, Inc.

Los Altos
$952,845.00
DPI Inc
Livermore
$1,178,528.34
Corcus Construction
San Francisco
$1,190,155.00
West Valley
San Jose
$1,192,376.00
Ella
Alamo
$1,254,170.00
GCJ Incorporated
Tracy
$1,503,086.17
Engineer's Estimate

$1,050,000.00

Staff will coordinate with the residents impacted by the work and provide them with at least two weeks' notice by mail or 72 hours via door hanging notice before their service will be replaced. Each resident will have their water off for only one working day. An updated construction schedule will be made available to the residents on the City's website.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

Project 2023-14 is included in the FY 2023-28 Capital Improvement Plan. A total of $1.3 million is budgeted in FY 2024-25 from the Water Replacement Fund 641. Based on the bids coming in lower than estimated, the total project costs will be less than currently budgeted. However, due to the poor condition of the streets in this neighborhood, staff decided to slurry seal the entire neighborhood. The total cost of slurry sealing the neighborhood is $300,000. Half of the road area needs to be slurry sealed due to the 35 water lateral replacements and will be funded with Water Replacement Fund 641; the remaining cost of the slurry seal work, $150,000, will be funded by
Measure BB-Local Street and Road (Fund 830)
and
needs to be appropriated to the project in FY 2024-25. This project will not cause an increase in operation and maintenance costs.

COMMUNITY PILLAR:

1: A Safe Community that Thrives

GOAL

11: Operate and maintain municipal water systems that provide safe, efficient delivery of potable and recycled water, collect and treat wastewater, and comply with all federal, state, and local regulations.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Vicinity Map

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - Agreement

Prepared by: Jarrett Rasmussen
Associate Civil Engineer

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
36 Vicinity Map - Springtown Water Service Replacement Project This map is based on City of Livermore GIS Information and reflects the most current information at the time of this printing. The map is intended for reference purposes only and the City and its staff is not responsible for errors or omissions.
8,000
Livermore IT, GIS Services
1,333.3
1:NAD_1983_2011_StatePlane_California_III_FIPS_0403_Ft_US Feet1,333.30 Notes666.67
ATTACHMENT 1
37 1 RESOLUTION NO. ________

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPRORIATION
OF MEASURE BB-LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS, FUND 830, IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000 IN FY 2024-25 AND AWARDING A

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH DEVANEY ENGINEERING INC, IN
AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $646,011, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION

OF THE SPRINGTOWN WATER SERVICE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
2023-14
(Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14)
The Springtown Water Service Replacement Project is located in the Springtown neighborhood between Springtown Boulevard and Rhododendron Drive and will consist of replacing 68 polybutylene water service lines. The polybutylene water service lines installed in certain areas of the Springtown Neighborhood in the 1980s have experienced a significantly higher failure rate than surrounding areas with similar characteristics. To lower water loss, reduce emergency replacements, and minimize overall cost, the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project will replace the 68 service lines with polyethylene service lines. The new service lines will reduce the number of line failures and is therefore a public benefit.

The City of Livermore advertised on November 18, 2024, and opened bids on December 11, 2024, for construction of the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14 ("Project").

City staff recommends awarding the project to Devaney Engineering Inc., the lowest responsible and responsive bidder for the Project, and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement.

A supplemental appropriation of $150,000 in Measure BB-Local Street and Road Fund 830 in FY 2024-25 is required to fund 50% of the road rehabilitation work for this project. The remaining cost of the of the road rehabilitation work will repair the water lateral trenches and be funded with Water Replacement Funds.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore:

1. Authorizes a supplemental appropriation of the Measure BB-Local Street and Road Fund 830 in the amount of $150,000 in FY 2024-25 to fund project WT202314;

2. Awards a construction contract to Devaney Engineering Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $646,011, and authorizes the City Manager to sign the contract attached as Exhibit A which is incorporated by this reference to the resolution;

3. Rejects all other bids or proposals; and
38 2 RESOLUTION NO. ________

4. Authorizes the City Manager to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution including approving minor changes to the proposed agreement for the Springtown Water Service Replacement Project 2023-14.

On motion of Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ______________________, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ /s/ Tara Mazzanti
Deborah L. Elam Senior Assistant City Attorney
City Clerk
Exhibit A - Construction Contract with Devaney Engineering Inc. 39 EXHIBIT A

Page 1 of 5 ends

40 EXHIBIT A

Page 2 of 5 ends

41 EXHIBIT A

Page 3 of 5 ends

42 EXHIBIT A

Page 4 of 5 ends

43 EXHIBIT A

Page 5 of 5 ends

44 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.5

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing execution of a second amendment to the agreement with Chrisp Company to continue providing on-call pavement striping and traffic sign installation services, increasing the not-to-exceed agreement amount from $200,000 to $400,000 and extending the term of the agreement from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

SUMMARY
On May 8, 2023, the City of Livermore (City) and Chrisp Company (Consultant) entered into an Agreement for Services in the amount of $100,000 to provide on-call services to furnish and install traffic signs, pavement striping, legends, and markers. On August 15, 2024, the City Manager executed a first amendment to the original agreement to increase the not-to-exceed amount to $200,000. This second amendment will increase the not-to-exceed amount to $400,000 to allow Chrisp company to continue providing pavement striping services as needed for various road improvements and extend the term of the agreement from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027.

DISCUSSION
On May 8, 2023, the City of Livermore (City) and Chrisp Company (Consultant) entered into an Agreement for Services in the amount of $100,000 with a term ending on May 1, 2026, to provide on-call services to furnish and install traffic signs, pavement striping, legends, and markers. On August 15, 2024, The City Manager executed a first amendment to the original agreement to increase the not-to- exceed amount to $200,000.

The City and Contractor desire to amend the original agreement to increase the total compensation by $200,000. This increase will amend the not to exceed amount to $400,000. The parties also desire to 45 extend the term of the agreement from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027. This is the second amendment to the original agreement.

Chrisp Company has expertise in pavement markings also known as road striping. As the City continues to make improvements to safety by installing more Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) and painting red curbs for implementation of the new Assembly Bill (AB 413), more funds are needed to complete these and other road improvements. The on-call services include new bike lane striping, additional RRFB installations, painted bulb-out curbs, painted crosswalks, road signs, and road pavement markers.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The Second Amendment increases the not-to-exceed amount of the agreement to $400,000. Funding for this amendment is covered in the budget for Miscellaneous Traffic Signing/Striping 2021-2023 Project 2021-31 in the 2023-28 Capital Improvement Plan and the budget for Miscellaneous Traffic Signing/Striping 2026-2031 Project 2026-15 that will be part of the 2025-30 Capital Improvement Plan.

Gas Taxes (fund 834) will fund these roadway maintenance activities.

COMMUNITY PILLAR

1: A Safe Community That Thrives

GOAL

10: Work to maintain a safe and efficient local transportation network and address safety concerns

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - Second Amendment

Prepared by: Juan Tenorio
Senior Engineering Technician

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A SECOND

AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH CHRISP COMPANY TO

CONTINUE PROVIDING ON-CALL PAVEMENT STRIPING AND

TRAFFIC SIGN INSTALLATION SERVICES, INCREASING THE
NOT-TO-EXCEED AGREEMENT AMOUNT FROM $200,000 TO
$400,000 AND EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE AGREEMENT FROM
MAY 1, 2026, TO DECEMBER 31, 2027
On May 8, 2023, the City of Livermore (City) and Chrisp Company (Consultant) entered into an Agreement for Services in the amount of $100,000 to provide on-call services to furnish and install traffic signs, pavement striping, legends, and markers. On August 15, 2024, the City Manager executed a First Amendment to the original agreement to increase the not-to-exceed amount to $200,000 (First Amendment).

City of Livermore Staff and Chrisp Company now desire to amend the Original Agreement and First Amendment to increase the not-to-exceed amount from $200,000 to $400,000 and to extend the term from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027. This is the second amendment to the Original Agreement. This will allow Chrisp Company to continue providing pavement striping services as needed for various road improvements.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that it hereby:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute a Second Amendment to the Agreement with Chrisp Company, attached hereto as Exhibit A, to continue providing on-call pavement striping and traffic sign installation services, increasing the not-to- exceed amount from $200,000 to $400,000, and extending the term of the agreement from May 1, 2026, to December 31, 2027.

2. Authorizes the City Manager to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution, including approving minor changes to the proposed agreement.

On motion of Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ______________________, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
47 2 RESOLUTION NO. ________
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ /s/ Tara Mazzanti
Deborah L. Elam Tara Mazzanti
City Clerk Senior Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Second Amendment – Chrisp Company
48 Amendment – General Services Page 1
Rev. 09/19/23

SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into this ____ day of ________, 2025, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”), a municipal corporation, and Chrisp Company (“Contractor”), a California corporation.

RECITALS

On May 8, 2023, City and Contractor entered into an agreement for Contractor to provide professional pavement striping and installation of traffic signs services to City (“Original Agreement”). Section 21 of the Original Agreement requires that any modifications to it must be in writing and signed by the parties.

On August 15, 2024, the first Amendment to the original agreement was executed to increase the contract amount from $100,000 to $200,000.

City and Contractor desire to amend the Original Agreement to increase the total compensation by $200,000. This increase will amend the not to exceed amount to $400,000. The parties also desire to extend the term of the original agreement for an additional one-year term, to terminate on December 31, 2027. This is the second amendment to the Original Agreement.

AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, City and Contractor hereby agree that the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. The Original Agreement is amended as follows:

A. Section 5 (a) of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

The total compensation payable by City to Contractor for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $400,000 ("not-to-exceed amount"). City shall compensate Contractor for the Services rendered at the hourly rates or task amounts set forth in Exhibit “A” up to the not -to-exceed amount.

Except as provided in the body of this Agreement, the hourly rates or t ask amounts are intended to be Contractor’s only compensation for the Services and is inclusive of all costs of labor, licensing, permitting, travel expenses, overhead and administrative costs, and any-and-all other costs, expenses, and charges incurred by Contractor, its agents, and employees to provide the Services.

B. Section 6 of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

The term of this Agreement commences on May 1, 2023, and terminates upon the completion of the services or December 31 , 2027, whichever Docusign Envelope ID: C0584588-03C4-4F63-BCC1-578D1F1E133B

EXHIBIT A
49 Amendment – General Services Page 2
Rev. 09/19/23
occurs first.

2. These amendments are prospective and only apply to the S ervices rendered by Contractor after the execution of this Amendment. Unless otherwise stated herein, this Amendment does not relieve the parties of the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement as written and in effect at the time the Services were rendered.

3. Except as amended above, the Original Agreement remains in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: C0584588-03C4-4F63-BCC1-578D1F1E133B

EXHIBIT A
50 Amendment – General Services Page 3
Rev. 09/19/23

In concurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the date first written above.

CONTRACTOR: Dated:

____________________________ ___________________________ Mark Chrisp
Executive Vise President

CITY OF LIVERMORE: Dated:

____________________________ ____________________________ Marianna Marysheva
City Manager

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

___________________________
Deputy/Assistant/City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

Risk Manager/Analyst

Docusign Envelope ID: C0584588-03C4-4F63-BCC1-578D1F1E133B 1/13/2025 | 4:05 PM PST

EXHIBIT A
51 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.6

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing additional appropriations and execution of consultant amendments for the Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage Construction Project DR586003.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the following actions for the Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage Construction Project DR586003:
1 .

Authorize a supplemental appropriation of $3,040,000 from 2022 COPs Construction Fund (Fund 540) to fund project DR586003.
2 .

Execute a second amendment to the agreement with Consolidated Engineering Laboratories, increasing the amount of the agreement by $150,000 to a total not-to-exceed amount of $624,000 for additional inspection services during construction; 5 .

Authorize a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 from the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services in FY 2024-25; and
6 .

SUMMARY
Watry Buehler Collaborative, Gannett Fleming Inc., and Consolidated Engineering Laboratories (CEL) are providing engineering, construction management and inspection services in connection with the Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage Construction Project. The L Street Garage is currently under construction east of L Street, between Veterans Way and First Street as shown in Attachment 1. When 52 completed, the parking garage will be 4 levels and contain 452 parking spaces.

These amendments increase the budget for engineering, construction management and inspection services during construction. In particular, these amendments budget for the extended duration of activities required to complete the project through 2025. Services include ongoing engineering design and field observation oversight during construction, scheduling and performance impact analysis, construction management and field inspection services.

A supplemental appropriation in the amount of $3,040,000 of accrued and projected interest earnings from the 2022 COPs Construction Fund 540 is required to cover the cost of these amendments and additional internal project management costs. In 2022, bond proceeds (2022 COPs Construction Fund 540) in the amount of $40,930,127 were issued for three projects in the Downtown Livermore Village area: L Street Garage, Livermore Village Remediation, and Livermore Village Joint Trench. Interest from these bond proceeds will cover this appropriation. With this appropriation, the bond proceeds and accrued interest will fund the completion of all three projects.

In addition, the City Attorney's Office requires a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 from the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services in FY 2024-25.

DISCUSSION
The Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage Construction Project DR586003 consists of two phases.

Phase 1 has been completed and included reconfiguring the surface parking lot east of the future garage, constructing a trash enclosure facility, and installing infrastructure for 16 electrical vehicle fast chargers. Phase 2 involves construction of the parking garage and the remaining site improvements. City Council awarded the Phase 2 construction contract on November 28, 2022, and began construction April 17, 2023.

The garage and all supporting services had been contracted to be complete by October 2024, but the Contractor has taken more time than originally scheduled to complete the work. City staff estimates the updated earliest completion date is now expected to extend through late summer 2025. The schedule delay is based on Contractor work being performed slower than originally anticipated. The City is now bearing additional costs required to extend the overall project schedule. Due to the extended schedule, additional appropriations and consultant amendments are required to provide further construction management services by the City project management team. Staff has included enough funding in the appropriation to cover these extended services through the end of 2025.

The City team is actively monitoring the Contractor to ensure proper enforcement of quality control and schedule monitoring oversight. One example of project delay and additional oversight required is the recent level 4 damaged deck concrete which was a result of a defective concrete batch supply to the jobsite. Although the repair and schedule delays are the contractor's responsibility it does affect the overall project schedule. Staff is working diligently with our consultant team, the contractor, and the subcontractors to complete the project as soon as possible. Additional staff efforts include proactive coordination meetings with the contractor and their subcontractors to make sure the schedules provided by the contractor are realistic and well-coordinated. The consultant team is also conducting additional inspections to identify and correct defective work as soon as possible, and make sure the contractor has completed necessary tasks before moving on to new work items. For example, inspectors are checking to make sure all reinforcement and mechanical and electrical conduits are installed prior to concrete 53 pours. Additional engineering, construction management and inspection services during construction are required to manage and support the final construction phase of this project due to the extended duration of activities. Engineering services include submittal and Request for Information (RFI) reviews, additional field site observations and reports, assistance with change orders and final project close out.

Construction management services include leading weekly meetings, maintaining project documentation, coordinating construction activities, preparing weekly inspection reports, managing submittals, assistance with change orders, as well as project close-out. Inspection services include material testing, conducting field inspections, preparing non-compliance reports, reviewing project schedules and preparing inspection daily reports.

On December 14, 2021, Council approved an engineering services agreement with Watry Buehler Collaborative in an amount of $1,410,000 to design a parking garage and site improvements and provide engineering services during construction in connection with the L Street Garage Project DR586003. On May 16, 2022, the City and Watry Buehler increased the amount of the agreement by $100,000 to add additional design services for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects and a constructability review of the Phase 2 documents (first amendment). On June 15, 2023, Council approved the second amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $114,000 to add additional design services for the Phase 2 bid package. On June 15, 2023, Council approved the third amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $168,800 to add additional engineering services during construction for Phase 1 and Phase 2. On June 25, 2024, Council approved the fourth amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $299,000 to add additional engineering services during construction. This fifth amendment will increase the amount of the agreement by $660,000 to add additional engineering services during construction to extend the project to close out through 2025. These services include additional construction management meetings and site visits by the design team. The design team is made up of engineers with different disciplines such as civil, structural, architectural, mechanical, electrical, and landscaping. On a rotating basis they will provide site visits. Observation memorandums will be issued to the City and the garage contractor at the end of each visit. These extra site visits will enhance interaction and communication between the design team, construction management team, and the contractor and endeavor to guard the City against defects and deficiencies in the permanent work constructed by the contractor. This fifth amendment will increase the amount of the agreement to a total amount of $2,751,800. The $2,751,800 contract amount is approximately 9.1% of the $30,090,000 construction contract. This is within the typical range for engineering design and construction support services which can be up to 10% of the construction contract.

On February 14, 2023, Council approved a professional services agreement with Gannett Fleming in an amount of $952,000 for construction management services. On May 15, 2024, Council approved the first amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $1,100,000 to add additional construction management and inspection services during construction. This second amendment will increase the amount of the agreement by $1,250,000 to add additional construction management and inspection services during construction to extend the project to close out through 2025. In order to complete the project, additional construction management activities are required such as leading weekly meetings, maintaining project documentation, coordinating construction activities, preparing weekly inspection reports, managing submittals, providing schedule review services, assistance with change orders, as well as project close-out. This second amendment will ensure uninterrupted full-time construction management support services through completion of the Phase 2 construction. This second amendment will increase the amount of the agreement to a total amount of $3,302,000. The $3,302,000 contract amount is approximately 11% of the $30,090,000 construction contract. This is 3% above the typical range for construction management support services which is usually around 8% of the construction 54 contract. The higher range is due to the additional oversight required to manage the extended contractor schedule including more in depth project management, schedule and impact analysis, and inspection services.

This second amendment will increase the amount of the agreement by $150,000 to add additional field inspection and material testing services during construction to extend the project to close through 2025.

In order to complete the project, additional inspection and testing activities are required such as material testing and special inspection for concrete placement, post tensioning, rebar and anchoring inspection, conducting field inspections, preparing non-compliance reports, and preparing inspection daily reports.

This second amendment will ensure uninterrupted full-time field inspection and material testing services through completion of the Phase 2 construction. This second amendment will increase the amount of the agreement to a total amount of $624,000. The $624,000 contract amount is approximately 2.1% of the $30,090,000 construction contract. This is within the typical range for field inspection and material testing services which can be up to 3.5% of the construction contract.

Additionally, the City Attorney's Office requires a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 from the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services in FY 2024-25.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

Although staff is currently estimating the completion date for construction to be late summer 2025, funding is being requested to cover consultant expenditures through the end of 2025. This is a conservative approach that ensures funding will be available for construction support services in the event of additional delays. An additional $3,040,000 from the 2022 COPs Construction Fund is requested to cover these additional costs and an additional $300,000 appropriation is required from the General Liability Fund for unanticipated litigation services related to the L Street Parking Garage.

Contractors will bill the City on a time and materials basis. Only those funds needed to complete the project will be utilized.

Funding for this project is included in the FY 2023-28 Capital Improvement Plan from 2022 COPs Construction Fund 540 as shown in the table below. Originally, the construction contract and all supporting services were estimated to be completed by October 2024, but due to construction delays, the completion date is now expected to extend through late summer 2025. The $3,040,000 expenditure increase is comprised of additional amendments covering engineering services during construction, construction management, inspection and materials testing services as well as additional City's internal project management costs required to cover the extended construction duration through 2025.

The 2022 COPs Construction Bond (Fund 540) was originally established to provide funding for three projects in the Downtown Livermore Village area including the L Street Garage Project DR586003, Livermore Village Remediation Project 2021-18, and Livermore Village Joint Trench Project 2021-19.

The table below provides a summary of the total funding sources and final expected costs. Due to accrued and projected interest earnings, the 2022 COPs Construction Fund 540 has sufficient funds to cover this requested appropriation of $3,040,000. With this appropriation, the 2022 COP bond proceeds and interest earnings will cover the completion of all three projects.

55 2022 COP Construction Fund 540 Available Funding:

Funding Source
Original 2022 COPs
Budget
Revised 2022 COPs
Budget
Difference
2022 COPs Bond
Proceeds
$40,930,127
$40,930,127

2022 COPs Bond Interest
Earnings
0 $3,041,293

Total 2022 COPs
Funding
$40,930,127
$43,971,420
$3,041,293

2022 COP Construction Fund 540 Projected Expenditures:

Project Name
Original 2022 COPs
Budget
Revised 2022 COPs
Budget
Difference
Livermore Village
Remediation Project
$1,400,000
$518,153
($881,847)
Livermore Village Joint
Trench Project
$1,000,000
$942,669
($57,331)
L Street Garage Project
$38,530,127
$42,509,305
$3,979,178
Total Budget
$40,930,127
$43,970,127
$3,040,000

In addition, the City Attorney's Office requires a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 from the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services in FY 2024-25.

COMMUNITY PILLAR

4: Inclusive & Inviting Spaces & Places

GOAL
3: Continue to implement the Downtown Specific Plan

GUIDING DOCUMENT

Downtown Specific Plan

ATTACHMENTS

1. Site Plan

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - Fifth Amendment to Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP

4. Exhibit B - Second Amendment to Gannett Fleming Inc.

5. Exhibit C - Second Amendment to Consolidated Engineering Laboratories

Prepared by: Farnoush Levers
Assistant City Engineer

56 Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
57 Livermore Village Garage
Si
te Plan
ATTACHMENT 1
58 1 RESOLUTION NO. ________

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION OF $3,040,000 FROM 2022 COP CONSTRUCTION FUND 540 TO FUND PROJECT DR586003, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENTS FOR ADDITIONAL

ENGINEERING SERVICES, CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION

SERVICES DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AUTHORIZING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION OF $300,000 IN THE GENERAL LIABILITY FUND (FUND 700) FOR ADDITIONAL LITIGATION SERVICES IN FY 2024-25
(Livermore Village Parking Garage Construction Project 586003) The Livermore Village (L Street) Parking Garage is currently under construction east of L Street, between Veterans Way and First Street. When completed, the parking garage will be 4 levels and contain 452 parking spaces. For this project, Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP is providing engineering services during construction, Gannett Fleming, Inc. is providing construction management services and Consolidated Engineering Laboratories (CEL) is providing field inspection and material testing services.

Additional engineering, construction management and inspection services during construction are required to manage and support the final construction phase of this project due to the extended duration of activities required to complete the project through 2025.

On December 14, 2021, Council approved an engineering services agreement with Watry Buehler Collaborative (Consultant) in an amount of $1,410,000 to design a parking garage and site improvements and provide engineering services during construction in connection with Livermore Village Parking Garage Construction Project 586003. On May 16, 2022, the City of Livermore (City) and Consultant increased the amount of the agreement by $100,000 to add additional design services for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects and a constructability review of the Phase 2 documents (first amendment). On June 15, 2023, Council approved the second amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $114,000 to add additional design services for the Phase 2 bid package. On June 15, 2023, Council approved the third amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $168,800 to add additional engineering services during construction for Phase 1 and Phase 2. On June 25, 2024, Council approved the fourth amendment which increased the amount of the agreement by $299,000 to add additional engineering services during construction. This fifth amendment will increase the amount of the agreement by $660,000 to add additional engineering services during construction to extend the project to close out through 2025. This fifth amendment will increase the amount of the agreement to a total amount of $2,751,800.

On December 9, 2022, the City entered into an agreement with Consolidated Engineering Laboratories to provide construction inspection, special inspections, and material testing services. On January 6, 2025, the City executed the first amendment which extended the termination date to December 31, 2025. This second amendment will increase the amount of the agreement by $150,000 to add additional field inspection services during construction to extend the project to close out through 2025. This second amendment will increase the amount of the agreement to a total amount of $624,000.

A supplemental appropriation in the amount of $3,040,000 from the 2022 COPs Construction Fund 540 is required to cover the cost of these amendments and additional internal project management costs. In 2022, bond proceeds (2022 COPs Construction Fund 540) in the amount of $40,930,127 were issued for three projects in the Downtown Livermore Village area: L Street Garage, Livermore Village Remediation, and Livermore Village Joint Trench. Interest from these bond proceeds will cover this appropriation. With this appropriation, the bond proceeds and accrued interest will fund the completion of all three projects.

In addition, the City Attorney's Office requires a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 in the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services related to the L Street Garage in FY 2024-25.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that it hereby:

1. Authorizes a supplemental appropriation of $3,040,00 from the 2022 COPs Construction Fund (Fund 540) to fund project DR586003;

2. Authorizes the execution of a fifth amendment to the agreement with Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A and is incorporated by this reference, increasing the amount of the agreement by $660,000 to a total not-to-exceed amount of $2,751,800 for additional engineering services during construction;

3. Authorizes the execution of a second amendment to the agreement with Gannett Fleming Inc., a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B and is incorporated by this reference, increasing the amount of the agreement by $1,250,000 to a total not-to-exceed amount of $3,302,000 for additional construction management services during construction;
60 3 RESOLUTION NO. ________

4. Authorizes the execution of a second amendment to the agreement with Consolidated Engineering Laboratories, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit C and is incorporated by this reference, increasing the amount of the agreement by $150,000 to a total not-to-exceed amount of $624,000 for additional inspection services during construction; and

5. Authorizes a supplemental appropriation of $300,000 in the General Liability Fund (Fund 700) for additional litigation services in FY 2024-25; and

6. Authorizes the City Manager to sign the above amendments and to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution, including approving minor changes to the proposed agreements
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council
Member , the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ /s/ Tara Mazzanti
Deborah L. Elam Tara Mazzanti
City Clerk Senior Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Fifth Amendment to Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP Exhibit B - Second Amendment to Gannett Fleming Inc.

Exhibit C - Second Amendment to Consolidated Engineering Laboratories 61 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 1
Rev. 09/19/23

FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
T
HIS FIFTH AMENDMENT is made and entered into this ___day of ________, 20___, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”), a municipal corporation, and Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP (“Consultant”), a California Corporation.

RE
CITALS
O
n May 16, 2022, City and Consultant amended the Original Agreement to add additional design services for the Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects and a constructability review of the Phase 2 50% construction documents and increase Consultant’s compensation by $100,000. ("First Amendment")
O
n November 29, 2022, City and Consultant amended the Original Agreement and First Amendment to add additional design services for the Phase 2 bid package and increase Consultant’s compensation by $114,000. ("Second Amendment") O
n June 15, 2023, City and Consultant amended the Original Agreement, First Amendment, and Second Amendment to add additional construction engineering support services for Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects and increase Consultant’s compensation by $168,800. (“Third Amendment”)
O
n June 25, 2024, City and Consultant amended the Original Agreement, First Amendment, Second Amendment and Third Amendment to add additional construction support services for Phase 2 and increase the Consultant’s compensation by $299,000. (“Fourth Amendment”)
C
ity and Consultant desire to amend the Original Agreement and First , Second, Third and Fourth Amendment to provide additional engineering services during construction as specified in the Original Agreement by increasing the Consultant’s compensation by $660,000. This is the Fifth amendment to the Original Agreement.

REEMENT
NO
W, THEREFORE, City and Consultant hereby agree that the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. T
he Original Agreement is amended as follows:

A. S
ection 3 of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Description of Services. Consultant shall provide engineering services to design a parking garage and site improvements and provide engineering services during construction in conjunction with Livermore V illage Parking Garage Construction Project 586003 (“Project”), as more particularly set Docusign Envelope ID: 7A9F5CA4-9C3F-4A4E-AD02-3C7B3A014A1D

EXHIBIT A

Page 1 of 6 ends

62 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 2 Rev. 09/19/23
forth in E xhibit “A” to the Original Agreement, Exhibit “A -1” to the First Amendment, Exhibit “A-2” to the Second Amendment, Exhibit “A -3” to the Third Amendment, Exhibit “A-4” to the Fourth Amendment, and Exhibit “A- 5” to this Fifth Amendment (collectively “the Services”).

B. Section 6(a) of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Compensation and Payment. The total compensation payable by City to Consultant for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $ 2,751,800 (“not-to-exceed amount”).

1. The compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit “A” of the Original Agreement SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $1,410,000.

2. The compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit “A -1” of the First Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $100,000.

3. The compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit “A-2” of the Second Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $114,000.

4. The compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit “A -3” of the Third Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $168,800.

5. The compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit “A-4” of the Fourth Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $299,000.

6. The compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit “A -5” of the Fifth Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $660,000.

City shall compensate consultant for the Services rendered at the hourly rates or task amounts set forth in Exhibit “A” to the Original Agreement, Exhibit “A -1” to the First Amendment, Exhibit “A -2” to the second Amendment, Exhibit “A -3” to the Third Amendment, Exhibit “A -4” to the Fourth Amendment, and Exhibit “A-5” to the Fifth Amendment up to the not- to-exceed amount. Except as provided in the body of the agreement, the hourly rates or task amounts are intended to be Consultant’s only compensation for the Services and is inclusive of all costs of labor, licensing, permitting, overhead, and administrative costs, and any -and-all other costs, expenses, and charges incurred by Consultant, its agents, and Docusign Envelope ID: 7A9F5CA4-9C3F-4A4E-AD02-3C7B3A014A1D

EXHIBIT A

Page 2 of 6 ends

63 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 3 Rev. 09/19/23
employees to provide the services.

2. These amendments are prospective and only apply to the S ervices rendered by Consultant after the execution of this Amendment. Unless otherwise stated herein, this Amendment does not relieve the parties of the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement as written and in effect at the time the Services were rendered.

3. Except as amended above, the Original Agreement remains in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: 7A9F5CA4-9C3F-4A4E-AD02-3C7B3A014A1D

EXHIBIT A

Page 3 of 6 ends

64 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 4 Rev. 09/19/23
In concurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the date first written above.

CONSULTANT: Dated:

____________________________ ___________________________ John D Harvey, Principal
Watry Buehler Collaborative, LLP

CITY OF LIVERMORE: Dated:

____________________________ ____________________________ Marianna Marysheva
City Manager

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

___________________________
Deputy/Assistant/Senior/City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

Risk Manager/Analyst

Attachments:

Exhibit A-5

Docusign Envelope ID: 7A9F5CA4-9C3F-4A4E-AD02-3C7B3A014A1D 1/29/2025 | 1:29 PM PST

EXHIBIT A

Page 4 of 6 ends

65 Exhibit A-5
Scope of Work
Fifth Amendment
Livermore Village Parking Garage Construction Project 586003

The City of Livermore has requested the following additional Scope of Work pertaining to the design of ‘L’ Street Parking Structure. The additional design team scope of work is summarized below.

Additional Scope of Work Items.

Bireley Trash Enclosure Additional Water Heater-RFI 311 The City requested to provide a hot water heater at the Bireley Trash Enclosure. The City inspector requested the addition of a water heater since one of the businesses the trash enclosure serves will be a future restaurant.

Coordinating with the City, a dedicated outlet was provided from the parking structure for a future water heater (which will be provided by the future business). Electrical and Architectural drawings were adjusted to provide this addition.

Security Camera Revisions
During Construction, the City requested revise the security cameras from the originally specified Axis to Avigilon cameras. Design team revised the original design to incorporate the requested cameras.

Additional Construction Administration Phase Duration and Site Visits Through June 2025 (Additional Construction Administration Phase)
Due to the increased construction schedule, the Design Team members are to continue to provide additional Construction Administration services from January 1, 2025 through June 30, 2025. These extended services include addressing RFI’s generated by the contractor, reviewing submittals, addressing potential construction issues and defects, and attending virtual construction management meetings for the ‘L’ Street Parking Structure.

(Additional Construction Administration Site Visits)
Members of the Design Team to continue to provide up to weekly site visits and observations to review the current construction progress and discuss upcoming work with Zovich Construction (Contractor) and the project inspector.

The purpose of these site visits and observations is to provide enhanced interaction between the Design Team and Contractor for the purpose of increasing the speed of communication.

The duration of each weekly site visit is anticipated to be 4 hours, and an observations memorandum will be issued to the City and Contractor at the end of each visit. The Design Team will visit the site on a rotating basis. The rotation will be determined by the Design Team and the Contractor will be informed accordingly. To the extent feasible, the Design Team will attempt to maintain a consistent schedule for the duration of the construction phase.

The following is a list of consultants included in the Design Team and the anticipated additional duration of participation for each:

Watry-Buehler (Project Management) 26 weeks
Buehler Engineering (Structural Engineering) 26 weeks
Komorous-Towey Architects 26 weeks
Guttmann & Blaevoet (MEP) 26 weeks
Kier & Wright (Civil) 26 weeks

Based on these on-site observations, the Design Team shall endeavor to guard the City against apparent defects and deficiencies in the permanent work constructed by the Contractor but shall not guarantee the performance of the Contractor. Please note that these additional site visits have been requested in an attempt to facilitate a reduction in the currently projected construction duration. The Design Team is not responsible for any construction related activities, liabilities, or performance.

46 46
46 46
46 Docusign Envelope ID: 7A9F5CA4-9C3F-4A4E-AD02-3C7B3A014A1D

EXHIBIT A

Page 5 of 6 ends

66 The estimated compensation for these services will be on an hourly (time and materials) basis at the design team’s current standard hourly rates. Due to the unforeseen nature of Construction Administration, if required hours exceed the current anticipated workload, the design team will notify the City prior to June 2025. If significant unforeseen construction defects develop, the WBC design team will notify the City of the anticipated design effort needed to correct the noted construction defects, and will wait for approval from the City, prior to taking action. The estimated compensation for these services to be the following:

Bireley Trash Enclosure Additional Water Heater
Watry-Buehler Collaborative ...................................................................................................... $1,500.00 Komorous-Towey Architects ...................................................................................................... $2,000.00 Guttmann & Blaevoet .................................................................................................................. $3,000.00 Total Fee ..................................................................................................................................... $6,500.00

Security Camera Revisions
Watry-Buehler Collaborative ...................................................................................................... $1,500.00 Guttmann & Blaevoet .................................................................................................................. $5,500.00 Total Fee ..................................................................................................................................... $6,500.00

Additional Construction Administration Services and Site Visits (Hourly) Total Fee ................................................................................................................................. $435,956.00

Three-Way Split of Previous Additional Construction Administration Fees Total Fee ................................................................................................................................... $31,044.00

TOTAL FEE FOR FIFTH AMENDMENT ........................................................................ $480,000.00

615,956.00
660,000.00
Docusign Envelope ID: 7A9F5CA4-9C3F-4A4E-AD02-3C7B3A014A1D

EXHIBIT A

Page 6 of 6 ends

67 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 1 Rev. 09/19/23

SECOND AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into this ____ day of ________, 20____, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”) , a municipal corporation, and Gannett Fleming, Inc. (“Consultant”), a Delaware Corporation.

RECITALS

On February 14, 2023, City and Consultant entered into an agreement for Consultant to provide construction management services for the Livermore Village Parking Garage Construction Project 586003. Section 21 of the Original Agreement requires that any modifications to it must be in writing and signed by the parties.

On May 15, 2024 , City and Consultant amended the Original Agreement to add additional services for construction management services for the Livermore Village Parking Garage Construction Project 586003 and increase the total contract amount to $2,052,000 (“First Amendment”).

City and Consultant desire to amend the Original Agreement and First Amendment to provide additional construction management services as specified in the Original Agreement by increasing the Consultant’s compensation by $ 1,250,000. This is the Second amendment to the Original Agreement.

AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, City and Consultant hereby agree tha t the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. The Original Agreement is amended as follows:

A. Section 5 of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Compensation and Payment.
a. The total compensation payable by City to Consultant for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $ 3,302,000 ("not-to- exceed amount").

1. The compensation payable by the City to
Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit A to
the Original Agreement SHALL NOT EXCEED
$952,000.

2. The compensation payable by the City to
Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit A-1
to the First Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED
$1,100,000.

3. The compensation payable by the City to
Docusign Envelope ID: 079D568C-A486-4667-B4F5-9E8E1ACDB680

EXHIBIT B

Page 1 of 3 ends

68 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 2 Rev. 09/19/23
Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit A-1
to the Second Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED
$1,250,000.

City shall compensate Consultant for the Services rendered at the hourly rates or task amounts set forth in Exhibit “A” to the Original Agreement and Exhibit “A-1” to the First Amendment and Second Amendment up to the not- to-exceed amount. Except as provided in the body of the Agreement, the hourly rates or task amounts are intended to be Consultant’s only compensation for the Services and is inclusive of all costs of labor, licensing, permitting, overhead and administrative costs, and any -and-all other costs, expenses, and charges incurred by Consultant, its agents, and employees to provide the Services.

3. Except as amended above, the Original Agreement remains in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: 079D568C-A486-4667-B4F5-9E8E1ACDB680

EXHIBIT B

Page 2 of 3 ends

69 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 3 Rev. 09/19/23
In concurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the date first written above.

CONSULTANT: Dated:

____________________________ ___________________________ Rany Check, Vice President
Gannett Fleming, Inc.

CITY OF LIVERMORE: Dated:

____________________________ ____________________________ Marianna Marysheva
City Manager

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

___________________________
Deputy/Assistant/Senior/City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

Risk Manager/Analyst

Docusign Envelope ID: 079D568C-A486-4667-B4F5-9E8E1ACDB680 1/29/2025 | 1:49 PM PST

EXHIBIT B

Page 3 of 3 ends

70 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 1 Rev. 09/19/23

SECOND AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made and entered into this ____ day of ______, 20___, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”), a municipal corporation, and Quality Assurance Engineering, Inc. dba Consolidated Engineering Laboratories (“Consultant”), a California Corporation.

RECITALS

On December 9 th, 2022, City and Consultant entered into an agreement for Consultant to provide construction inspection, special inspections, and material testing services for the Livermore Village Parking Garage Construction Project 586003. Section 21 of the Original Agreement requires that any modifications to it must be in writing and signed by the parties.

On January 6, 2025, City and Consultant amended the Original Agreement to extend the termination date to December 31, 2025. This was the First amendment to the Original Agreement.

City and Consultant now desire to amend the Original Agreement and First Amendment to increase total compensation from $474,000 to $624 ,000. This is the Second amendment to the Original Agreement.

AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, City and Consultant hereby agree tha t the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. The Original Agreement is amended as follows:

A. Section 5(a) of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Compensation and Payment.
a. The total compensation payable by the City to Consultant for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $624,000 (“not to exceed amount”). City shall compensate Consultant for the Services rendered at the hourly rates, task amounts or travel expenses set forth in Exhibit “A” to the Original Agreement and to the First Amendment up to the not- to-exceed amounts. Except as provided in the body of this Agreement, the hourly rates, task amounts or travel expenses are intended to be Consultant’s only compensation for the Services and is inclusive of all costs or labor, licensing, permitting, overhead and administrative costs, and employees to provide the Services.

2. These amendments are prospective and only apply to the S ervices rendered by Consultant after the execution of this Amendment. Unless otherwise stated herein, this Docusign Envelope ID: A7D79286-1457-4244-9D93-F9851C0E2CB7

EXHIBIT C

Page 1 of 3 ends

71 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 2 Rev. 09/19/23
Amendment does not relieve the parties of the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement as written and in effect at the time the Services were rendered.

3. Except as amended above, the Original Agreement remains in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: A7D79286-1457-4244-9D93-F9851C0E2CB7

EXHIBIT C

Page 2 of 3 ends

72 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 3 Rev. 09/19/23

In concurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the date first written above.

CONSULTANT: Dated:

____________________________ ___________________________ Rob Morse, Senior Vice President
Consolidated Engineering Laboratories

CITY OF LIVERMORE: Dated:

____________________________ ____________________________ Marianna Marysheva
City Manager

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

___________________________
Deputy/Assistant/Senior/City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

Risk Manager/Analyst

Docusign Envelope ID: A7D79286-1457-4244-9D93-F9851C0E2CB7 2/12/2025 | 6:24 AM PST

EXHIBIT C

Page 3 of 3 ends

73 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.7

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution a
uthorizing execution of a first amendment to the agreement with David L.

Gates & Associates, Inc. for
additional
landscape
design and construction support
services for the Flagpole Plaza Project 2022-25, increasing the not-to-exceed contract amount
from $280,528 to $320,528, with a term ending May 1, 2026 .

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution:
1 .

Authorizing the City Manager to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution including approving minor changes to the proposed agreement.

SUMMARY
David L. Gates & Associates worked on the preliminary and final design of the Flagpole Plaza Project.

Design elements include the replacement of the existing bluestone with new stamped concrete, along with new hardscaped designated outdoor dining areas and the restoration of a public gathering space.

The redesigned plaza will be fully ADA-compliant and accessible to all. Planned upgrades include enhanced lighting, featuring string lights to create a warm and inviting ambiance, as well as new landscaping. Additionally, advanced security cameras will be installed to bolster public safety at both the Flagpole Plaza and Livermorium Plaza. This project aims to enhance both the safety and aesthetics of a prominent city intersection, transforming it into a vibrant and functional space for the community.

This first amendment with David L. Gates & Associates covers required additional services such as designing proposed layouts for outdoor dining areas, providing block diagrams, including cabling requirements and typical device connections, and services during construction specifically for installing the new advanced security cameras and reconnecting the cameras to the data systems. This first 74 amendment increases the contract amount from $280,528 to $320,528.

DISCUSSION
On February 27, 2024, the City entered into an agreement with David L. Gates & Associates to provide landscape design services for the reconstruction of the Flagpole Plaza. The Plaza was originally designed with a large grass area serving as a public gathering space. However, following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the area was repurposed for outdoor dining. During this time, the grass was removed and replaced with decomposed granite to better accommodate dining needs.

David L. Gates & Associates has since developed design plans for Flagpole Plaza with the following key goals: restoring the public gathering space, strengthening the connections between the flagpole, the large existing fountain, and the plaza, and retaining opportunities for outdoor dining in alignment with the Downtown Outdoor Dining Program. The design also aims to maintain east-west and north-south pedestrian connections through the site while incorporating new landscaping, lighting, and advanced security cameras.

Required additional services, unforeseen at the time of original contract, include the following:

Construction services for the installation of advanced security cameras and reconnection to data systems.

Preparation of block diagrams, including cabling requirements and typical device connections.

Furniture layout plans for Flagpole Plaza businesses' outdoor dining areas.

Creation of additional exhibits and graphics.

Construction support and attendance at additional meetings with City staff and business owners.

The first amendment in the amount of $40,000 increases the total amount of the agreement from $280,528 to $320,528.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The Flagpole Plaza Project 2022-25 budget is currently $2.1 million: $1.7 million from Gas Taxes Fund 560 and $400,000 from Measure BB-Local Streets and Roads Fund 552. This budget covers this first amendment and other design, management, and construction activities in FY 2024-25. An additional $1.36 million is required in FY 2025-26 to cover remaining construction, change orders, inspection, materials testing, engineering design services during construction, and project management. This additional funding will be requested as part of the 2025-2030 Capital Improvement Plan that will come to Council for approval in June 2025. This additional funding will come from Measure B - Bike/Pedestrian Fund 831 and Measure B - Local Streets and Roads Fund 832.

COMMUNITY PILLAR

4: Inclusive & Inviting Spaces & Places

GOAL

3: Continue to implement the Downtown Specific Plan

ATTACHMENTS
75 1. Project Location

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - First Amendment

Prepared by: Joel Waxdeck
City Engineer

LOCATION MAP

PROJECT SITE
ATTACHMENT 1
77 1 RESOLUTION NO. ________

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A FIRST

AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH DAVID L. GATES & ASSOCIATES FOR ADDITIONAL

LANDSCAPE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES
FOR THE FLAGPOLE PLAZA PROJECT 2022-25, INCREASING THE
NOT-TO-EXCEED CONTRACT AMOUNT FROM $280,528 TO $320,528, WITH A TERM ENDING MAY 1, 2026
On February 27, 2024, the City entered into an agreement with David L. Gates & Associates to provide landscape design services for the Flagpole Plaza. The Plaza was originally designed with a large grass area serving as a public gathering space. However, following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the area was repurposed for outdoor dining. During this time, the grass was removed and replaced with decomposed granite to better accommodate dining needs.

Gates & Associates has since developed a reconstruction design for Flagpole Plaza with the following key goals: restoring the public gathering space, strengthening the connections between the flagpole, the large existing fountain, and the plaza, and retaining opportunities for outdoor dining in alignment with the Downtown Outdoor Dining Program.

The design also aims to maintain east-west and north-south pedestrian connections through the site while incorporating new landscaping, lighting, and advanced security cameras.

The First Amendment covers additional construction services, including services during the installation of the advanced security cameras and reconnection to data systems, preparation of block diagrams, cabling and device connections. Gates & Associates will also provide furniture layout plans for the Flagpole Plaza businesses’ outdoor dining areas, create additional exhibits, attend additional meetings with City staff and business owners. This First Amendment in the amount of $40,000 increases the total amount of the professional services agreement from $280,528 to $320,528.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that it hereby:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute a First Amendment to the Agreement with David L. Gates & Associates, Inc., attached hereto as Exhibit A, for additional landscape design and construction support services for the Flagpole Plaza Project 2022-25, increasing the not-to-exceed contract amount from $280,528 to $320,528; and

2. Authorizes the City Manager to take whatever actions are necessary and appropriate to carry out the purpose and intent of this resolution including approving minor changes to the proposed agreement.
78 2 RESOLUTION NO. ________
On motion of Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ______________________, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ /s/ Tara Mazzanti
Deborah L. Elam Tara Mazzanti
City Clerk Senior Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A - First Amendment to Agreement with David L. Gates & Associates 79 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement
Rev. 09/19/23

FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
T
HIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into this ____ day of ________, 2025, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”), a municipal corporation, and David L. Gates & Associates, Inc. (“Consultant”), a California corporation.

RE
CITALS
On
February 27, 2024, City and Consultant entered into an agreement for Consultant to provide professional landscape design services to City (“Original Agreement”). Section 21 of the Original Agreement requires that any modifications to it must be in writing and signed by the parties.

C
ity and Consultant desire to amend the Original Agreement to add additional design services and increase compensation. This is the first amendment to the Original Agreement.

REEMENT
NO
W, THEREFORE, City and Consultant hereby agree that the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. T
he Original Agreement is amended as follows:

A. S
ection 3 of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Description of Services Consultant shall provide professional design services as more particularly set forth in “Exhibit A” to the Original Agreement and “Exhibit A-1” to the First Amendment.

B. S
ection 5 of the Original Agreement is amended to read as follows:

Compensation and Payment
(a
) The total compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $3 20,528 (“not-to-exceed” amount).

1. T
he compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit A to the Original Agreement SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $280,528.

2. T
he compensation payable by the City to the Consultant for the Services required by Exhibit A -1 to the First Amendment SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $40,000.

Docusign Envelope ID: 70C23FCC-DFA4-4C37-8E9B-EE967E0861DF

EXHIBIT A

Page 1 of 5 ends

80 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement
Rev. 09/19/23
Except as provided in the body of this Agreement, the hourly rates, task amounts, or travel expenses are intended to be Consultant’s only compensation for the S ervices and is inclusive of all costs of labor, licensing, permitting, overhead and administrative costs, and any -and- all other costs, expenses, and charges incurred by Consultant, its agents, and employees to provide the Services.

2. Th
ese amendments are prospective and only apply to the S ervices rendered by Consultant after the execution of this Amendment. Unless otherwise stated herein, this Amendment does not relieve the parties of the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement as written and in effect at the time the Services were rendered.

3. E
xcept as amended above, the Original Agreement remains in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: 70C23FCC-DFA4-4C37-8E9B-EE967E0861DF

EXHIBIT A

Page 2 of 5 ends

81 Amendment - Professional Services Agreement
Rev. 09/19/23
I
n concurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the date first written above.

CO
NSULTANT: Dated:
___
_________________________ ___________________________
Casey Case
Managing Partner
C
ITY OF LIVERMORE: Dated:
___
_________________________ ____________________________
Marianna Marysheva
City Manager
APPR
OVED AS TO FORM:
___
________________________
Deputy/Assistant/Senior/City Attorney
APPR
OVED AS TO INSURANCE:

Risk Manager/Analyst
A
ttachments:

Exhibit A-1 Scope of Services
Docusign Envelope ID: 70C23FCC-DFA4-4C37-8E9B-EE967E0861DF 1/28/2025 | 9:43 AM PST

EXHIBIT A

Page 3 of 5 ends

82 EXHIBIT A-1

ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES

FIRST AMENDMENT

Date: January 7, 2025
Project: Flagpole Plaza and Downtown Streetscape (C No. 2022-25) Client: City of Livermore

SCOPE OF SERVICES:

David L. Gates & Associates will coordinate with the City to provide additional services for updating security cameras at Livermorium Plaza site, layout plan of outdoor dining zones, additional construction support for unforeseen/potential utility conflicts, and downtown streetscape improvements as listed below. David L. Gates & Associates will proceed with the services upon the approval of the Additional Work Authorization. Work for Item 1 and 2 will be completed within 10 working days from the contract execution date.

1. Provide an additional electrical plan sheet to include security camera update at Livermorium Plaza:
$7,500

· Identify existing pathways for reuse and existing cameras to be removed. · Provide new cameras and reconnect to data systems.
· Provide block diagrams including typical cabling requirements and typical device connections.
· Security camera – Design of camera and wiring for IP-based camera system; specify make/model of camera based on City standards. · Additional security camera coordination as needed.

2. Provide a layout plan of tables/chairs arrangement for the outdoor dining zones. $1,400

3. Additional construction support: $25,940

· Additional utility agency meetings as required.
· Attendance of site meetings as required
· Coordination with City, team and contractors
· Respond to RFIs of unforeseen utility conflicts and update plans/ASIs

Docusign Envelope ID: 70C23FCC-DFA4-4C37-8E9B-EE967E0861DF

EXHIBIT A

Page 4 of 5 ends

83 4. Downtown Streetscape Improvements $5,160

· Additional site meetings as required.
· Additional graphics and exhibits as required.

TOTAL FEE FOR WORK: $40,000

Docusign Envelope ID: 70C23FCC-DFA4-4C37-8E9B-EE967E0861DF

EXHIBIT A

Page 5 of 5 ends

84 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.8

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with SVA Architects Inc., in an amount not-to-exceed $553,000 and a term ending April 30, 2028, to provide design and construction support services for the Fleet Shop Expansion Project 2022-12 at the Maintenance Service Center.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

SUMMARY
The Fleet Shop Expansion Project involves expanding the footprint of the fleet services building on the north side to provide City of Livermore (City) fleet services staff with adequate space to complete their duties while working on large fleet vehicles and receive parts in a safe, secure and efficient manner.

Attachment 1 shows the location of the fleet services building at the Maintenance Service Center. This agreement with SVA Architects Inc, in an amount not to exceed $553,000, provides engineering services for the expansion and modernization of the fleet services building and includes site survey, geotechnical engineering investigation, permitting, architectural, civil, structural, mechanical, electrical and plumbing design, and engineering services during construction support.

DISCUSSION
The fleet services staff currently do not have adequate workspace to service the increasing number of large fleet vehicles in a safe and efficient manner, specifically the Fire Department’s new tractor drawn aerial apparatus. Expanding the main structure on the north side of the building by approximately 3,000 square feet will allow for increased safe zones within the building where fleet services staff can complete tasks with an adequate separation from potentially dangerous equipment as well as allow staff to perform their duties in a protected area without the threat of inclement weather. The addition will be two-stories with (4) service bays below and warehouse/storage above. The security of the building will also be improved as the bay doors cannot currently be closed when large vehicles are parked in the shop for 85 repair. The expansion of the main building will allow for the fleet parts receiving area to be expanded.

The safety and security of the shop will be enhanced by eliminating foot traffic of vendors and delivery personnel into the center of the fleet shop. Vehicle lifts will be included within the new expanded area and a new lift/elevator to reach the second floor. The project also includes the modernization and expansion of existing spaces within the building including restrooms, locker rooms, office space and workstations along with HVAC and exhaust ventilation system improvements.

In 2024, City staff issued a request for proposals for various City capital improvement projects and SVA Architects Inc. was selected as the most qualified candidate for the Fleet Shop Expansion Project after internal evaluations of the proposals received. The total fee of $553,000 is approximately 14.5% of the total estimated construction cost of $3,800,000 which is typical for design, bidding and construction support services of this scale which can be up to 20% of the construction contract.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The budget for the Fleet Shop Expansion Project in the current 2023-28 five-year Capital Improvement Plan includes $400,000 in General Funds in FY 2024-25. This budget will cover initial design activities for the project covered under this Agreement and other staff project management costs. An additional $5.4 million will be required to complete the project and cover remaining engineering services under this agreement, permit fees, construction, change orders, project management, construction management, inspection, and materials testing. This additional funding will be requested as part of the 2025-30 Capital Improvement Plan that will come to Council for approval in June 2025. General Funds (Fund 811) will be requested for these additional expenditures.

COMMUNITY PILLAR

5: A City That Works

GOAL

14: Develop, operate, and maintain the City's infrastructure

ATTACHMENTS

1. Vicinity Map

2. Resolution

3. Exhibit A - Agreement

Prepared by: Jarrett Rasmussen
Associate Civil Engineer

86 Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
87 ATTACHMENT 1
88 1 RESOLUTION NO. ________

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
WITH SVA ARCHITECTS INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED
$553,000 AND A TERM ENDING APRIL 30, 2028, TO PROVIDE

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES FOR THE
FLEET SHOP EXPANSION PROJECT 2022-12 AT THE MAINTENANCE

SERVICE CENTER
The Fleet Shop Expansion Project involves expanding the footprint of the fleet services building on the north side to provide City fleet services staff with adequate space to complete their duties while working on large fleet vehicles and receive parts in a safe, secure and efficient manner.

This agreement with SVA Architects Inc, in an amount not-to-exceed $553,000, provides engineering services for the expansion and modernization of the fleet services building and includes site survey, geotechnical engineering investigation, permitting, architectural, civil, structural mechanical, electrical and plumbing design, and engineering services during construction support.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that the City Council:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute an Engineering Services Agreement with SVA Architects Inc., attached hereto as Exhibit A, in an amount not-to- exceed $553,000 and a term ending April 30, 2028, to provide design and construction support services for the Fleet Shop Expansion Project No. 2022-12.

On motion of Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ______________________, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
89 2 RESOLUTION NO. ________
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ /s/ Tara Mazzanti
Deborah L. Elam Tara Mazzanti
City Clerk Senior Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A- Agreement with SVA Architects Inc.
90 ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 2025, (“Effective Date”) by and between the Cit y of Livermore, a municipal corporation (“City”), and SVA Architects Inc., a California Corporation (“Consultant”).

RECITALS
City requires engi neering services to desi gn and provide contract administration for the expansion and modernization of the Fleet Shop Services building at the Maintenance Service Center.

Consultant warrants it possesses the distinct professional skills, qualifications, experience, and resources nece ssary to timely perform the services described in this Agreement. Consultant acknowledges City has relied upon these warranties to retain Consultant.

AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Consultant hereby agree that the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. Retention as Consultant. City hereby retains Consultant, and Consultant hereby accepts such engagement, to perform the services described in Section 3 below subject to the terms and conditions in this Agreement.

2. Relationship of Parties – Independent Contractors. The relationship of the parties shall be that of independent contractors. Consultant and its employees are not City officers or employees. Consultant is responsible for the supervision and management of its employees, including any workers compensation insurance, withholding taxes, unemployment insurance, and any other employer obligations associated with the delivery of the services contemplated by this Agreement.

3. Description of Services. Consultant shall provide engineering services to design and provide contract administration for an approximately 3,000 square foot expansion and modernization of the Fleet Shop Services building at the Maintenance Service Center in conjunction with the Fleet Shop Expansion Project No. 2022-12, (“Project”), as more particularly set forth in Exhibit "A" (collectively “the Services”).

4. Consultant Responsibilities. Consultant shall:
(a) Consultant shall investigate and verify all existing site conditions for the Project and take them into account when preparing the Project’s design even when "As Built" or "Record Drawings" are used by Consultant.
(b) Consultant shall review and respond to construction submittals and shop drawings within fourteen (14) calendar days following their receipt by Consultant; Engi
neering Services Page 1 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 1 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
91 requests for information with comments noted thereon shall be reviewed and responded to within seven (7) working days following their receipt by the Consultant. (c) Diligently perform the Services in a manner commensurate with industry, professional, and community standards;
(d) Provide the resources necessary to complete the Services in a timely manner;
(e) Obtain a business license from the City of Livermore, and keep it in effect for the term of this Agreement;
(f) Obtain and keep in effect all necessary licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance, and approvals legally and professionally required for Consultant to practice its profession and to provide the Services;
(g) Comply with all laws in effect that are related to Consultant and the Services;
(h) Coordinate the Services with Jarrett Rasmussen (“Project Manager ”), or such other person designated as the Project Manager by City; (i) Be available to the Project Manager, and other parties referred to Consultant by the Project Manager, to answer questions or inquiries related to the Services;
(j) Only invoice City for the Services rendered. Consultant’s invoice shall be in writing and describe the Services performed for the payment requested. Consultant shall not submit an invoice to City more frequently than once a month; (k) Keep and maintain invoices and records related to the Services in an organized manner. At a minimum, the records must be kept for at least 3 years from the date of final payment to Consultant and must include time sheets, work progress reports, and other documentation to adequately explain all the Services invoiced for payment.

Consultant shall make the invoices and records immediately available to City upon delivery of a written request to examine, audit, or copy them at City’s place of business during normal business hours. Consultant shall give City 30 calendar-days’ written notice prior to destroying the invoices and records, and allow City an opportunity to take possession. If City wants them, Consultant and City shall coordinate their delivery to City in the most efficient manner possible;
(l) Prepare and submit a written report to the Project Manager, with each invoice and when requested in writing by the Project Manager, that identifies the Services completed and in progress, the charges incurred to date, and the anticipated cost to complete the remaining Services; and,
E
ngineering Services Page 2 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 2 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
92 (m) Consultant shall correct, at its own expense, all errors in the Services.

Should Consultant fail to make such correction in a timely manner, City may make the correction and charge the cost thereof to Consultant.
(n) Consultant’s services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, and all amendments thereto, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA.

5. Compensation and Payment.
(a) The total compensation payable by City to Consultant for the Services SHALL NOT EXCEED the sum of $553,000 ("not-to-exceed amount"). City shall compensate Consultant for the Services rendered at the hourly rates or task amounts set forth in Exhibit “A” up to the not-to-exceed amount. Except as provided in the body of this Agreement, the hourly rates or task amounts are intended to be Consultant’s only compensation for the Services and is inclusive of all costs of labor, licensing, permitting, travel expenses, overhead and administrative costs, and any-and-all other costs, expenses, and charges incurred by Consultant, its agents, and employees to provide the Services.
(b) City shall pay Consultant no later than 30 days after City receives a written invoice from Consultant and verifies the Services were performed for the payment requested.

6. Term. The term of this Agreement commences on the Effective Date and terminates upon the depletion of funds or April 30, 2028, whichever occurs first.

7. Termination by City. City may terminate any portion or all of the Services by giving Consultant at least 30 calendar-days written notice. Upon receipt of a termination notice, Consultant shall immediately stop all work in progress on the Services except where necessary to preserve the benefit of the work, and assemble the work on the Services for delivery to City on the termination date. All compensation for Services performed prior to the termination date shall be payable to Consultant in accordance with Section 5.

8. Ownership of Documents. All drawings, designs, data, photographs, reports and any and every other types of items prepared or obtained by Consultant in the performance of the Services under this Agreement shall be the property of the City and Consultant shall deliver them to City upon demand. The Consultant shall assume no responsibility for the unintended use by others of any such documents, information, or materials on project(s) which are not related to the scope of the Services described under this Agreement.

Engi
neering Services Page 3 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 3 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
93 9. Copyright and Right of Use. All items created by Consultant for City under this Agreement are works made for hire, and Consultant shall give City the copyright and all intellectual property rights to all items developed, prepared, and delivered as part of the Services. Consultant agrees that all aspects of the Services and items created thereby will be original works of creation and will not use, in whole or in part, any work created by any other party, except when expressly disclosed by Consultant to City and Consultant obtains a license to such items for the benefit of City. All licenses must be perpetual, world-wide, non-exclusive, and royalty free sufficient in scope to permit City’s full use and enjoyment of its ownership rights in the items created by the Services.

10. Confidentiality. Consultant shall not disclose any confidential or proprietary information received from City to anyone except Consultant’s employees who require access to the information to perform the Services. This obligation shall survive termination and remain in full force and effect until the information, and any copies thereof, are destroyed or returned to City.

11. Indemnity and Defense.
(a) Definitions. When used in this “Indemnity and Defense” section, these terms have the following meaning:
(1) “City,” means the City, its elected officials, officers, directors, employees, agents, or designated volunteers.
(2) “Design Professional,” means licensed architects, licensed landscape architects, registered professional engineers, professional land surveyors and the business entities which offer such services in accordance with the provisions of the California Business and Professions Code listed at California Civil Code, section 2782.8, upon which Consultant relies to meet the obligations of, or perform work pursuant to, this Agreement.
(3) “Non-Design Professional,” means any person or entity upon which Consultant relies to meet the obligations of, or perform work pursuant to, this Agreement who or which is not a Design Professional.
(4) “Loss,” or “Losses,” mean all claim for or actual loss, liability, damage, cost, and expense including but not limited to reasonable attorney, consultant and expert fees, and court costs arising out of or in connection with Consultant’s obligation or work to perform this Agreement including the City’s active or passive negligence, except for such Loss arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. (b) Non-Design Professional Services. Consultant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from and against any alleged Loss arising out of, pertaining to, or relating to, the services of any Non-Design Professional.

Engineering Services Page 4 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 4 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
94 (c) Design Professional Services. For an alleged Loss that solely arises out of, pertains to, or relates to, the services of a Design Professional, Consultant shall defend and indemnify the City solely for such Losses due to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Design Professional(s) as allowed by application of California law, including California Civil Code, section 2782.8, as written on the effective date of this Agreement and according to applicable judicial interpretations. (d) Mixed Services. If an alleged Loss arises out of, pertains to, or relates to both the services of a Design Professional and a Non-Design Professional, Consultant shall defend City against the claimed Loss and shall indemnify and hold harmless City from all Losses alleged against the Non-Design Professional combined with any Losses allegedly due to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of any Design Professional.

12. Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain insurance during the term of this Agreement in the amounts and under the terms set forth in Exhibit “B” against claims that may arise from or in connection with this Agreement and performance of the Services.

Upon reasonable written notice, Consultant shall comply with any changes in the amounts and terms of insurance as may be required from time-to-time by City’s Risk Manager.

13. Acceptance of Final Payment. Consultant’s acceptance of final payment will release City from any-and-all claims and liabilities for compensation under this Agreement.

14. Acceptance of Work. City’s acceptance of, or payment to Consultant for, the Services does not release Consultant from its responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or competency of the Services, nor do the actions constitute an assumption of Consultant’s responsibility or liability by City for any defect or error in the Services.

15. Conflict of Interest. Consultant represents that no City employee or official has a financial interest in Consultant. Consultant shall not offer, encourage, or accept any financial interest in any part of Consultant's business by or from a City employee or official during the term of this Agreement or as a result of being awarded this Agreement. If any of the Services are paid by reimbursement from an agreement between City and a private party, Consultant represents that it has not performed any work for that private party during the 12-month period prior to the execution of this Agreement, and that it shall not negotiate, offer or accept any contract for services from that party during the term of this Agreement.

16. Economic Disclosure. Consultant shall comply with City’s local conflict of interest code and the Political Reform Act, and prepare and file an economic disclosure statement if the Services involve making, or participation in making, decisions which may have a material effect on the Consultants’ financial interest. While it is Consultant’s sole responsibility to evaluate its conflicts of interest, the Consultant nevertheless agrees to prepare and file an economic disclosure statement if requested by City.

Engineering Services Page 5 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 5 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
95 17. Non-Exclusive Agreement. This is a non-exclusive agreement. City reserves the right to provide, and to retain other consultants to provide, services that are the same or similar to the Services described in this Agreement.

18. No Assignment. Consultant shall not assign or subcontract any of the Services without City’s prior written consent. For the purposes of this section, a change of fifty- percent or more in the ownership or control of Consultant constitutes an assignment.

19. Entire Agreement; Modification. This Agreement supersedes all other agreements, whether oral or written, between the parties with respect to the Services.

Any modification to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by both parties. In the event the original of this Agreement is lost or destroyed, an archival copy maintained by City can be used in place of the original for all purposes with the same effect as if it was the original.

20. Remedies. All remedies permitted or available under this Agreement, or at law or in equity, are cumulative and alternative, and the invocation of a right or remedy will not be construed to waive or elect a remedy with respect to any other available right or remedy. As a condition precedent to commencing legal action involving a claim or dispute against City arising from this Agreement, the Consultant must present a written claim to City in accordance with Chapter 3.42 of the Livermore Municipal Code.

21. Construction of Language. The terms and conditions in this Agreement have been arrived at through negotiation and each party had a full and fair opportunity to review and revise this Agreement with legal counsel. Any ambiguity in this Agreement will not be resolved against either party as the drafting party. In the event of an inconsistency or conflict between the language in the body of the Agreement and an attachment hereto, the language in the body of the Agreement controls.

22. Notice. Notices under this Agreement must be delivered to the addresses below by deposit in the United States mail or by overnight delivery service, with postage prepaid and delivery confirmation:

TO
CITY: Attention: City Engineer
CC: Project Manager
City Administration Building
City of Livermore
1052 S. Livermore Avenue
Livermore, California 94550
TO CONSULTANT: Attention: Nathan Herrero, AIA Principal SVA Architects, Inc.
7901 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 100
Pleasanton, CA 94588
Engineering Services Page 6 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 6 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
96 23. Waiver. Failure to insist upon the strict performance of any term or conditions in this Agreement, no matter how long the failure continues, is not a waiver of the term or condition and does not bar the right to subsequently demand strict performance. To be effective, a waiver must be in writing and signed by the non-breaching party.

24. Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction determines a provision in this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will nevertheless continue in full force and effect without being impaired in any way.

25. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterpart by delivering a facsimile or secure electronic copy of the signed agreement to the other party, followed by delivery of the original documents bearing the original signatures. However, failure to deliver the original documents does not affect the enforceability of this Agreement.

26. Governing Law. This Agreement is governed by California law. Consultant consents to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the state and federal courts of Alameda County, California.
****************************************************
***********************************************
Signatures and Attachment List on the Next Page
Engin
eering Services Page 7 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 7 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
97 In concurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement, effective on the date first written above.

CONSUL
TANT: Dated:

By: Robert Simons
Title: Partner
CITY
OF LIVERMORE: Dated:

Marianna Marysheva
City Manager

APPROVED
AS TO FORM:

Deputy/Assistant/City Attorney
APPROVED AS TO INSURANCE:

Risk M
anager/Analyst
Att
achments:

Exhibit A – Scope of Work
Exhibit B – Insurance Requirements
Engi
neering Services Page 8 of 8
Rev. 04/16/2024
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338 1/15/2025 | 7:15 PM PST

Page 8 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
98 Santa Ana + Pleasanton + San Diego + Davis SVA Architects, Inc. 7901 Stoneridge Dr, Suite 100
Pleasanton, CA 94588
T 510.267.3180

www.sva-architects.com

EXHIBIT "A"
Fleet Shop Expansion
(City Project No. 2022-12)

This Letter of Understanding (the “LOU”) shall serve as confirmation between The City of Livermore (“Client”) and SVA Architects, Inc. (“Consultant”) of our mutual understanding of the work to be performed for the Livermore Fleet Shop Expansion Project No. 2022-12 (“Project").

I. Projection Description
Project consists of the expansion and modernization of the Fleet Shop Services building at the Maintenance Service Center. The work will include:

A. An approximately 3,000 SF addition to the north side of the building – the addition will be two-stories with (4) service bays below and warehouse/storage above. Vehicle lifts will be included within the new area as required and connections provided for their operation.

B. Lift/Elevator to reach 2nd floor.

C. Bridge Crane for the expansion service bays.

D. Modernization and expansion of existing spaces within the building – restrooms, locker rooms, office space and workstations. SVA will indicate location of new workstations or furnishings as selected by the City.

E. HVAC Improvements, including ceiling fans.

F. Site Work (paving) and utilities as required to support expanded footprint, including potential utility relocation from below new building footprint.

G. Seismic Design of Storage Racks.

H. CASp Review
I. Overhead expansion of fluids, compressed air, and lubricant dispensers.

J. Exhaust v entilation system.

K. MEP Systems, including electrical and lighting updates within the modernized areas. Full replacement of in-building utilities is NOT included – solely replacement as required to support the updates.

L. Wet utility relocations as required by expansion.

The following services are included in our proposal:

1. Architectural, structural, civil and MEP engineering.

2. Geotechnical engineering for design phase (listed as a separate cost in fee schedule in section III).

Geotechnical engineer will take borings for expansion and prepare geotechnical report including grading and foundation recommendations for addition.

3. Topographic survey for project area (limited to the immediate vicinity of the project area only – listed separately in the fee schedule in section III).

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 9 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
99 City of Livermore
Fleet Shop Expansion Project
Revised December 19, 2024

Page 2 ends

4. Cost Estimating – Two cost estimates at SD/DD and two at Construction Documents (4 total). First SD estimate will be a high-level budget number, second DD estimate will be more detailed. During CD, estimates will be updated at 60% and 100% stages.

5. CASp Review – Consultant will provide review of the existing building during the design phase as well as review of the construction documents to ensure the new improvements meet all accessibility requirements.

6. Erosion Control Plan - SWPPP not required for work as site disturbance will be less than 1 acre.

7. Title 24 Energy Calculations for impacted areas.

The following services are not included in our proposal:

1. Geotechnical services during construction (testing, etc.).

2. Commissioning services (not required for project size of 3,000 SF).

3. Fire Sprinkler Design (deferred approval item by contractor). Reference guide specifications will be provided for fire sprinkler design.

4. Structural improvement to existing structure not impacted by addition (no retrofit work).

II. Project Schedule
Our proposed project schedule is as follows –
Schematic Design – February 2025
Design Development – April 2025
Prepare Cost Estimate from DD Set – by mid-May 2025
Construction Documents – May 2025 – July 2025
Permitting – August/Sept. 2025
Bidding – Oct/November 2025
Construction – December 2025 – April 2027

III. Compensation

A. The Client agrees to compensate Architect, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the amounts per the table below:

Discipline Amount ($)
Design Services (Architecture, Civil, Structural, MEP) $408,000 FF&E (Furniture) Design Services $15,000
Cost Estimate (2 DD Phase / 2 CD Phase) $22,000
Survey $12,500
CASp Review $13,000
Geotechnical Engineering $27,000
Reimbursable Allowance $5,500
Subtotal $503,000
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 10 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
100
City of Livermore
Fleet Shop Expansion Project
Revised December 19, 2024

Page 3 ends

As-Directed Additional Services (10%) $50,000
Total $553,000
B. Payment to SVA will be made monthly in the proportion to services performed.

C. Reimbursement for any direct expenses will be at 1.10 times the actual expense. Reimbursable expenses will include, but not be limited to, printing and reproduction (for client’s use only – SVA’s in- house printing is excluded) and any delivery or messenger services required.

D. See attachment for proposed hourly rates for SVA and its consulting engineers.

IV. Scope of Services
Task 1.0 - Project Management and Meetings
Project Management:

Consultant shall be responsible for project management activities throughout the life of the project including but not limited to planning, entitlement, design, advertisement, and construction. Scope of activities includes but not limited to scheduling meetings, managing project schedule, tracking action items, providing monthly progress letter with invoices, field reviews and preparing all submissions for the City of Livermore.

Meetings:

SVA assumes bi-weekly project meetings for the duration of the project (16 meetings assumed during design and permitting phases). For each meeting, we will prepare meeting agenda and meeting minutes to document key discussion issues, action items, and decisions made.

Consultant will maintain a Decision Log to track the impact of decisions made on design, cost, construction cost, and project schedule.

Consultant responsibilities include, but not limited to:
• Progress letter report with each invoice.
• Meeting agenda, presentation material, and minutes.
• Updated Project Schedule.
• Coordination with outside consultants and external agencies as required.

Task 2.0 – Program needs/Schematic Design
SVA will evaluate program needs and prepare schematic and design development plans and cost estimates. SVA will identify stakeholders, collect project requirements, provide alternatives, and hold pre-application meetings with the division of Community Development.

Consultant deliverables for task 2.0:
• 50% Schematic plans (initial upfront estimate provided). Shall include architectural, civil, structural and MEP drawings at schematic level and basis of design/report. • 100% Schematic plans and cost estimates. Shall include architectural, civil, structural and MEP drawings at schematic level and basis of design/report.

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 11 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
101
City of Livermore
Fleet Shop Expansion Project
Revised December 19, 2024

Page 4 ends

Task 3.0 - Project Entitlement/Design Development
Consultant will process entitlement applications for projects through the City of Livermore process. Entitlement will include coordination with various departments and divisions in the City, addressing requirements, and guiding the project through the public approval process. Responsibilities include, but not limited to:
• Submit Complete Planning Commission (PC) applications and present at Planning Commission meeting and subsequent City Council meeting.
• Incorporate /address all of City comments including those comments related to the building permit planning commission applications. City shall pay for Building Permit and standard City processing/entitlement fees.

Consultant deliverables for task 3.0:
• 50% design development plans for architectural, civil, structural, electrical, utility trench, mechanical and plumbing drawings.
• 90% design development plans for architectural, civil, structural, electrical, utility trench, mechanical and plumbing drawings.
• 100% design development plans and cost estimates for architectural, civil, structural, electrical, utility trench, mechanical and plumbing drawings.
• 100% design development technical specifications
• Civil Topographic needed for site work design

Task 4.0 – Construction Documents
SVA will prepare construction documents for the purpose of advertising and construction. The deliverables will include specifications, plans, estimates at three distinct milestones. The contract documents shall comply with the latest City standards, codes, and best practices. Tasks include, but not limited to:
• Preparation of Construction Documents with plans/specification and cost estimates. Consultant to use City’s standard CSI boilerplate and general/technical CSI specifications. Consultant shall submit construction documents (Specs and plans) at three milestones for review. Cost estimates will only be provided at two milestones as noted.
o City will provide template for Division 0 & 1 (Front End) and SVA will provide assistance with completing these sections and setting the bid schedule. SVA will prepare the technical specifications and material specifications.
o Consultant s
hall provide specifications for all materials in project. o Provide independent construction cost estimates by sub consultant at 60% and 100% milestones. o Meet C3 regulatory requirements through stormwater analysis and treatment. o Provide a list of materials with long lead items, their submittals, inspection requirements, testing requirements, required spare parts, manuals, and potential special training. o Provide any special contractor qualifications.

• Incorporate or address City’s comments for each design submittal including City’s formal conditions of approval for project.
• Submit Building Permit application with wet-stamped drawings including Title 24 drawings and all CAL Green mandatory requirements adopted by the City.
• All construction drawings will be prepared in either Revit or AutoCAD format depending on discipline and include at a minimum demolition, architectural, civil with NPDES calculations, structural, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, data and communication.

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 12 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
102
City of Livermore
Fleet Shop Expansion Project
Revised December 19, 2024

Page 5 ends

• Address all comments received from permit reviews and coordinate with City building department throughout building permit process.
• Incorporate fire/life/safety requirements into building design. • Provide a list of any sole source items and respective vendors.

Consultant Deliverables for Task 4.0:
• 60% Construction Documents and Cost Estimates. Includes architectural, civil, structural, MEP drawings. • 90% Construction Documents (no estimate update at this phase). Includes architectural, civil, structural, MEP drawings.
• 100% Construction Documents and Cost Estimates. Includes architectural, civil, structural, MEP drawings.
• Additional submittals will be provided as required to obtain building permit.

Task 5.0 Bidding Support
SVA shall provide bidding support during advertisement. Responsibilities include, but not limited to:
• Attend up to (2) pre-bidding walk through meeting.
• Consultant to prepare addendum as needed.
• Respond to bidder request for information (RFI).
• Assist in reviewing bids if necessary, during the bidding process. • City will advertise and bid the project.
• Prepare conformed drawings and specifications.

Task 6.0 Construction Support
SVA will provide construction support for the duration of the project. Construction support will involve many activities. Responsibilities may include but not limited to:
• Track, re view all Material and shop drawing submittals as required. • Track and respond to all Requests for Information as required. • Assist with Contract change order review, preparation, and payment requests. • Assist with reviewing progress payment requests.
• Assist with review of Contractor’s initial construction schedule and critical path items. • Attend construction meetings as requested over construction period. Assuming 50% virtual and 50% in- person meetings, with a total of sixty meetings (30 each format). • Assist in establishing procedures for testing and inspection. • Review substitution requests and provide revision acceptance and recommendations. • Prepare punch list.

Deliverables for Task 6.0:
• Punch list

Task 7.0 Project Closeout
SVA will assist in project closeout including but not limited to the following tasks:
• Prepare record drawings for project (conformed final set). Contractor shall be responsible for as-built drawing preparation. Drawings will be distributed in AutoCAD format. • Prepare a ‘lessons learned’ document and recommended improvements. • Update all project documents.
• Transfer all project files including electronic CAD files to the City.

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 13 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
103
City of Livermore
Fleet Shop Expansion Project
Revised December 19, 2024

Page 6 ends

Consultant Deliverables for Task 7.0:
• Record Drawings
• Lessons learned
• Electronic transmit of all project files

Task 8.0 Specialty Design Services
The following items are critical services that will be a part of the consultant’s scope of services:

Task 8.1 – Geotechnical Services
Consultant shall provide geotechnical investigations and a report for the design of building, grading and foundation. These geotechnical recommendations shall be incorporated in the construction documents (drawings and technical specifications). The geotechnical must provide a letter to the requirements of the latest California Building Code.

Task 8.2 CASp
Consultant shall retain the services of a CASp inspector. The CASp inspector shall review construction documents and stamp the construction plan set prior to advertising. During the construction phase, the CASp inspector shall inspect and verify all project elements are built to ADA standards. During closeout, the CASp must stamp as-built drawings to confirm the project elements were built to standard.

Task 8.3 - Field Survey
Consultant shall obtain Civil Topographic survey needed for site work design.

Task 9.0 As-Directed Additional Services
Consultant shall provide as-directed additional services to the City. A budget allowance of $50,000 has been included. Any use of this budget allowance shall require written authorization from the City that includes scope of as-directed services and an agreed upon not-to-exceed limit. As-directed services could include the following services:
* Additional surveys
* Site design changes requested by City
*Tenant improvement design changes requested by the City *Additional re quired meetings
* Additional required site inspections
* Additional construction administration tasks
* Additional geotechnical services

Our compensation for these services will be at our standard rates as indicated in the attached fee schedule of hourly rates.

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 14 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
104
City of Livermore
Fleet Shop Expansion Project
Revised December 21, 2024

Page 7 ends

Sincerely,

SVA Architects, Inc.

Nathan Herrero, AIA
Principal
License No.: C33048
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 15 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
105
$50,000
As-Directed Additional Services
GRAND TOTAL $553,000

CITY OF LIVERMORE - FLEET EXPANSION FEE MATRIX
Discipline TASK 1 TASK 2 TASK 3 TASK 4 TASK 5 TASK 6 TASK 7 TOTAL Project
Management
Program /
Schematic Entitlement Construction
Documents Bidding Construction
Support Closeout
Architectural & Interiors $12,925 $38,775 $25,850 $116,325 $5,170 $51,700 $7,755 $258,500 Civil Engineering $1,375 $4,125 $2,750 $12,375 $550 $5,500 $825 $27,500 Structural Engineering $3,600 $10,800 $0 $39,600 $1,440 $14,400 $2,160 $72,000 MEP Engineering $3,250 $9,750 $0 $35,750 $1,300 $13,000 $1,950 $65,000 Cost Estimating $0 $5,000 $0 $17,000 $0 $0 $0 $22,000
Survey $0 $12,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $12,500
CASp Review $0 $4,000 $0 $4,500 $0 $4,500 $0 $13,000
Geotechnical Report $0 $27,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,000
Reimbursable Allowance $1,500 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $0 $1,000 $0 $5,500 SUBTOTALS $22,650 $112,950 $29,600 $226,550 $8,460 $90,100 $12,690 $503,000

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 16 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
106

10. Fee Schedule

HOURLY RATES
Below are SVA’s and our team’s hourly rates.

SVA ARCHITECTS, INC.

Architect
Partner/Principal $225
Sr. Project Architect/Manager $195
Senior Designer / Planner $195
Project Architect / Manager $175
Designer / Planner $175
Job Captain $155
Intermediate Designer $125
Junior Technical Designer $100
Clerical Staff $75

EDESIGNC
MEP Engineers
Principal $255
Senior Engineer $233
Project Manager $207
Project Engineer $186
Telecom Designer $195
Designer $154

ANLA ASSOCIATES
Landscape Architect
Landscape Architect $170
Project Manager/Designer $145
Cad Drafting $125

CARROLL CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Civic Engineer
Principal Engineer $245
Principal Surveyor $225
Associate Engineer $205
Project Engineer $180
Assistant Engineer $155
Survey Assistant (Office) $155
CAD Operator/Drafter $132

THORNTON TOMASETTI
Structural Engineer
Sr. Vice President / Principal $305
Vice President / Associate Principal $290
Senior Associate $240
Associate $230
Sr. Architect / Engineer / Director $215
Project Architect / Engineer / Director $205
Sr. Engineer / Designer $180
Engineer / Designer $160

STONE CREEK ENGINEERING
Cost Estimator
Senior Estimator $175
Estimator $150
Junior Estimator $135
Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 17 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
107

EXHIBIT B

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS

Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance
Consultant/Contractor shall maintain limits no less than:

1. Commercial General Liability, including operations, products, and completed operations, as applicable:
$5,000,000 per occurrence/$10,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. If Commercial General Liability or other form of insurance with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability:
$2,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer's Liability:

Statutory limits as required by the State of California including $1,000,000 Employers’ Liability per accident, per employee for bodily injury or disease. A waiver of subrogation is required for Workers’ Compensation insurance. If Consultant/Contractor is a sole proprietor, then they must sign “Contractor Release of Liability”.

4. Professional Liability/Errors and Omissions:
$5,000,000 per claim. Consultant/Contractor warrants that any retroactive date under this policy shall precede the effective date of this contract and, either continuous coverage will be maintained, or an extended discovery period will be exercised for a period of two years beginning at the time work under this contract is completed.

Deductibles and Self-Insured Retention
All self-insured retentions (SIR) must be disclosed to Risk Management for approval and shall not reduce the limits of liability. Policies containing any self-insured retention (SIR) provision shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the SIR may be satisfied by either the named insured or the City of Livermore. The City of Livermore reserves the right to obtain a full certified copy of any insurance policy and endorsements. Failure to exercise this right shall not constitute a waiver of right to exercise later.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A:

VII and accepted to do business in the State of California, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Livermore.

Other Insurance Provisions
The general liability and automobile liability policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

1. The City of Livermore, its officers, officials, employees, and designated

Revised 1/3/2020 B11.5 – 5M E&O

Page 1 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 18 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
108
volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant/Contractor; or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant/Contractor. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to the City of Livermore, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

2. The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. The additional insured coverage under the Consultant’s/Contractor’s policy shall be primary and non-contributory and will not seek contribution from the City’s insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 04 13. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of the City of Livermore before the City’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

3. Any failure to comply with reporting or other provisions of the policy, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect coverage provided to the City of Livermore, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.

4. The Consultant’s/Contractor's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.

5. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party before expiration of the policy unless notice is delivered in accordance with policy provisions.

6. It shall be a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than, or in excess of, the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be available to the additional insured. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named Insured; whichever is greater.

7. Certificate Hol
der section of the insurance certificate should read: City of Livermore, 1052 S. Livermore Avenue, Livermore, CA 94550 Verification of Coverage
Consultant/Contractor shall furnish certificates of insurance and endorsement(s) effecting coverage to the City of Livermore for approval. The endorsements shall be on forms acceptable to the City of Livermore. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Livermore before work commences. The City of Livermore reserves the right to require complete and certified copies of all insurance policies required by this Agreement.

Revi
sed 1/3/2020 B11.5 – 5M E&O

Page 2 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: 1BCB61E3-F64F-4DA7-8A79-581006B1D338

Page 19 of 19 ends

EXHIBIT A
109

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 5.9

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Jeramy Young, Police Chief
SUBJECT:

Resolution authorizing a first amendment to the agreement with Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District (LVJUSD) to include the requirements of insurance coverage for Horizons Family Counseling who provide school-based services at LVJUSD school sites, in the amount of $304,500 for Horizons Family Counseling for the period of July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

SUMMARY
For ten years, the City of Livermore has partnered with LVJUSD to partially fund school-based services provided by Horizons Family Counseling. Since 2022, LVJUSD and five other Alameda County school districts were awarded a grant from the Mental Health Services Act (MHSSA) requiring Alameda County to partner with the school districts to expand the mental health services for youth at schools. As per the MHSSA grant, the term of the agreement between LVJUSD and Horizons Family Counseling is 2.5 years (July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026) for a total amount not to exceed is $304,500. This funding from LVJUSD would continue to support Horizons Family Counseling salaries and program services costs for the term of the agreement.

On September 24, 2024, City and LVJUSD entered into an agreement for Horizons Family Counseling to provide professional mental health related services to LVJUSD. Section 9 of the Original Agreement requires that any modifications to it must be in writing and signed by the parties. Per the request of LVJUSD, City and LVJUSD desire to amend the Original Agreement to include the requirements of insurance coverage. The coverage is in effect and provided through participation in a risk sharing joint powers authority: general liability and automobile liability pooled self-insurance, as defined in the Memorandum of Coverage on file with California Joint Powers Risk Management Authority.

DISCUSSION
110
Since 1973, Horizons Family Counseling, a division of the Livermore Police Department, has been dedicated to addressing the mental health needs and strengthening the relationship skills of the Tri- Valley youth and their families. Horizon's mission is to serve youth and families through counseling, education, and support services. Horizon's vision is that every young person is resilient, feels supported, and connected to family and community and ultimately finds safety, hope, and success in their lives. In this effort, Horizons Family Counseling has collaborated with LVJUSD for the past 10 years by providing counseling, case management, and crisis intervention. Since 2022, these services for LVJUSD were funded by the MHSSA grant awarded by Alameda County Health.

On September 24, 2024, the City and LVJUSD entered into an agreement for Horizons Family Counseling with a total amount not to exceed $304,500 (July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026) to continue providing professional mental health related services to LVJUSD. Section 9 of the Original Agreement requires any modifications must be in writing and signed by the parties. Per the request of LVJUSD, City and LVJUSD desire to amend the Original Agreement to include the requirements of insurance coverage. The coverage is in effect and provided through participation in a risk sharing joint powers authority: general liability and automobile liability pooled self-insurance, as defined in the Memorandum of Coverage on file with California Joint Powers Risk Management Authority.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

The term of the reimbursement agreement is 2.5 years (July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026) and the total amount not to exceed is $304,500 (July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 at $131,500; July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 at $131,500; and July 1, 2026 to December 31, 2026 at $41,5000). This funding from LVJUSD will continue to support Horizons Family Counseling salaries and program services costs and offset the need for the General Fund to cover those expenses for the term of the agreement. Specifically, the mental health services include the following: up to 10 individual and/or group counseling sessions per student; 6 mental health related classroom trainings/presentations per academic year; and Horizons staff to attend 6 LVJUSD Coordination of Services Team (COST) meetings for academic year not to exceed the reimbursable amount per fiscal year.

COMMUNITY PILLAR

1: A Safe Community That Thrives

GOALS

4: Partner with the community to enhance collaborative problem solving and to improve the quality of life in Livermore

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A - First Amendment

Prepared by: Asceneth
Paez-Arroyo
Youth and Family Services Manager -
Clinical

111

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A FIRST

AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF LIVERMORE AND LIVERMORE VALLEY JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE TERM OF JULY 1, 2024 TO JUNE 30, 2026 IN THE AMOUNT OF $304,500
The City of Livermore has been awarded $304,500 from Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District (LVJUSD) for the period of July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026, to provide school-based counseling services such as individual/group counseling, classroom presentations, and continued collaboration amongst Livermore schools. On September 24, 2024, the City and LVJUSD entered into an agreement for Horizons Family Counseling, a division of the Livermore Police Department, to provide mental health related services to LVJUSD (Original Agreement).

Funding from LVJUSD allows Horizons to continue to provide high quality, safe, effective, and confidential services for Livermore students. In addition, the funding provides LVJUSD students access to receive free school-based counseling on site.

City and LVJUSD now desire to amend the Original Agreement to include the requirements of insurance coverage.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that it hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to the Standard Services Agreement between the City of Livermore and Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District for the term of July 1, 2024 to December 31, 2026, in the amount of $305,000, attached hereto as Exhibit A.

On motion of Council Member ______________________, seconded by Council Member ______________________, the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________ /s/ Katherine Mirassou
Deborah L. Elam Katherine Mirassou
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – First Amendment to Professional Services Agreement 113
Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 1
Rev. 09/19/23

FIRST AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
T
HIS FIRST AMENDMENT is made and entered into this ____ day of ________, 20___, by and between the City of Livermore (“City”), a municipal corporation, and Livermore Valley Joint Unified School District (“LVJUSD”).

RE
CITALS
On
September 24, 2024, City and LVJUSD entered into an agreement for Horizons Family Counseling, a division of the Livermore Police Department, to provide professional mental health related services to LVJUSD (“Original Agreement”). Section 9 of the Original Agreement requires that any modifications to it must be in writing and signed by the parties.

Cit
y and LVJUSD desire to amend the Original Agreement to include requirements of insurance coverage. This is the First amendment to the Original Agreement.

REEMENT
NO
W, THEREFORE, City and LVJUSD hereby agree tha t the aforementioned recitals are true and correct and further agree as follows:

1. T
he Original Agreement is amended as follows:

A. Section 14. Insurance is added to read as follows:

The City shall not commence work under this Agreement until the insurance requirements under this paragraph have been obtained and satisfactory proof of such insurance has been submitted and approved by LVJUSD.

Except for worker’s compensation insurance, the policy shall not be amended or modified and the coverage amounts shall not be reduced without LVJUSD prior written consent. LVJUSD shall be named as an additional insured and be furnished thirty (30) days written notice prior to cancellation.

C
ity shall have and maintain in force during the term of this Contract, with the minimum indicated limits, the following insurance:

Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate minimum
Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence
Errors and Omissions/
Professional Liability
$1,000,000 per occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate minimum
Workers Compensation Statutory limits pursuant to State law Employers’ Liability $1,000,000 each accident, disease (each employee and policy limit)
Docusign Envelope ID: E101B5C8-B13A-46E3-8769-2496B2D22178

EXHIBIT A
114
Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 2 Rev. 09/19/23
Sexual Abuse and Molestation
(SAM)
$1,000,000 per occurrence
$2,000,000 aggregate minimum

2. These amendments are prospective and only apply to the S ervices rendered by the City after the execution of this Amendment. Unless otherwise stated herein, this Amendment does not relieve the parties of the terms and conditions of the Original Agreement as written and in effect at the time the Services were rendered.

3. Except as amended above, the Original Agreement remains in full force and effect.

Docusign Envelope ID: E101B5C8-B13A-46E3-8769-2496B2D22178

EXHIBIT A
115
Amendment - Professional Services Agreement Page 3
Rev. 09/19/23
In c
oncurrence and witness whereof, and in recognition of the mutual consideration provided therefore, the parties have executed this Agreement effective on the date first written above.

Dat
ed:
______
_____________________
Dat
ed:
______
______________________
CONSULTANT:
___________________________
Kayla Wasley
Assistant Superintendent of
Business Services
C
ITY OF LIVERMORE:
___
_________________________
Marianna Marysheva
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Deputy/Assistant/City Attorney

APPROVED AS TO IN
SURANCE:

Risk Manager/Analyst
Docusign Envelope ID: E101B5C8-B13A-46E3-8769-2496B2D22178 1/27/2025 | 9:33 AM PST

EXHIBIT A
116

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
ITEM NO. 6.1

DATE:

February 24, 2025
TO:

Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM:

Brent Smith, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:

Hearing to consider a request for a Municipal Code Amendment, Development Code Amendment, Conditional Use Permit Modification, Development Agreement, Site Plan Design Review, and Site Plan Design Review Modification for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project and citywide cardroom operations.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

The Planning Commission and staff recommend the City Council:
1 .

Adopt a resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24-001, Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24-010 and Site Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24-024; 3 .

Introduce an ordinance
and waive the first reading, approving Municipal Code Amendment (MUNI) 24-002 and Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24-004; and, 4 .

Introduce an ordinance
and waive the first reading, authorizing execution of Development Agreement (DA) 24-003.

SUMMARY
Livermore Municipal Code Chapter 5.20, Cardrooms, regulates cardroom licensing, employee work permits, number of card tables, operations, and safety and security. Livermore Municipal Code Section

5.20.160(Q) outlines expanded services a cardroom may request, subject to the approval of a Development Agreement (DA) and Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Livermore Development Code Section

6.03.030, Cardrooms, further regulates cardroom location and reiterates the requirements for expanded cardroom services set forth in the Municipal Code. The City currently has two existing cardrooms in operation, Parkwest Casino 580 at 968 North Canyons Parkway and Livermore Casino at 3571 First Street; both cardrooms are considered expanded services cardrooms and have existing DAs and CUPs.

In June 2019, Parkwest Casino 580 applied to the City of Livermore for a Municipal Code Amendment, Development Code Amendment, Conditional Use Permit Modification, Development Agreement, Site 117
Plan Design Review, and Site Plan Design Review Modification for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion (Project). The Project includes operational changes at Parkwest Casino 580 including increasing the number of card tables, increasing the hours of operation, increasing the maximum bet limit, permitting limited backline betting, and permitting new card games not prohibited by state law.

The Project includes amendments to the Livermore Municipal Code that would be applied citywide. The amendments include increasing the total number of card tables permitted citywide, modifications to tournament noticing requirements, changes to the number of cardroom licenses permitted per person, and miscellaneous amendments made for clarification.

Finally, the Project includes the development of a 230-space paved parking lot with new trees to meet the current and future parking demand, construction of a Class IV bicycle lane along the North Canyons Parkway project frontage, installation of bicycle racks outside of the Parkwest Casino 580 building, and removal of one tree. This additional on-site parking will alleviate the current overflow parking that consistently occurs on Doolan Road and Collier Canyon Road adjacent to the casino. Parkwest Casino 580 will provide other public benefits such as paying the City an increased per table monthly fee starting at $4,800 (they are currently paying $1,890 per table) and providing funds for installation and maintenance of traffic cameras and license plate readers near the casino.

DISCUSSION

BACKGROUND
On March 28, 2011, the City approved Development Code Amendment (DCA) 10-006, Development Agreement (DA) 10-003, and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 10-007 for Parkwest Casino 580, located at the southeast corner of North Canyons Parkway and Doolan Road at 968 North Canyons Parkway. The approvals authorized an expanded services cardroom for Parkwest Casino 580 to permit the casino to operate10 card tables, seat 10 players per table, operate 24-hours a day six days a week, with a nine- hour closure on Mondays, apply a maximum bet limit of $200 per game, play games authorized by the State Department of Justice, Bureau of Gambling Control except for Pai Gow with tiles, and operate an ancillary restaurant.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
For a complete project description, please refer to the attached January 7, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report (Attachment 2).

The Project includes several proposed operational changes at Parkwest Casino 580 which necessitate modifications to the City’s Municipal Code and Development Code, as well as the existing Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Design Review permit. The project includes:

Municipal Code Amendment

Municipal Code Amendment (MUNI) 24-002 amends Chapter 5.20, Cardrooms, of the Livermore Municipal Code which regulates cardrooms within the city limits and includes requirements for licensing, employee work permits, number of card tables, operations, and safety and security regulations. Per section 5.20.160(Q), a cardroom may offer expanded services subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Development Agreement (DA). Parkwest Casino 580 currently operates as an 118
expanded service cardroom with an active CUP and DA.

Amendments to the Municipal Code include increasing the total number of card tables permitted citywide by establishing a maximum number rather than a ratio of the City’s population, increasing the total number of card tables permitted per gambling establishment, increasing allowable hours of operation, increasing the maximum bet limit, permitting limited backline betting, permitting the play of new card games not prohibited by state law, modifying tournament noticing requirements, modifying the number of cardroom licenses permitted per person, and additional miscellaneous amendments made for clarification.

Development Code Amendment
Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24-004 amends Chapter 11, Definitions, of the Livermore Development Code which includes a definition of a cardroom. The amendment is required to update the reference to the Livermore Municipal Code to be consistent with the proposed Municipal Code Amendments. This is simply a change to ensure internal consistency between the Municipal Code and Development Code.

Conditional Use Permit Modification
Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24-001 amends the existing CUP 10-007 to capture modified business operations at Parkwest Casino 580. The CUPM includes the authorization to operate 16 card tables, 24/7 operations, permit backline betting up to 10 standing players per table, permit a maximum bet of up to $1,000, and permit play of any game not prohibited by the State. The CUP, as modified by the CUPM, would remain applicable to the property until the City or landowner proposes to modify the CUPM and DA in the future.

Site Plan Design Review

Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24-010 will allow development of a new surface parking lot with 230 parking spaces. The proposed surface parking lot would connect the existing casino parking lot to the west, which is currently accessed from driveways on Doolan Road and North Canyons Parkway (See Attachment 4). The proposed surface parking lot would also connect to a new driveway on North Canyons Parkway at the northeast corner of the project site. The proposed parking lot will accommodate current overflow parking on Doolan Road and Collier Canyon Road as well as additional parking for the proposed expansion.

Site Plan Design Review Modification
Site Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24-024 will allow removal of one tree on the current site to accommodate pedestrian access from the new parking lot and installation of bicycle racks around the existing building.

Development Agreement
Development Agreement (DA) 24-003 will support the modified business operations at Parkwest Casino 580 and provide additional public benefits. Specifically, DA 24-003 requires the applicant provide a financial contribution of $4,800 per table per month, and three one-time financial contributions towards 119
safety and security equipment including $60,000 for the purchase and installation of three new traffic cameras, $5,000 towards traffic camera maintenance, and $24,000 for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of license plate readers. The term of the proposed DA is 20 years.

PLANNING COMMISSION AND PUBLIC COMMENT

The Planning Commission considered the project at a public hearing on January 7, 2025. The Planning Commission staff report and draft meeting minutes are attached (Attachments 2 and 3). There was one speaker who had concerns about safety.

The Planning Commission topics of discussion included parking demand, bet limit increase, site plan/landscape plan details, increase in the total number of tables citywide (32), and community benefits.

Following discussion, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended City Council approval the project per staff recommendation.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The City of Livermore contracted with Raney Planning and Management (Consultant) to prepare an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Project. The IS/MND analyzed the project’s impacts to the environment and identified mitigation measures that would be required to be implemented (see Attachment 8, Exhibit B). The following environmental topics were identified as less than significant with mitigation:

• Biological Resources;
• Cultural Resources;
• Geology and Soils; and
• Tribal Cultural Resources

One comment letter was received via email from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), District 4 (Attachment 9, Exhibit C). Caltrans noted that the project site’s proposed drainage plan may impact their facilities and requested additional information to determine if additional mitigation measures are needed. All other comments from Caltrans were primarily informational in nature. Staff and the applicant team reviewed the site plan and made minor modifications to the surface parking lot layout such that the design avoids all Caltrans’ right of way, easements, and infrastructure.

FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE IMPACTS

Per the requirements of the proposed Development Agreement, a financial contribution to the City of $4,800 per table per month will be provided. This is an increase from the current contribution of $1,890 per table per month under the current DA. The increased financial contribution will be effective six months after the Chief of Police approves the amended cardroom license. This will allow the applicant a ramp-up period to bring the additional six card tables and business operations into effect. The applicable Consumer Price Index (CPI) value will be added to the financial contribution three years following the date of the approved amended cardroom license and applied every year thereafter.

Before the addition of CPI, the net new revenue received from the monthly table fees is estimated to be approximately $695,000 annually and will be used in part to fund two full-time positions, one in the Police Department and one in the Community Development Department. This net new revenue, staff positions 120
and public safety security equipment is in addition to the existing annual per table revenue of approximately $226,900 and is expected to easily offset any additional City services provided to Parkwest Casino 580.

COMMUNITY PILLAR
2: Economy That Prospers

GOAL
1: Lead efforts, in collaboration with internal and external partners, to provide effective communication and engagement with businesses

ATTACHMENTS

1. Site Map

2. Planning Commission Staff Report

3. Planning Commission Draft Minutes 1-7-25

4. Parkwest Casino 580 Development Plans

5. DOJ Bureau of Gambling Control Letters

6. Resolution - CEQA

7. Exhibit A - Planning Commission CEQA Resolution 01-25

8. Exhibit B - Initial Study/Mitigation Negative Declaration

9. Exhibit C - Caltrans Comments

10. Exhibit D - Response to Comments

11. Exhibit E - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progam

12. Resolution - Project

13. Exhibit A - Planning Commission Project Reso 02-25

14. Exhibit B - Conditions of Approval

15. Ordinance for Municipal Code Amendment and Development Code Amendment

16. Exhibit A - Municipal Code Amendment

17. Exhibit B - Livermore Development Code Text Amendment

18. Ordinance Adopting Development Agreement 24-003

19. Exhibit A - Development Agreement

Prepared by: Susan Frost
Special Projects Coordinator

Approved by:
____________________________________
Marianna A. Burch
City Manager
Fiscal Review by:
____________________________________
Tina Olson
Administrative Services Director
121
Approximate Project Site Boundaries
Map
ATTACHMENT 1
122
ATTACHMENT 2
123
ATTACHMENT 2
124
ATTACHMENT 2
125
ATTACHMENT 2
126
ATTACHMENT 2
127
ATTACHMENT 2
128
ATTACHMENT 2
129
ATTACHMENT 2
130
ATTACHMENT 2
131
ATTACHMENT 2
132
ATTACHMENT 2
133

DRAFT MINUTES
PLA

NNING COMMISSION
JANUARY 7, 2025
________________________________________________________________ REGUL

AR MEETING

1. CALL T
O ORDER – The meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jacob Anderson at 7:00 pm, held in person at 1016 S.

Livermore Avenue.

ROLL
CALL – Present: Chairperson Anderson, Vice- Chairperson Yolanda Fintschenko, Commissioner Daniel Leary, Commissioner Tracy Kronzak.

PLE

DGE OF ALLEGIANCE

2. OPEN F
ORUM
Chair
person Anderson opened the public comment period.

Connie
Kopps asked who authorized the Planning Commission to approve Phase 1 of the Springtown Park ; discussed issues raised by the residents that were not addressed; and provided a copy of her letter.

There
were no additional speakers and the public comment period was closed.

3. CONSE
NT CALENDAR – NONE.

4. PROJ
ECT REVIEW – NONE.

5. PUBLI

C HEARINGS

5.1 Hear
ing to consider a request for a Municipal Code Amendment, Development Code Amendment, Conditional Use Permit Modification, Development Agreement, Site Plan Design Review, and Site Plan Design Review Modification for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project and city-wide cardroom operations.

Rec
ommendation: S taff recommends the Planning Commission adopt resolutions recommending the City Council take the following actions:

1. Adopt a resolution certifying the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project, which includes city-wide Municipal Code and Development Code

2. Amendments, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and Adopt a resolution approving Municipal Code Amendment ATTACHMENT 3
134
(MUNI) 24 -002; Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24- 004; Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24- 001; Development Agreement (DA) 24-003; Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24-010 and Site Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24- 024 amending the Livermore Municipal Code including increasing the total number of card tables permitted citywide, increasing the total number of card tables permitted per gambling establishment, increasing allowable hours of operation, increasing the maximum bet limit, permitting limited backline betting, permitting the play of new card games not prohibited by state law, modifying tournament noticing requirements, modifying the number of cardroom licenses permitted per person, and additional miscellaneous amendments made for clar ification; and authorizing operational changes at Parkwest Casino 580 including increasing the number of card tables, increasing hours of operation, increasing the maximum bet limit, permitting limited backline betting, and permitting the play of new card games not prohibited by state law; and approve the development of a 230- space surface parking lot for Parkwest Casino 580.

Seni
or Planner Ashley Vera presented the staff report.

In res
ponse to Commission questions, Senior Planner Vera confirmed the remainder of Lot 12 was owned by the applicant and nothing had been formally proposed; purpose of updating the Code and standards; and maximum card tables at the site and additional availability of card tables in the City that could be used by others including Livermore Casino.

Chai
rperson Anderson opened the public hearing.

Connie
Kopps expressed concern about the location of the casino in relation to Springtown Park and potential safety issues.

There
were no more speakers, and the hearing was closed.

Comm
issioner Leary indicated support for the proposed parking stalls and size of the parking lot; confirmed the landscaping plans and pedestrian link and walkways; agreement with the stormwater control plan; and concern with the gambling limit.

In res
ponse to Commissioner Kronzak , Mike Vasey, Chief Financial Officer, Park West Casinos, explained bus parking; and Senior Planner Vera explained street signage prohibiting parking on streets; enforcement of the Gambling Control Act; and reference in the Municipal Code to non-profit fundraisers.

RECESS
Ch
airperson Anderson called a recess at 7:40 p.m. The meeting reconvened at ATTACHMENT 3
135
7:45 p.m. with all Commissioners present.

In response t
o Vice Chair Fintschenko, Senior Planner Vera explained the gambling limit set by the jurisdiction . Captain Boberg explained crimes centered around casino operations and evaluation of the gambling license.

In response t
o Commissioner Kronzak , Senior Planner Vera explained the process of a CUP modification for increasing gambling limit.

Vice Chai
r Fintschenko confirmed the zoning and distant limits from schools and parks. Senior Planner Vera explained the City-wide card table limit; and decrease in bioretention planters based on Caltrans comments.

In response
to Chairperson Anderson, Senior Planner Vera explained the bike lane and bike parking plans ; and indicated there were no changes to the alcohol license.

Commiss
ioner Leary confirmed the bike lane plan, particularly by the bus stop; and sidewalk from the west.

In response t
o Commissioner Kronzak, Senior Planner Vera discussed permit requirements for tournaments and special events. Planning Manager Riley explained management of people and traffic for special events. Senior Planner Vera discussed surveys and mitigation measures to ensure special protected species.

Chairper
son Anderson indicated the community benefit package outweighed card table uses.

Vice Chai
r Fintschenko indicated the required findings for the project could be made.

ON THE MOT

ION OF VICE CHAIR FINTSCHENKO, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER KRONZAK AND CARRIED ON A 4- 0 VOTE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS:

Resoluti
on 01-25 Recommending that the City Council adopt the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Resoluti
on 02-25 Recommending that the City Council approve Municipal Code Amendment (MUNI) 24 -002, Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24- 004, Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24- 001, Development Agreement (DA) 24 -003, Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24 -010, and Sit e Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24 -024 for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project and Citywide Cardroom Operations

6. MATTERS F

OR CONSIDERATION
ATTACHMENT 3
136

6.1 Election of the 2025 Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson.

Recommendation:

Staff r
ecommends the Planning Commission nominate and vote on
candidates for the offices of Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson.

ON THE M

OTION OF C HAIRPERSON ANDERSON, SECONDED BY
COMMISSIONER LEARY AND CARRIED ON A 4-0 VOTE, TO NOMINATE VICE

CHAIR FINTSCHENKO AS CHAIR AND COMMISSIONER KRONZAK AS VICE CHAIR.

7. MATTERS
INITIATED BY PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF –
Planning M
anger Riley discussed Planning Commission recruitment and the January 27, 2025 application deadline; training for potential Commissioners on January 21, at 5:30 p.m.; and additional efforts on Matters Initiated.

Commis
sioner Kronzak discussed follow up on M atters Initiated; and encouraged training, adding Key to City training.

8. ADJOURNMENT
– at 8:19 p.m. to a Regular Planning Commission
Meeting on Tuesday, January 21, 2025, at 7:00 pm, Civic Center Meeting Hall, City Council Chambers, 1016 S. Livermore Ave.

ATTACHMENT 3
137
ATTACHMENT 4
138
ATTACHMENT 4
139
ATTACHMENT 4
140
ATTACHMENT 4
141
ATTACHMENT 4
142
ATTACHMENT 4
143
ATTACHMENT 4
144
ATTACHMENT 4
145
ATTACHMENT 4
146
ATTACHMENT 4
147
ATTACHMENT 4
148
ATTACHMENT 4
149
ATTACHMENT 4
150
ATTACHMENT 4
151
ATTACHMENT 4
152
Rob Bonta
Attorney General

BUREAU OF GAMBLING CONTROL
2450 DEL PASO ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95834
October 20, 2023
Ashley Vera Via e-mail only
Associate Planner
City of Livermore
Community Development Department
1052 S. Livermore Ave.

Livermore, CA 94550
[email protected]
Re: City of Livermore – Ordinance Amendments
Dear Ms. Vera:

On March 1, 2023, the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Gambling Control (Bureau) received an email from you that provided the Bureau with a copy of proposed amendments to chapter 5.20 of the City of Livermore (Livermore) Municipal Code, which contains the ordinances that govern the licensing and operation of gambling establishments.1 These proposed amendments were submitted for review by the Bureau in compliance with Business and Professions Code section 19961.1. The Bureau offers the following comments. 2

1. Section 5.20.010 3 – Cardroom Defined
Section 5.20.010 currently provides the definition of a “cardroom.” The proposed amendments to this section delete language excepting from this definition a “bona fide nonprofit society, club, fraternal, labor or other organization as defined in [Livermore Municipal 1 Chapter 5.20 of the City’s Municipal Code refers to a “cardroom,” which the Bureau acknowledges as being synonymous with the definition of a “gambling establishment” under the Gambling Control Act. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19805, subd. (o).) 2 The City’s proposed amendments also include non-substantive changes to which the Bureau provides no comment.
3 Section references are to the City’s Municipal Code, unless otherwise indicated.

ATTACHMENT 5
153
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 2 ends

Code Section] 5.20.060,” and add definitions for a “standard services” cardroom, and an “expanded services” cardroom. The proposed definition of a “standard services cardroom” in section 5.20.010 is one that is “limited to operational rules and regulations” as described by section 5.20.160, subdivisions (A) through (P). The proposed definition of an “expanded services cardroom” in section 5.20.010 is one that “may include additional services through a Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit pursuant to [Livermore Municipal Code] Section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q).”

The proposed amendments to section 5.20.010 appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

2. Section 5.20.015 – Exception – Fundraisers by Nonprofit Organizations

Current section 5.20.015 provides that the provisions of Chapter 5.20 of the Municipal Code shall not apply to a nonprofit organization. The proposed amendment would insert a reference to the definition in Business and Professions Code section 19986, subdivision (h), of a “nonprofit organization.” This proposed amendment appears to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

3. Section 5.20.030 – License – Required

Section 5.20.030 sets forth two requirements that a person must meet before operating a cardroom. The City proposes adding a third requirement with respect to land use permitting and parking requirements. The proposed amendments to section 5.20.030 appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

4. Section 5.20.040 – License – Application – Fingerprints Required – Renewal – Continuing Obligation To Provide Current Information

Current section 5.20.040 sets forth what an applicant is required to submit with a license application. The proposed amendments to this section would delete a provision specifying that a license in effect on January 1, 2009 shall have been deemed to have been granted on that date, and shall expire on December 31, 2010, unless revoked, suspended, or renewed prior to that date. The remaining text of this subdivision would specify that a license shall be valid for a period of one year, unless revoked or suspended by the Chief of Police, or surrendered by the licensee. This proposed amendment appears to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

ATTACHMENT 5
154
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 3 ends

5. Section 5.20.050 – License – Only One License Per Person – Transferability4

Section 5.20.050 currently provides that a person shall be granted one license to operate a cardroom. The proposed amendments would permit a person to hold up to two licenses to operate a cardroom. A person seeking to obtain two licenses is required to file separate applications, and each application is subject to approval. The proposed amendments to this section appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

6. Section 5.20.060 – License – Fee – Exceptions
5 Current section 5.20.060 sets forth the fees required to be paid by licensees. The proposed amendments to this section would delete references to exceptions to the fee requirement for nonprofit societies, clubs, or fraternal, labor, or other organizations, and nonprofit organizations as defined by Business and Professions Code section 19986, subdivision (h). These proposed amendments appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

7. Section 5.20.070 – License – Denial by Chief of Police – Grounds

Current section 5.20.070 sets forth the grounds upon which the Chief of Police is required to deny an application to operate a cardroom, and the procedure for appealing a denial. The proposed amendments to this section would include as a basis for denial an applicant’s failure to comply with the Livermore Development Code or land use permitting requirements. The amendments would also make clarifying changes to the appeal process.

These proposed amendments appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

8. Section 5.20.140 – Suspension and Revocation of License and Work Permits

Current section 5.20.140 provides the bases upon which the Chief of Police may suspend or revoke a license or work permit, and the procedure for imposing a suspension or revocation. The proposed amendments would add the provision that when an appeal of a suspension or revocation is filed, the license is suspended pending the outcome of the appeal, and the City Council shall consider the appeal within 60 days of filing. The proposed amendments appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

9. Section 5.20.150 – Number of Tables – Limitation

Section 5.20.150 currently states that the number of tables allowed within the City shall be limited to one table per 4,200 residents of the City. 6 The proposed amendments to section

4 The City proposes retitling this section as “License – Only two licenses per person – Transferability.”
5 The City proposes retitling this section as “License – Fee.”

ATTACHMENT 5
155
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 4 ends

5.20.150 would eliminate the calculation of tables allowed within the City based upon the number of residents and instead provide that the maximum number of tables allowed within the City is 28. The proposed amendments would also provide that a standard services cardroom, as defined in amended section 5.20.010, would be allowed to have a maximum of ten tables, pursuant to section 5.20.160, subdivision (D),7 and an expanded services cardroom would be allowed to have a maximum of 14 tables, pursuant to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q).8

Business and Professions Code section 19961 provides, in pertinent part:
(a) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), on or after the effective date of this chapter, any amendment to any ordinance that would result in an expansion of gambling in the city, county, or city and county, shall not be valid unless the amendment is submitted for approval to the voters of the city, county, or city and county, and is approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon.

(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1) and Section 19962, an ordinance may be amended without the approval of the electors after the effective date of this chapter to expand gambling by a change that results in an increase of less than 25 percent with respect to any of the matters set forth in paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (5) of subdivision (b). Thereafter, any additional expansion shall be approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon.

(b) For the purposes of this article, “expansion of gambling” means, when compared to that authorized on January 1, 1996, or under an ordinance adopted

6 This section further provides that when the Chief of Police determines that an additional table is available based upon the population, the Chief of Police shall give notice to existing licensees having less than the maximum number of tables allowed that they are eligible to apply for an additional table. There are additional conditional use permit conditions for standard services and expanded services cardrooms, as well as proposed procedural rules with respect to additional card tables based upon increases in the City’s population. 7 Current section 5.20.160, subdivision (D), allows a cardroom to operate up to ten tables.

8 The amendments to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), provide for the same per-cardroom table limits as those contained in the proposed amendments to section 5.20.150. For the sake of clarity, and to avoid duplicative commentary, the Bureau’s comments regarding the cardroom table limit specified in section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), have been omitted, and the Bureau’s comments regarding the proposed amendments to section 5.20.150 should be understood as applying to the proposed amendments to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), as well.

ATTACHMENT 5
156
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 5 ends

pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 19960, whichever is the lesser number, a change that results in any of the following:

(1) An increase of 25 percent or more in the number of gambling tables in the city, county, or city and county.

. . .

(3) An increase of 25 percent or more in the number of gambling tables that may be operated in a gambling establishment in the city, county, or city and county.

. . .

(c) The measure to expand gambling shall appear on the ballot in substantially the following form: “Shall gambling be expanded in ____ beyond that operated or authorized on January 1, 1996, by ____ (describe expansion) Yes ____ No ____.”

(d) The authorization of subdivision (c) is subject to Sections 19962 and 19963 until those sections are repealed.

. . .

(f) No city, county, or city and county shall amend its ordinance in a cumulative manner to increase gambling by more than 25 percent for the factors listed in subdivision (b), when compared to that authorized on January 1, 1996, without conducting an election pursuant to this section.

(Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19961.)

On January 1, 1996, the City had in effect an ordinance limiting the number of tables allowed in a cardroom to one table for every 5,000 residents. Based upon the City’s population at that time, the cardroom table limit would have been 13. 9 9 The estimated population of the City as of January 1996 was 64,370, according to the California Department of Finance E-4 Revised Historical City, County and State Population Estimates, 1991-2000, with 1990 and 2000 Census Counts, available at https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-4-revised-historical-city-county-and- state-population-estimates-1991-2000-with-1990-and-2000-census-counts/.

ATTACHMENT 5
157
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 6 ends

In 2009, the City amended its ordinance to modify the population-based formula for setting the maximum number of tables that can be operated within the jurisdiction, changing the formula from one table per 5,000 residents to one table per 4,200 residents. This change had the effect of increasing the jurisdictional table limit to 16 tables, an increase of three tables.
10 This 2009 amendment appears to have been in compliance with Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (a)(2), as the increase in the jurisdictional table limit by three tables was less than 25 percent of what was permitted on January 1, 1996. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19961, subd. (b)(1).)
Thereafter, in 2011, Livermore Casino sought and received approval to operate an additional two tables, resulting in its operating a total of eight tables. It is the Bureau’s understanding that this permanent table increase request was approved pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 19961.06, but that the City did not amend its ordinances to reflect this increase. Assuming that this approval was made pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 19961.06, the City’s jurisdictional table limit would then have been 18.

Given the Bureau’s understanding of the City’s jurisdictional table limit as of January 1, 1996, and the intervening increases to the jurisdictional table limits and cardroom table limits described above, the proposed amendment to the City’s ordinance, specifying that the City’s jurisdictional table limit is 28 tables, would appear to exceed the allowable number of tables under Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (a)(2), thus resulting in an unauthorized expansion of gambling.
11 10 At the time of the 2009 amendment, there were two cardrooms operating in the City: Casino 580 and Livermore Casino. Consistent with the jurisdictional table limit of 16 tables, Casino 580 was operating ten tables, and Livermore Casino was operating six tables. 11 Language that provides for “automatic” increases to a local jurisdiction’s table limits does not appear to comply with the Gambling Control Act. Business and Professions Code section 19860, subdivision (a)(5), requires that an ordinance govern “[t]he number of gambling tables in each gambling establishment and in the jurisdiction.” The Commission shall deny a gambling license with respect to a gambling establishment located in a city, county, or city and county that does not have an ordinance governing this and other specified matters. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19860, subd. (a).) If the jurisdictional table limits increased by operation of the ordinance language, but without specifying the jurisdictional table limit within the ordinance, the ordinance would not comply with Business and Professions Code section 19860, subdivision (a)(5). This is further supported by the plain language of Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (a), which specifies limitations on the “amendment” of an ordinance to, among other things, increase the number of tables allowed within a gambling establishment, and within a jurisdiction. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19961, subd. (b).) The requirement that an ordinance be “amended” necessarily requires an affirmative act by the City, through its legislative processes, to approve and implement such an increase.

ATTACHMENT 5
158
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 7 ends

However, Business and Professions Code section 19965 authorizes the proposed jurisdictional table limit and the amendments to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q). Business and Professions Code section 19965 provides, in pertinent part:

Notwithstanding Sections 19961 and 19962, a city, county, or city and county may amend an ordinance to increase the number of gambling tables that may be operated in a gambling establishment as follows:

. . .

(b) If the ordinance in effect on July 1, 2007, provided for nine to 12 tables, inclusive, the amended ordinance may allow an increase of four tables.

Since at least 1999, section 5.20.160, subdivision (D), provided that “[n]ot more than 10 tables shall be permitted in any cardroom.”
12 This subdivision does not appear to have been
amended at any time up to and including July 1, 2007. Accordingly, Business and Professions

Laws previously authorizing increases to gambling establishment table limits have consistently required the affirmative adoption of ordinances by local jurisdictions to authorize the legislatively-approved table limit increases. (See, e.g., Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 19961.06 (providing that “a city, county, or city and county may amend an ordinance to increase by two the number of gambling tables that may be operated in a gambling establishment”) (emphasis added), 19965 (providing that “a city, county, or city and county may amend an ordinance to increase the number of gambling tables that may be operated in a gambling establishment”) (emphasis added).) Assuming that future limitations of gambling establishment table limit increases under the Gambling Control Act similarly require local jurisdictions to act to adopt amendments to their ordinances, the proposed language allowing automatic increases to the gambling establishment table limits would not comply with the Gambling Control Act absent, at a minimum, the affirmative adoption of amendments to the ordinance to implement such increases.

Furthermore, a self-executing ordinance that increases the jurisdictional table limit, could, depending on the amount of the increase effected thereby, run afoul of the prohibition on the expansion of gambling contained in Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (b), if the ordinance, by its own terms, would allow an increase to the gambling establishment or jurisdictional table limits by 25 percent or more, and without in each instance obtaining the majority vote of the electors, as required by Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (a)(1). Accordingly, a so-called self-executing increase, in the absence of an official act by the City to amend its ordinance, would not comply with the Gambling Control Act.

12 City of Livermore Ordinance No. 1563.

ATTACHMENT 5
159
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 8 ends

Code section 19965, subdivision (b), would appear to allow an increase to the cardroom table limit from ten to 14, and also a corresponding increase to the jurisdictional table limit to accommodate the per cardroom increase, notwithstanding section 5.20.150’s lack of a specified jurisdictional table limit prior to these proposed amendments. Instead, the amendment to section 5.20.150, replacing the resident-based calculation with “28 tables” could be more properly characterized as a change conforming the section to the requirements of the Gambling Control Act.
13 As such, the proposed amendments to section 5.20.150, specifying a jurisdictional limit of 28 tables, and the proposed amendments permitting up to 14 tables for an expanded services cardroom, pursuant to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

10. Section 5.20.160 – Operation – Rules and Regulations Current section 5.20.160 sets forth various restrictions on the operation of cardrooms.

The City proposes amendments that principally affect expanded services cardrooms, and would allow expanded services cardrooms to (1) operate up to 14 tables,14 (2) offer for play any game not prohibited by state law, (3) allow up to ten seated and ten standing players at a table, (4) operate for 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and (5) limit wagers to $1,000, subject to

13 The Bureau believes that this proposed deletion of the population-based calculation of tables allowed within the City brings this ordinance into compliance with the Gambling Control Act, as ordinance language that provides for “automatic” increases to the number of tables allowed within the City is not compliant. Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (a)(1), provides that “any amendment to any ordinance that would result in an expansion of gambling in the city, county, or city and county, shall not be valid unless the amendment is submitted for approval to the voters of the city, county, or city and county, and is approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon.” And, Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (b)(1), defines an “expansion of gambling” as, among other actions, an increase of “25 percent or more in the number of gambling tables in the city, county, or city and county.” An “automatic” increase in the number of tables allowed within the City that meets or exceeds 25 percent of that allowed on January 1, 1996 would be an unauthorized expansion of gambling, in the absence of approval by the electors of the City.

Additionally, the plain language of Business and Professions Code section 19961, subdivision (a), which specifies limitations on the “amendment” of an ordinance to, among other things, increase the number of gambling tables allowed within a jurisdiction, does not contemplate “automatic” increases to the items listed therein (see Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19961, subd. (b)), because the requirement that an ordinance be “amended” necessarily requires an affirmative act by the City to implement such an increase.

14 See the discussion of section 5.20.150 for the Bureau’s comments regarding the proposed amendment to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), allowing up to 14 tables in an expanded services cardroom.

ATTACHMENT 5
160
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
October 20, 2023

Page 9 ends

specified Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit requirements. These proposed amendments appear to be consistent with the Gambling Control Act.

While the Bureau is required to review and comment upon proposed ordinance amendments, the Bureau notes that nothing contained herein shall be construed to authorize the operation of a gambling establishment in any manner that is inconsistent with the Gambling Control Act or any other applicable provision of law.

If you have any questions, or wish to submit further revisions to these ordinances, please contact Analyst Kenneth Larsen at (916) 559-6103, or by email at [email protected]. Thank you for your cooperation regarding this matter.

Sincerely,

BRENT Y. JO
Deputy Attorney General

For ROB BONTA
Attorney General

ATTACHMENT 5
161
Rob Bonta
Attorney General

DIVISION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

BUREAU OF GAMBLING CONTROL
2450 DEL PASO ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95834
(916) 830-1700
March 12, 2024
Ashley Vera Via e-mail only
Associate Planner
City of Livermore
Community Development Department
1052 S. Livermore Ave.

Livermore, CA 94550
[email protected]
Re: City of Livermore – Bureau of Gambling Control Review of Proposed Ordinance Amendments
Dear Ms. Vera:

On January 31, 2024, the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Gambling Control (Bureau) received an email from you that provided the Bureau with a copy of proposed amendments to chapter 5.20 of the City of Livermore (City) Municipal Code, which contains the ordinances that govern the licensing and operation of gambling establishments.1 The bulk of the proposed amendments were previously submitted to the Bureau for review in compliance with Business and Professions Code section 19961.1 in March 2023. The Bureau provided its comments to the City on those proposed amendments on October 20, 2023. I have attached a copy of that letter for reference. The City does not appear to have adopted the previously submitted proposed amendments as of the date of this letter.

The proposed amendments submitted on January 31, 2024 include all of the proposed amendments previously submitted in March 2023, as well as additional amendments to section

5.20.150 of the Municipal Code. The Bureau reiterates its October 20, 2023 comments regarding the previously submitted proposed amendments, and offers the following comments regarding the additional proposed amendments to section 5.20.150. 1 Chapter 5.20 of the City’s Municipal Code refers to a “cardroom,” which the Bureau acknowledges as being synonymous with the definition of a “gambling establishment” under the Gambling Control Act. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19805, subd. (o).) ATTACHMENT 5
162
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
March 12, 2024

Page 2 ends

1. Section 5.20.150 – Number of Tables – Limitation

The City proposes further amendments to section 5.20.150 to specify that the maximum number of tables allowed within the City is 32, increased from 28 tables as proposed in the March 2023 amendments. The proposed amendments also provide that an expanded services cardroom would be allowed to have a maximum of 16 tables, increased from 14 tables as proposed in the March 2023 amendments, pursuant to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q). 2

Business and Professions Code section 19961.07 provides in pertinent part:
(a) Notwithstanding Sections 19961 and 19962, and except as provided in subdivision (b), a city, county, or city and county may amend an ordinance to increase the number of gambling tables that may be operated in a gambling establishment as follows:

(1) The ordinance shall apply only to a gambling establishment that operates fewer than 20 gambling tables.

(2) The ordinance shall allow a gambling establishment to increase the number of gambling tables operated at the gambling establishment by up to 2 additional tables within the first year after the ordinance takes effect, and up to 2 additional tables every four years thereafter, not to exceed 10 additional tables above the number of tables operated at the gambling establishment on January 1, 2023. A gambling establishment shall have all permitted gambling tables in operation and remain current in payment on all taxes and other applicable fees before an increase in gambling tables is allowed pursuant to this subdivision.

The proposed amendment allowing two additional tables per gambling establishment pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 19961.07, in addition to the City’s March 2023 proposed amendments to section 5.20.150, would result in a total of 16 tables per gambling establishment, with a jurisdictional table limit of 32. This proposed amendment appears compliant with the Act, provided that the gambling establishments have all permitted

2 The amendments to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), provide for the same per-cardroom table limits for an expanded services cardroom as those contained in the proposed amendments to section 5.20.150. For the sake of clarity, and to avoid duplicative commentary, the Bureau’s comments regarding the cardroom table limit specified in section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), have been omitted, and the Bureau’s comments regarding the proposed amendments to section 5.20.150 should be understood to apply to the proposed amendments to section 5.20.160, subdivision (Q), as well.

ATTACHMENT 5
163
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
March 12, 2024

Page 3 ends

gambling tables in operation and remain current in payment of all taxes and other applicable fees as specified in Business and Professions Code section 19961.07, subdivision (a)(2).3

As noted above, the proposed amendments appear to be compliant with the Act. If further amendments are forthcoming, please provide the Bureau with those amendments prior to adoption as required by Business and Professions Code section 19961.1.

Sincerely,

BRENT Y. JO
Deputy Attorney General
For ROB BONTA
Attorney General
Enclosure

3 Please note that the Bureau’s October 20, 2023 letter at page 5, last paragraph, should read:

On January 1, 1996, the City had in effect an ordinance limiting the number of tables allowed in [the City] to one table for every 5,000 residents. Based upon the City’s population at that time, the [jurisdictional] table limit would have been 13.

This revision does not, and is not intended to, change the Bureau’s prior analysis.

ATTACHMENT 5
164
Rob Bonta
Attorney General

BUREAU OF GAMBLING CONTROL
2450 DEL PASO ROAD, SUITE 100
SACRAMENTO, CA 95834
December 16, 2024
Ashley Vera Via e-mail only
Associate Planner
City of Livermore
Community Development Department
1052 S. Livermore Ave.

Livermore, CA 94550
[email protected]
Re: City of Livermore – Ordinance Amendments
Dear Ms. Vera:

On November 18, 2024, the California Department of Justice, Bureau of Gambling Control (Bureau), received an email from you that provided the Bureau with a copy of further proposed amendments to chapter 5.20 of the City of Livermore (City) Municipal Code, which contains the ordinances that govern the licensing and operation of gambling establishments.1 These proposed amendments were submitted for review by the Bureau in compliance with Business and Professions Code section 19961.1, and for the Bureau to evaluate the proposed amendments to the City’s Municipal Code in light of the restrictions and limitations contained in the Gambling Control Act (Act). The Bureau offers the following comments. 1 Chapter 5.20 of the City’s Municipal Code refers to a “cardroom,” which the Bureau acknowledges as being synonymous with the definition of a “gambling establishment” under the Gambling Control Act. (See Bus. & Prof. Code, § 19805, subd. (o).) In March 2023, and January 2024, the City submitted proposed amendments to chapter 5.20 of its Municipal Code, and the Bureau provided its comments to the City in letters dated October 20, 2023, and March 12, 2024, respectively. This letter addresses only the proposed amendments that differ from those submitted previously submitted amendments.

ATTACHMENT 5
165
Ashley Vera, Associate Planner, City of Livermore
December 16, 2024

Page 2 ends

1. Section 5.20.1102 – Employee work permits – Issuance restrictions

Section 5.20.110 currently provides that a work permit shall only be issued to citizens of the United States who have resided in California for at least one year immediately preceding the submission of an application for a work permit. The City proposes amending section 5.20.110 to instead provide that work permits shall only be issued to individuals authorized to work in the United States. The proposed amendment appears compliant with the Act.

Sincerely,

BRENT Y. JO
Deputy Attorney General

For ROB BONTA
Attorney General

2 Section references are to the City’s Municipal Code, unless otherwise indicated.

ATTACHMENT 5
166
1 RESOLUTION NO.

IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LIVERMORE, CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PARKWEST CASINO 580 EXPANSION PROJECT

INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION

AND MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Municipal Code Amendment (MUNI) 24-002, Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24-004, Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24-001, Development Agreement (DA) 24-003, Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24-010, and Site Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24-024
The City received applications for Municipal Code Amendment (MUNI) 24-002, Development Code Amendment (DCA) 24-004, Conditional Use Permit Modification (CUPM) 24-001, Development Agreement (DA) 24-003, Site Plan Design Review (SPDR) 24-010, and Site Plan Design Review Modification (SPDRM) 24-024 to 1) amend the Livermore Municipal Code including increasing the total number of card tables permitted citywide, increasing the total number of card table permitted per gambling establishment, increasing allowable hours of operation, increasing the maximum bet limit, permitting limited backline betting, permitting the play of new card games not prohibited by state law, modifying tournament noticing requirements, modifying the number of cardroom licenses permitted per person, and additional miscellaneous amendments made for clarification; 2) authorize operational changes at Parkwest Casino 580 including increasing the number of card tables, increasing hours of operation, increasing the maximum bet limit, permitting limited backline betting, and permitting the play of new card games not prohibited by state law; and 3) approve the development of a 230-space surface parking lot for Parkwest Casino 580 for the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project (“Project”).

On January 7, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project and staff recommendation, heard public testimony, made the necessary findings, and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-25 recommending the City Council adopt the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

On February 24, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project, Planning Commission and staff recommendations, all public comments and testimony, and findings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Livermore that prior to taking action on the Project, and at a properly noticed public hearing, the City Council reviewed written and oral staff reports, conducted a public hearing on the Project and took testimony, and received into the record all pertinent documents related to the Project (collectively, the “Record Evidence”). The City Council’s 167
2 RESOLUTION NO.
determination is based on the Record Evidence, which is incorporated into this Resolution by reference.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore, has considered the findings made in Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-25, attached hereto as Exhibit A, along with the comment and response to comments documents in Exhibits C and D, respectively, and the City Council hereby adopts the same findings by this reference and incorporates them as their own findings as part of this resolution. Based upon the City Council’s own independent review of the Record Evidence and considerations, the City Council hereby finds all potentially significant environmental impacts have been identified in the initial study and reduced to a less-than-significant level with mitigation, and hereby adopts the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration attached hereto as Exhibit B, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDthat the City Council of the City of Livermore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit E, which is incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for the project.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Livermore directs the Planning Manager to file a Notice of Determination with the Alameda County Clerk, if the project is approved.

The documents that constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based can be found in the City Clerk’s Office, 1052 S. Livermore Avenue, in Livermore, California. This resolution shall be effective upon adoption by the City Council.

On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council
Member , the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted on February 24, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/s/ Katherine Mirassou
Deborah L. Elam Katherine Mirassou
City Clerk Assistant City Attorney
Exhibit A – Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-25
Exhibit B – Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration 168
3 RESOLUTION NO.

Exhibit C – Caltrans Comment Letter
Exhibit D – Response to Comments
Exhibit E – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 169

EXHIBIT A
170

EXHIBIT A
171
City of Livermore
Community Development Department
Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project
Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Novemb
er 2024
Prepared by
1501 Sports Drive, Suite A, Sacramento, CA 95834

EXHIBIT B
172

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 1 B. SOURCES ........................................................................................................................ 3 C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED .......................................... 5 D. DETERMINATION ............................................................................................................ 6 E. BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION........................................................................... 7 F. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 7 G. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ................................................................................... 15 I. AESTHETICS. ..................................................................................................... 16 II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. .................................................. 19 III. AIR QUALITY. ..................................................................................................... 20 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. .............................................................................. 28 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. ................................................................................. 39 VI. ENERGY. ............................................................................................................ 42 VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. ..................................................................................... 45 VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. .................................................................... 49 IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. ..................................................... 52 X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. .............................................................. 55 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING............................................................................... 60 XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. .................................................................................... 61 XIII. NOISE. ................................................................................................................ 62 XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING. .......................................................................... 70 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES. ........................................................................................... 71 XVI. RECREATION. .................................................................................................... 73 XVII. TRANSPORTATION. .......................................................................................... 74 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. ................................................................... 79 XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. ............................................................... 82 XX. WILDFIRE. .......................................................................................................... 85 XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. .................................................. 86

APPENDICES:

Appendix A: Air Quality Modeling Results
Appendix B: Biological Resource Technical Report
Appendix C: Transportation Impact Analysis Report

EXHIBIT B
173

INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

November 2024

A. BACKGROUND

1. Project Title: Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project

2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Livermore
Community Development Department
1052 S. Livermore Avenue
Livermore, CA 94550

3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Ashley Vera
Senior Planner
(925) 960-4479

4. Project Location: 950-968 North Canyons Parkway
and unaddressed vacant property to the east of
950-968 North Canyons Parkway
Livermore, CA 94551
APNs: 905-0016-086-00, 905-0016-087-00,
905-0016-088-00, and 905-0009-013-03

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address: Parkwest Casino 580 968 North Canyons Parkway
Livermore, CA 94551

6. General Plan Designation: Isabel Neighborhood (IN)

7. Zoning Designation: Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan (INSP), General Commercial

8. Required Approvals from other Public Agencies: Approval of City of Livermore Municipal Code amendments by the
California Bureau of Gambling Control and
approval of modified permit by the
California Gambling Control Commission

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The approximately 9.5- acre project site ( Assessor’s Parcel Number s [APNs] 905-0016- 088-00, 905-0016-087-00, 905-0016-086-00, and a portion of APN 905-0009-013-03) is located at 968 North Canyons Parkway in the City of Livermore, California. The three western parcel s (APNs 905-0016-088-00, 905-0016-087-00, 905-0016-086-00) are developed with the existing Parkwest Casino 580 and associated parking lot, and the eastern parcel (APN 905-0009-013-03) is undeveloped. Surrounding existing land uses include a business park to the north, across North Canyons Parkway; a gas station, restaurant, and three hotels to the east, across Airway Boulevard; Interstate 580 (I- 580)

EXHIBIT B
174
and the Las Positas Golf Course to the south, and undeveloped land and Doolan Canyon to the west, across Doolan Road. The project site is within the Isabel Neighborhood and is zoned Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan (INSP), General Commercial.

10. Project Description Summary:

The proposed project would add a new surface parking lot with 230 parking spaces, which would be located east of the existing Parkwest Casino 580. The new parking lot would be located on the southern portion of the eastern parcel and would include 1 78 standard stalls, 26 electric vehicle (EV) capable spaces, 26 EV charging stations, as well as racks for up to 36 bicycles. The additional 230 parking spaces would increase the number of available parking spaces for the casino from 131 to 361. In addition, the proposed project would convert five of the existing standard stalls to one Americans with Disabilities (ADA) compliant EV charging station and four ADA stalls. A total of nine ADA stalls and one ADA compliant EV charging station would be provided on-site.

One tree located in the existing parking lot would be removed as part of the proposed project. Removal of the tree would be required to
accommodate a pedestrian connection
from the new surface parking lot to the existing sidewalk surrounding the building. In addition, the applicant is proposing operational changes to Parkwest Casino 580, including an increase in the total number of card tables from 10 to 16 tables, an increase in the hours of operation to 24/7 operations, an increase in the maximum bet limit from $200 to $1,000, permittance of up to 10 backline betters per table, and permittance of new card games not prohibited by state law, including Pai Gow with tiles.

Access to the parking lot would be provided by existing driveways on Doolan Road and North Canyons Parkway, as well as a new driveway from North Canyons Parkway, at the northeast corner of the project site. The proposed project would also include off- site improvements along North Canyons Parkway, including the development of a new Class IV bike lane with a landscaped buffer , and restriping of traffic lanes . The existing bus turnout and concrete pad on North Canyons Parkway w ould be shifted north and space for a bus shelter would be maintained for future installation as determined by the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA). With the exception of new bicycle racks, exterior improvements to the existing Parkwest Casino 580 would not occur as part of the proposed project.

The installation of bicycle racks outside of the Parkwest Casino 580 entrances and tree removal in the existing parking lot would require City approval of a Site Plan Design Review Modification. The parking lot expansion and frontage improvements in the vacant parcel to the east of Parkwest Casino 580 would require City approval of a Site Plan and Design Review. As noted above, the applicant is proposing operational changes to Parkwest Casino 580 related to the number of card tables, hours of operation, bet limits, backline betters, and card games. These operational changes require amendments to the City of Livermore Municipal Code, several of which would also be captured in a new Development Agreement and a modified Conditional Use Permit for the property .

Additional amendments to the Livermore Municipal Code that would be applied citywide include an increase in the total number of card tables citywide, modifications to tournament noticing requirements, changes to the number of cardroom licenses permitted per person, and miscellaneous amendments made for clarification. In addition, a Development Code Amendment is required to update the Livermore Municipal Code section referenced in the cardroom definition. The Site Plan Design Review Modification, Site Plan Design review,

EXHIBIT B
175
Livermore Municipal Code amendments, new Development Agreement, modified Conditional Use Permit, and Development Code Amendment require City approval.

11. Status of Native American Consultation Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1:

In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21080.3.1), a project notification letter was distributed to the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation, Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area, Northern Valley Yokut/Ohlone Tribe, Ohlone Indian Tribe, Wilton Rancheria, and the Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band. The letters were distributed on July 24, 2024. A response from the Ohlone Indian Tribe and the Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation were received, requesting additional information.

The Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of San Juan Bautista provided recommendations if positive cultural or historic sensitivity is determined within one-mile of the project area and requested Tribal monitoring, which have been implemented as m itigation measures herein. The Confederated Villages of Lisjan Nation also provided recommended mitigation measures, which have also been implemented herein. The Indian Canyon Band of Costanoan Ohlone People recommended Tribal monitoring and cultural sensitivity training, which have been implemented as mitigation measures herein. Other requests to consult were not received within the required response period.

B. SOURCES
The following documents are referenced information sources used for the purpose of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND):

1. Alameda County Community Development Agency. Livermore Executive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan [Figure 3-1]. August 2012.

2. Alameda County Transportation Commission. 2023 Congestion Management Program .

October 2023.

3. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023.

4. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April 2022.

5. CalEPA. Cortese List Data Resources . Available at:
https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. Accessed August 2024.

6. California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone. February 27, 2009.

7. California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application.

Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed August 2024.

8. California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder. Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed May 2024.

9. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer.

Available at:
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/03beab8511814e79a0e4eabf0d3e7247/.

Accessed August 2024.

10. California Department of Transportation. California State Scenic Highway System Map.

Available at:

EXHIBIT B
176
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8 e8057116f1aacaa. Accessed August 2024.

11. California Department of Transportation. Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations.

TAV-02-01-R9601. February 20, 2002.

12. City of Livermore Water Resources Division. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. June 28, 2021.

13. City of Livermore. City of Livermore General Plan 2003-2025. Amended December 2014.

14. City of Livermore. Design Standards and Guidelines. Adopted June 28, 2004.

15. City of Livermore. Emergency Operations Plan. January 2018.

16. City of Livermore. Livermore Bicycle and Trails Active Transportation Plan. June 11, 2018.

17. City of Livermore. Livermore Municipal Water . Available at:
https://www.livermoreca.gov/departments/public-works/water-resources/livermore- municipal-water. Accessed August 2024.

18. City of Livermore. Livermore Water Reclamation Plant. Available at:
http://www.cityoflivermore.net/citygov/pw/public_works_divisions/wrd/water_reclamation _plant/lwrp.htm. Accessed May 2021.

19. Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. SWIS Facility Detail, Vasco Road Sanitary Landfill (01-AA-0010). Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/9?siteID=8. Accessed August 2024.

20. Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/. Accessed August 2024.

21. Department of Water Resources. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act 2018 Basin Prioritization [Table A-1]. January 2019.

22. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Insurance Rate Map 06001C0329G.

Effective August 3, 2009.

23. Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Guidelines. May 2006.

24. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December 2018.

25. Historic Resource Associates. Phase 1 Cultural Resources Study Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project 968 North Canyons Parkway, Livermore, Alameda County, California 94550. August 2024.

26. Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority. 30R Dublin-Livermore via Las Positas College. August 10, 2024.

27. Native American Heritage Commission. Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project, Alameda County. July 12, 2024.

28. Natural Resource Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed August 2024.

29. State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Available at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?myaddress=California&from=header&cqid= 8858350455. Accessed August 2024.

30. TJKM. Traffic Impact Analysis Report – Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion. November 6, 2024.

31. WRA Environmental Consultants. Biological Resource Technical Report – Casino Parkwest 580 Parking Lot Expansion. November 2024.

32. Zone 7 Water Agency. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan [pg. 6-7]. March 31, 2016.

33. Zone 7 Water Agency. Groundwater Management Plan for Livermore-Amador Valley Groundwater Basin. September 2005.

EXHIBIT B
177
C. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is “Potentially Significant” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

 Aesthetics  Agriculture and Forest
Resources
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources  Cultural Resources  Energy
 Geology and Soils  Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Hazards and Hazardous Materials  Hydrology and Water
Quality
 Land Use and Planning  Mineral Resources
 Noise  Population and Housing  Public Services
 Recreation  Transportation  Tribal Cultural Resources  Utilities and Service
Systems
 Wildfire  Mandatory Findings of
Significance

EXHIBIT B
178

EXHIBIT B
179
E. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
This IS/MND identifies and analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project (proposed project). The information and analysis presented in this document is organized in accordance with the order of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) checklist in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Where the analysis provided in this document identifies potentially significant environmental effects of the project, mitigation measures are prescribed.

The mitigation measures prescribed for environmental effects described in this IS/MND would be implemented in conjunction with the project, as required by CEQA. The mitigation measures would be incorporated into the project through project conditions of approval. The City would adopt findings and a Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project in conjunction with approval of the project.

In 2004, the City of Livermore completed a comprehensive update of the City’s General Plan and adopted an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the updated General Plan. The General Plan EIR is a program EIR, prepared pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR], Sections 15000 et seq.). The General Plan EIR analyzed full implementation of the General Plan and identified measures to mitigate the significant adverse impacts associated with the General Plan. In 2009, the City certified a Supplemental EIR analyzing proposed amendments to the General Plan to include policies related to Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. Applicable portions of the General Plan and General Plan EIR are incorporated by reference, as necessary, as part of this IS/MND. Project-specific technical reports have been prepared for the proposed project and form the basis of applicable technical sections of this I S/MND. Technical reports used in the preparation of this IS/MND are included as appendices.

In 2018, the INSP was prepared to guide future development of the area surrounding the proposed San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) station in the I-580 median at Isabel Avenue. On May 14, 2018, the Livermore City Council adopted the INSP and certified the EIR (SCH #2016042039) for the INSP. The resolution accompanying the adoption (Resolution #2018- 067) stated, “The INSP is contingent upon the decision by the BART Board of Directors to extend conventional (full) BART service to Isabel Avenue (as opposed to another transit mode) …” At its May 24, 2018 meeting, the BART Board voted not to advance BART to Livermore. The City of Livermore has since allowed INSP to proceed with a Valley Link Station. Similar to the BART to Livermore extension, the proposed Valley Link rail system would include a transit station at Isabel Avenue in the I-580 median. In 2020, the City of Livermore prepared an updated INSP, which included modifications to the INSP policies and maps related to the proposed Valley Link Rail system, as well as minor land use map adjustments to better reflect the existing development. A Supplemental EIR to the 2018 INSP EIR was prepared and certified for the 2020 INSP update.

F. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The following provides a description of the project site’s current location and setting, as well as the proposed project components and the discretionary actions required for the project.

Project Location and Setting
The approximately 9.5-acre project site, identified by APNs 905-0016-086-00, 905-0016-008087- 00, 905-0016-088-00, and a portion of 905-0009-013-03, is located at 950-968 North Canyons Parkway and an unaddressed vacant parcel to the east of 950-968 North Canyons Parkway in the City of Livermore, California. The three western parcels (APNs 905-0016-086-00, 905-0016- 008087-00, 905-0016- 088-00) are developed with the existing Parkwest Casino 580 and

EXHIBIT B
180
associated parking lot, and the eastern parcel (APN 905-0009-013-03) is undeveloped.

Surrounding existing land uses include a business park to the north, across North Canyons Parkway; undeveloped land to the east, as well as a gas station, restaurant, and hotels further east, across Airway Boulevard; I- 580 and the Las Positas Golf Course to the south; and undeveloped land and Doolan Canyon to the west, across Doolan Road (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The General Plan designates the project site as Isabel Neighborhood (IN) , and the site is zoned Isabel Neighborhood Specific Plan (INSP), General Commercial.

Project Components
The proposed project would include a new surface parking lot with 230 parking spaces, located east of the existing casino, which would serve the casino’s customers and employees (see Figure 3). The new parking lot would be located on the southern portion of the eastern parcel and would include 178 standard stalls, 26 EV capable spaces, 26 EV charging stations, as well as racks for up to 36 bicycles. The additional 2 30 parking spaces would increase the number of available parking spaces for the casino from 131 to 361. The proposed project would also convert five of the existing standard stalls to one ADA compliant EV charging station and four ADA stalls. A total of nine ADA stalls and one ADA compliant EV charging station would be provided on-site.

In addition, the applicant is proposing operational changes , including an increase in the total number of card tables from 10 to 16 tables , an increase in the hours of operation to 24/7 operations, an increase in the maximum bet limit from $200 to $1,000, permittance of up to 10 backline betters per table, and permittance of new card games not prohibited by state law , including Pai Gow with tiles. As discussed below, the aforementioned operational changes would require amendments to the Livermore Municipal Code, which would be applied citywide. The proposed parking lot would alleviate the existing parking deficit and accommodate the anticipated increase in parking demand resulting from the operational changes at the casino.

Poles and lighting would be installed within the parking lot islands. The proposed parking lot would connect to the existing casino parking lot to the west, which is currently accessed from driveways on Doolan Road and North Canyons Parkway. The proposed parking lot would also connect to a new driveway on North Canyons Parkway, at the northeast corner of the project site. On-site improvements would include additional ADA striping and symbols at four designated ADA parking spaces located in front of the casino entrance. The proposed project would also include off-site improvements along North Canyons Parkway, including upgrading the existing Class II bike lane to a Class IV separated bikeway, restriping of traffic lanes, and shifting the existing bus turnout and bus shelter pad north of its existing location for future installation and use by LAVTA. Exterior improvements to the existing Parkwest Casino 580 would be limited to the installation of bicycle racks near the business entrances as part of the proposed project.

A landscape area planted with hydroseed grass would be located north of the proposed parking lot expansion and smaller landscape islands would be located throughout the parking lot. Three bioretention planters would be located along the center and southwest corner of the parking lot.

Concrete pavement would be located along the eastern border of the large landscape area and three concrete islands would be located within the parking lot.

The proposed project would include approximately 2.72 gross acres of new impervious surfaces as part of development of the parking lot. The project site would be divided into two drainage management areas (DMAs).

EXHIBIT B
181
Figure 1
Regional Project Location

Project Site

EXHIBIT B
182
Figure 2
Approximate Project Site Boundaries Map

EXHIBIT B
183
Figure 3
Site Plan

EXHIBIT B
184
Stormwater runoff from the new impervious surfaces within the DMAs would be directed to the three on-site bioretention planters, with two located within DMA 1 as part of Treatment Control Measure (TCM) 1, and one located within DMA 2 as part of TCM 2. (see Figure 4).

Municipal Code Amendment
The proposed project would include amendments to Chapter 5.20, Cardrooms, of the Livermore Municipal Code. Several of the amendments are cardroom -specific and include additional services that may be permitted to a cardroom requesting “expanded services ,” as described in Livermore Municipal Code Section 5.20.160(Q) . The remaining amendments are applicable citywide. The proposed amendments include the following:

• Increase the limit of the allowable number of cardroom licenses per person from one to two cardroom licenses per person;
• Increase the limit on the number of cardroom tables citywide from one table per 4,200 residents to 32 tables citywide;
• Increase the maximum number of tables per cardroom from 10 tables to 16 tables; • Increase tournament noticing requirements to the Chief of Police from 5 days to 14 days in advance of a tournament with a list of games to be played, a parking plan, and a security plan;
• Permission to play games not prohibited by State law, including Pai Gow with tiles; • Increase the number of players allowed per card table from 10 seated players to 10 seated players and up to 10 standing betters;
• Increase allowed hours of operation from 24 hours a day, with a 9- hour closure on Mondays, to 24 hours a day, seven days a week;
• Increase maximum bet limit from $200 to $1,000; and
• Miscellaneous amendments made for clarification including the definition of a cardroom, references to applicable state law sections, entitlement and permit requirements, license fee exceptions, license revocation appeal process, employee work permit restri ctions, process to grant additional card tables to eligible cardrooms, and cross references to sections within Chapter 5.20.

The aforementioned changes to Chapter 5.20 of the Livermore Municipal Code would apply to all cardrooms in the City, subject to City approval of a new or amended Development Agreement and Conditional Use Permit. Only one other cardroom, Livermore Casino, exists in the City. The Municipal Code changes would only apply if the Livermore Casino applies for a new or amended Development Agreement or Conditional Use Permit, which would be subject to separate environmental review and discretionary approval.

Development Agreement
The Livermore Development Code requires cardrooms requesting expanded services, such as the proposed project, to enter into a Development Agreement (DA) to provide the applicant assurance for the expanded services and require the applicant provide a public benefit. Parkwest Casino 580 has an existing DA with the City. However, the proposed project would require a new DA to allow for the modified operational changes and an amended public benefit. As discussed above, operational changes would include an increase in the total number of card tables from 10 to 16 tables, an increase in the hours of operation to 24/7 operations, an increase in the maximum bet limit from $200 to $1,000, permittance of up to 10 backline betters per table, and permittance of new card games not prohibited by state law, including Pai Gow with tiles.

EXHIBIT B
185
Figure 4
Preliminary Stormwater Quality Control Plan

EXHIBIT B
186
Amended public benefits associated with the proposed project would include payment of monthly fees per card table and additional financial contributions.

Conditional Use Permit
Pursuant to the INSP, cardrooms within the General Commercial land use designation require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). In addition, cardrooms requesting expanded services, such as the proposed project, are subject to a CUP pursuant to the Livermore Development Code. The Parkwest Casino 580 operates under an existing CUP. However, the proposed project would require a modification to the existing CUP to allow for the modified operational changes.

Development Code Amendment
An amendment to Chapter 11, Definitions, of the Livermore Development Code would be required as part of the proposed project. The amendment would update the Livermore Municipal Code section referenced in the Livermore Development Code under the cardroom definition.

Site Plan and Design Review and Site Plan Design Review Modification The proposed project would be subject to a Site Plan and Design Review and Site Plan Design Review Modification by the City of Livermore. Chapter 9.07 of the City’s Development Code specifies that the purpose of Site Plan and Design Review “is to provide a process for the appropriate review of construction and development projects.” Such review is intended to ensure that new development and/or redevelopment within the City respect environmental and aesthetic considerations, reduce potential visual impacts, and provide for physical safety of the public, among other considerations. As described above, the Site Plan Design Review and Site Plan Design Review Modification entitlements are required for the new parking lot, tree removal, and bicycle rack installation.

Discretionary Actions
The proposed project would require City approval of the following:

• Adoption of the IS/MND;
• Adoption of the MMRP;
• Municipal Code Amendment;
• Development Agreement;
• Conditional Use Permit Modification;
• Development Code Amendment;
• Site Plan and Design Review; and
• Site Plan Design Review Modification.

In addition, the California Bureau of Gambling Control (CBGC) must review and preliminarily approve all changes related to Livermore Municipal Code Chapter 5.20, Cardrooms. The CBGC provided preliminary approval of the proposed Municipal Code amendments in October 2023.

Should the City Council approve the project, the City must provide a copy of the Municipal Code changes to the CBGC. Finally, the cardroom must apply for, and the California Gambling Control Commission must approve, the cardroom’s request to operate 16 tables before the project applicant can apply for an amended cardroom license with the City. The project applicant will be leading the effort to acquire an updated gaming license.

EXHIBIT B
187
G. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The following checklist contains the environmental checklist form presented in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The checklist form is used to describe the impacts of the proposed project. A discussion follows each environmental issue identified in the checklist. For this checklist, the following designations are used:

Potentially Significant Impact: An impact that could be significant, and for which no mitigation has been identified. If any potentially significant impacts are identified, an EIR must be prepared.

Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: An impact that requires mitigation to reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

Less-Than-Significant Impact: Any impact that would not be considered significant under CEQA relative to existing standards.

No Impact: The project would not have any impact.

EXHIBIT B
188
I. AESTHETICS.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?     b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
   
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized ar ea, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
   
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
   

Discussion
a,b. Examples of typical scenic vistas include mountain ranges, ridgelines, or bodies of water as viewed from a highway, public space, or other area designated for the express purpose of viewing and sightseeing. In general, a project’s impact to a scenic vista would occur if development of the project would substantially change or remove a scenic vista. The City’s General Plan identifies a number of roadways within the Planning Area that are considered scenic routes. Scenic routes are designated as such because they pass through areas of high scenic value or provide access to important scenic, recreational, cultural, or historic points.
1 Scenic routes identified in the project vicinity include I-580 and Isabel Avenue. In addition, the General Plan identifies specific scenic vista points throughout the City. Figure 4-1 of the City’s’ General Plan identifies the area looking south from I-580 towards the Las Positas Golf Course as a scenic vista. In addition, Figure 2 -6 of the INSP includes four scenic viewpoints located along I-580 to the east of the project site, none of which include the project site. The proposed project would not affect such views from I-580.

According to the City’s General Plan, protection of scenic views from I-580 is of particular importance, because the roadway provides some of the best views of Livermore’s surrounding hillsides and ridgelines. As such, the City seeks to preserve views from I-580 through control of grading, landscaping, and building height within the I-580 Scenic Corridor. The I-580 Scenic Corridor is defined as areas that are within 3,500 feet of the freeway centerline and are visible from the roadway. While the project site is located within 3,500 feet of I-580, the proposed project would be limited to the expansion of the existing parking lot and would not introduce new buildings that could block views from I-580.

Additionally, the landscaping associated with the proposed project would be subject to approval of Site Plan and Design Review, which would reduce potential visual impacts.

According to the California Scenic Highway Mapping System, the project site is not located within the vicinity of an officially designated State Scenic Highway. I-580 is an Eligible State Scenic Highway, but has not been officially designated. The nearest officially designated State Scenic Highway is I-680, located approximately 5.4 miles from the 1 City of Livermore. City of Livermore General Plan 2003-2025. Amended December 2014.

EXHIBIT B
189
project site.2 Thus, the proposed project would not have a significant impact on a State Scenic Highway.

Based on the above, development of the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

c. The project site includes the existing Parkwest Casino 580, as well as an undeveloped parcel. Surrounding land uses include a business park to the north, across North Canyons Parkway; a gas station, restaurant, and three hotels to the east, across Airway Boulevard; I-580 and the Las Positas Golf Course to the south; and undeveloped land and Doolan Canyon to the west, across Doolan Road. Therefore, the site is in an urbanized area and, in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the relevant threshold is whether the project would conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

Physical improvements associated with the proposed project would be limited to the expansion of the existing parking lot, and the exterior of the existing building would not change. Nonetheless, the proposed project would be subject to Site Plan and Design Review and Site Plan Design Review Modification pursuant to Section 9.07.020 of the City’s Development Code. Chapter 9.07 of the City’s Development Code specifies that the purpose of Site Plan and Design Review “is to provide a process for the appropriate review of construction and development projects.” As part of the design review process, the project would be reviewed for conformance with the City of Livermore Design Standards and Guidelines, which include provisions related to architectural design, landscaping, exterior materials, and compatibility with existing uses. 3 For example, Section D,
Landscape Design, of Chapter 5 of the City’s Design Standards and Guidelines contains specific requirements related to landscape coverage and layout within parking areas.

Compliance with such would ensure consistency with all applicable policies and guidelines related to visual resources in the project vicinity.

Based on the above, the proposed project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, and a less-than -significant impact would occur.

d. Due to the undeveloped nature of the parking lot expansion area, existing sources of light and glare do not currently exist. However, the existing Parkwest Casino 580 creates sources of light and glare within a portion of the site. In addition, existing sources of light and glare are currently present within the project vicinity, mainly associated with traffic on I-580, roadway lighting along the project site frontages, and the outdoor and indoor lighting fixtures of existing development within the project vicinity such as the business park to the north.

Development of the project site with the proposed parking lot expansion would involve sources of light and glare associated with outdoor lighting within parking areas. However, through the City’s Site Plan and Design Review process, the proposed project would be reviewed for consistency with the City’s Design Standards and Guidelines. 4 Section F,
2 California Department of Transportation. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Available at:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa.

Accessed August 2024.
3 City of Livermore. Design Standards and Guidelines. Adopted June 28, 2004. 4 City of Livermore. Design Standards and Guidelines Adopted June 28, 2004.

EXHIBIT B
190
Lighting Design, of Chapter 5 of the City’s Design Standards and Guidelines contains specific restrictions to ensure that the design of fixtures and the light provided contributes to the character of development and does not adversely affect adjacent development.

Pursuant to Guidelines F.1.2.3, area lighting should be directed downward or employ control features to avoid light being directed off-site and to avoid lighting of the night sky.

Compliance with the City’s Design Standards and Guidelines would ensure that lighting from the proposed project would not be directed off-site, and would not adversely affect existing development in the project vicinity.

Given that the Site Plan and Design Review process would include plan checks to ensure that proposed lighting features are properly designed to avoid lighting off-site onto nearby commercial developments, or into the night sky, implementation of the project would result in a less-than-significant impact with respect to creating a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

EXHIBIT B
191
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST
RESOURCES.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
   
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?    
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
   
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?    
e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
   

Discussion
a,e. The project site currently consists of the existing Parkwest Casino 580, as well as undeveloped land in the eastern parcel. According to the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), the site is designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land.”
5 With respect to whether the proposed project
involves other changes in the existing environment which could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use, farmland is not located adjacent to the project site, such that it could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed project. Therefore, no impact would occur.

b. The proposed project site is not under a Williamson Act contract and is not designated or zoned for agricultural uses. Therefore, buildout of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact would occur.

c,d. The project area is not considered forest land (as defined in PRC Section 12220[g]), timberland (as defined by PRC Section 4526), and is not zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104[g]). Therefore, the proposed project would have no impact with regard to conversion of forest land or any potential conflict with forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production zoning. 5 California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed May 2024.

EXHIBIT B
192
III. AIR QUALITY.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?    
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
   
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?    
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
   

Discussion
a,b. The City of Livermore is located in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin (SFBAAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). The SFBAAB area is currently designated as a nonattainment area for the State and feder al ozone, State and federal fine particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5), and State respirable particulate matter 10 microns in diameter (PM 10) ambient air quality standards (AAQS). The SFBAAB is designated attainment or unclassified for all other AAQS. It should be noted that on January 9, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued a final rule to determine that the Bay Area has attained the 24-hour PM

2.5 federal AAQS. Nonetheless, the Bay Area must continue to be designated as nonattainment for the federal PM 2.5 AAQS until such time as the BAAQMD submits a redesignation request and a maintenance plan to the USEPA, and the USEPA approves the proposed redesignation. The USEPA has not yet approved a request for redesignation of the SFBAAB; therefore, the SFBAAB remains in nonattainment for 24-hour PM

2.5. In compliance with regulations, due to the nonattainment designations of the area, the BAAQMD periodically prepares and updates air quality plans that provide emission reduction strategies to achieve attainment of the AAQS, including control strategies to reduce air pollutant emissions through regulations, incentive programs, public educ ation, and partnerships with other agencies. The current air quality plans are prepared in cooperation with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

The most recent federal ozone plan is the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan, which was adopted on October 24, 2001 and approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) on November 1, 2001. The plan was submitted to the USEPA on November 30, 2001 for review and approval. The most recent State ozone plan is the 2017 Clean Air Plan, adopted on April 19, 2017. The 2017 C lean Air Plan was developed as a multi -pollutant plan that provides an integrated control strategy to reduce ozone, PM, toxic air contaminants (TACs), and GHGs. Although a plan for achieving the State PM 10 standard
is not required, the BAAQMD has prioritized measures to reduce PM in developing the control strategy for the 2017 Clean Air Plan. The control strategy serves as the backbone of the BAAQMD’s current PM control program.

The aforementioned air quality plans contain mobile source controls, stationary source controls, and transportation control measures to be implemented in the region to attain the State and federal AAQS within the SFBAAB. Adopted BAAQMD rules and regulations, as well as the thresholds of significance, have been developed with the intent to ensure

EXHIBIT B
193
continued attainment of AAQS, or to work towards attainment of AAQS for which the area is currently designated nonattainment, consistent with applicable air quality plans. The BAAQMD’s established significance thresholds associated with development projects for emissions of the ozone precursors reactive organic gases (ROG) and oxides of nitrogen (NO
X), as well as for PM10, and PM2.5, expressed in pounds per day (lbs/day) and tons per year (tons/yr), are listed in Table 1.

Table 1
BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
Pollutant
Construction Operational
Average Daily
Emissions
(lbs/day)
Average Daily
Emissions
(lbs/day)
Maximum Annual
Emissions
(tons/year)
ROG 54 54 10
NOx 54 54 10
PM10 (exhaust) 82 82 15
PM2.5 (exhaust) 54 54 10
Source: BAAQMD, CEQA Guidelines, May 2017.

By exceeding the BAAQMD’s mass emission thresholds for construction or operational emissions of ROG, NOX, PM10, or PM2.5, a project would be considered to conflict with or obstruct implementation of the BAAQMD’s air quality planning efforts.

Particulate matter can be split into two categories: fugitive and exhaust. The BAAQMD thresholds of significance for exhaust are presented in Table 1. BAAQMD does not maintain quantitative thresholds for fugitive emissions of PM 10 or PM2.5, rather, BAAQMD
requires all projects within the district’s jurisdiction to implement Basic Construction Mitigation Measures (BCMMs) related to dust suppression.

In order to compare the proposed project’s emissions to the most recent BAAQMD thresholds, air quality modeling was conducted for the proposed project. The proposed project’s construction and operational emissions were quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) web -based version 2022.1.1.26 – a statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify air quality emissions, including GHG emissions, from land use projects. The model applies inherent default values for various land uses, including construction data, trip generation rates, vehicle mix, trip length, average speed, compliance with the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), etc.

Where project-specific information is available, such information is applied in the model.

For the proposed project, project-specific trip generation rates provided by TJKM traffic consultants were input into the model, as well as information related to the anticipated construction schedule for the proposed project. In addition, t he modeling assumed that the grading phase of construction would require the removal of approximately 49,000 cubic yards (CY) of soil from the site, and the off-site improvements to North Canyons Parkway would include 0.35-acres of asphalt surfaces. All CalEEMod results are included as Appendix A to this IS/MND.

The proposed project’s estimated emissions associated with construction and operations are presented and discussed in further detail below. A discussion of the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative air quality conditions is provided below as well.

EXHIBIT B
194
Construction Emissions
During construction of the proposed project, various types of equipment and vehicles would temporarily operate on the project site. Construction exhaust emissions would be generated from construction equipment, vegetation clearing and earth movement activities, construction worker commutes, and construction material hauling for the entire construction period. The aforementioned activities would involve the use of diesel - and gasoline-powered equipment that would generate emissions of criteria pollutants. Project construction activities also represent sources of fugitive dust, which include PM emissions.

As construction of the proposed project would generate air pollutant emissions intermittently within the site, and the vicinity of the site, until all construction has been completed, construction emissions are a potential concern because the proposed project is in a non-attainment area for ozone and PM.

According to the CalEEMod results, the proposed project would result in maximum unmitigated construction criteria air pollutant emissions as shown in Table 2. As shown in the table, the proposed project’s construction emissions would not exceed the applicable thresholds of significance for ROG, NO
x, PM10, and PM2.5.

Table 2
Maximum Unmitigated Construction Emissions (lbs/day)
Pollutant
Proposed Project
Emissions
Threshold of
Significance
Exceeds
Threshold?
ROG 3.64 54 NO
NOX 54.0 54 NO
PM10* 0.87 82 NO
PM2.5* 0.87 54 NO
Note:
* Denotes emissions from exhaust only. BAAQMD has not yet adopted PM thresholds for fugitive emissions.

Source: CalEEMod, August 2024 (see Appendix A).

All projects under the jurisdiction of the BAAQMD are required to implement all of the BAAQMD’s BCMMs, which include the following:

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

EXHIBIT B
195

7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator.

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

The proposed project’s required implementation of the BAAQMD’s B CMMs listed above would help to further minimize construction-related emissions. In particular, implementation of the foregoing measures would reduce fugitive dust emissions resulting from project construction. Even without consideration of BAAQMD’s BCMMs, as shown in Table 2, construction of the proposed project would result in emissions of criteria air pollutants below BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance. Consequently, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans during project construction.

Operational Emissions
According to the CalEEMod results, the proposed project would result in maximum unmitigated operational criteria air pollutant emissions as shown in Table 3. As shown in the table, the proposed project’s operational emissions of ROG, NO x, PM10, and PM 2.5
would be below the applicable thresholds. Consequently, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans during project operation.

Table 3
Unmitigated Maximum Operational Emissions
Pollutant
Proposed Project
Emissions
Threshold of
Significance Exceeds
Threshold? lbs/day tons/yr lbs/day tons/yr
ROG 1.13 0.19 54 10 NO
NOX 1.11 0.19 54 10 NO
PM10* 0.02 <0.005 82 15 NO
PM2.5* 0.01 <0.005 54 10 NO
* Emissions from exhaust only. BAAQMD has not yet adopted thresholds for fugitive PM emissions.

Source: CalEEMod, August 2024 (see Appendix A).

Cumulative Emissions
Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. A single project is not sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of AAQS. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project’s contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project’s impact on air quality would be considered significant. In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, BAAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. The thresholds of significance presented in Table 1 represent the levels at which a project’s individual emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursors would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the SFBAAB’s existing air quality conditions. 6 If a project
6 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023.

EXHIBIT B
196
exceeds the significance thresholds presented in Table 1, that project’s emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse cumulative air quality impacts to the region’s existing air quality conditions. As presented above, the proposed project would not exceed the applicable thresholds for criteria pollutant emissions during project construction or operations. Thus, the project w ould not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the region’s existing air quality conditions.

Conclusion
As stated previously, the applicable regional air quality plans include the 2001 Ozone Attainment Plan and the 2017 C lean Air Plan. Because the proposed project w ould not result in construction or operational emissions of criteria pollutants in excess of BAAQMD’s applicable threshold of significance, conflicts with or obstruction of implementation of the applicable regional air quality plans w ould not occur. Thus, a less- than-significant impact would result.

c. Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others, due to the types of population groups or activities involved. Heightened sensitivity may be caused by health problems, proximity to the emissions source, and/or duration of exposure to air pollutants. Children, pregnant women, the elderly, and those with existing health problems are especially vulnerable to the effects of air pollution. Accordingly, land uses that are typically considered to be sensitive receptors include residences, schools, childcare centers, playgrounds, retirement homes, convalescent homes, hospitals, and medical clinics. Within the project vicinity, the nearest sensitive receptor is the Acton Academy East Bay school , located approximately 700 feet northeast of the project site’s northern boundary.

The major pollutant concentrations of concern are localized carbon monoxide (CO), TAC emissions, and criteria pollutant emissions, which are addressed in further detail below.

Localized CO Emissions
High levels of localized CO concentrations are only expected where background levels are high, and traffic volumes and congestion levels are high. Emissions of CO are of potential concern, as the pollutant is a toxic gas that results from the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as gasoline or wood. CO emissions are particularly related to traffic levels.

In order to provide a conservative indication of whether a project would result in localized CO emissions that would exceed the applicable threshold of significance, the BAAQMD has established screening criteria for localized CO emissions. According to BAA QMD, a proposed project would result in a less -than-significant impact related to localized CO emission concentrations if all of the following conditions are true for the project:

• The project is consistent with an applicable congestion management program established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways, regional transportation plan, and local congestion management agency plans;
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour; and
• The project traffic would not increase traffic volumes at affected intersections to more than 24,000 vehicles per hour where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is substantially limited (e.g., tunnel, parking garage, underpass, etc.).

EXHIBIT B
197
The proposed project is anticipated to generate a total of approximately 304 daily trips, including 26 AM peak hour trips and 25 PM peak hour trips. 7 Additionally, the proposed project is consistent with the site’s current land use and zoning designations. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the Alameda County Transportation Commission Congestion Management Program (CMP). 8 T he highest volume of an affected intersection (North Canyons Parkway/Airway Boulevard) under Existing Plus Project conditions would be 885 vehicles during the PM peak hour, thus the proposed project would not increase traffic volumes at any intersection to more than 44,000 vehicles per hour. Furthermore, areas where vertical and/or horizontal mixing is limited due to tunnels, underpasses, or similar features do not exist in the project area. Therefore, based on the BAAQMD’s screening criteria for localized CO emissions, the proposed project would not be expected to result in substantial levels of localized CO at surrounding intersections or generate localized concentrations of CO that would exceed standards or cause health hazards.

TAC Emissions
Another category of environmental concern is TACs. The CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (Handbook) provides recommended setback distances for sensitive land uses from major sources of TACs, including, but not limited to, freeways and high traffic roads, distribution centers, gas dispensing facilities, and rail yards. The CARB has identified diesel particulate matter (DPM) from diesel-fueled engines as a TAC; thus, high volume freeways, stationary diesel engines, and facilities attracting heavy and constant diesel vehicle traffic are identified as having the highest associated health risks from DPM. Health risks associated with TACs are a function of both the concentration of emissions and the duration of exposure, where the higher the concentration and/or the longer the period of time that a sensitive receptor is exposed to pollutant concentrations would correlate to a higher health risk. As noted above, the nearest existing sensitive receptor to the project site is the Acton Academy East Bay school, located approximately 700 feet northeast of the project site’s northern boundary.

The proposed project does not include any operations that would be considered a substantial source of TACs. Accordingly, operations of the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to excess concentrations of TACs.

Short-term, construction-related activities would result in the generation of TACs, specifically DPM, from on-road haul trucks and off-road equipment exhaust emissions.

Construction is temporary and occurs over a relatively short duration in comparison to the operational lifetime of the proposed project. Health risks are typically associated with exposure to high concentrations of TACs over extended periods of time (e.g., 30 years or greater), whereas the construction activities associated with the proposed project are estimated to be temporary and periodic, with construction completed over the course of approximately eight months, and the intensive equipment phase occurring over a total period of four weeks.

All construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated pursuant to the In- Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which is intended to help reduce emissions associated with off-road diesel vehicles and equipment, including DPM. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable BAAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. In addition, only 7 TJKM. Traffic Impact Analysis Report – Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion. November 6, 2024. 8 Alameda County Transportation Commission. 2023 Congestion Management Program. October 2023.

EXHIBIT B
198
portions of the site would be disturbed at a time throughout the construction period, with operation of construction equipment occurring intermittently throughout the course of a day rather than continuously at any one location on the project site. Operation of construction equipment within portions of the development area would allow for the dispersal of emissions, and would ensure that construction -activity is not continuously occurring in the portions of the project site closest to existing sensitive receptors. Because construction equipment on-site would not operate for long periods of time and would be used at varying locations within the site, associated emissions of DPM would not occur at the same location (or be evenly spread throughout the entire project site) for long periods of time. Due to the temporary nature of construction and the relatively short duration of potential exposure to associated emissions, the potential for any one sensitive receptor in the area to be exposed to concentrations of pollutants for an extended period of time would be low.

Conclusion
Based on the above, the proposed project would not expose any sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of localized CO or TACs during construction or operation.

Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant impact related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

d. Emissions of concern include those leading to odors, emission of dust, or emissions considered to constitute air pollutants. Air pollutants have been discussed in sections “a” through “c” above. Therefore, the following discussion focuses on emissions of odors and dust.

Per the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines, odors are generally regarded as an annoyance rather than a health hazard.
9 Manifestations of a person’s reaction to odors can range from psychological (e.g., irritation, anger, or anxiety) to physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory effects, nausea, vomiting, and headache). The presence of an odor impact is dependent on a number of variables including: the nature of the odor source; the frequency of odor generation; the intensity of odor; the distance of odor source to sensitive receptors; wind direction; and sensitivity of the receptor.

Due to the subjective nature of odor impacts, the different variables that can influence the potential for an odor impact, and the variety of odor sources, quantitative analysis to determine the presence of a significant odor impact is difficult. Typical odor -generating land uses include, but are not limited to, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and composting facilities. The proposed project would not introduce any such land uses.

Construction activities often include diesel-fueled equipment and heavy-duty trucks, which could create odors associated with diesel fumes that may be considered objectionable.

However, the construction phase is temporary in nature and would occur over a period of approximately eight months, with the intensive equipment phase occurring over a total of only four weeks. Project construction would also be required to comply with all applicable BAAQMD rules and regulations, particularly associated with permitting of air pollutant sources. The aforementioned regulations would help to minimize emissions, including emissions leading to odors. Accordingly, substantial objectionable odors would not be expected to occur during construction activities.

9 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023.

EXHIBIT B
199
As noted previously, all projects under the jurisdiction of BAAQMD are required to implement the BAAQMD’s BCMMs. The BCMMs would act to reduce construction-related dust by ensuring that haul trucks with loose material are covered, reducing vehicle dirt track-out, and limiting vehicle speeds within the improvement area, among other methods, which would ensure that construction of the proposed project does not result in substantial emissions of dust. Following construction, the entire improvement area would be either paved or landscaped. Thus, project operations would not generate significant amounts of dust that would adversely affect a substantial number of people.

For the aforementioned reasons, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people, and a less-than-significant impact would result.

EXHIBIT B
200
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
   
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
   
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
   
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites?
   
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
   
f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
   

Discussion
a. Several species of plants and animals within the State of California have low populations, limited distributions, or both. Such species may be considered “rare” and are vulnerable to extirpation as the state’s human population grows and the habitats the species occupy are converted to agricultural and urban uses. State and federal laws have provided the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) with a mechanism for conserving and protecting the diversity of plant and animal species native to the state. A sizable number of native plants and animals have been formerly designated as threatened or endangered under state and federal endangered species legislation. Others have been designated as “candidates” for such listing. Still others have been designated as “species of special concern” by CDFW. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS) has developed its own set of lists of native plants considered rare, threatened, or endangered. Collectively, these plants and animals are referred to as “special-status species.” Although CDFW Species of Special Concern generally do not have special legal status, they are given special consideration under CEQA. Special - status species include the following:

• Plant and wildlife species that have been formally listed as threatened or endangered, or are candidates for such listing by the USFWS or National Marine Fisheries (NMFS);
• Plant and wildlife species that have been listed as threatened or endangered or are candidates for such listing by the CDFW;
• CDFW Species of Special Concern, which are species that face extirpation in California if current population and habitat trends continue;

EXHIBIT B
201
• CDFW Fully Protected Species; and
• Species on CNPS Lists 1 and 2, which are considered to be rare, threatened, or endangered in California by the CNPS and CDFW.

As discussed below under Question ‘f,’ the project site is within the boundaries of the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy (EACCS), a guidance document for regional conservation and environmental permitting for private and public development projects.

The proposed project would be subject to applicable EACCS requirements related to special-status species.

In addition to regulations for special-status species, most birds in the U.S., including non- status species, are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918. Under the MBTA, destroying active nests, eggs, and young is illegal.

The following discussion is based primarily on a Biological Resourc e Technical Report (BRTR) prepared by WRA Environmental Consultants for the proposed project (see Appendix B).
10 The BRTR evaluated existing biological resources within the approximately

11.31-acre study area, which encompassed the area to be developed with the proposed parking lot, as well as the undeveloped land to the east of the project site bounded by North Canyons Parkway to the north, Airway Boulevard to the east, and an I-580 on-ramp to the south. With regard to the off-site improvements along North Canyons Parkway, the proposed project would not include any new ground disturbance within the existing right- of-way (ROW). In order to identify potential biological resource constraints and assess the suitability of habitats in the study area to potentially support State- and federally-protected species, the BRTR’s analysis included review of background literature to determine the potential presence of sensitive vegetation communities, aquatic communities, and special- status plant and wildlife species. Resources reviewed for sensitive vegetation and aquatic features included aerial photography, mapped soil types, the CNPS Online Databases, the CDFW’s California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), and the USFW’s Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database. Additionally, a site visit was conducted on June 18, 2024 to map vegetation, aquatic features, and other land cover types; document plant and wildlife species present; and evaluate on-site habitat for the potential to support special-status species.

Special-Status Plants
Based on the results of the CNDDB, CNPS, and IPaC search, a total of 14 special-status plant species have been documented to occur within the vicinity of the study area. The study area is unlikely or does not have potential to support 11 of the 14 of the species because hydrologic conditions, soil conditions, pH conditions, and vegetation communities, such as forest, woodland, scrub, or vernal pools, necessary to support the species are not present . Additionally, the study area is geographically isolated from the documented range of the majority of special-status species, and the historic land use of the study area has resulted in habitat conversion and has a degree of disturbance to preclude the colonization and establishment of special-status species.

Three special-status plant species were determined to have moderate potential to occur within the study area, including Livermore Valley tarplant (Deinandra bacigalpuii ), Congdon’s tarplant ( Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii), and San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquiniana). While the three aforementioned species were not observed during 10 WRA Environmental Consultants. Biological Resource Technical Report – Casino Parkwest 580 Parking Lot Expansion. November 2024.

EXHIBIT B
202
the June 18, 2024, site visit, the species germinate and bolt in late spring, and bloom in the summer into fall. Likewise, the species are annuals that are tolerant of disturbance (e.g., tilling) and can tolerate competitive pressure from non-native annual herbs (e.g., wild oats (Avena barbata). The species are discussed in detailed below.

Livermore Valley Tarplant
Livermore Valley tarplant is listed as endangered by the CDFW and is a CNPS Rank 1B.1 plant. The species is an annual forb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae) that blooms from June through October and typically occurs in alkaline herbaceous communities and scalds within meadow and seep habitat at elevations ranging from 485 to 600 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Observed associated species include ripgut brome ( Bromus diandrus), soft chess (B. hordeaceus ), Mediterranean barley ( Hordeum marinum ), salt grass (Distichlis spicata), iodine bush ( Allenrolfea occidentalis ), common spikeweed (Centromadia pungens), brittlescale (Atriplex depressa), sand spurry ( Spergularia spp.), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), yellow tarweed ( Holocarpha virgata), and three-ray tarweed (Deinandra lobbii).

The study area contains moderately alkaline clay soil. The most recent occurrence of the species is six miles northeast of the study area near Springtown Village. Livermore Valley tarplant has relative tolerance to disturbance; however, the species frequently occur in strongly alkali conditions, with extended saturation. Therefore, the population near Springtown Village is likely in better soil conditions than the project site. However, a moderate potential exists for the species to occur within the study area.

Congdon’s Tarplant
Congdon’s tarplant is a CNPS Rank 1B.1 plant. The species is an annual forb in the sunflower family (Asteraceae) that blooms from June to November. The species typically occurs in alkaline grassy areas on the edge of brackish marsh in valley and foothill grassland habitat at elevations ranging from 1 to 750 feet amsl. Observed associated species include common tarplant ( Centromadia pungens ssp. pungens), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), salt grass ( Distichlis spicata ), Italian rye grass ( Festuca perennis ), Mediterranean barley ( Hordeum marinum), foxtail barley ( Hordeum murinum), stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens), yellow star thistle ( Centaurea solstitialis), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), and Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon).

The study area contains moderately alkaline clay soils with species associated with Congdon’s tarplant. Due to the species’ relative tolerance to disturbance and the presence of a seed source within three miles to the west and within the direction of prevailing winds, moderate potential exists for the species to occur within the study area.

San Joaquin Spearscale
San Joaquin spearscale is a CNPS Rank 1B.2 plant. The species is an annual herb in the goosefoot family (Chenopodiaceae) that blooms from April to October. The species typically occurs in seasonal alkali sink scrub and wetlands in chenopod scrub, alkali meadow, and valley and foothill grassland habitat at elevations ranging from 0 to 2,740 feet amsl. Observed associated species include salt grass (Distichlis spicata), alkali heath (Frankenia salina), Mediterranean barley ( Hordeum marinum), Italian rye grass (Festuca perennis), bird’s -foot trefoil ( Lotus corniculatus ), docks ( Rumex crispus, R. pulcher ), tarplants (Centromadia parryi, C. pungens ), pickleweed (Salicornia pacifica), and fat hen (Atriplex prostrata).

EXHIBIT B
203
The study area contains grasslands with moderately alkaline clay soil. Due to the species’ relative tolerance to disturbance and the presence of a seed source within three miles to the west and within the direction of prevailing winds, moderate potential exists for the species to occur within the study area.

Impacts to Special-Status Plant Species
The proposed project would involve permanent and temporary impacts to approximately

5.22 acres of non-native grassland, which was determined to have moderate potential to support Livermore Valley tarplant, Congdon’s tarplant, and San Joaquin spearscale.

Construction of concrete medians, bioswales, and grading for base rock and asphalt and landscaping could result in the direct removal of special -status plant species if present within the study area, which could result in a significant impact.

Special-Status Wildlife
Based on the results of the CNDDB and IPaC search, a total of 48 special -status wildlife species have been documented to occur within the project region. However, according to the BRTR, the majority of such species are excluded from the study area based on a lack of required habitat features, such as vernal pools, perennial aquatic habitat (e.g. streams, rivers or ponds), tidal marsh areas, broad-leafed woodland, cismontane woodland, serpentine soils to support host plants, sandy beaches or alkaline flats, presence of specific host plants, caves, mine shafts, and abandoned buildings.

The absence of such habitat features eliminates components critical to the survival or movement of most special -status species found in the vicinity. For example, California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii), northwestern pond turtle (Actinemys marmota), foothill- yellow legged frog ( Rana boylii) and tricolored blackbird ( Agelaius tricolor) are known to occur in the open spaces in the vicinity. However, suitable aquatic habitat such as streams, ponds, and emergent wetlands and associated movement corridors connecting the study area to source populations are absent due to development, precluding such species from inhabiting or dispersing through the study area. Furthermore, the project site lacks hydrologic connectivity suitable foothill -yellow legged frog habitats nearby. Tricolored blackbirds may occasionally be seen flying over the study area, though nesting habitat or significant foraging resources are not supported. Therefore, the aforementioned species have no potential or are unlikely to occur within the s tudy area. Given the s tudy area’s relative proximity to sensitive habitats on the San Francisco Bay, many species documented nearby are additionally obligates to tidal marsh habitats which are not present on or in the immediate vicinity of the study area.

One special-status species has potential to occur in the immediate vicinity of or in portions of the s tudy area: Crotch’s bumble bee ( Bombus crotchii). The species is discussed in detail below. In addition, non-listed native birds protected by MBTA and CDFW have the potential to occur on-site.

Crotch’s Bumble Bee
Crotch’s bumble bee is a candidate species for listing under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). The species occurs primarily in central and southern California, from coastal areas inland to the foothills. The species is now largely absent from the Central Valley, although the species was historically common in the region. Crotch’s bumble bee occurs in grassland and scrub habitats, and has also been documented in agricultural areas. Like other bumble bee species, Crotch’s bumble bee is a social species with an annual life cycle. Queens emerge from hibernation in the late winter/early spring to

EXHIBIT B
204
establish a new colony. The colony produces workers throughout the spring and summer, and reproductives (i.e., drones and queens) in the early fall. Nests are built in pre-existing cavities. The species are commonly found underground, in abandoned rodent burrows, or aboveground in grass tufts, rock piles, abandoned bird nests, or tree cavities. Crotch’s bumble bee feeds on pollen and nectar during all life stages; preferred host species include, but are not limited to, milkweeds (Asclepias spp.), chaenactis (Chaenactis spp.), clarkias (Clarkia spp.), larkspurs (Delphinium spp.), buckwheats (Eriogonum spp.), lupines (Lupinus spp.), medicks (Medicago spp.), bladderpod ( Peritoma arborea), phacelias (Phacelia spp.), poppies (Eschscholzia spp.), sages (Salvia spp.), and thistles (Centaurea spp.). Queens overwinter in hibernacula; little is known about habitat requirements for hibernacula; bare ground, leaf litter and/or duff, and pre-existing cavities may provide overwintering habitat.

The study area is within the known range of the species and contains suitable foraging habitat and overwintering habitat for Crotch’s bumble bee. According to the BRTR, several ground squirrel burrows are located along the perimeter of the study area. Rodent burrows provide suitable ground nesting sites; however, tilling and disking frequency could preclude the species from nesting. Foraging plants available include Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus ), yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitalis ), black mustard (Brassica nigra), and field mustard ( Hirschfeldia incana). Therefore, moderate potential exists for Crotch’s bumble bee to occur in the study area.

Project activities such as grubbing, vegetation removal, grading, and imper vious surface installation would directly remove approximately 5.22 acres of potentially suitable foraging and nesting habitat. Project landscaping w ould temporarily impact potential Crotch’s bumble bee foraging habitat. If the species is present, a potentially significant impact could occur to Crotch’s bumble bee.

Nesting Birds and Raptors
The study area has the potential to seasonally support nesting birds and raptors protected by the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code ( CFGC). Off-site trees along the perimeter of the study area and the un-mowed swale and fringe of the study area supporting annual grasses and forbs may provide nesting habitat. T ree removal, mechanized work, and vehicle traffic associated with construction of the proposed project could directly and indirectly disturb nesting birds and result in nest abandonment if individuals are present during initiation of ground-disturbing activity. Thus, a potentially significant impact could occur to nesting birds and raptors.

Conclusion
The proposed project would comply with all applicable EACCC requirements. However, based on the above, the proposed project could have an adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as special -status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or the USFWS, and a potentially significant impact could occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

EXHIBIT B
205
Special-Status Plant Species
IV-1 Prior to any vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities, a focused survey shall be conducted to determine the presence of special-status plant species with potential to occur within the project site. Surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities (CDFG 2009), which require rare plant surveys to be conducted at the proper time of year when rare or endangered species are both “evident” and identifiable. Field surveys shall be scheduled to coincide with known blooming periods, and/or during periods of physiological development that are necessary to identify the plant species of concern.

The results of the surveys shall be submitted to the City of Livermore Community Development Department prior to the commencement of construction activities. If special -status plant species are not found, additional mitigation measures are not necessary. If any of the species are found on-site and cannot be avoided, the following measures shall be required:

• If the survey determines that special -status plant species are present within or adjacent to the project site, direct and indirect impacts of the project on the species shall be avoided where feasible through the establishment of activity exclusion zones, where ground-disturbing activities shall not take place, including construction of new facilities, construction staging, or other temporary work areas. Activity exclusion zones for special-status plant species shall be established prior to construction activities around each occupied habitat site, the boundaries of which shall be clearly marked with standard orange plastic construction exclusion fencing or its equivalent. The establishment of activity exclusion zones shall not be required if construction-re lated disturbance would not occur within 250 feet of the occupied habitat site. • If exclusion zones and avoidance of impacts on special -status species within the project site are not feasible, then the loss of individuals or occupied habitat of special -status plants shall be compensated using the habitat mitigation rations impacts on habitat for the species as written below as prescribed by the East Alameda County Conservation Strategy ( EACCS) and obtain an incidental take permit from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for State listed species. Before the implementation of compensation measures, the project applicant shall provide detailed information to the CDFW and City of Livermore Community Development Department on the quality of preserved habitat, location of the preserved occurrences, provisions for protecting and managing the areas, the responsible parties involved, and other pertinent information that demonstrates the feasibility of the compensation.
• Compensation recommendations from the EACCS are as follows:
o Temporary effects to State and federally listed species, such as Livermore tarplant at a 1:1 ratio.
o Congdon’s tarplant at a 5:1 ratio or above through
coordination with relevant regulatory agencies.
o San Joaquin spearscale at a 1:1 ratio.

EXHIBIT B
206
Crotch’s Bumble Bee
IV-2 The provisions contained herein only apply if Crotch’s bumble bee is a candidate species or is listed under CESA at the commencement of construction. Following CDFW’s status report on Crotch’s bumble bee, if the California Fish and Game Commission finds that the petitioned action is not warranted, the provisions contained herein shall not be required.

If feasible, initial ground-disturbing activities associated with the proposed project (e.g., grading, vegetation removal, staging) shall take place between September 1 and March 31 (i.e., outside the colony active period) to avoid potential impacts on special-status bumble bees.

If completing all initial ground-disturbing activities between September 1 and March 31 is not feasible, then at a maximum of 14 days prior to the commencement of construction activities, a qualified biologist with 10 or more years of experience conducting biological resource surveys within California shall conduct a preconstruction survey for special - status bumble bees in the area(s) proposed for impact.

The survey shall occur during the period from one hour after sunrise to two hours before sunset, with temperatures between 65 degrees Fahrenheit and 90 degrees Fahrenheit, with low wind and zero rain. If the timing of the start of construction makes the survey infeasible due to the temperature requirements, the surveying biologist shall select the most appropriate days based on the National Weather Service seven- day forecast and shall survey at a time of day that is closest to the temperature range stated above. The survey duration shall be commensurate with the extent of suitable floral resources (which represent foraging habitat) present within the area proposed for impact, and the level of effort shall be based on the metric of a minimum of one person-hour of searching per three acres of suitable floral resources/foraging habitat. A meandering pedestrian survey shall be conducted throughout the area proposed for impact in order to identify patches of suitable floral resources. Suitable floral resources for Crotch’s bumble bee include species in the following families:

Apocynaceae, Asteraceae, Boraginaceae, Fabaceae, and Lamiaceae.

Suitable floral resources for western bumble bee include species in the following families: Asteraceae, Fabaceae, Rhamnaceae, and Rosaceae, as well as plants in the genera Eriogonum and Penstemon.

At a minimum, preconstruction survey methods shall include the following:

• Search areas with floral resources for foraging bumble bees.

Observed foraging activity may indicate a nest is nearby, and therefore, the survey duration shall be increased when foraging bumble bees are present;
• If special-status bumble bees are observed, watch any special- status bumble bees present and observe their flight patterns.

Attempt to track their movements between foraging areas and the nest;

EXHIBIT B
207
• Visually look for nest entrances. Observe burrows, any other underground cavities, logs, or other possible nesting habitat; • If floral resources or other vegetation preclude observance of the nest, small areas of vegetation may be removed via hand removal, line trimming, or mowing to a height of a minimum of four inches to assist with locating the nest;
• Look for concentrated special-status bumble bee activity; • Listen for the humming of a nest colony; and
• If bumble bees are observed, attempt to photograph the individual and identify it to species.

The biologist conducting the survey shall record when the survey was conducted, a general description of any suitable foraging habitat/floral resources present, a description of observed bumble bee activity, a list of bumble bee species observed, a description of any vegetation removed to facilitate the survey, and their determination of if survey observations suggest a special -status bumble bee nest(s) may be present or if construction activities could result in take of special-status bumble bees. The report shall be submitted to the City of Livermore Community Development Department prior to the commencement of construction activities.

If bumble bees are not located during the preconstruction survey or the bumble bees located are definitively identified as a common species (i.e., not special-status species), then further mitigation or coordination with the CDFW is not required.

If any sign(s) of a bumble bee nest is observed, and if the species present cannot be established as a common bumble bee, then construction shall not commence until either (1) the bumble bees present are positively identified as common (i.e., not a special -status species), or (2) the completion of coordination with CDFW to identify appropriate mitigation measures, which may include, but not be limited to, waiting until the colony active season ends, establishment of nest buffers, or obtaining an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) from CDFW.

If special-status bees are located, and after coordination with CDFW take of special -status bumble bees cannot be avoided, the project proponent shall obtain an ITP from CDFW, and the project proponent shall implement all conditions identified in the ITP. Mitigation required by the ITP may include, but not be limited to, the project proponent translocating nesting substrate in accordance with the latest scientific research to another suitable location (i.e., a location that supports similar or better floral resources as the impact area), enhancing floral resources on areas of the project site that will remain appropriate habitat, worker awareness training, and/or other measures specified by CDFW.

Nesting Birds and Raptors
IV-3 If project construction begins during the nesting season (February 1 to August 31), a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within

EXHIBIT B
208
seven days prior to construction activities. The nesting bird survey shall include walking transects to search for ground nesting birds, and an examination of all trees on-site and within all accessible areas within 200 feet of the entire project site and off -site improvement areas (i.e., within a zone of influence of nesting birds). If nesting birds are not found within the project site or off-site improvement areas, further mitigation shall not be required.

If migratory birds are identified nesting on or within the zone of influence, the Wildlife Agencies shall be notified immediately of nest locations. A qualified biologist shall establish a temporary protective nest buffer around the nest(s). The nest buffer shall be staked with orange construction fencing.

The buffer must be of sufficient size to protect the nesting site from construction-related disturbance and shall be established by a qualified ornithologist or biologist with extensive experience working with nesting birds near and on construction sites. Typically, adequate nesting buffers are 75 feet from the nest site or nest tree dripline for small birds and up to 300 feet for sensitive nesting birds that include several raptor species known in the region of the project site but that are not expected to occur on the project site. Upon completion of nesting surveys, if nesting birds are identified on or within a zone of influence of the project site, a qualified ornithologist/biologist that frequently works with nesting birds shall prescribe adequate nesting buffers to protect the nesting birds from harm while the project is constructed.

Construction or earth-moving activity shall not occur within any established nest protection buffer prior to September 1 unless a qualified ornithologist/biologist determines that the young have fledged and have attained sufficient flight skills to avoid project construction zones, or that the nesting cycle is otherwise completed. In the region of the project site, most species complete nesting by mid-July; however, the date may be significantly earlier or later, and would have to be determined by the qualified biologist. At the end of the nesting cycle, and fledging from the nest by its occupants, as determined by a qualified biologist, temporary nesting buffers may be removed and construction may commence in established nesting buffers without further regard for the nest site. If active nesting buffers are established and a biologist does not confirm that the nesting cycle is completed, then the nesting buffers must be maintained until the end of the CDFW recognized nesting season (September 1).

Should construction activities cause a nesting bird to do any of the following in a way that would be considered a result of construction activities, then the exclusionary buffer shall be increased such that activities are far enough from the nest to stop the following agitated behavior: vocalize, make defensive flights at intruders, get up from a brooding position, or fly off the nest. The revised non- disturbance buffer shall remain in place until the chicks have fledged or as otherwise determined by a qualified biologist in consultation with the City of Livermore.

A report detailing compliance with the provisions set forth herein shall be prepared by the qualified biologist and submitted for review and approval to the City of Livermore Community Development Department.

EXHIBIT B
209
b,c. As part of the BRTR prepared for the proposed project, the project site was reviewed for the presence of wetlands and other aquatic resources according to the methods described in the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) Manual, the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West/Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, and A Field Guide to the Identification of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in the Arid West Region of the Western United States. Areas meeting such indicators were not mapped, as aquatic resources were not found using the methods described above. Presence of riparian habitat was not identified, which was evaluated based on the lack of woody plant species meeting the definition of riparian vegetation provided in A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Section 1600- 1607, California Fish and Game Code, and based on bes t professional judgement of biologists completing the site visit.

Therefore, sensitive land cover types or aquatic resources do not exist with in the project site, and the proposed project would not have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, or federally protected wetlands . Thus, no impact would occur.

d. Wildlife corridors link areas of suitable wildlife habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by urbanization creates isolated "islands" of wildlife habitat. Fragmentation can also occur when a portion of one or more habitats is converted into another habitat, such as when woodland or scrub habitat is altered or converted into grasslands after a disturbance such as fire, mudslide, or grading activities. Wildlife corridors mitigate the effects of this fragmentation by: (1) allowing animals to move between remaining habitats, thereby permitting depleted populations to be replenished and promoting genetic exchange; (2) providing escape routes from fire, predators, and human disturbances, thus reducing the risk of catastrophic events (such as fire or disease) on population or local species extinction; and (3) serving as travel routes for individual animals as they move within their home ranges in search of food, water, mates, and other needs.

According to the BRTR prepared for the proposed project, the project site is not within a designated wildlife corridor, an essential habitat connectivity unit, and does not support the movement of wildlife species. The project site is located within a larger tract of mixed- development land within the INSP. While common wildlife species such as birds presumably utilize the site to some degree for movement at a local scale, the project site itself does not provide corridor functions beyond providing a similar land use as surrounding areas. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

e. Chapter 12.20 of the City’s Municipal Code comprises the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. The proposed project would require the removal of one on-site tree located on the western parcel identified as 950 North Canyons Parkway. According to the BRTR, the tree proposed for removal is not protected under the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance.

Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

EXHIBIT B
210
f. The project site is within the boundaries of the EACCS, a guidance document for regional conservation and environmental permitting for private and public development projects.

While conservation strategies are provided by the EACCS, the document is not considered an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Conservation Community Plan.

The proposed project would be subject to the EACCS requirements, which are intended to provide protection and mitigation for covered species. Covered species under the EACCC include the following 13 wildlife species: longhorn fairy shrimp; vernal pool fairy shrimp; callippe silverspot butterfly; California tiger salamander; California red‐ legged frog; foothill yellow‐legged frog; Alameda whipsnake; Central California coastal steelhead; golden eagle; tricolored blackbird; western burrowing owl; American badger; and San Joaquin kit fox. The EACCS also includes the following six covered plant species: San Joaquin spearscale; big tarplant; Congdon’s tarplant; palmate‐ bracted bird's ‐beak; Livermore Valley tarplant; and recurved larkspur. As discussed above, the potential exists for San Joaquin spearscale, Congdon’s tarplant, and Livermore Valley tarplant to occur within the project site. However, Mitigation Measure IV -1, above, which requires preconstruction surveys for such species, as well as EACCS habitat mitigation requirements, would reduce any potential impacts to such species to a less -than- significant level.

Pursuant to the EACCS, the project site is located in CZ-4 , which encompasses 9,409 acres of the largely urbanized Livermore Valley. The dominant natural land cover types in the conservation zone are annual grassland (4,253 acres), alkali meadow and scald (258 acres), valley sink scrub (410 acres), alkali wetland (106 acres), and seasonal wetland (347 acres). According to Figure 2-8 of the EACCS, the entirety of the project site consists of ruderal land.

Based on the discussion above, the proposed project would not conflict with the applicable provisions of the EACSS, and a less-than-significant impact would occur related to conflicts with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

EXHIBIT B
211
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?     b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
   
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries.    

Discussion
The following is based on a Phase 1 Cultural Resources Study prepared for the proposed project by Historic Resources Associates (HRA).11

a. Historical resources are features that are associated with the lives of historically-important persons and/or historically -significant events, that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to the pre-history or history of the local area, California, or the nation. Examples of typical historical resources include, but are not limited to, buildings, farmsteads, rail lines, bridges, and trash scatters containing objects such as colored glass and ceramics.

The Phase 1 Cultural Resources Study consisted of a literature review to identify any previously recorded historical resources and a field survey, conducted on August 10, 2024, of the entire project site. On June 26, 2024, and July 16, 2024, record searches of the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) were performed by the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) for cultural resource site records and survey reports within the project area. The NWIC concluded that three cultural resource studi es encompassing the project site have been previously conducted. According to the NWIC records search, the project site does not contain precontact archaeological sites or historical archaeological resources. In addition, historic resources were not discovered on- site during the August 10 field survey. With regard to the off-site improvements along North Canyons Parkway, the proposed project would not include further disturbance within the existing ROW. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5, and a less-than-significant impact would occur.

b,c. Based on the results of the records search of the CHRIS, conducted as part of the Phase 1 Cultural Resources Study, the NWIC concluded that the project site does not contain any recorded archaeological resources. In addition, based upon historic photographs, maps, and other documents, and the lack of precontact archeological resources identified within 0.25-mile of the project site, HRA determined that the archaeological site sensitivity of the site was low. Furthermore, the entirety of the project site was subjected to a pedestrian survey at 1 -meter intervals and cultural resources, including precontact or historic-period artifacts or other indications of archaeological resources, were not discovered on-site during the field survey. Finally, a search of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) Sacred Lands File did not yield any information regarding 11 Historic Resource Associates. Phase 1 Cultural Resources Study Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project 968 North Canyons Parkway, Livermore, Alameda County, California 94550. August 2024.

EXHIBIT B
212
the presence of Tribal Cultural Resources within the project site or the immediate area. 12 The site has also been subject to past disturbance associated with former unspecified agricultural uses and grading activities. Any subsurface resources would likely have been uncovered as part of the previous site disturbance.

Nonetheless, the City’s General Plan notes that prehistoric resources have been discovered within the City’s Planning Area. Thus, previously unrecorded archaeological resources, including human remains, have the potential to exist on- site, and such resources could be encountered during ground-disturbing activity related to project construction. Therefore, the proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 and/or disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, should any such resources be encountered during construction.

Consequently, the impact could be considered potentially significant.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

V-1 In the event a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork activities, all construction activities on-site shall cease and workers should avoid altering the materials until an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology has evaluated the find(s). The Applicant shall include a standard inadvertent discovery clause in every construction contract to inform contractors of this requirement. The qualified archeologist shall make recommendations to the Lead Agency on the measures that shall be implemented to protect the discovered resources, including but not limited to, culturally appropriate temporary and permanent treatment, which may include avoidance of cultural resources, in-place preservation, and/or re -burial on project property so the resource(s) are not subject to further disturbance in perpetuity. If avoidance is determined to be infeasible, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(b)(3)(C), a data recovery plan, which makes provisions for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about the historical resource, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken. Such studies shall be deposited with t he California Historical Resources Regional Information Center. If necessary, excavation and evaluation of the find(s) shall comply with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Potentially significant cultural resources include, but are not limited to, stone, bone, glass, wood, or shell artifacts or features, including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites, including trash pits older than 50 years. Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction within the project site shall be recorded on appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms and will be submitted to the City of Livermore, the Northwest Information Center, and the State Histor ic Preservation Office (SHPO), as required.
12 Native American Heritage Commission. Parkwest Casino 580 Expansion Project, Alameda County. July 12, 2024.

EXHIBIT B
213
V-2 In the event of the accidental discovery or recognition of any human remains, further excavation or disturbance of the find or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains shall not occur until compliance with the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e)(1) and (2) has occurred. The Guidelines specify that in the event of the discovery of human remains other than in a dedicated cemetery, no further excavation at the site or any nearby area suspected to contain human remains shall occur until the County Coroner has been notified to determine if an investigation into the cause of death is required.

If the C oroner determines that the remains are Native American, then, within 24 hours, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which in turn will notify the most likely descendants who may recommend treatment of the remains and any grave goods. The potential exists that the Native American Heritage Commission may be unable to identify a most likely descendant, the most likely descendant fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours after notification by the Native American Heritage Commission, or the landowner or his authorized agent rejects the recommendation by the most likely descendant and mediation by the Native American Heritage Commission fails to provide a measure acceptable to the landowner. In such a case, the landowner or his authorized representative shall rebury the human remains and grave goods with appropriate dignity at a location on the property not subject to further disturbances. Should human remains be encountered, a copy of the resulting County Coroner report noting any written consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission shall be submitted as proof of compliance to the City’s Community Development Department.

EXHIBIT B
214
VI. ENERGY.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
   
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?    

Discussion
a,b. A description of the currently adopted 2022 California Green Building Standards Code and the Building Energy Efficiency Standards, as well as discussions regarding the proposed project’s potential effects related to energy demand during construction and operations are provided below.

California Green Building Standards Code
The 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, otherwise known as the CALGreen Code (CCR Title 24, Part 11) , is a portion of the CBSC (CCR Title 24), which became effective on January 1, 2023. The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices. The CALGreen Code standards regulate the method of use, properties, performance, types of materials used in construction, alteration repair, improvement, and rehabilitation of a structure or improvement to property. The provisions of the code apply to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure throughout California. Requirements of the CALGreen Code include, but are not limited to, the following measures:

• Compliance with relevant regulations related to future installation of EV charging infrastructure in residential and non-residential structures; • Reduction of indoor water use consumption through the establishment of maximum fixture water use rates;
• Outdoor landscaping compliance with the California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO), or a local ordinance, whichever is more stringent, to reduce outdoor water use; • Diversion of 65 percent of construction and demolition waste from landfills; and • Mandatory use of low-pollutant emitting interior finish materials, such as paints, carpet, vinyl flooring, and particle board.

Building Energy Efficiency Standards
The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards is a portion of the CBSC, which expands upon energy -efficiency measures from the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, and went into effect starting January 1, 2023. The 2022 standards provide for additional efficiency improvements beyond the 2019 standards. The proposed project would be subject to all relevant provisions of the most recent update of the CBSC, including the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Adherence to the most recent CALGreen Code and Building Energy Efficiency Standards would ensure that the proposed project would consume energy efficiently.

EXHIBIT B
215
Construction Energy Use
Construction of the proposed project would involve on-site energy demand and consumption related to use of oil in the form of gasoline and diesel fuel for construction worker vehicle trips, hauling and materials delivery truck trips, and operation of off-road construction equipment. In addition, diesel-fueled portable generators may be necessary to provide additional electricity demands for temporary on-site lighting, welding, and for supplying energy to areas of the site where energy supply cannot be met through a hookup to the existing electricity grid. Project construction would not involve the use of natural gas appliances or equipment.

All construction equipment and operation thereof would be regulated pursuant to the CARB In-Use Off-Road Diesel Vehicle Regulation, which is intended to reduce emissions from in-use, off-road, heavy-duty diesel vehicles in California by imposing limits on idling, requiring all vehicles to be reported to CARB, restricting the addition of older vehicles into fleets, and requiring fleets to reduce emissions by retiring, replacing, or repowering older engines, or installing exhaust retrofits. The In-Use Off-Roa d Diesel Vehicle Regulation would subsequently help to improve fuel efficiency and reduce GHG emissions.

Technological innovations and more stringent standards are being researched, such as multi-function equipment, hybrid equipment, or other design changes, which could help to further reduce demand on oil and limit emissions associated with construction.

Based on the above, the temporary increase in energy use occurring during construction of the proposed project would not result in a significant increase in peak or base demands or require additional capacity from local or regional energy supplies. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations related to energy conservation and fuel efficiency, which would help to reduce the temporary increase in demand.

Operational Energy Use
Pacific Gas and Electricity Company (PG&E) currently provides electricity and natural gas to the project site and would continue to do so following the implementation of the proposed project. Energy use associated with operation of the proposed project would be typical of parking lots, including electricity associated with parking lot lighting and EV charging spaces. The energy use associated with operation of the proposed EV chargers and parking lot lighting would not be substantial. In addition, the proposed parking lot lighting would be subject to the outdoor lighting requirements pursuant to Section 140.7 of the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. The proposed project would also include the addition of operational changes to the interior of the casino, including increased allowed hours of operation to 24 hours a day, seven days a week . With the exception of an existing nine-hour closure requirement on Mondays, the Parkwest Casino 580 is allowed to operate 24 hours a day for the remainder of the week. However, the increased hours of operation would not create a substantial increase in energy consumption.

Additional operational changes would not involve changes to the HVAC or other existing building features requiring energy and, thus, would not be expected to substantially increase the building energy usage beyond existing conditions.

Electricity supplied to the project by PG&E would comply with the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires investor -owned utilities, electric service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total procurement by 2020 and to 60 percent by 2030. Thus, a portion of the energy consumed during project operations would originate from renewable sources.

EXHIBIT B
216
In addition to on-site energy use, the proposed project would result in transportation energy use associated with vehicle trips generated by the customers and employees of the casino. While the proposed project would increase traffic compared to existing levels, and, thus, increase energy use associated with transportation, the proposed project would comply with all applicable regulations associated with vehicle efficiency and fuel economy.

Further discussion of the proposed project’s impacts related to transportation is provided in Section XVII, Transportation, of this IS/MND. As discussed therein, the proposed project would be considered a local-serving use, which would have a less than significant increase in vehicle miles travelled (VMT).

Conclusion
Based on the above, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources or conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Thus, a less- than-significant impact would occur.

EXHIBIT B
217
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less-Than-
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:

i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated
on the most recent Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and
Geology Special Publication 42.
   
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?    
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?    
iv. Landslides?    
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?     c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on - or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
   
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
   
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
   
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?    

Discussion
ai-aii. The project site is not located within the boundaries of an Earthquake Fault Zone, as designated pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. 13 As noted in the City’s General Plan, the City is located within the vicinity of the San Andreas, Calaveras, Hayward, and San Jacinto active faults. However, pursuant to Figure 10-1 of the General Plan, the project site is not underlain by any active faults or trace lines. Thus, fault rupture hazard is not a significant geologic hazard at the site.

Based on the proximity of the project site to local and regional faulting, as well as historical seismic activity, the project site is considered subject to relatively high ground shaking risk and related effects. The proposed project would not include construction of any habitable structures. In addition, the parking lot w ould be properly engineered in accordance with the CBSC, which includes engineering standards appropriate for the seismic area in which the project site is located. Proper engineering of the proposed parking lot would ensure that the proposed project would not be subject to substantial risks related to seismic ground shaking.

Thus, the proposed project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death associated with seismic-related ground failure, including rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground 13 California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone. February 27, 2009.

EXHIBIT B
218
shaking, liquefaction, or landslides. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

b. Issues related to erosion are discussed in Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this IS/MND. As noted therein, the proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Thus, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

aiii,aiv,
c. The proposed project’s potential effects related to liquefaction, landslides, lateral spreading, and subsidence are discussed in detail below.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of loose, saturated granular sediments from a solid state to a liquefied state as a result of seismic ground shaking. In the process, the soil undergoes transient loss of strength, which commonly causes ground displacement or ground failure to occur. Because saturated soils are a necessary condition for liquefaction, soil layers in areas where the groundwater table is near the surface have higher liquefaction potential than those in which the water table is located at greater depths. Additionally, loose unsaturated sandy soils have the potential to settle during strong seismic shaking. As noted in the City’s General Plan, the majority of the planning area is underlain by materials which have a very low to moderate liquefaction potential.

Additionally, the project site is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction.
14 Therefore, the proposed project would not be subject to risk from liquefaction.

Landslides
Seismically-induced landslides are triggered by earthquake ground shaking. The risk of landslide hazard is greatest in areas with steep, unstable slopes. The City has determined the potential for seismically -induced land sliding to occur would depend on a number of activities contributing to instability, such as extensive irrigation, poor drainage, removal of stabilizing vegetation, and over -steepening of slopes. The project site does not feature varying degrees of slope commonly associated with areas at risk for earthquake-induced landslides. Thus, landslides would not occur on-site as a result of the proposed project.

Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is horizontal/lateral ground movement of relatively flat-lying soil deposits towards a free face such as an excavation, channel, or open body of water; typically, lateral spreading is associated with liquefaction of one or more subsurface layers near the bottom of the exposed slope. Lateral spreading or lurching is a situation in which soil mass deforms laterally toward a free face, such as an excavation, channel, or open body of water, during a seismic event. The failure occurs along a liquefiable or weak subsurface layer. The amount of movement depends on the soil strength, duration and intensity of seismic shaking, topography, and free face geometry. Given that the project site does not contain any free faces, the potential for lateral spreading to pose a risk to the proposed project is negligible.
14 California Department of Conservation. California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/EQZApp/app/. Accessed August 2024.

EXHIBIT B
219
Subsidence/Settlement
Subsidence is the settlement of soils of very low density generally from either oxidation of organic material, desiccation and shrinkage, or both, following drainage. Subsidence takes place gradually, usually over a period of several years. According to the City of Livermore’s General Plan EIR, subsidence is not likely to occur within the City.

Additionally, compliance with General Plan policies would ensure future developments would be required to employ structurally sound building practices. Therefore, the potential subsidence/settlement to pose a risk to the proposed project is relatively low.

Conclusion
Based on the above discussion, the proposed project would not result in potential hazards or risks related to liquefaction, landslides, lateral spreading, or subsidence/settlement. Therefore, a less-than-significant impact would occur.

d. Expansive soils are soils which undergo significant volume change with changes in moisture content. Specifically, such soils shrink and harden when dried and expand and soften when wetted. Expansive soils can shrink or swell and cause heaving and cracking of slabs-on-grade, pavements, and structures founded on shallow foundation. Pursuant to the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, the soils underlying the project site are made up of Diablo clay, very deep, three to 15 percent slopes. 15 Soils with a linear extensibility rating of between six and nine percent with a clay content of 35 to 45 percent are characterized by a high shrink-swell class. According to the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the Diablo clay soils on-site have a linear extensibility rating of 7 .5 percent and have a clay content of 47.5 percent. Therefore, the project site contains soil types that are considered to be moderate to highly expansive.

Based on the above, the proposed project has the potential to create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property related to being located on expansive soil. Therefore, a potentially significant impact could occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

VII-1 Prior to approval of any grading permits, a Geotechnical Analysis shall be conducted by a California Registered Civil Engineer or Geotechnical Engineer to characterize the subsurface conditions of the project site. The report shall address and make recommendations on the following:

• Road, pavement, and parking area design;
• Grading practices;
• Erosion/winterization; and
• Special problems discovered on-site, (i.e., groundwater, expansive/unstable soils, etc.).
15 Natural Resource Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed August 2024.

EXHIBIT B
220
All grading plans for the project shall be designed by a Civil and Structural Engineer and reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer, Chief Building Official, and a qualified Geotechnical Engineer prior to issuance of grading and building permits to ensure that all geotechnical recommendations specified in the Geotechnical Analysis are properly incorporated and utilized in the project design.

e. The construction or operation of septic tanks or other alternative wastewater disposal systems is not included as part of the project. Therefore, no impact regarding the capability of soil to adequately support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur.

f. The City’s General Plan indicates that several Pleistocene aged paleontological fossils have been discovered within the City’s Planning Area. In particular, the most recent fossil discovery within the City occurred in the vicinity of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which is approximately six miles southeast of the project site.

As noted in the City’s General Plan, the City is underlain by alluvium, which consists mainly of unconsolidated gravel, sand, silt, and clay deposits. Such soil types are not considered unique geologic features and are common within the geographic area of the City.

Furthermore, the City’s General Plan does not note the existence of any unique geologic features within the City.

Nonetheless, should previously unknown paleontological resources exist within the project site, ground-disturbing activity, such as grading, trenching, or excavating, associated with implementation of the proposed project would have the potential to result in direct or indirect destruction of unique geologic features. Therefore, a potentially significant impact could occur.

Mitigation Measure(s)
Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce the above potential impact to a less-than-significant level.

VII-2 The following requirements shall be noted on project Improvement Plans, subject to review and approval by the City of Livermore Community Development Department. Should any vertebrate fossils (e.g., teeth, bones), an unusually large or dense accumulation of intact invertebrates, or well -preserved plant material (e.g., leaves) be unearthed by the construction crew, then ground-disturbing activity shall be diverted to another part of the project site and a paleontologist shall be called on-site to assess the find and, if significant, recover the find in a timely matter.

Finds determined significant by the paleontologist shall then be conserved and deposited with a recognized repository, such as the Universi ty of California Museum of Paleontology. The alternative mitigation would be to leave the significant finds in place, determine the extent of significant deposit, and avoid further disturbance of the significant deposit. The City of Livermore Community Development Department shall be notified of the discovery of any paleontological resources.

EXHIBIT B
221
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.

Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less-Than-
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
   
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gasses?
   

Discussion
a,b. Emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change are attributable in large part to human activities associated with the industrial/manufacturing, utility, transportation, residential, and agricultural sectors. Therefore, the cumulative global emissions of GHGs contributing to global climate change can be attributed to every nation, region, and city, and virtually every individual on Earth. An individual project’s GHG emissions are at a micro-scale level relative to global emissions and effects to global climate change; however, an individual project could result in a cumulatively considerable incremental contribution to a significant cumulative macro-scale impact. As such, impacts related to emissions of GHG are inherently considered cumulative impacts.

Implementation of the proposed project would cumulatively contribute to increases of GHG emissions. Estimated GHG emissions attributable to future development would be primarily associated with increases of carbon dioxide (CO 2) and, to a lesser extent, other
GHG pollutants, such as methane (CH 4) and nitrous oxide (N 2O) associated with area sources, mobile sources or vehicles, utilities (electricity), water usage, and the generation of solid waste. The primary source of GHG emissions for the project would be mobile source emissions. The common unit of measurement for GHG is expressed in terms of annual metric tons of CO
2 equivalents (MTCO2e/yr).

The proposed project is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of BAAQMD. The most recent BAAQMD Air Quality Guidelines were released in April 2023. 16 The updated GHG thresholds address more recent climate change legislation, including Senate Bill (SB) 32, Executive Order (EO) B -55-18, and EO S-03-05, and provide qualitative thresholds, as discussed in further detail below.

BAAQMD Thresholds of Significance
According to BAAQMD’s qualitative GHG thresholds of significance, a project must either include specific project design elements (e.g., exclude use of natural gas, achieve a specific reduction in project-generated VMT below the regional average) or be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).
17 On November 28, 2022, the City of Livermore adopted an updated 2022 Climate Action Plan (CAP), which, according to Section 2 of Appendix D of the CAP, meets the criteria to be a GHG reduction strategy under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). Therefore, the following analysis is based on the proposed project’s consistency with the City’s 2022 CAP.

16 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. 2022 California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. April 2023. 17 Bay Area Air Quality Management District. CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April 2022.

EXHIBIT B
222
City of Livermore CAP Consistency
The 2022 CAP is intended to create a roadmap to achieve emissions reductions of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and carbon neutrality (i.e., net zero carbon emissions) by 2045. The CAP contains mitigation strategies and actions, consistent with State climate mitigation targets, which were developed to reduce the City’s GHG emissions to reach its adopted reduction targets for 2030 and 2045. The project’s consistency with the applicable mitigation strategies and actions is assessed in Table 4 below. As shown in the table, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable strategies and actions of the City’s CAP.

Table 4
Project Consistency with the Livermore Climate Action Plan Strategies and Actions Consistency Discussion
Strategy D-1: Improve water conservation
and reuse.

All landscaping improvements would be consistent
with Section 13.25 of the Municipal Code, Water
Efficient Landscape, and would be irrigated by an
automatic irrigation system. Therefore, the
proposed project would be generally consistent
with Strategy D-1.

Action D-1.3: Continue implementing the
Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.

As discussed above, all landscaping improvements
would be consistent with Section 13.25 of the
Municipal Code, Water Efficient Landscape, and
would be irrigated by an automatic irrigation
system. Therefore, the proposed project would be
consistent with Action D-1.3.

Action F-1.5: Require new hardscape to
be permeable.

Page 46 ends

Livermore City CouncilFebruary 24, 2025

Livermore City Council
February 24, 2025