AGENDA
REGULAR JOINT MEETING OF THE OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL/OAKLEY CITY
COUNCIL ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE OAKLEY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/OAKLEY PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
Tuesday, August 13, 2024
6:30 PM
Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California 94561.
Unless stated otherwise on the agenda, every item on the agenda is exempt from CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15378, 15301, 15323 and/or Public Resources Code Section 21065.
MISSION STATEMENT: The City of Oakley will create a resilient future that fosters and attracts a vibrant and evolving community that welcomes and values all people.
VISION STATEMENT: The City of Oakley celebrates our unique Delta lifestyle and small-town feel where we Live in a safe, dynamic community, Work together to build the future, and Play in our own backyard.
Agendas are posted in Oakley at Oakley City Hall-3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School-4901 Frank Hengel Way and outside the Library at Freedom High School-1050 Neroly Road.
Agendas are also posted on the City’s Internet Website www.ci.oakley.ca.us.
A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each item is available for public review prior to an Oakley City Council and/or City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority meeting at Oakley City Hall, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Oakley City Council, Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency or Oakley Public Financing Authority regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection, during regular business hours, at the front counter in the Main Lobby of the Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561. Agendas may be picked up at the Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 for no charge. To request information regarding placement on the City’s agenda e-mail distribution list, please contact us at (925) 625-7000.
The City of Oakley provides social media options to stay connected to City Hall through Facebook, Twitter, Next Door and Instagram. Other opportunities to connect with City Hall include Envision Oakley, Oakley OnDemand on the City's website, and by emailing [email protected].
If you require special accommodation, please call the City Clerk’s office at (925) 625-7000 before the meeting or contact City staff at the meeting.
1 Please keep cell phones/electronic devices turned off during the meeting. Please be advised that City Council meetings are video recorded and attendees may appear on video.
Information Regarding Public Comment
Members of the public may address the Council on items of interest that are within the City’s jurisdiction. In compliance with State law, the council may not take action or have discussion on any item that is not specifically listed on the agenda. Public comment on items not listed on the agenda will be heard under the Public Comments section of the agenda. Public comments on items listed on the agenda will be heard as the Mayor calls the items. In compliance with State law, the Council may not take action on an item that is not specifically listed on the agenda. If you would like to speak on any agenda item, please fill out a public speaker card available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk seated in the Council Chamber prior to the agenda item being called. The Mayor will call you by name to the podium to hear your comment.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES. Online public comments are accepted until 5 p.m. the day of the meeting and can be submitted at
https://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/online-public-comment-card/.
1.OPENING MATTERS
Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority
1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
1.3 Proclamation Recognizing August 31, 2024 as International Overdose Awareness Day (Danielle Aubin, Patient Navigator, BAART Programs) Proclamation
1.4 American Discovery Trail Update (John Mercurio, California Coordinator)
1.5 Contra Costa County Fire Protection District Update (Scott Wannamaker, Assistant Fire Chief, EMS Division)
2 1.6 Contra Costa Animal Services Update (Ben Winkleblack, Director)
2.PUBLIC COMMENTS
At this time, the public is permitted to address the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority on non-agendized items.
3.COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
4.CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar items are typically non-controversial in nature and are considered for approval by the Oakley City Council/ Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority with one single action. Members of the audience, Staff or the Oakley City Council/ Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority who would like an item removed from the Consent Calendar for purposes of public input may request the Mayor remove the item. The public may request to remove an item(s) to provide input by completing a public speaker card and submitting it to the City Clerk prior to the item(s) being called by the Mayor.
4.1 Approve Minutes from the Special City Council Meeting held July 9, 2024 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk)
Minutes 07-09-24-Sp
4.2 Approve Minutes from the Regular Joint City Council/City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency and Special Public Financing Authority Meeting held July 9, 2024 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk) Minutes 07-09-24
4.3 Accept Report Out of Closed Session Memo (Derek P. Cole, City Attorney) Memo
4.4 Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 10-24 Amending Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.1.404.c.9 (Zoning Text Amendments – Winery-Related Uses) (RZ 02-24) (Ken Strelo, Community Development Director) Ordinance 10-24
4.5 Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 11-24 Approving the project titled, “Bernard Corners Rezone (RZ 01-24)” (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner)
3 Ordinance 11-24
4.6 Waive the Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 12-24 Approving the Burroughs Subdivision 9557 Development Agreement Amendment (DA 01-24) (Ken Strelo, Community Development Director)
Ordinance 12-24
4.7 Adopt a Resolution Amending the City's Proclamation Policy to Add Disability Pride Month (July) to the Approved Proclamation List (Kim Snodgrass, Deputy City Clerk)
Staff Report
1. Resolution
2. Sample Proclamation
4.8 Adopt two Resolutions Approving a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Sellers Subdivision 9614 located at the west side of Sellers Avenue and south of Vitale Lane (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
Staff Report
1. Vicinity Map
2. Resolution Approving the Final Map
3. Resolution Approving the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA)
5. Reduction of Sellers Subdivision 9614 Final Map
4.9 Adopt a Resolution for the Award of an On-Call agreement to Martell Water Systems, Inc. for Well and Pump Maintenance Services at various City Parks and Facilities for Fiscal Years 2024/25 and 2025/26 (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
Staff Report
1. Resolution
2. Proposal from Martell Water Systems, Inc.
4.10 Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. for On-Call Grant Writing and Legislative Advocacy Services (Danielle Navarro, Assistant City Manager) Staff Report
1. Proposed Resolution
4 2. Proposed Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. Agreement
4.11 Adopt a Resolution Approving the Parcel Map for Minor Subdivision 24-976 for Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields located at 998 Laurel Road (APN 035-220-028) (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer) Staff Report
1. Resolution
2. Vicinity Map
3. Parcel Map
4.12 Adopt two Resolutions approving a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 Subdivision 9619 located at the northeast corner of East Cypress Road and Bethel Island Road (Large Lot 4 of Subdivision 9307) (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
Staff Report
1. Vicinity Map
2. Resolution Approving the Final Map
3. Resolution Approving the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA)
5. Reduction of Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 Final Map
4.13 Adopt Two Resolutions approving a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 7 Subdivision 9622 located at the northeast corner of East Cypress Road and Bethel Island Road (Large Lot 7 of Subdivision 9307) (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
Staff Report
1. Vicinity Map
2. Resolution Approving the Final Map
3. Resolution Approving the Subdivision Improvement Agreement
4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA)
5. Reduction of Subdivision 9622 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 7 Final Map
4.14 Adopt a Resolution Approving a Deferred Improvement Agreement at 720 Brownstone Road for Renovation and Flip, LLC (APN 034-140-013) (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
Staff Report
1. Resolution
5 2. Deferred Improvement Agreement
4.15 City of Oakley as Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency Quarterly Investment Report (4th Quarter FY 2023/24) (Jeri Tejeda, Administrative Services Director)
Staff Report
1. City of Oakley as Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2024
4.16 City of Oakley Quarterly Investment Report (4th Quarter FY 2023/24) (Jeri Tejeda, Administrative Services Director)
Staff Report
1. City of Oakley Investment Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2024
2. FY 2024 City Investment Worksheet
5.PUBLIC HEARINGS
6.REGULAR CALENDAR
6.1 Appeal of Hearing Officers Decision Regarding 404 Malicoat Avenue (Kim Snodgrass, Deputy City Clerk)
Staff Report
1. December 19, 2023 Notice of Violation
2. Red Tag
3. December 19, 2023 Administrative Citation AC-23-000989
4. December 19, 2023 Administrative Citation AC-23-000990
5. January 12, 2024 Request for Appeal of Administrative Citation AC 23-000989
6. January 30, 2024 Request for Advance Deposit Hardship Waiver Citation AC 23-000989
7. March 13, 2024 Notice of Hearing
8. Hearing Officer’s Decision
9. Request for Appeal of Hearing Officer’s Decision
6.2 Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Agreement between the City of Oakley and the Liberty Union High School District for School Resource Officer Services (Joshua McMurray, City Manager) Staff Report
1. Resolution
2. Proposed Agreement between the City of Oakley and the Liberty Union High School District for School Resource Officer Services
Exhibit A - Responsibilities of the City
7.REPORTS
6 7.1 CITY MANAGER
(a) City Manager
(b) Business License Update
(c) Report from the Oaks Apartments
(d) Fireworks Update (Police Chief, Paul Beard and Lt. Robert Roberts)
7.1 (b) - July New Business Licenses
7.1 (c) - CBH Status Memo
7.1 (c) The Oaks PP Presentation
7.2 OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL/OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS THE
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE OAKLEY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(a) Reports from Council Liaisons to Regional Committees, Commissions and Boards AND Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency
(b) Requests for Future Agendas
8.WORK SESSIONS
8.1 Work Session Discussion regarding Creekside Park (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
Staff Report
1. Park Exhibit
9.CLOSED SESSION
10.ADJOURN
7 Proclamation
International Overdose Awareness Day
August 31, 2024
WHEREAS, the City of Oakley does affirm and acknowledge the harm and hardship caused by drug overdose; and
WHEREAS, we recognize that the purpose of International Overdose Awareness Day is to remember loved ones lost to overdose and to end the stigma surrounding substance use disorder (SUD) and drug-related deaths; and
WHEREAS, we resolve to play our part in reducing the toll of overdose in our community, which continues to claim the lives of Oakley community members every year and forever affects those who loved and cared about them; and
WHEREAS, we affirm that the people affected by overdose are our sons and daughters, our mothers and fathers, our brothers and sisters, and are deserving of our love, compassion and support and remembrance.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, I, Anissa Williams, Mayor of the City of Oakley, along with the members of the Oakley City Council recognize August 31, 2024 as International Overdose Awareness Day throughout the City of Oakley.
August 13, 2024
____________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
8 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL
JULY 9, 2024
1.Call to Order and Roll Call
Mayor Anissa Williams called the special meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California.
Vice Mayor Shannon Shaw and Councilmembers Hugh Henderson, Dr. George Fuller, and Aaron Meadows were also present.
2.Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Mayor Williams led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
3.Public Comments
None.
4.Closed Session
Mayor Williams announced the agenda item. The City Council met in its antechamber for Closed Session.
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: (One potential case based on California Attorney General letter dated June 24, 2024 concerning automatic license plate reader practices)
5.Adjourn
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:21 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Libby Vreonis
City Clerk
9 Minutes of the Regular Joint Meeting of the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority held July 9, 2024
1) OPENING MATTERS
1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority
Mayor Anissa Williams called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California. Vice Mayor Shannon Shaw and Councilmembers Hugh Henderson, Dr. George Fuller, and Aaron Meadows were also present.
City Attorney Derek Cole reported out of Closed Session from the special meeting held prior to this meeting that the City Council heard one anticipated litigation item regarding a letter received by the California Attorney General and in response to that item, the Council, by motion of Councilmember Meadows and second by Vice Mayor Shaw, directed the Oakley Police Department to discontinue sharing automatic license plate reader data with out of state agencies at this time. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0)
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Councilmember Meadows led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
1.3 Proclamation Recognizing July as Parks and Recreation Month (Jesse Dela Cruz, Public Works Maintenance Manager and Troy Faulk, Recreation Manager) Mayor Williams announced the agenda item. Vice Mayor Shaw presented the proclamation to Public Works Maintenance Manager Jesse Dela Cruz and Recreation Manager Troy Faulk.
Mr. Dela Cruz thanked the City Council for its recognition of Public Works Maintenance and Recreation employees.
1.4 Tri-Delta Transit Update (Toan Tran, COO, Tri-Delta Transit) Tri-Delta Transit COO Toan Tran provided an update to the City Council, including a PowerPoint presentation, providing background information regarding Tri-Delta Transit, 10 information regarding a system redesign project, and project goals, approach and its related schedule.
Dr. Fuller commented that Mr. Tran mentioned “new transportation”. He asked Mr. Tran if he could be more specific on that.
Mr. Tran explained that currently general services include a fixed route which includes cut-a-ways on Main Street and also Tri MyRide is offered, which is an on-demand Uber/Lyft type of service using Tri-Delta vehicles. He mentioned there are also opportunities to leverage relationships with transportation network companies where they would provide service and Tri-Delta would provide subsidies for people to use that service and customers would pay a fraction of the price, so Tri-Delta does not have to invest capital funds into a new service.
Mayor Williams commented about the Makers Boulevard at the Oakley Park & Ride.
1.5 Update from Contra Costa Transportation Authority Citizens Advisory Committee (Kai-Christian Torf, Committee Member)
Mayor Williams announced this update is rescheduled to a date uncertain.
1.6 Presentation on Oakley Veterans' Needs (Roy Manning, Assistant Commander/Service Officer for American Legion Post 202) Roy Manning, Assistant Commander/Service Officer for American Legion Post 202, stationed in Brentwood with focus on East County area, mentioned there are 232 members in this post, 2 million veterans male/female in all posts, and 13,000+ posts in the U.S. and overseas. He shared that the American Legion was founded in 1919 in Paris, France under President Roosevelt. He explained that at that time, if a veteran completed service and was discharged, it was up to them to find a way back, until the American Legion was formed. He mentioned Brentwood was chartered in 1922 at its current facility on 2nd Street in Brentwood and it has 40 Oakley members with their post, including a former marine, Dr. Fuller, whom he thanked for his service overseas and his service in the community. He shared that American Legion is involved in community activities such as parades, flags, a motorcycle group that conducts escorts for deceased veterans to cemeteries, and has youth activity and programs to take care of families of soldiers and veterans. He mentioned American Legion Baseball has 100,000 players from 12-18 years old and 600 teams nationally, and many want to play professionally; there are 60 former American Legion players in the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, NY.
He mentioned they sponsor Boys & Girls State where they send youth to Sacramento to learn how to become politicians, almost every post has a Boy Scout troop, and they work closely with the ROTC program at Heritage High School of which 6 seniors recently graduated and 4 are medics. He shared information regarding the “Be The One” Program that their post became involved with three years ago but has been in existence since 2003, and they actively seek veterans in crisis. He mentioned there are 22 veterans, male and female, that commit suicide each day. He explained that this program finds who they can help, and it only takes a minute of time to talk to someone that is contemplating suicide. He left cards at the back and encouraged everyone to take one. He mentioned homeless that are veterans that are not counted in the 22 per day.
He mentioned you can offer them a phone #, the veterans crisis hotline, and they are doing a good job about desensitizing illness; they want people to know it may take nothing more than saying hello, provide card, and save a life. He mentioned you can ‘Be The One’ who saves a life.
11 Dr. Fuller inquired if he left cards in the back of the room and Mr. Manning confirmed that is correct.
Dr. Fuller thanked Mr. Manning and other veterans for their service. He mentioned there is a VFW post and a Marine post.
2) PUBLIC COMMENTS
Andrew Advincula submitted an online comment regarding reckless drivers doing donuts in California Visions that has gotten extremely bad recently and Police can’t/won’t do anything. He was called upon to speak but was not present.
Claudia Correia submitted an online comment regarding abandonment of Seniors of Oakley and disgraceful conditions of the current building including the swamp cooler and lack of storage, mentioning the City Council should be ashamed, excluding Dr. Fuller.
Enrique Samson provided photos to the Council and commented that he was originally from San Francisco, purchased a home in Richmond in 1999, and met his wife in 2002 and had two kids, and their home was broken into three times so his wife suggested they move to Oakley which they did, purchasing a new build near Main Street and Shady Oak Drive across the street from the big oak tree. He mentioned about 15 years ago, the builder would not construct a concrete wall completely around his home as he requested but rather it was built partially with an iron fence extending around the remainder which they paid for, and he had no choice but to accept it. He mentioned the sprinkler system installed by the builder was less than a foot away from the iron fence and rotted the iron fence. He mentioned he contacted the City to inquire what it was going to do about the rotting fence and the City told him there is no money and it is his responsibility, though it is not his responsibility; it is the City’s sprinkler system that has rotted the fence; it is not his sprinkler system. He shared that he has spoken with just about everyone in the City and nothing has been done. He mentioned one morning he awoke to a Bobcat on his property removing the fence, so he contacted the City and was told they are taking away the fence. He added that there is a refurbished fence near Gehringer but the City has no money for his fence and with it gone, they have people trespassing, cutting through his yard, and it is a safety issue because there is no protection for his house and is the reason he moved away from Richmond.
Bud Chaddock commented that he was in an accident at Brown Road and Laurel Road, the road that he keeps talking regarding speeders who hit and totaled his truck at 40mph without putting brakes on. He mentioned they are sore, and he is here today, and his wife is at the doctor. He gave a shout out to Oakley Police as their staff was on scene within 2 minutes, if that, along with EMTs. He mentioned they were very cooperative and worked with a person who was not helping the situation very beautifully. He commended Officer Canady for being professional. He mentioned with the new Safeway being built, he works for them, and thinks there should be an ordinance to address when deliveries can be made like at the stores he has worked at because residents do not want to hear trucks all night. He mentioned he contacted South Beach Clean Creeks Coalition regarding salmon poaching at Marsh Creek and someone contacted him who is also helping with Coyote Creek in San Jose and has good backing, and the person wants to speak with him further.
12 Doug Gamble commented on serious issues happening at The Oaks, including a kidnapping this morning; a resident was caught in the laundry room and held against her will for some time before being released. He mentioned he does not know the nature of it because no one at The Oaks is telling them anything about it. He mentioned usually when something happens, The Oaks sends out an email blast indicating what has happened and what residents need to lookout for but nothing has come out. He mentioned the people got into the building through a broken lock on the side door, a broken lock that has been there for months. He mentioned Building 67 has a similar problem where the locks have been broken and not fixed for an extended period of time.
He explained that this is allowing people to enter the building and do all sorts of things, apparently including kidnapping. He shared that no one feels safe in the building because of what has happened, and the kidnapping is more of a symptom of the problem; if management was taking care of the problems, it probably would not have happened, but there are a lot of problems that just get dropped. He mentioned one problem is the manager, Carla, who refuses to meet with tenants if she doesn’t feel the issue is significant enough or something she doesn’t want to discuss because she has made a decision and doesn’t want to reverse it, and she is hostile toward tenants. He mentioned one problem is that she doesn’t live here; all past managers have been residents of The Oaks; she lives in Bakersfield and commutes, so she is not always on site, not as often as they need since it is a problem complex. He mentioned they need a manager on site.
He shared that residents were most disturbed when she recently told them that they could not have keys to the club room because they were becoming too powerful and a bit uppity. He mentioned they are going to bring this information to Oke Johnson’s attention to see if they can get resolution. He indicated he reviewed minutes from previous City Council meetings when Oke was present and residents are concerned that the City Council is being told things are completed that are not, a good example being the locks on the doors. He mentioned something needs to be done and he is not sure what or how other than bringing the City Council up to speed.
Jackie Rider commented that residents at The Oaks have been promised for months that doors will be fixed, they are paying for secure buildings, and they are not getting it, and it is going to take someone getting severely hurt before they do something about it. She mentioned after telling them about it and putting in work order after work order after work order, nothing happens. She mentioned they have had homeless people sitting in their community room watching TV or reading the newspaper. She mentioned she doesn’t know what the solution should be; they can’t afford to pay to have the locks fixed. She mentioned they are in the process of setting up a trust fund for their rent to be deposited if things are not taken care of. She mentioned they are only interested in getting their rent checks. She shared that their last meeting with Oke was June 23 and he said the locks would be fixed that day and now they have another door, the main entrance, as well as the two side doors, that don’t lock. She mentioned they are seniors, not young people, and even if they were young people, they still don’t have security, and it is getting scary what is walking through their apartments.
Councilmember Meadows inquired if anyone is present from Winn Management. No one was present.
Mike Walko commented on the westbound traffic situation at Main and Cypress. He mentioned traffic is heavy and backed up on the number 3 lane. He suggested a traffic study and making lane 3 a right turn only lane, lane 2 a straight and left turn lane, and lane 1 a left turn only lane to improve traffic flow and eliminate back up across the railroad tracks which probably did contribute to a fatal accident there a few years ago. 13 Paul Seger addressed the new CEQA guidelines on the agenda which he finds a bit misleading and potentially an act of intentional misdirection. He mentioned the agenda states that every item is exempt from certain selected CEQA guideline sections and Public Resources Code Section 21065; at first glance it may seem like a comprehensive coverage but in reality, it is a selective interpretation that provides cover for those who understand its true intent to minimize environmental review and expedite project approval at the lowest cost to developers. He explained that it is problematic because the City as lead agency, has ultimate authority to determine the scope of CEQA review. He mentioned by selectively highlighting only exemptions, staff sidesteps the rigorous environmental scrutiny that the community deserves by implying that if Oakley staff states they determined the projects are exempt, that they are truly exempt; that is the end of the story. He mentioned this approach allows the City to perform the bare minimum required under CEQA and unless legally challenged, they get away with it indefinitely. He commented that in all honesty, most projects are legitimately exempt, but it’s a ploy; staff does not mention CEQA codes that grant themselves the ultimate authority to perform the minimum of CEQA guidelines. He mentioned CEQA Guidelines Section 15060 outlines that if City staff determines it is exempt, the project can proceed without further CEQA review. He commented on who is really asking the tough questions on behalf of the public. He referenced CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) and that it allows the City to declare a project exempt from CEQA so City staff is leading the charge, declaring everything exempt, in some form or fashion. He mentioned Public Resources Code Section 21080 grants City staff authority to determine whether a project is subject to CEQA and determine the appropriate level of environmental review. He mentioned these sections collectively empower City staff to make final determinations about all CEQA applicability and the level of review required. He mentioned these determinations are not subject to external oversight and remain uncontested unless an outside agency or group legally challenges the decision which is expensive and a burden on all parties. He added that by not critically questioning other CEQA sections, staff’s new CEQA tags throughout the agenda, is merely an act of selective transparency that undermines public trust and the intent of CEQA.
Paul Olsson submitted a speaker card. He did not wish to speak. He inquired when the City is going to stop illegal fireworks; they went on July 4, 5 and 6. 3) COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Dr. Fuller shared that his service dog, Ivar, developed a tumor on his spleen, had a splenectomy on June 21, and passed away June 23. He mentioned he loved being here and loved all. He mentioned in the public discussion regarding Mayor Williams’ trip to China, he heard a statement many times and he thinks he knows where it came from, that he is racially bigoted because he refers to the Chinese which is based on evil, fear, ignorance, and it does not exist. He shared that he did say that the United Nations has found that the communist government in China is one of the worst violators of human rights, especially when including Tiananmen Square with the slaughter of 10,000 people.
He mentioned Jamestown Foundation has found that China is a habitual violator of human rights, the U.S. Department of State has habitually found them violating rights and the U.S. Department of State has firmly suggest not to travel in China because of their violation of human rights which he will restate again, and again, and again as a statement of fact. He mentioned Amnesty International believes the same. He mentioned he refers to people living in China as Chinese as that is the correct demonym; they are communist Chinese as that is part of their identity, but not all Chinese are communists, and they are subject to inhumane conditions. He mentioned to bring it on, step in, if they want to keep going on the racial divide situation, but in the interim, he would like to call 14 upon Mayor Williams to promptly place forth the gifts she received from the communists, from China, from whatever organization for her to travel, stay and be fed in China, and return, forthwith, so people can understand the gift that was received. 4) CONSENT CALENDAR
Dr. Fuller pulled items 4.7 and 4.9 for discussion.
It was moved by Councilmember Meadows and seconded by Vice Mayor Shaw to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0)
Item 4.7
Dr. Fuller mentioned this is the same thing he has objected to during the last 3-4 meetings, this time being the code department hiring outside to do the work. He mentioned he believes the City is farming out jobs that can be handled within the City.
He mentioned without a meet and confer process, staff should reach out to employees to see if they can fill it, and then work on a way to put it out to bid. He shared that he will vote no on this item.
It was moved by Councilmember Meadows and seconded by Councilmember Henderson to adopt the resolution. AYES: Henderson, Meadows, Shaw, Williams.
NOES: Fuller. (4-1)
Item 4.9
Dr. Fuller inquired if R&R Pacific Construction bid at approximately $6.5 million, $207,550 less than the next bid, which Mr. Rohani confirmed is correct. Dr. Fuller mentioned he will abstain.
It was moved by Vice Mayor Shaw and seconded by Councilmember Henderson to adopt the resolution. AYES: Henderson, Meadows, Shaw, Williams. ABSTENTIONS:
Fuller. (4-0-1)
4.1 Approve the Minutes of the Special Oakley City Council Meeting held June 11, 2024 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk)
4.2 Approve Minutes from the Regular Joint City Council/City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency/ Public Financing Authority Meeting held June 11, 2024 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk)
4.3 Report Out of Closed Session Memo (Derek Cole, City Attorney)
4.4 Accept the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/24 Fourth Quarter Report on the Capital Improvement Program (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
4.5 Adopt a Resolution Awarding a Contract to Quality Sound for the Civic Center Amphitheater Sound System Project-CIP No. 319 (Troy Faulk, Recreation Manager)
4.6 Adopt a Resolution Establishing Special Speed Zones for Specific City Streets (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer) 15 4.7 Adopt a Resolution Approving a Consulting Services Agreement between the City of Oakley and TRB and Associates, Inc. for On-Call services Related to Code Compliance Plan Review and Inspection Services for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 (Ken Strelo, Community Development Director)
4.8 Adopt a Resolution Awarding a Contract to CivicPlus for the Design, Hosting and Maintenance of a New City Website (Danielle Navarro, Assistant City Manager)
4.9 Adopt a Resolution for the Award of a Construction Agreement with R&R Pacific Construction, Inc. for the construction of the Laurel Road Widening (Cloverbrook Avenue to O’Hara Avenue) Project-Capital Improvement Project Number 280 (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
4.10 Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with BKF Engineers, Inc. to provide Additional Design and Construction Support Services for the Laurel Road Widening (Cloverbrook Avenue to O’Hara Avenue) Project-Capital Improvement Project Number 280 (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
4.11 Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Consulting Services Agreement with BSK Associates to Provide Materials Testing and Special Inspections for the East Cypress Road Widening (Knightsen Avenue to Jersey Island Road) Project-Capital Improvement Project Number 247 (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer)
4.12 Creating Zone 192 within the Oakley Special Police Tax Area consisting of the Rosewood Estates project (Subdivision 8787) located at 4073 Rose Avenue (APN 035-220-035-6) (Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer) 5) PUBLIC HEARINGS
5.1 Waive the First Reading and Introduce an Ordinance Amending Oakley Municipal Code Sections 9.1.404.c.9 and 9.1.1238.b.6 (Zoning Text Amendments- WineryRelated Uses and Carwash Highway Buffers) (RZ 02-24) (Ken Strelo, Community Development Director)
CEQA Determination: Find the project is categorically exempt under the Common- Sense-Exemption (14 Cal. Code Regs./CEQA Guideline § 15061(b)(3)) Community Development Director Ken Strelo presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation.
Vice Mayor Shaw requested if they could separate them out for discussion and go one by one.
City Attorney Derek Cole noted for the record that the agenda for this item and other items that come after that there is a CEQA finding. He mentioned whenever staff has a land use matter before the Planning Commission or City Council, he works with the City Clerk to make sure that the CEQA determination they are asking the Council to make in that land use matter, whether a CUP, a rezone, or anything involving a zoning interpretation, it is specifically called out on the agenda. He mentioned court cases have made it clear that the Brown Act requires us to do that, so the default CEQA verbiage at 16 the beginning of the agenda is meant to address the perfunctory things that are not land use actions, general language on agenda. He made clear for this specific item that staff has specifically identified CEQA action they are proposing the Council adopt for this item and they have called that out in the agenda.
Mayor Williams commented that she would also like to separate out the two items.
Mr. Strelo mentioned staff is proposing a single ordinance and suggested the Council could delete part of it if the Council does not wish to approve a part. He deferred to the City Attorney whether they could split this into two separate ordinances.
Dr. Fuller mentioned as there are CEQA questions, he would prefer to look at CEQA first, if that is the proper order.
Mr. Cole requested Dr. Fuller share any concerns regarding CEQA as that is a threshold matter to address first.
Dr. Fuller inquired about use of the common sense exemption mentioning since there is no new construction and nothing to worry about, it is common sense that CEQA is not needed. He shared he is thinking how can a new winery be built without sinking a foundation, and if there will be sinking of a foundation, there will be ground breaking; in the process there will be increased traffic to the area or at least that is the hope of the winery for people to go there so he is not certain how can we say there is no ground breaking, there is nothing new, and nothing will occur to upset the environment so we don’t need a CEQA, and yet they are talking about building wineries. He mentioned he hasn’t seen anything in the proposals that say they will be using existing buildings to open a winery which means a building will be built and people will go there. He mentioned he thinks they need to look at that and have a public hearing on CEQA. He added there are schools in the area that are concerned about products being grown in the area and there are people in the community that are worried about increased traffic and another use of commercial in the area. He mentioned he cannot buy into bypassing CEQA by saying it is common sense that they are not going to build anything when they know there will be groundbreaking, roads, and increased traffic.
Mr. Cole explained that the project at issue is not anything specific to any specific project at any specific site; at this point they are only amending the code to allow certain winery uses and car wash uses within certain zones within the City; it is discretionary project; they are amending the code to authorize something; there is no project yet, so he feels comfortable that adoption of code is exempt. He mentioned if someone comes forward with a CUP application, they would treat that as a project, there would be a project description, and staff could meaningful evaluate their proposal, but they are not there yet. He mentioned Dr. Fuller’s concerns are legitimate and staff can address CEQA once staff receives a CUP application.
Dr. Fuller inquired why CEQA is listed within 5.1 and must be approved now if they must look at every project with CEQA. He mentioned he cannot justify in his mind that he fully understands there will be no groundbreaking as he cannot imagine a winery being built without breaking ground, without something there. He mentioned at that point they may have to look at it, but in this item, they are looking to waive CEQA and build economic activity, but the question still remains why they must look at CEQA now if they are going to look at each individual project that comes in.
17 Mr. Cole explained that every time a decision-making body, the Planning Commission or City Council, makes a discretionary decision, whether to do something or not doing something, as in this item where it is to amend the zoning code to authorize this use in the abstract, not at a specific site as that will come later, it is a project under the definition of CEQA, and it is a project that requires that staff must make some finding. He mentioned their view is when they are simply amending the code and authorizing something, it can be looked at as a separate project and there are no specifics to formulate a project description of actually digging up land, improving land, building tasting rooms, or anything like that, so it is their belief this is appropriate to treat this code amendment under the common sense exemption as there are no CEQA impacts, but when a project comes forward, staff will require an initial study and it will go through CEQA analysis for every possible impact and staff would make a determination. He expressed that Dr. Fuller’s concerns are valid and they will get to those when they have actual applications, but they can't have applications until they amend the code to allow applications.
Dr. Fuller mentioned he is not commenting on car washes or wineries or anything else, he is only commenting on CEQA, and his discretionary vote is no.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if the zoning text amendment is approved ‘as is’ or if it is split, if nothing would automatically be allowed to be built and everything would still come before Council for approval. Mr. Strelo confirmed that is correct; this is a zoning text amendment; there is no physical project being proposed.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if it is only car washes and wineries being voted on, not CEQA that was being discussed as if it were a third part for vote. Mr. Strelo confirmed CEQA is not and explained it is a finding in the ordinance.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that it is a requirement to show there is no CEQA issue with this.
Mr. Strelo explained there are projects that require a Notice of Determination be adopted by the decision-making body and this is not one of those; this is an exempt project.
Mayor Williams inquired if by changing the zoning text, it does not mean that projects are by right; someone could not just build a winery on their property; a process must happen. She also inquired if all are subject to CUPs.
Mr. Strelo mentioned the use for wineries and agricultural tasting rooms is currently a conditionally permitted use, it currently requires approval of a conditional use permit, and the proposed text would allow it in differently zoned lands within the same size of properties as currently allowed.
Mayor Williams inquired if tomorrow someone buys a property 40,000 sq. ft. that does not currently have any vineyards on it, and plants, and it takes 5 years minimum to mature, if there will be any time limits associated with projects or if staff anticipates applications will be for existing vineyards, so applications are not sitting for 5 years.
Mr. Strelo explained that as the language is proposed, it needs to be an existing vineyard in place at the time the application is submitted for a CUP; that is the intent of the ordinance.
18 Dr. Fuller inquired about the City’s definition of a vineyard. He mentioned he sees lots of brown vines that haven’t been irrigated for some time.
Mr. Strelo mentioned it is the agricultural production of grapes.
Dr. Fuller inquired if the vines are brown and the vineyard has not been irrigated, if it is classified as a vineyard.
Mr. Strelo mentioned if vines are growing, he would consider it a vineyard, as they can go dormant and come back.
Dr. Fuller commented that he swears he saw cannabis and economic development and should have taken a screenshot.
Dr. Fuller commented that they have discussed wineries which he can understand for economic development and use of the land, and agricultural products which people have asked him if they are agricultural products. He mentioned Continente has been wanting to change its commercial operation to cannabis; agricultural production seems to be another topic. He mentioned that agriculture production changes daily it seems with a lot of research happening with a lot of different things grown and he doesn’t want to try and project in future what an agricultural product will be. He mentioned the other topic is car washes. He agreed with Vice Mayor Shaw that they should bifurcate all three, put in wineries as there seems to be validity although he would like to see the success rate for small wineries, car washes he can kind of go along with, but not the agricultural product.
He mentioned they determined they put too many things into the Strategic Plan and they should tamper it down to concentrate on one or two items rather than ten at a time. He inquired why they can’t do that with these, bring back a proposed winery, then agricultural products, then look at car washes. He mentioned they could look at CEQA and vote on them separately. He commented that he hears how great wineries could be but he doesn’t want to decide on them when he has all of these other items in front of him as well.
Councilmember Meadows commented that he sees wineries and car washes. He mentioned you don’t have to have irrigation to have vineyard; he doesn’t have irrigation and there are many vineyards in Oakley that do not have irrigation. He shared that his vineyard turns brown in the winter but is green in the spring and just because a vineyard is brown, it doesn’t mean it’s dead.
Mayor Williams commented that the better the grapes are, the more struggle, so they don’t need to be irrigated. She shared that her vines look terrible in winter and plentiful in August when they pick. She mentioned that the staff report changed only slightly from when it was presented to the Planning Commission on May 7 but there was no mention of cannabis. She inquired if there was a secret staff report that they are unaware of. She mentioned everything she has researched suggests that cannabis is illegal to be infused in anything in a winery.
Mr. Strelo confirmed there was no draft version of a staff report that included cannabis; they do not have secret staff reports. He mentioned cannabis is illegal to grow outdoors, and 6 plants are allowed indoors. He mentioned there is no outdoor cannabis processing allowed, agricultural products by default cannot include outdoor cannabis growth, this ordinance has nothing to do with cannabis, and agricultural products is not meant to include cannabis in this code.
19 City Manager Joshua McMurray commented for the record that the agenda was published only once on July 2.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if approved, if this ordinance would this allow cannabis to be grown if legal which Mr. Strelo confirmed it would not.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if the theory was that (and it is not) with this ordinance the products they are talking about would allow cannabis growth, wouldn’t properties in R-20 and R-40 zoning already be able to grow cannabis. She mentioned that properties that are already R-20 or R-40 zoned can apply for a CUP for tasting rooms and this ordinance is to expand it for properties with vineyards that are greater than 20,000 sq. ft. to have the same ability that already exists in the code for R-20 and R-40 zoned properties.
Mr. Strelo confirmed that is correct.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that approval of this ordinance does not change cannabis, it does not allow small vineyards to grow cannabis even though larger vineyards can’t, to clarify. She expressed she is in support of this. She mentioned it is already in R-20 and R-40 so she thinks it is smart but will discuss further in deliberation.
Mr. Strelo mentioned Oakley is a developing city; there are properties throughout the city that may have owners that sell to developers, and they become subdivisions and other owners that hold onto their properties that may have vineyards. He added that when the City incorporated it adopted a General Plan and some larger properties were designated for higher, relatively speaking, density in the future, and ultimately those properties were zoned R-10, R-12, R-6. He explained that this ordinance will allow those properties that are hold out properties to still have a large parcel and grow grapes but may not be zoned appropriately to apply for a CUP compared to an identical property that may have a different zoning designation as it relates to wineries, tasting rooms, and processing of agricultural products; this has zero to do with cannabis.
Mayor Williams mentioned staff marked the one property the ordinance would apply to for car washes. She inquired if staff has something similar for wineries; if staff knows how many properties potentially this would apply to for wineries in the city.
Mr. Strelo mentioned he does not have a count.
Mr. McMurray mentioned the reason that the ordinance is being brought forth is there is interest from a property owner, and he anticipates if approved, there could be more, and that they would have an application in the near future.
Mayor Williams opened the public hearing.
A speaker who did not identify herself mentioned her nephew is an attorney and his niche is cannabis; when cannabis is grown, it is tracked by seed, you can’t just grow it out in a field, it is treated like a drug, from seed to harvest to sale, you can’t mix the two.
She mentioned you can’t have a liquor license and also a cannabis license; it is not allowed, so it gives a little protection.
Mayor Williams closed the public hearing.
20 Vice Mayor Shaw expressed that she supports the section regarding wine-related uses and thinks it is great to allow some of the other properties similar to R-20 and R-40 to have the same opportunity. She mentioned car washes mimicking the buffering of gas stations, and she was on the Council when it happened, but the conversation started before she was elected. She shared that she sees drivers getting off the highway to get gas and then get back on the highway but doesn’t see a lot of people getting off the highway to wash their car and then get back on the highway; and that is why she thinks it sets better for gas stations than it does for car washes. She inquired if there is an argument why they would want to match it with gas stations.
Mr. Strelo mentioned there is not necessarily an argument; there are properties that have development interests and there are certain types of development that tend to help those properties take off and bring those businesses to Oakley. He mentioned staff knows through special land uses that having those businesses too saturated and near residential is not something from a voting standpoint that the majority of the City Council is in support of. He explained that this is an opportunity for some properties that have been awaiting commercial development for many years to possibly get that spark needed. He further explained that these are uses that come to Oakley and are looking to develop; they don’t want them going to the middle of town in a dense area but if there is another area such as the intersection provided, there could be an exception to that density saturation criteria.
Dr. Fuller commented that it has become a quagmire in the way that it has been presented. He mentioned he would like to see each one come back without agricultural products. He mentioned people are concerned about agricultural products, he knows what he saw, and people are asking if an agricultural product is cannabis. He shared that in his days at Iowa State that if it grew in the ground and was harvested for money, it was an agricultural product, but in talking with Mr. Cole, he mentioned kind of, but not really that it would ever be classified as that, and he can speak to that if he would like to, but he has consulted with him on it and Mr. Cole mentioned it probably would not be a problem, and there was another person who commented whom he thanked and mentioned you can see everything going around. He mentioned he would like to see them come back, with wineries bifurcated and taking out any consideration of agricultural products. He mentioned if there is a venture that is interested in new products to grow on their land, he thinks the City has a mechanism to require a permit. He suggested if the City is going to allow wineries, to delete reference to agricultural products or enhancement of economic activities under the ordinance section 1 b. He mentioned he fully understands these but doesn’t think they necessarily need to be put in the ordinance. He mentioned there is a cannabis wine available throughout the state, and he hasn’t drank in 40 years, and he doesn’t use dope, but he has been told you can go to CoCo Farms to buy it. He suggested eliminating the term “agricultural products”; if they want to have a winery, have the space, and have the necessary investment to produce and sell wine, they can look at that ordinance. He suggested they look at car washes separately.
Councilmember Meadows commented that car washes are mentioned in one location, at the four corners, and there is no housing in that area. He mentioned that there is a demand for additional car washes in Oakley, and if they can have a car wash in that location, away from residents, it is better for residents as it won’t disturb anyone and it takes one off the table. He expressed that he supports the ordinance and supports it ‘as is’.
21 Mayor Williams commented that she would like to make some clarifying points. She mentioned she thinks agricultural products is in this because wine is an agricultural product, and she doesn’t see how someone could have the winery without the agriculture.
Mr. Strelo commented that processing grapes to ferment into wine is processing an agricultural product and drying almonds would be processing an agricultural product. He referred to a slide in his presentation mentioning that the non-underlined section already exists in the ordinance, and they are proposing adding processing of agricultural products tonight.
Mr. Cole mentioned that the last phrase clarifies for processing agricultural products that it must contain an existing vineyard at time of the application, so it is narrowly drafted.
He agreed with the speaker that you cannot receive a state license to be involved in cannabis business and involved with alcohol at the same site which he believes is also true for tobacco.
Mayor Williams commented that this ordinance limits it further; some people have peach trees to make peach wine but that is not a vineyard. She inquired if this is only intended for grape vineyards.
Mr. Cole explained that the intent is to use sites with existing vineyards.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that some may have issues with what agricultural products includes because there were two posts online saying item 5.1 is about cannabis. She mentioned she thinks that sparked a lot of questions because she knows she started to receive a lot of questions, and she spoke with a lot of people letting them know that was not what this was about. She mentioned even if this were to pass, and in the R-20 and R-40, you can’t have both a cannabis license and an alcohol license.
Dr. Fuller requested a point of order for outside text being brought in.
Mayor Williams hit the gavel to restore order mentioning Vice Mayor Shaw may finish her statement.
Dr. Fuller mentioned he has people telling him this is the information, and she [Vice Mayor Shaw] is bringing in things off her cell phone.
Vice Mayor Shaw continued, mentioning she did not say anything about her cell phone, but that there were two online posts by you [Dr. Fuller] saying this subject is about cannabis which sparked a lot of people to ask questions and reach out to her since that post so she can let them know this is not about cannabis. She mentioned the reason that people are inquiring about agricultural products is…
Mr. Cole interjected to help clarify that this is a legislative act and if Councilmembers rely on what they hear from constituents, that is the nature of legislating; if they were in a situation to decide a CUP or a quasi-judicial matter where Councilmembers are acting like judges, he would be concerned about outside information such as Facebook or Nextdoor; however, this is a legislative act and they are acting as legislators; it is a common function to rely on what they hear from constituents. He mentioned if you read something nowadays on social media, that is a form of communication so that is his response to the dialogue they are having now.
22 Vice Mayor Shaw continued, sharing that she believes that is why so many people were concerned about agricultural products. She mentioned if someone gets this and decides to stop selling alcohol so they can then get this and do it with cannabis, cannabis is still illegal in Oakley; they still can’t do it here. She mentioned they are saying you can’t have both, alcohol and cannabis, so this couldn’t pass, then they say they got it and will stop selling alcohol so they can start selling cannabis but cannot because it is still illegal in Oakley. She mentioned she thinks that is why there has been some confusion, and some people are reaching out, because there has been some information put out there that this is about cannabis. She shared that she has done her best to clear that up with people she has spoken with. She restated that she thinks that is why so many questions have come out about this.
Councilmember Meadows mentioned he knows they have all heard it over the years that Oakley wants to protect the vineyards. He mentioned they are sitting there until a developer comes along to develop them, but if they allow wineries for these parcels, it will protect at least those parcels for a while, and helps vineyard owners to continue to grow. He shared that wineries have currently cut back on grape purchasing as there is a massive oversupply of grapes and bulk wine, so this may help vineyards stay around a while longer.
Mayor Williams agreed with Councilmember Meadows and commented that the saying is that if you want to make a million in wine, you have to start with 2 million, so it is kind of a losing proposition from the beginning. She mentioned there is a draw; she heard many people were interested in wineries and tasting rooms when she ran for office. She also mentioned Brentwood and Knightsen have some good areas and it is providing good economic development, and she wants Oakley to stay as true to its agricultural roots as possible so she loves that part of the ordinance. She shared that she doesn’t like the car wash part of the ordinance. She mentioned it is no secret that she wanted the zoning amendments to be made and they ended up with what she felt was a watered-down version of the ordinance, but she was happy to get something passed and happy for the collaboration to get it passed. She commented that she does not see the benefit of this part of the ordinance to residents. She mentioned Oakley is already struggling with some of its commercial which she believes Councilmember Meadows will say is the exact reason why they need to change this, but they have some commercial that is already struggling that could put in a car wash and still is not building, specifically, at E. Cypress and Main. She mentioned she doesn’t want to give a plot of land away that is zoned a particular way if building is not happening on the parcels where these uses are currently zoned for. She mentioned if staff can separate out the two uses, wineries and car washes, she would support the winery portion.
Councilmember Henderson commented that car washes have been a hot topic; this one area doesn’t have housing around it, and it will still take an application to get a CUP. He mentioned when looking at commercial properties and trying to fill them, somebody would have to know they can make it work to make the investment in the area. He added that they would be approving that area, and when the property originally sold, they were hoping for a different commercial look for that property, but now it sits vacant on a main intersection when they show off our town. He suggested they let commercial businesses make a determination if the model works for them; if the Council approves, the Council is saying it is okay, but it would still come back for CUP, so he thinks they are kind of hurting themselves if they don’t move forward with that.
Vice Mayor Shaw slightly disagreed mentioning they had an application come in and they all wanted option 1 but that didn’t happen; this gas station ordinance was already in 23 place when they bought that, so she feels like they lost that gamble. She mentioned she knows these are the businesses that are coming here, and Bridgehead industrial is coming, but she doesn’t know when, and there will be more uses that could go there and they may get someone who wants to put a different store there that is not a gas station.
She mentioned she feels they are hurting themselves if they fill all their commercial properties with more car washes.
Councilmember Meadows disagreed. He asked Mr. Cole if they could split the ordinance to remove car washes and vote only on wineries.
Vice Mayor Shaw said she would make a motion to change it and he [Mr. Cole] mentioned earlier they could.
Mr. Cole commented that the item was noticed as single ordinance for both wineries and car washes, and they could remove one of those because the greater includes the lesser. He mentioned that they would need to ensure that they pull out section 4 of the ordinance but also pull out 2c because it addresses car washes, but everything else can remain in. He mentioned if it is the pleasure of the City Council, they can move to approve the ordinance with the deletion of sections 2c and 4, and sections 5 and 6 can be renumbered accordingly.
Mr. Strelo commented that the proposed changes cover the body of the ordinance, but he would like to know if the title should change or if staff can add an additional ‘whereas’ to explain the deletions.
Mr. Cole reviewed the title.
Mayor Williams suggested everything after ‘agricultural products’ in the title could be deleted.
Mr. Cole advised if it is the pleasure of the Council, they could remove from the title the portion related to car washes and a ‘whereas’ provision was not necessary as the minutes will reflect the revisions.
Mr. Strelo added that if section 4 was removed, sections thereafter would be renumbered, of which Mr. Cole agreed.
Dr. Fuller agreed with Councilmember Henderson on car washes and he understands vineyard property owners want to develop their property. As far as priorities are concerned, he suggested they address car washes first then come back to wineries. He mentioned he believes he likes the wineries portion except the agricultural products part of it as it is confusing what is or is not included, including cannabis, in his opinion.
It was moved by Vice Mayor Shaw to waive the first reading and adopt the ordinance removing from the title everything after “winery related uses”, removing section 2c, removing section 4, and renumbering sections 5 and 6.
Mr. Cole clarified that the title is correct; however, they would leave in “finding the action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act”.
Vice Mayor Shaw restated the motion to approve the text amendment, removing from the title all references to car washes, removing sections 2c and 4, and renumbering sections 5 and 6.
24 It was seconded by Mayor Williams.
Dr. Fuller requested the ordinance be read back as it will be appear.
Mr. Cole read the proposed changes explaining in the title of the ordinance, after “wineries, tasting rooms and processing of agricultural products” they would remove the word “and”, and remove the phrase with the numbers related to car washes, and they would pick back up with “finding the action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act”. He mentioned in the ordinance, sections 2c and 4 would be removed, and current sections 5 and 6 would be renumbered to become sections 4 and 5.
Dr. Fuller asked if he would read those sections and Mr. Cole explained that the new section 4 would have the CEQA language and new section 5 would have the effective date.
Dr. Fuller mentioned he will abstain as he still thinks it is too confusing; it could come back to haunt them.
AYES: Henderson, Meadows, Shaw, Williams. ABSTAIN: Fuller. (4-0-1)
5.2 Waive the First Reading and Introduce an Ordinance recommending the City Council approve the project titled, Bernard Corners Rezone (RZ 01-24) (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner)
CEQA Determination: Find that the project is categorically exempt under the CEQA Common Sense Exemption (14 Cal. Code Regs./CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3))
Associate Planner Evan Gorman presented the staff report and provided a PowerPoint presentation.
Dr. Fuller mentioned he has the same question on CEQA with the common sense exemption being applied because staff is saying there is no physical change, yet they would be rezoning it so can be built on, and that whole area has construction, traffic, and increased traffic, so he is baffled how it can be said there is no impact on the environment when they are asking for a rezone that will make an impact on the environment.
Mr. Gorman provided an analogy of a burrowing owl on the property wouldn’t know if we changed the law today, but when an application comes in to bulldoze and grade the property and have a project, the burrowing owl would know, or the site would be impacted, or neighbors would be impacted by the traffic. He mentioned they will have the same conversation when those aspects of the project are proposed, and they will review CEQA once more.
Dr. Fuller inquired when he [Mr. Gorman] says they will review CEQA again if that is when there is a CUP or building permit. He inquired how they will review it if it is not an adverse impact on the environment.
Mr. Gorman confirmed that when there is a specific project proposed, it will have an evaluation under CEQA.
25 Mr. Cole mentioned CEQA follows the Goldilocks Rule, his term and not anyone else’s, which is like the Goldilocks’ fairy tale of not too hot, not too cold, but just right. He explained that when review is required for a project, staff reviews it when it is just right; if they start review too early which is where they are at right now, they don’t have a project they can meaningfully evaluate as they don’t have all the details; if they wait too long, they are rubber stamping and they are not doing that, so they have to find the place where they can meaningfully conduct a CEQA review and he believes what Mr. Gorman is saying is that we are not there yet. He mentioned they will be there at some point if someone has a full-fledged application, so he wants to make clear that they are not shirking their responsibilities; a full review will be conducted with staff, consultants and a whole team, but when just making code changes, they don’t have to worry about that.
Dr. Fuller commented that he appreciates his explanation but does worry about CEQA.
Mr. Cole mentioned the law requires us to be worried about it but he wants to make clear that staff is taking it seriously and not trying to piecemeal or compartmentalize things to make it look like each step is by itself and minimal; they are not doing that. He mentioned there will be a full and robust CEQA review when they have something to review.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that today they are changing paper and there is no environmental impact to that, there is no one wanting to go on a site right now, no store, nothing yet. She mentioned she feels like that is the difference; they have to put it in there because they are making a change, but changing a document on paper is not going to impact the environment, but when they bring the project forward that has more to do with it. She inquired if there is already a plan in place or if they want to see this ordinance in place and then go out and seek an applicant.
Mr. Gorman mentioned there was no mention of it with the application materials and in informal conversation they said they were looking for someone.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if when that person comes, and the application moves forward, at that time it would undergo CEQA review which Mr. Gorman confirmed is correct.
Mayor Williams mentioned it sounds like they are trying to streamline the process. She shared that she always thought it was commercial because it only makes sense to be commercial there, but this streamlines the process so it doesn’t get stuck; potentially someone who wants to develop it would have to go through a rezone at the time of the application if they don’t do it now preemptively to be business friendly.
Mr. Gorman clarified that in the early 1990s when the P-1 was established, it could have been commercial as P-1 allows you to customize it and right now is a good example, there are neighboring adjacent properties in the General Plan and each one has the same process, but this one lags behind because it needs that rezoning and the applicant is just requesting to be brought to the same as everyone else.
Mayor Williams opened the public hearing.
Victor Hoeke provided public comment, mentioning residents need Oakley to look like Oakley, not like Brentwood; everything on E. Cypress looks like Brentwood and Oakley has its uniqueness. He mentioned the way the property is situated, only the south side can be developed that faces residents and that will create a big change in decibels. He 26 mentioned it also gives potential for developers to increase profits. He mentioned they need to think about what is going to look good, possibly residential housing to connect to the neighborhood behind it, but a smoke shop brings people who blast their music which they have already had to address; they don’t want things to make more noise, create ugliness or increase traffic. He mentioned Main Street is chaos and E. Cypress has traffic that is deadly; the lady who crashed her car into a train because her father didn’t know the sister-in-law was picking up her nephew and she decided to go through the bars and that was tragic. He mentioned there are jagged lines and people need to stay in their lanes near ARCO. He mentioned they need to figure out a better solution or change school drop off times so people have space to get to work. He mentioned there is a lot to think about who is trying to make a commission or quick buck, who is jumping in to develop, and building a three-story structure that is going to look ugly.
Applicant Brian Kelly commented that he has owned the property for quite some time and wants to bring the property into conformance with the General Plan designation of commercial; the PUD overlay zoning on it now is confusing, so he decided to take initiative for the rezoning to make it commercial use.
Mayor Williams closed the public hearing.
Dr. Fuller expressed concern that it is a small parcel; the storage bins and storefronts seem good and used quite frequently, there are residential units to the north, and he expects someday they will also be there. He inquired how the applicant is envisioning putting a project there without overcrowding it.
Mr. Kelly mentioned anyone bringing a viable project to the City would be required to go through the normal Planning Commission and Planning Department requirements with site plans, elevations, etc. He added that staff and the Planning Commission would have control over height, density etc., so it is a normal development process that every developer goes through.
Councilmember Meadows commented that he is okay with the request, it is cleaning up to what it should have been and is following the General Plan.
Vice Mayor Shaw agreed mentioning that she always thought this site was zoned properly so she thinks this is what it should be; it is right next to Hairy Hounds, it is a good spot for commercial, so she is in support.
Mayor Williams commented that she is also in support, it makes sense. She mentioned she thinks the speaker left but wants to ensure that it goes through the regular process; they don’t just build a 7-story mall here. She mentioned people should know it is an acceptable zoning and it would come before the Council to ensure the use.
It was moved by Councilmember Henderson and seconded by Councilmember Meadows to waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0)
5.3 Adopt a resolution approving the project titled Oakley Village Subdivision 9577 Tentative Map Extension (TME 01-24) (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner) CEQA Determination: Find that the project is within the scope of the previously conducted environmental review for the approved tentative map and that no further review is necessary.
27 Dr. Fuller recused himself and left the room.
Associate Planner Evan Gorman presented the staff report and provided a PowerPoint presentation.
Mayor Williams opened the public hearing and called for public comments; there being none, she closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Councilmember Meadows and seconded by Vice Mayor Shaw to adopt the resolution. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0) Mayor Williams called for a brief recess at 8:42 p.m. The City Council reconvened at 8:48 p.m.
Dr. Fuller returned to the room.
5.4 Waive the First Reading and Introduce an Ordinance Approving the Burroughs Subdivision 9557 Development Agreement Amendment (DA 01-24) and Adopt a Resolution approving the Burroughs Subdivision 9557 Tentative Map Extension (TME 02-24) (Ken Strelo, Community Development Director) CEQA Determination: Find that the project is within the scope of the previously conducted environmental review for the approved tentative map and that no further review is necessary.
Community Development Director Ken Strelo presented the staff report and provided a PowerPoint presentation.
Dr. Fuller inquired if affordable units will be constructed within the project.
Mr. McMurray mentioned he made sure the purchase and sale agreement with KB Homes includes 17 lots graded and with utilities that will be deeded to the City and the City will find a developer to construct those affordable homes.
Dr. Fuller mentioned that is all because he [Mr. McMurray] and Mr. Strelo made sure it was in the purchase and sale agreement.
Mayor Williams commented that this is on a key corridor for the City and she inquired if extending the map will not impact improvements on E. Cypress which Mr. Strelo confirmed is correct.
Mayor Williams opened the public hearing.
Mike Walko provided public comment mentioning they live close to the property and got a report on the project. He shared that before that, he was on the Knightsen Town Council and they were trying to get a signal somewhere in that area as it is hard to get out onto E. Cypress Road now with traffic, especially during mornings, but part of the 28 plan of this subdivision is the entrance to it is going to line up with Broadway where he lives and they are going to get a traffic light there. He inquired how the extension will impact that part of the plan for the E. Cypress improvement.
Mr. McMurray mentioned it will have no impact; the City is constructing those frontage improvements, the City has a contract in place, and construction is going to start next Monday. He added that the curb, gutter and sidewalk, along with the signalized intersection at Broadway, will still be completed with this project.
Mr. Walko requested clarification if it will be completed as part of the road project, not the subdivision project which Mr. McMurray confirmed is correct, mentioning the City took on the roadway project as a Capital Improvement Project.
Mayor Williams closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Meadows commented that the road work is starting Monday so in about a year from now, that project will be completed regardless of what is happening with the homes.
It was moved by Dr. Fuller and seconded by Vice Mayor Shaw to waive the first reading and introduce the ordinance. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0) 6) REGULAR CALENDAR
6.1 Adopt a Resolution to Establish an Oakley Senior Center Specific Sub-Committee (Joshua McMurray, City Manager)
Mr. McMurray presented the staff report. He mentioned it is well known that the City is talking about plans to demolish the building where the current Senior Center is located and the Oakley Senior Citizens Club, a non-profit, currently leases the building from the City to run the Oakley Senior Center. He mentioned he thought it would be a good idea to set up a short-term sub-committee consisting of staff, 2 Councilmembers and a small group of the Oakley Senior Citizens Club, to discuss issues as they approach this transition. He explained that the sub-committee will meet once a month starting this month and conduct 5-6 meetings until end of this year.
Mayor Williams inquired if seniors outside of that club are being considered for the subcommittee. She mentioned the Club has approximately 192 members but there may be other seniors outside of that.
Mr. McMurray mentioned their membership is growing and he has had many meetings with their President, Allan Perry, and when they last met, he agreed to this prior to him placing it on the agenda and they have a small group selected; the goal is not to have an ad-hoc committee that must be publicly noticed, but rather a smaller committee to discuss any issues. He mentioned the Oakley Senior Club is currently operating the center and has the most intimate knowledge of what is offered and the needs they are hearing from the community, so it is meant to be small and focused.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if he knows who they have selected to be on it. She mentioned they have Board members and club members and club members have expressed some frustration with the Board always speaking for them and that’s not 29 necessarily what they want or like. She also mentioned people outside of the club now may be able to give ideas what they would like that the City could bring. She mentioned they may not have joined the club because they don’t like its direction so if they only listen to the club members, she is concerned they will not hear what the broader senior community may want.
Mr. McMurray mentioned this is just to talk about the transition and he agrees they need to engage the larger senior community, and they will do that, but the intent here is to establish a much smaller group. He added that he does not know who the Senior Club plans to bring but he does know it will be Allan and 3-4 people. He mentioned if the Council wants him to do additional outreach, they can direct that, but that was not the direction for tonight.
Vice Mayor Shaw mentioned not limiting it to Board members would be a good start.
Mr. McMurray commented that he thinks Allan discussed that with him, but he can reiterate that to him.
Mayor Williams inquired if there will be continuity just like the Councilmembers who will be on the committee that will not rotate.
Mr. McMurray confirmed they discussed having the same group meeting consistently over the next few months.
Mayor Williams inquired if it will be specified that it will be the same people meeting each time which Mr. McMurray confirmed it would.
Dr. Fuller inquired how he [Mr. McMurray] envisions how the Senior Club members will be chosen for the committee.
Mr. McMurray mentioned he does not and he does not recommend the City get involved with their selection.
Councilmember Meadows inquired what age constitutes a senior.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that it is 55 in most communities, 62 in certain senior housing communities.
Mayor Williams inquired if there are any volunteers for the sub-committee.
Dr. Fuller mentioned he will volunteer, but he does not like the idea that they are not bound by the Brown Act; he thinks everyone should know what is going on. He mentioned it is his understanding they are going to have Mr. Perry and Mr. Dale Smith but that could change, and he thinks it should be no secret; the whole group should know ongoing what is taking place.
Councilmember Henderson volunteered to be on the sub-committee.
Vice Mayor Shaw suggested they have one person who has been involved in the library subcommittee and one who has not and she is not saying that should be her, but they have had many conversations with the seniors up to this point and there is some history there so she would like it to be one of the people within the library sub-committee group and one that is not.
30 Councilmember Meadows and Mayor Williams supported Vice Mayor Shaw and Councilmember Henderson.
Dr. Fuller commented that the continuity issue is silent. He expressed that his concern is with Vice Mayor Shaw’s initial statement that they don’t need seniors, they need young people that can bring in new businesses, and he cannot support her speaking for seniors in their best interests in this community.
Mayor Williams mentioned she would support Vice Mayor Shaw as she has shown time and time again as emergencies have come up with seniors that she is there, and with her professional career she has experience working with people and with the inevitable fear that comes with change with the Senior Center, she believes she would show compassion and help guide that, so she supports Vice Mayor Shaw. She mentioned she also supports Councilmember Henderson as there is history with it being a former fire building and that may be interesting.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that she wasn’t originally suggesting herself but thought it would be Mayor Williams, but she is happy to step in if Mayor Williams has too much on her plate. She mentioned they have two seniors on the City Council so she did not just say only one could be here. She mentioned she works with seniors in her day job and something that she has experience with, so if Mayor Williams does not want to do it, she would take it.
It was moved by Councilmember Meadows to appoint Vice Mayor Shaw and Councilmember Henderson to the Oakley Senior Center Specific Sub-Committee. He mentioned he is less than 6 months away from that definition of a senior.
Dr. Fuller asked Vice Mayor Shaw if she said that someone from the library committee didn’t want two seniors on it.
Vice Mayor Shaw mentioned her suggestion was to have one person who is serving on the library committee because they have had many conversations with the seniors up until this point, and one not. She clarified that she made a comment about two seniors, and that you [Dr. Fuller] referenced that she only wanted one senior, and she was reminding him that there are two seniors on the Council right now.
Dr. Fuller inquired if there was a reply to that.
Vice Mayor Shaw confirmed there was not a reply, but a motion.
Mayor Williams seconded the motion.
AYES: Henderson, Meadows, Shaw, Williams. NOES: Fuller. (4-1) 7) REPORTS
7.1 CITY MANAGER
(a) City Manager
City Manager Joshua McMurray mentioned the City will be opening its cooling center tomorrow and Thursday this week, 12pm-6pm, in the Council Chambers. 31 (b) Business License Update
Mr. McMurray mentioned the June business license update is attached. (c) Report from the Oaks Apartments
Mr. McMurray mentioned that The Oaks Apartments update is included, however there is no representative here this evening, but Oke Johnson will be here in August.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented she is very disappointed no one is here from The Oaks.
She shared she received information from a tenant that on June 16 there was more flooding in a different building, Building 81, causing several apartments to have to be evacuated; they are claiming it was due to a Band-Aid fix. She added that she received photos of the water and 4 of the units were vacant, and the resident that sent the photos was being sent to a hotel. She mentioned she is very disappointed this was not included in this report when it should have been. She mentioned there are photos of dryer units all the way down the hallway and rather than plugging the units into a hallway outlet, they were plugged into tenants’ units so the utility cost will apply to the tenants. She mentioned some of the residents spoke about locks not working for months and they [Winn] assured the Council last month that all the locks were working so she is beginning to believe that they [City Council] are being fed what they [Winn] think they [Winn] want to us [City Council] to hear and she is not ready to pull back on quarterly reports; she wants to pull them in a room to discuss because they had requested the good, the bad and the ugly. She mentioned she saw their occupancy rates are the same or have gone up. She mentioned they used to put in the report the new certifications being processed and said they wanted 90% occupancy by June 30 which has mysteriously disappeared from this report. She shared that she was fuming when she got this report and mentioned she gets calls from residents from The Oaks on a regular basis. She added she is quite disappointed, and that they didn't show today when they said they would as a condition of closing the committee, she thinks the Council should weigh that seriously.
Councilmember Meadows commented that he was not as disappointed as Vice Mayor Shaw with the report, but his thought was that they are not really making improvements.
He shared that Vice Mayor Shaw manages senior housing and he manages regular housing and if he was looking at these numbers, he would be embarrassed. He mentioned they had somebody call about air conditioning over the weekend and they dispatch for repair service or have someone in there to repair Monday morning. He mentioned with these work orders, he would be embarrassed if he were Winn, and even more embarrassed if he were the ownership group that has never really cared since day one, back when he was at a meeting at Delta Vista Middle School; they fed garbage to the Council then. He commented that he wouldn't mind if they had to come back. He mentioned they heard from seniors during public comment and Doug Gamble. He mentioned Mr. Gamble was on the committee and was not very vocal and was very reasonable when on the committee and tonight Mr. Gamble was more upset than through all the committee hearings. He expressed that he believes they were fed BS and now they are going backward. He inquired if the community rooms are locked and if residents have access by keys or if they are always open. He inquired how people got into the building. He mentioned they have heard about locks tonight and at every committee meeting. He mentioned he is not an attorney and will not advise, but they might want to look at options and it sounds like some may be going in that direction by having set up an escrow account.
32 Mayor Williams inquired if any code enforcement action could be taken for broken locks.
Mr. McMurray responded not really, these are landlord/tenant disputes, but life safety issues have been addressed in the past.
Mayor Williams commented that residents reach out to her all time as well with pictures of mold. She inquired if there is a way to match up code enforcement cases with how many complaints are coming into the City or how many resources of the City this is occupying. She shared she thinks there needs to be additional recourse that the City can’t have but if they have residents that have no choice but to call the City because an elevator going to the 4th floor is broken, she would like to see an additional layer of how many code enforcement complaints are received and how much of City resources that is taking up.
Councilmember Meadows inquired what would be a code enforcement issue.
Mr. McMurray mentioned he can provide it in the next update.
Vice Mayor Shaw inquired if there were any calls about flooding.
Mr. McMurray commented that he is not aware.
Vice Mayor Shaw mentioned regarding compliance and recertifications, recertifications in their type of housing must be done every month based on their annual move in date.
She mentioned this report show 25 annual recertifications due in May (23 completed, 2 pending), 37 annual recertifications due in June (34 completed, 3 pending), and now it is July; these things can be done up to 180 days in advance so it is no wonder that they cannot get their occupancy rate up if they can’t even recertify the people that currently live there.
Dr. Fuller expressed what is frustrating him is that he spoke about this when the ad-hoc committee first came together and what are they going to do if they [Winn] don't listen, and here they are again having these discussions while the ones hurting are the ones living there and they are not taking them into account. He mentioned the bottom line is the City is part owner and it is time to have legislation that has teeth; the City financed the building with bonds. He mentioned the City owes responsibility to the people and they need to stop talking about it and have legislation. He mentioned they have been at this quite a while.
Councilmember Meadows inquired what is the legislation he will bring to solve these problems.
Dr. Fuller commented that he will first stop talking about it and then ask Mr. McMurray to research it.
Councilmember Meadows commented that he [Dr. Fuller] does not have any ideas.
Dr. Fuller commented that if he [Councilmember Meadows] wants him [Dr. Fuller] to sit in Mr. McMurray’s seat, he would be happy to because he makes a lot of money.
Councilmember Meadows responded that he does not.
33 Dr. Fuller commented that he will let Mr. McMurray research it then.
Vice Mayor Shaw commented that while things are not fixed, she doesn’t think either of them [she and Councilmember Meadows] have said they have it under control; they said they would bring the Council reports and if it doesn’t work, they would bring it back. She mentioned they have given the residents a place to come and speak. She mentioned when they have had these meetings, they have heard things that they may have not otherwise heard directly from the residents. She mentioned that not everything is fixed, some things have changed as far as having the meetings in place, it is not working but they have done something, it is not going to get perfect, but they are showing they are not going to let it slide, and they brought residents and management to the table and communication is happening; they are not doing nothing. She mentioned if he has ideas, great, if not, they will continue to work on fixing it and she is not giving up on it.
Dr. Fuller suggested the City Manager research it and bring forth legislation that is enforceable rather than pontificating.
Mayor Williams asked Councilmember Meadows if the City ever steps in when he has a landlord dispute.
Councilmember Meadows mentioned no, unless there is a code enforcement violation.
Mayor Williams commented that is where the City has power. She mentioned she keeps hearing the City owns part of the building. She inquired what the City’s ownership in the building is.
Mr. McMurray mentioned the City has a financial interest in Building 53, the family building.
Mayor Williams inquired if that financial interest gives the City leverage over buildings other than 53.
Mr. McMurray responded that he does not believe so because they are separate parcels and owners.
Mayor Williams mentioned Vice Mayor Shaw had made a good point that they probably are going to watch the meeting videos and read the minutes. She shared that Vice Mayor Shaw spent several hours there explaining to residents the different layers of funding mechanisms and she requested they [Winn] tell us [City] which agency(ies) are overseeing certifications, but it is not in any of the reports. She mentioned she wants to know how many certifications they are behind on and she wants to know who provides their funding so the City knows who they can lean on from a legislative standpoint.
Vice Mayor Shaw mentioned Home, HUD and CTAC.
Mayor Williams commented she wants to know who they were submitted to and when. (d) Tyler ERP Conversion Update (Holly Sitton Orognen, Senior Project Manager, KOA Hills Consulting)
Mr. McMurray indicated staff, along with Holly Sitton Orognen from KOA Hills Consulting, are updating the City Council on a quarterly basis. 34 Ms. Sitton Orognen provided a PowerPoint presentation update on the Tyler ERP system.
7.2 OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL/OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL ACTING AS THE SUCCESSOR
AGENCY TO THE OAKLEY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(a) Reports from Council Liaisons to Regional Committees, Commissions and Boards AND Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency
Councilmember Meadows reported since the last City Council meeting, he has attended a Contra Costa Transportation Authority meeting and a Marin Clean Energy meeting.
Councilmember Henderson reported he attended two Ironhouse Sanitary District meetings. He provided City staff kudos for their work on SummerFest and the parade.
He also reported he attended Friday Night Bites.
Vice Mayor Shaw reported she attended the Library subcommittee meeting, a Chamber mixer at Brownstone Gardens with Oakley, Brentwood and Discovery Bay Chambers mixed, a ribbon cutting for the Beer Isle, Oakley’s Juneteenth event, lunch at ODAT— Elevated Youth California is a student group trying to raise drug and smoking awareness in high schools and they wanted to present it to a select group of adults to see if it is something that would be supported, the swearing-in ceremony for Officer Todd Sorrell, the Knightsen Advisory meeting with a presentation by the Friends of the Oakley Library, the Brentwood Juneteenth event, the CalCities Policy Committee meeting for public safety where they voted to support the Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act to the full Board and they votes to support to amend their support on the retail theft legislation package to change it from support to neutral due to the inoperability clause, and it did get approved by the Board, so a letter has gone out from Calcities. She also reported she attended the Meet the Mayor and Vice Mayor event, the Tri-Delta Transit meeting where they had an update on the comprehensive operational analysis and they approved the annual budget, and the parade and Summerfest. She thanked Brentwood and Antioch Mayors for presenting certificates of recognition for Oakley’s 25th Anniversary. She mentioned she watched the Planning Commission meeting, and she was happy to see how the Safeway item went.
Mayor Williams reported she attended the Library stakeholder meeting, the Tri-Chamber mixer, the police officer swearing-in ceremony, the LUHSD Board meeting to present to Superintendent Volta on behalf of Oakley for his service, Brentwood’s Juneteenth event, the Community Services Policy Committee--they are watching AB 2157 (a new disclosure for non-profits and other organizations that contract with cities) and Housing Committee regarding Housing Element compliance audits (SB 1037 which would fine cities up to $50,000 per month for violations), Revenue & Taxation Committee (SB 1494 exempting new ADUs from property taxes when certain conditions are met, and the Transportation, Communications and Public Works Committee (broadband communications and autonomous vehicles). She mentioned for her policy committee, they heard from LISTAS California regarding disaster preparedness, and she reached out to them to see if they want to table any Oakley events. She mentioned there have been some implementation updates to Prop 1 which require them to work with our County and there is a lot of funding available if they can get a County-sponsored letter to apply for funding for services. She mentioned the Taxpayer Deception Act was ruled unconstitutional and will not appear on the November ballot, she attended the Advancing Women in Transit Award gala where Oakley Planning Commissioner Jeanne Krieg 35 received an award, the ABAG General Assembly which she attended on behalf of the Senate but there were no Oakley representatives there and there was no quorum so she subbed in for Oakley as the voting delegate. She shared that BAFHA Board advanced its measure so it will appear on the November ballot. She mentioned that SB 7 is a gut and amend bill that will not allow cities to self-certify and the ABAG Board mentioned they are making clarity in the Housing Element process of priority. She mentioned there was a speaker there expressing concern regarding the California Forever Project which is 70% opposed by the residents of Suisun but there is talk about it going to the State Legislature if it doesn’t get the vote (with dwindling local control this is an area of concern; it is the agriculture that they are going after). She mentioned they discussed that the budget for ABAG is having structural deficit and they are looking to sell an ownership interest to fix the deficit. She mentioned there are also a lot of different boards that meet there, and she was kind of dismayed to see that East County does not have a voice on it. She mentioned there were work sessions on fire, green infrastructure, and she would like to see Oakley have more of a voice on some of the committees. She reported she attended the legislative recap for CalCities where important bills were discussed and she attended Senate floor sessions, and some cities are doing sales tax on cars purchased outside their jurisdiction. She inquired if Mr. McMurray was able to look up how all of that works.
Mr. McMurray responded that he reached out to that city manager and didn’t hear back.
Mayor Williams reported she got to be on the Senate floor when a journalism bill sponsored by Senator Glazer was passed, and she attended the 25th Anniversary parade and Summerfest. She mentioned the team should give themselves a pat on the back for the event, it was amazing, they are doing great things, it had a kid area great, and was impressive.
(b) Requests for Future Agendas
Vice Mayor Shaw requested a meeting with The Oaks, bring an agenda item to the City Council to discuss re-opening the committee or discuss what steps to move forward.
Mayor Williams supported it.
Dr. Fuller requested to add Disability Pride Month (July) to the proclamation list. Mayor Williams supported it.
8) WORK SESSIONS
None.
9) ADJOURN
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:47 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Libby Vreonis
City Clerk
36 MEMORANDUM
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Date: July 10, 2024
To: Mayor and City Councilmembers
From: Derek P. Cole, City Attorney
CC: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
Subject: Closed Session Report-Out Memo
For Consideration at the City Council Meeting of August 13, 2024 Background and Analysis
The City Council considered the following closed session item during its special meeting held July 9, 2024:
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) or (3): (One potential case based on California Attorney General letter dated June 24, 2024, concerning automatic license plate reader practices).
It was moved by Councilmember Meadows and seconded by Vice Mayor Shaw to discontinue sharing automatic license plate reader data with out of state agencies at this time. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (5-0)
Fiscal Impact
None.
Recommendation
Receive and file this report.
Attachments
None.
37 Ordinance No. 10-24 Page 1 of 3
ORDINANCE NO. 10-24
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY AMENDING OAKLEY MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9.1.404.C.9 RELATED TO WINERIES,
TASTING ROOMS, AND PROCESSING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS AND
FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
WHEREAS, this is a City-initiated application requesting approval of a Rezoning (RZ 02- 24) consisting of zoning text amendments to amend 1) Oakley Municipal Code (“OMC”) section 9.1.404.c.9 so that wineries, tasting rooms, and processing of agricultural products are not only conditionally permitted in the R-20 and R-40 District, but also in other R Districts on properties of at least 20,000 square feet that have an existing vineyard; and 2) OMC section 9.1.1238.c.6, a performance standard for applicable to Carwashes, by adding an exclusion to the 1,000-foot minimum buffer between carwashes when within 1,000 of a highway on/off ramp (“Project ); and WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Rezone (RZ 02-24), received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, and discussed the matter. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 9-24 recommending the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on or before June 28, 2024, the Notice of Public Hearing for the Project was duly noticed in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general distribution, was posted at Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School located at 4901 Frank Hengel Way, outside the library at Freedom High School located at 1050 Neroly Road, and was mailed out to outside agencies and to parties requesting such notice; and
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2024, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Ordinance, received the staff report and staff presentation, received comments from the public and interested parties, considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and discussed the matter; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of the Ordinance have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as findings as if fully set forth herein.
38 Ordinance No. 10-24 Page 2 of 3
SECTION 2. Additional Findings.
A. The City Council finds the proposed ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) – Common Sense Exemption in that the proposed ordinance would only establish and clarify administrative processes and would not facilitate new construction or other groundbreaking activities. There is no potential to result in either a direct physical change to the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. None of the circumstances described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies.
B. Amending OMC section 9.1.404.c.9 related to wineries, tasting rooms, and processing of agricultural products will provide small vineyard owners on properties of at least 20,000 square feet the option to apply for a conditional use permit for a commercial winery, tasting room, or other processing of their viticulture products, which will result in helping viticulturalists continue their practices by opening new avenues for financial stability and opportunities for more small businesses in the City of Oakley. These additional use options are expected to be sought after by some property owner/vineyard owners, which would help to further preserve some of Oakley’s smaller vineyards.
SECTION 3. Subsection 9.1.404.c.9 of the Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.1.404 titled, “Single-Family Residential Districts (R-6; R-7; R-10; R-12; R-15; R-20; R-40)” is hereby repealed and amended, as follows:
“9. Wineries, tasting rooms, and processing of agricultural products in the R-20 and R-40 residential districts and in the other R districts when a lot is a minimum 20,000 square feet in size and contains an existing vineyard at the time of the application.”
SECTION 4. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
This project is exempt from environmental analysis under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), because it can be seen with certainty that the proposed amendments will not have a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 5. Effective Date and Posting.
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation, or by publishing a summary of the proposed ordinance, posting a certified copy of the proposed ordinance in the City Clerk’s Office at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the ordinance 39 Ordinance No. 10-24 Page 3 of 3
is to be adopted, and within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, publishing a summary of the ordinance with the names of the Council Members voting for and against the ordinance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________ __________ _____
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
40 Ordinance No. 11-24 Page 1 of
3 ORDINANCE NO. 11-24
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING A REZONE TO REZONE A 1.68-ACRE SITE FROM P-1 (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) DISTRICT TO C (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT APN 033- 320-033
FINDINGS
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2024, Brian J Kelly (“Applicant”) filed an application requesting approval of the following entitlements (“Project”):
Rezone (RZ 01-24) of 1.68 acres from P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District to C (General Commercial) District;
WHEREAS, the project site is located at the northeast corner of Bernard Road and Main Street and is zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District. (APN: 033-320-033); and WHEREAS, the proposal complies with the requirements of the rezoning application requirements of Section 2.4.012 (a) of the Oakley Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, on June 4, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the project at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Planning Commission held a vote and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 9- 24 WHEREAS, on or before June 28, 2024, the Notice of Public Hearing for the Project was duly noticed in the Contra Costa Times, a newspaper of general distribution, was posted at the Project site, at Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School located at 4901 Frank Hengel Way, and outside the library at Freedom High School located at 1050 Neroly Road, was posted to the City’s website, and was mailed out to all owners of property within a 500-foot radius of the project’s boundaries, to parties requesting such notice, and to outside agencies; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 2024, the City Council opened the public hearing at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the City Council took a vote and adopted this resolution approving the project, as conditioned; and The City Council of the City of Oakley does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings
A. Pursuant to Section 2.4.012 of the Oakley Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Oakley hereby finds and determines as follows:
41 Ordinance No. 11-24 Page 2 of
3 1. The rezone to C (General Commercial) District is consistent with the property’s Commercial (CO) General Plan Land Use Designation, and the description of the General Plan Land Use area provided in the General Plan describes the intention of accommodating uses that exactly align with those permitted within the proposed zoning district, and those uses have been permitted on other properties with the same General Plan Land Use District and Zoning District over the City’s history; and
2. The land uses that would be permitted on the property as a result of the rezoning are the same as those permitted and established on the commercial properties north of the project site; and
3. The surrounding community has a distinct need for additional Commercial land uses in this area of the City, especially on corner parcels along primary thoroughfares such as in this case; and
SECTION 2. Property Defined and Rezoned
A. 1.68-acre of real property located at the northeast corner of Bernard Road and Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 (APN 033-320-033).
SECTION 3. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Finding The request for a rezone to General Commercial District on a property designated commercial in the general plan is deemed to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), Common Sense Exemption.
The project is consistent with the general plan and cannot be expected to impact the physical environment or public health, safety, or welfare.
SECTION 4. Severability
If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses or phrases may be held unconstitutional, invalid or unenforceable.
SECTION 5. Effective Date and Posting
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation, or by publishing a summary of the proposed ordinance, posting a certified copy of the proposed office in the City Clerk’s Office at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the ordinance 42 Ordinance No. 11-24 Page 3 of
3 is to be adopted, and within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, publishing a summary of the ordinance with the names of the Council Members voting for and against the ordinance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ __________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
43 ORDINANCE NO. 12-24
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING THE BURROUGHS SUBDIVISION 9557 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
AMENDMENT (DA 01-24) BETWEEN THE CITY OF OAKLEY AND B&B BURROUGHS REVOCABLE TRUST, MARY E. BURROUGHS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST, ROBERT C. BURROUGHS, WARD N. BURROUGHS, AND KATHERINE
BURROUGHS TREAT FOR THE BURROUGHS PROPERTY
APNS 032-081-025 AND 032-081-026
WHEREAS, the City has enacted a Development Agreement Ordinance codified as Chapter 3 of Title 9 of the Oakley Municipal Code (“OMC”) establishing the procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, on April 15, 2024 the City of Oakley and Westgate Ventures (“Applicant”) filed an application requesting approval of 1) a Tentative Map Extension (TME 02-24) to extend the approval of Tentative Map 9557 (known as “Burroughs Subdivision 9557”) for a period of six (6) additional years, and 2) a Development Agreement Amendment (DA 01-24) to amend the term of the existing Development Agreement for the project site from August 13, 2025 to the date of the Tentative Map Extension (“Project”). This will be the first discretionary extension for this approval. The approved Tentative Map consists of approximately 43.24 acres subdivided into 208 single-family residential lots, open space, and public right of way. The project site is located on the north side of East Cypress Road between Knightsen Avenue and the CCWD Canal Crossing and is zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District. APNS 032-081-025 and 032-081-026; and WHEREAS, the approved Tentative Map consists of an approximately 43.24 acre site subdivided into 208 single family residential lots; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Designation for the project site is Residential Low (RLM). The site is zoned P-1 (Planned Unit Development) District; and WHEREAS, it can be seen with certainty that the request for an extension to the Tentative Map will not result in any new physical impacts to the project, and therefore not result in any new significant environmental impacts. The project falls within the scope of the original CEQA analysis, which included an Initial Study that resulted in a Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2021040251). No further environmental analysis is required; and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2024, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing at which it received a report from City Staff, oral and written testimony from the public and applicant, and deliberated on the project. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Planning Commission took a vote and adopted Planning Commission Resolution 14-24 recommending the City Council approve the Tentative Map Extension and Development Agreement Amendment; and
44 Ordinance No.12-24 Page 2 of
3 WHEREAS, on or before June 28, 2024, the Notice of Public Hearing for the project was published in the Contra Costa Times, and was posted at Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School located at 4901 Frank Hengel Way, and outside the library at Freedom High School located at 1050 Neroly Road, and mailed out to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project boundaries, outside agencies, and parties requesting such notice; and
WHEREAS, if any term, provision, or portion of these Findings or the application of these Findings to a particular situation is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Findings, or their application to other actions related to the Project, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City; and
WHEREAS, these Findings are based on the City’s General Plan, the City’s Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, the Subdivision Map Act, Tentative Map 9557, the project’s P-1 District, and the information submitted to the City Council at its July 9, 2024 meeting, both written and oral, including oral information provided by the applicant, as reflected in the minutes of such meetings, together with the documents contained in the file for the Subdivision (hereafter the “Record”).
The City Council of the City of Oakley does ordain as follows:
SECTION1. Findings
A. Regarding the application requesting approval of a Development Agreement Amendment (DA 01-24) to extend the term of the existing “First Amendment to the Development Agreement By and Between the City of Oakley and B&B Burroughs Revocable Trust, Mary E. Burroughs Revocable Living Trust, Robert C. Burroughs, Ward N. Burroughs, and Katherine Burroughs Treat for the Burroughs Property:”
1. The Project is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the Oakley General Plan;
2. The Project is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located in that the project is designed in compliance with the Oakley General Plan land uses on the subject property, and has received an entitlement for a vesting tentative map;
3. The Project is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice. The Burroughs Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR), certified May 25, 2021 by City Council Resolution No. 58-21, identified and provided mitigation measures for significant environmental impacts associated with development of the Burroughs Subdivision 9557.
The Development Agreement Second Amendment authorizes development consistent with the certified EIR and approved entitlements; 45 Ordinance No.12-24 Page 3 of
3 4. For the reasons set forth in Finding 3, the Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare; and
5. The Project will not adversely affect the orderly development of property.
The Project will actually enhance the orderly development of property by assuring that improvements to the property will be consistent with the certified EIR and applicable entitlements approved for the property.
B. The project complies with Measure J Growth Management requirements.
SECTION 2. Approval of the Development Agreement Second Amendment The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement Second Amendment (Exhibit “A) and authorizes and directs the Mayor to sign it.
SECTION 3. Recordation of Development Agreement
Within ten (10) days after the Mayor executes the Development Agreement, the City Clerk shall submit the Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation.
SECTION 4. Effective Date and Posting
This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its passage. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage in a newspaper of general circulation, or by publishing a summary of the proposed ordinance, posting a certified copy of the proposed ordinance in the City Clerk’s Office at least five (5) days prior to the City Council meeting at which the ordinance is to be adopted, and within fifteen (15) days after its adoption, publishing a summary of the ordinance with the names of the Council Members voting for and against the ordinance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ ___________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
46 STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 13, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kim Snodgrass, Deputy City Clerk
SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution Amending the City’s Proclamation Policy to add Disability Pride Month (July) to the Approved Proclamation List Background and Analysis
On August 9, 2022, the Oakley City Council approved a proclamation policy. In accordance with the policy, the Mayor, without formal action of the City Council, may issue proclamations on behalf of the City Council that adhere to the policy and are on a pre-approved list adopted by the City Council. Proclamations not on the list may be submitted and brought forth to the City Council for consideration. Disability Pride Month is not on the pre-approved list; therefore, approval is requested.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
Council engagement with community partners is consistent with the Community and Collaborative Partnerships Goal in the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+.
Fiscal Impact
None.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council review the requested proclamation and either approve or deny.
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Sample Proclamation
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
47 Resolution No. XX-24 Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. XX-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY AMENDING THE CITY’S APPROVED PROCLAMATION LIST
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the City’s Approved Proclamation List is hereby Amended to add Disability Pride Month (July).
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTION:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________ __________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
48 PROCLAMATION
DISABILITY PRIDE MONTH
WHEREAS, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law on July 26, 1990, marking a significant milestone in the ongoing struggle for the rights and inclusion of individuals with disabilities; and
WHEREAS, Disability Pride Month is an annual event celebrated in July to commemorate the signing of the ADA and to recognize and honor the history, achievements, experiences, and struggles of people with disabilities; and
WHEREAS, Disability Pride Month promotes visibility and mainstream awareness of the positive pride felt by people with disabilities, celebrating diversity and fostering a society that is inclusive and accessible to all individuals, regardless of ability; and WHEREAS, individuals with disabilities contribute to the cultural, social, economic, and political fabric of our community, enriching the lives of all residents through their unique perspectives and talents; and
WHEREAS, the City of Oakley is committed to supporting the rights of individuals with disabilities and ensuring that all public spaces, services, and opportunities are accessible and equitable; and
WHEREAS, celebrating Disability Pride Month provides an opportunity to educate the public about disability issues, challenge stereotypes and stigmas, and promote a more inclusive and respectful community; and
WHEREAS, the recognition of Disability Pride Month encourages all community members to acknowledge and appreciate the contributions of individuals with disabilities and to strive toward a future where all people are valued and empowered.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that I, __________, Mayor of the City of Oakley, along with the members of the Oakley City Council do hereby proclaim July as Disability Pride Month and encourage all residents to join in celebrating and promoting the dignity, equality, and inclusion of individuals with disabilities.
49 STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 13, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt Two Resolutions Approving a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Sellers Subdivision 9614 located at the west side of Sellers Avenue and south of Vitale Lane
Background and Analysis
On January 20, 2022, MLC Holdings filed an application to request approval of Vesting Tentative Map (TM 01-22) subdividing approximately 20.42 acres into 77 single residential lots. The proposed site is located at 5911 Sellers Avenue and APN 033- 150-013.
On April 4, 2023, Resolution 07-23, the Planning Commission approved the recommendation for the City Council to approve the Sellers Subdivision 9614 Vesting Tentative Map.
On July 11, 2023, Resolution 78-23, the City Council approved the Sellers Subdivision 9614 Vesting Tentative Map (TM 01-22) and the conditions of approval for the development.
In order to satisfy all remaining conditions of approval, a Subdivision Improvement Agreement must be approved with the recordation of the final map. Meritage Homes of California, Inc. has now requested approval by the City Council to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and approve the final map for Sellers Subdivision 9614.
The City Engineer and City Surveyor have reviewed the tentative map approval documents and the final map, and have found the map to be technically correct, in substantial compliance with the conditionally approved tentative map and all final map conditions of approval have been met (or are being secured by way of this agreement).
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goals under the Community Health and Safety Goal to build safe streets and healthy neighborhoods.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
50 STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action as all the work is being performed by the Developer.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and approve the Final Map for Sellers Subdivision 9614.
Attachments
Attachment 1. Vicinity Map
Attachment 2. Resolution Approving the Final Map
Attachment 3. Resolution Approving the Subdivision Improvement Agreement Attachment 4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA)
Exhibit A – City Council Resolution No. 78-23
Exhibit B – Prevailing Wage
Exhibit C – Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D – Verification of Required Insurance
Exhibit E – Engineer’s Estimate
Attachment 5. Reduction of Sellers Subdivision 9614 Final Map 51 Maxar
¯
Vicinity Map
Subdivision 9614
Sellers
52 RESOLUTION NO. ___-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR SELLERS SUBDIVISION 9614
WHEREAS, On January 20, 2022, MLC Holdings filed an application to request approval of Vesting Tentative Map (TM 01-22) subdividing approximately 20.42 acres into 77 single residential lots. The proposed site is located at 5911 Sellers Avenue and. APN 033-150-013; and,
WHEREAS, On April 4, 2023, Resolution 07-23, the Planning Commission approved the recommendation for the City Council to approve the Sellers Subdivision 9614 Vesting Tentative Map; and,
WHEREAS, On July 11, 2023, Resolution 78-23, the City Council approved the Sellers Subdivision 9614 Vesting Tentative Map (TM 01-22) and the conditions of approval for the development; and,
WHEREAS, Meritage Homes of California, Inc. has satisfied the necessary conditions of approval prior to recordation of the final map for Subdivision 9614 Sellers Subdivision, as approved by the City Council on July 11, 2023, Resolution Number 78-23; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the conditions of approval required prior to final map approval for the project have been satisfied; and WHEREAS, the City Surveyor has determined that the final map attached herein is technically correct.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the final map labeled “Subdivision 9614 Sellers”, as prepared by Carlson, Barbee, & Gibson, Inc. be approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley, California, this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
_________________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
53 ATTEST:
_______________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
54 RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING
THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WITH MERITAGE HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. FOR SELLERS SUBDIVISION 9614
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Oakley, California, wishes to enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Meritage Homes of California, Inc., a California Corporation, for the development of a residential subdivision known as Sellers Subdivision 9614; and
WHEREAS, this agreement will require the developer to complete $2,632,000 for subdivision site and landscape improvements and $355,000 for grading improvements, in accordance with the project conditions of approval and City standard construction design.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Meritage Homes of California, Inc., a California Corporation, is hereby approved and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the development of Sellers Subdivision 9614 in the form attached hereto is made part of this resolution.
PASSED, APROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
____________________
Anissa Wiilliams, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________ _____________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
55
CITY OF OAKLEY
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
SUBDIVISION 9614
This agreement is made and entered into this 13th day of August, 2024 by and between the City of Oakley, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and Meritage Homes of California, Inc., a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER".
R E C I T A L S
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City Council of the City of Oakley, State of California, that DEVELOPER, the subdivider of Sellers Subdivision 9614, desires to improve and dedicate those public improvements (hereafter “The Improvements”) required by the conditions of approval for the project as adopted by the City of Oakley City Council via Resolution Number 78-23 in accordance with the requirements and conditions set forth in approvals, the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and those certain plans and specifications for said development approved by CITY and titled (i) “Sellers Rough Grading Plans Subdivision 9614”, (ii) “Sellers Improvement Plans Subdivision 9614”, as prepared by Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc., and (iii) “Cedarstone Subdivision 9614 Onsite Landscape Improvement Plans” prepared by R3 Studios, Inc. (collectively, the “Improvement Plans”), now on file in the office of the City Engineer, which are hereby referred to for a more definite and distinct description of the work to be performed under this Agreement as though set forth at length herein; and
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER and CITY acknowledge that not all conditions of approval (“COA”) contained in Resolution Number 78-23 have been satisfied, but nevertheless, DEVELOPER desires to file a final map. The satisfaction of all COA are the subject of this Agreement. DEVELOPER’s agreement to satisfy all COA and construct the Improvements identified in the COA is a material part of the consideration for this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER intends to satisfactorily complete The Improvements within the time hereinafter specified, and CITY intends to accept DEVELOPER's offer(s) of dedication of The Improvements in consideration for DEVELOPER's satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, conditions and covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
1. Improvements.
DEVELOPER agrees to install the road improvements (both public and private), sewer and drainage improvements, signs, street lights, fire hydrants, landscaping, and such other improvements (including appurtenant equipment) as required as conditions 56 of approval of Tentative Map 01-22 for Subdivision 9614 as set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement, which is incorporated herein as if set forth at this point, or as otherwise required in the subdivision ordinance. In the event that any provision of this Agreement conflicts with the provisions of Exhibit A the provisions of Exhibit A shall prevail to the extent that the conflicting provision in Exhibit A requires a greater or more extensive improvement or expenditure, or to the extent that that provision extends DEVELOPER’s obligations over a greater period of time than the specific provision set forth herein.
Such improvements shall also be made in conformance with the City of Oakley Municipal Code and Contra Costa County Ordinance Code as adopted and enforced by the City of Oakley.
DEVELOPER will commence construction of The Improvements within 30 days following the date on which CITY executes this Agreement. DEVELOPER shall complete said work not later than 12 months following said date of execution in a good workmanlike manner, in accordance with accepted construction practices and in a manner equal or superior to the requirements of the City of Oakley Municipal Code and Contra Costa County Ordinance Code and rulings made thereunder; and where there is a conflict between the improvement plans and the City Municipal Code or County Ordinance Code, the stricter requirements shall govern. It is understood that the City of Oakley was incorporated effective July 1, 1999, and as such continues to rely on certain laws, ordinances and design standards of the County of Contra Costa. References herein to the County Code or County Ordinance Code are understood to refer to such ordinances and codes as if adopted by the City of Oakley.
Time is of the essence in this Agreement. Upon completion, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY with a complete and reproducible set of final as-built plans of The Improvements, including any authorized modifications.
2. Estimated Cost of Improvements and Possible Future Cash Deposit.
The estimated cost of constructing The Improvements required by this Agreement as adjusted for inflation is agreed to be $2,632,000 for subdivision site and landscaping improvements and $355,000 for Grading. Said amounts include costs and reasonable expenses and fees which may be incurred in enforcing the obligation secured.
57
3. Bonds Furnished.
Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY with the following security in the forms specified in Government Code sections 66499.1 and 66499.2 or in a form satisfactory to the CITY Attorney if different from said Government Code forms:
a. Faithful Performance. Either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond issued by a company duly and legally licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of California, or an instrument of credit equivalent to one hundred percent (100%) of the estimate set forth in Paragraph 2 and sufficient to assure CITY that The Improvements will be satisfactorily completed.
b. Labor and Materials. Either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond issued by a company duly and legally licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of California, or an instrument of credit equivalent to fifty percent (50%) of the estimate set forth in Paragraph 2 and sufficient to assure CITY that DEVELOPER'S contractors, subcontractors, and other persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment shall be paid therefor.
CITY shall be the sole indemnitee named on any instrument required by this Agreement. Any instrument or deposit required herein shall conform with the provisions of Chapter 5 of the Subdivision Map Act. DEVELOPER may request that portions or all of the bonds may be substituted by other parties in the event that portions or all of the Subdivision is sold to other parties, and such substitution shall not be unreasonably withheld by CITY.
4. Prevailing Wage.
CITY has determined that construction of The Improvements falls within the definition of “public works” set forth in California Labor Code Section 1720. Subject to any amendments to Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., DEVELOPER shall comply with Labor Code Section 1720 et seq., shall comply with the provisions set forth in Exhibit B and shall ensure that any contractors and subcontractors comply with the provisions of Exhibit B. DEVELOPER shall waive, indemnify, hold harmless and defend CITY concerning any liability arising out of Labor Code Section 1720 et seq.
5. Insurance Required.
Concurrently with the execution hereof, DEVELOPER shall obtain or cause to be obtained and filed with the CITY, all insurance required in this paragraph and as set forth in Exhibit C, and such insurance shall have been approved by the Finance Director 58
of CITY, or his designee, as to form, amount and carrier. Prior to the commencement of work under this Agreement, DEVELOPER's general contractor shall obtain or cause to be obtained and filed with the Finance Director, all insurance required under this paragraph and as set forth in Exhibit C, evidenced herein as Exhibit D, and such insurance shall have been approved by the Finance Director of CITY, as to form, amount and carrier. DEVELOPER shall not allow any contractor or subcontractor to commence work on this contract or subcontract until all insurance required for DEVELOPER and DEVELOPER's general contractor shall have been so obtained and approved. Said insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect until the completion of work under this Agreement and the final acceptance thereof by CITY. All requirements herein provided shall appear either in the body of the insurance policies or as endorsements and shall specifically bind the insurance carrier.
6. Work Performance and Guarantee.
Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, and excepting only items of routine maintenance, ordinary wear and tear and unusual abuse or neglect, DEVELOPER guarantees all work executed by DEVELOPER and/or DEVELOPER's agents, and all supplies, materials and devices of whatsoever nature incorporated in, or attached to the work, or otherwise delivered to CITY as a part of the work pursuant to the Agreement, to be free of all defects of workmanship and materials for a period of one (1) year after initial acceptance of the entire work by CITY. DEVELOPER shall repair or replace any or all such work or material, together with all or any other work or materials which may be displaced or damaged in so doing, that may prove defective in workmanship or material within said one-year guarantee period without expense or charge of any nature whatsoever to CITY. DEVELOPER further covenants and agrees that when defects in design, workmanship and materials actually appear during the oneyear guarantee period, and have been corrected, the guarantee period shall automatically be extended for an additional year to insure that such defects have actually been corrected.
In the event the DEVELOPER shall fail to comply with the conditions of the foregoing guarantee within thirty (30) days time, after being notified of the defect in writing, CITY shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to repair or obtain the repair of the defect, and DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY on demand all costs and expense of such repair. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in the event that any defect in workmanship or material covered by the foregoing guarantee results in a condition which constitutes an immediate hazard to the public health, safety, or welfare, CITY shall have the right to immediately repair, or cause to be repaired, such defect, and DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY on demand all costs and expense of such repair.
The foregoing statement relating to hazards to health and safety shall be deemed to include either temporary or permanent repairs which may be required as determined in the sole discretion and judgment of CITY.
If CITY, at its sole option, makes or causes to be made the necessary repairs or replacements or performs the necessary work, DEVELOPER shall pay, in addition to 59
actual costs and expenses of such repair or work, fifty percent (50%) of such costs and expenses for overhead and interest at the maximum rate of interest permitted by law accruing thirty (30) days from the date of billing for such work or repairs.
7. Inspection of the Work.
DEVELOPER shall guarantee free access to CITY through its City Engineer and his designated representative for the safe and convenient inspection of the work throughout its construction. Said CITY representative shall have the authority to reject all materials and workmanship which are not in accordance with the plans and specifications, and all such materials and or work shall be removed promptly by DEVELOPER and replaced to the satisfaction of CITY without any expense to CITY in strict accordance with the improvement plans and specifications.
8. Agreement Assignment.
This Agreement shall not be assigned by DEVELOPER without the written consent of CITY.
9. Abandonment of Work.
Neither DEVELOPER nor any of DEVELOPER's agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of DEVELOPER's obligations under this Agreement.
If DEVELOPER refuses or fails to obtain prosecution of the work, or any severable part thereof, with such diligence as will insure its completion within the time specified, or any extension thereof, or fails to obtain completion of said work within such time, or if DEVELOPER should be adjudged as bankrupt, or should make a general assignment for the benefit of DEVELOPER's creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed, or if DEVELOPER, or any of DEVELOPER's contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees should violate any of the provisions of this Agreement, the CITY through its Public Works Director may serve written notice on DEVELOPER and DEVELOPER's surety or holder of other security of breach of this Agreement, or of any portion, thereof, and default of DEVELOPER.
In the event of any such notice of breach of this Agreement, DEVELOPER's surety shall have the duty to take over and complete The Improvements herein specified; provided, however, that if the surety, within thirty (30) days after the serving upon it of such notice of breach, does not give CITY written notice of its intention to take over the performance of the contract, and does not commence performance thereof within thirty (30) days after notice to CITY of such election, CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of DEVELOPER and DEVELOPER's surety shall be liable to CITY for any damages and/or reasonable and documented excess costs occasioned by CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY, 60
without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, appliances, plant and other property belonging to DEVELOPER as may be on the site of the work and necessary therefor.
All notices herein required shall be in writing, and delivered in person or sent by registered mail, postage prepaid.
Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows:
City Manager and City Engineer
City of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Notices required to be given to DEVELOPER shall be addressed as follows:
Attn:
Meritage Homes of California, Inc.
2850 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95833
Notices required to be given surety of DEVELOPER shall be addressed as follows:
Attn:
Lexon Insurance Company
12890 Lebanon Road
Mt. Juliet, TN 37122
Any party or the surety may change such address by notice in writing to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, DEVELOPER has executed and has caused to be acknowledged an abstract of this Agreement. DEVELOPER agrees CITY may record said abstract in the Official Records of Contra Costa County.
10. Use of Streets or Improvements.
At all times prior to the final acceptance of the work by CITY, the use of any or all streets and improvements within the work to be performed under this Agreement shall be at the sole and exclusive risk of DEVELOPER. The issuance of any building or occupancy permit by CITY for dwellings located within the tract shall not be construed in any manner to constitute a partial or final acceptance or approval of any or all such improvements by CITY. DEVELOPER agrees that CITY's Building Official may withhold the issuance of building or occupancy permits when the work or its progress may substantially and/or detrimentally affect public health and safety. 61
11. Safety Devices.
DEVELOPER shall provide and maintain such guards, watchmen, fences, barriers, regulatory signs, warning lights, and other safety devices adjacent to and on the tract site as may be necessary to prevent accidents to the public and damage to the property. DEVELOPER shall furnish, place, and maintain such lights as may be necessary for illuminating the said fences, barriers, signs, and other safety devices. At the end of all work to be performed under this Agreement, all fences, barriers, regulatory signs, warning lights, and other safety devices (except such safety items as may be shown on the plans and included in the items of work) shall be removed from site of the work by the DEVELOPER, and the entire site left clean and orderly.
12. Acceptance of Work.
Upon notice of the completion of the work covered by this agreement and the delivery of a set of final as-built plans to CITY by DEVELOPER, CITY, through its City Engineer or his designated representative, shall examine the work without delay, and, if found to be in accordance with said plans and specifications and this Agreement, shall recommend acceptance of the work to the City Council and, upon such acceptance, shall notify DEVELOPER or his designated agents of such acceptance. CITY reserves the right to not accept the work until all construction activities, including those related to building construction, within the project boundaries has been completed.
13. Patent and Copyright Costs.
In the event that said plans and specifications require the use of any material, process or publication which is subject to a duly registered patent or copyright, DEVELOPER shall be liable for, and shall indemnify CITY from any fees, costs or litigation expenses, including attorneys' fees and court costs, which may result from the use of said patented or copyrighted material, process or publication.
14. Alterations in Plans and Specifications.
Any alteration or alterations made in the plans and specifications which are a part of this Agreement or any provision of this Agreement shall not operate to release any surety or sureties from liability on any bond or bonds attached hereto and made a part hereof, and consent to make such alterations is hereby given, and the sureties to said bonds hereby waive the provisions of Section 2819 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
15. Liability.
a. DEVELOPER Primarily Liable. DEVELOPER hereby warrants that the design and construction of The Improvements will not adversely affect any portion of adjacent properties and that all work will be 62
performed in a proper manner. DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend, release, and hold harmless CITY, and each of its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers agents and employees, from and against any and all loss, claims, suits, liabilities, actions, damages, or causes of action of every kind, nature and description, directly or indirectly arising from an act or omission of DEVELOPER, its employees, agents, or independent contractors in connection with DEVELOPER'S actions and
obligations hereunder; provided as follows:
1. That CITY does not, and shall not, waive any rights against DEVELOPER which it may have by reason of the aforesaid
hold harmless agreement, because of the acceptance by
CITY, or the deposit with CITY by DEVELOPER, of any of
the insurance policies described in Paragraph 4 hereof.
2. That the aforesaid hold harmless agreement by
DEVELOPER shall apply to all damages and claims for
damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations
referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not CITY has prepared, supplied, or approved of plans and/or specifications for the subdivision, or regardless of whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such damages or claims for
damages.
b. Design Defect. If, in the opinion of the CITY, a design defect in the work of improvement becomes apparent during the
course of construction, or within one (1) year following acceptance by the CITY of the improvements, and said
design defect, in the opinion of the CITY, may substantially impair the public health and safety, DEVELOPER shall, upon order by the CITY, correct said design defect at his sole cost and expense, and the sureties under the Faithful
Performance and Labor and Materials Bonds shall be liable to the CITY for the corrective work required.
c. Litigation Expenses. In the event that legal action is instituted by either party to this Agreement, and said action seeks damages for breach of this Agreement or seeks to
specifically enforce the terms of this Agreement, and, in the event judgment is entered in said action, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its attorneys' fees and court costs. If CITY is the prevailing party, CITY shall also be entitled to recover its attorney’s fees and costs in any action 63
against DEVELOPER’s surety on the bonds provided under
paragraph 3.
16. Recitals.
The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a part hereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement in duplicate at Oakley, California, the day and year first above written.
CITY OF OAKLEY
By:______________________
Joshua McMurray
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Derek P. Cole
City Attorney
ATTEST:
_________________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
DEVELOPER
By:______________________________
Meritage Homes of California, Inc.
Justin Derby
Vice President - Land Acquisition and
Development
64
Exhibits: Exhibit A – City of Oakley, City Council, Resolution No. 78-23 Exhibit B – Prevailing Wage
Exhibit C – Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D – Verification of Required Insurance
Exhibit E – Engineer’s Estimate
65
EXHIBIT A
(RESOLUTION No. 78-23)
66 67
68 69
70 71
72 73
74 75
76 77
78 79
80 81
82 83
84 85
86 87
88
EXHIBIT B
PROVISIONS REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE SECTION 1720 ET SEQ.
The Developer will ensure that any contract issued by the Developer or any privities of the Developer concerning the Improvements includes, and requires the parties to such contract to comply with, all applicable provisions contained in this Exhibit A and any other applicable requirements contained in California Labor Code Section 1720 and following.
HOURS OF WORK:
A. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1810, eight (8) hours of labor in performance of the Services shall constitute a legal day’s work under this Agreement.
B. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1811, the time of service of any worker employed in construction of the Improvements is limited to eight hours during any one calendar day, and forty hours during any one calendar week, except in accordance with California Labor Code Section 1815; which provides that work in excess of eight hours during any one calendar day and forty hours during any one calendar week is permitted upon compensation for all hours worked in excess of eight hours during any one calendar day and forty hours during any one calendar week at not less than one-and-one-half times the basic rate of pay.
C. The Developer and its contractors and subcontractors shall forfeit as a penalty to the City $25 for each worker employed in the construction of the Improvements for each calendar day during which the worker is required or permitted to work more than eight (8) hours in any one calendar day, or more than forty (40) hours in any one calendar week, in violation of the provisions of California Labor Code Section 1810 and following.
WAGES:
A. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1773.2, the City has determined the general prevailing wages in the locality in which the Improvements are to be constructed for each craft or type of work needed to be as published by the State of California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Statistics and Research, a copy of which is on file in the City Engineer’s office and shall be made available on request. The Developer, and contractors and subcontractors engaged in the construction of the Improvements shall pay no less than 89
these rates to all persons engaged in construction of the Improvements.
B. In accordance with Labor Code Section 1775, the Developer and any contractors and subcontractors engaged in construction of the Improvements shall comply with Labor Code Section 1775 which establishes a penalty of up to $50 per day for each worker engaged in the construction of the Improvements who the Developer or any contractor or subcontractor pays less than the specified prevailing wage. The amount of such penalty shall be determined by the Labor Commissioner and shall be based on consideration of the mistake, inadvertence, or neglect of the Developer, contractor or subcontractor in failing to pay the correct rate of prevailing wages, or the previous record of the Developer, contractor or subcontractor in meeting applicable prevailing wage obligations, or the willful failure by the Developer, contractor or subcontractor to pay the correct rates of prevailing wages. A mistake, inadvertence, or neglect in failing to pay the correct rate of prevailing wages is not excusable if the Developer, contractor or subcontractor had knowledge of their obligations under the California Labor Code. The Developer, contractor or subcontractor shall pay the difference between the prevailing wage rates and the amount paid to each worker for each calendar day or portion thereof for which each worker was paid less than the prevailing wage rate.
If a subcontractor worker engaged in construction of the Improvements is not paid the general prevailing per diem wages by the subcontractor, subject to applicable law, the prime contractor is not liable for any penalties therefore unless the prime contractor had knowledge of that failure or unless the prime contractor fails to comply with all of the following requirements:
1. Any agreement executed between the Developer and a contractor or a contractor and a subcontractor for the construction of part of the Improvements shall include a copy of the provisions of California Labor Code Sections 1771, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815.
2. The contractor shall monitor payment of the specified general prevailing rate of per diem wages by the subcontractor by periodic review of any subcontractor’s certified payroll records.
3. Upon becoming aware of a subcontractor’s failure to pay the specified prevailing rate of wages, the contractor shall diligently take corrective action to halt or rectify the failure, including, but not limited to, retaining sufficient funds due the subcontractor for construction of the Improvements.
4. Prior to making final payment to the subcontractor, the contractor shall obtain an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury from the subcontractor that the subcontractor has paid the specified general 90
prevailing rate of per diem wages employees engaged in the construction of the Improvements and any amounts due pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1813.
C. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1776, the Developer and each contractor and subcontractor engaged in construction of the Improvements, shall keep accurate payroll records showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed in construction of the Improvements. Each payroll record shall contain or be verified by a written declaration that it is made under penalty of perjury, stating both of the following:
1. The information contained in the payroll record is true and correct.
2. The employer has complied with the requirements of Sections 1771, 1811, and 1815 for any services performed by the employer’s employees on the public works project.
The payroll records required pursuant to California Labor Code Section 1776 shall be certified and shall be available for inspection by the City and its authorized representatives, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the Division of Apprenticeship Standards of the Department of Industrial Relations and shall otherwise be available for inspection in accordance with California Labor Code Section 1776.
D. In accordance with California Labor Code Section 1777.5, the prime contractor, on behalf of the Developer and any contractors or subcontractors engaged in construction of the Improvements, shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with California Labor Code Section 1777.5 governing employment and payment of apprentices on public works contracts.
E. In case it becomes necessary for the Developer or any contractor or subcontractor engaged in construction of the Improvements to employ on the construction of the Improvements any person in a trade or occupation (except executive, supervisory, administrative, clerical, or other non manual workers as such) for which no minimum wage rate has been determined by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations, the Developer, contractor or subcontractor shall pay the minimum rate of wages specified therein for the classification which most nearly corresponds to services to be performed by that person. The minimum rate thus furnished shall be applicable as a minimum for such trade or occupation from the time of the initial employment of the person affected and during the continuance of such employment.
91
EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS
MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $5,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit (i.e., $10,000,000)
2. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering Code 1 (any auto), with limits no less than $5,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employers’ Liability insurance with a limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
4. Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) insurance utilizing an “All Risk” (Special Perils) coverage form, with limits equal to the completed value of the project and no coinsurance penalty provisions.
5. Surety Bonds as described below.
6. Professional Liability (if Design/Build), with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, and $2,000,000 policy aggregate.
7. Contractors’ Pollution Legal Liability and/or Asbestos Legal Liability and/or Errors and Omissions (if project involves environmental hazards) with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, and $2,000,000 policy aggregate.
If the contractor maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, and if Contractor has a claims-made policy, Contractor shall maintain for two years thereafter, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the contractor shall cause the insurer to reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers; or the Contractor shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
92
Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations and automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by or on behalf of the Contractor. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01forms if later revisions used).
2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers.
Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be in excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
3. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall provide notice will be provided to City in the event that the policy is terminated. Contractor shall immediately notify City of any insurance cancellation or termination and shall provide replacement insurance policy documentation to the City.
Builder’s Risk (Course of Construction) Insurance
Contractor may submit evidence of Builder’s Risk insurance in the form of Course of Construction coverage. Such coverage shall name the City as a loss payee as their interest may appear.
If the project does not involve new or major reconstruction, at the option of the City, an Installation Floater may be acceptable. For such projects, a Property Installation Floater shall be obtained that provides for the improvement, remodel, modification, alteration, conversion or adjustment to existing buildings, structures, processes, machinery and equipment. The Property Installation Floater shall provide property damage coverage for any building, structure, machinery or equipment damaged, impaired, broken, or destroyed during the performance of the Work, including during transit, installation, and testing at the City’s site.
Claims Made Policies
If any coverage required is written on a claims-made coverage form:
1. The retroactive date must be shown, and this date must be before the execution date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of contract work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to the contract effective, or start of work date, the Contractor must purchase extended reporting period coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review.
5. If the services involve lead-based paint or asbestos identification/remediation, the Contractors Pollution Liability policy shall not contain lead-based paint or asbestos exclusions. If the services involve mold identification/remediation, the Contractors Pollution Liability policy shall not contain a mod exclusion, and the definition of Pollution shall include microbial matter, including mold.
93
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
Waiver of Subrogation
Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation which any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation.
Worker’s Compensation policies shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.
Verification of Coverage
Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements, or copies of the applicable insurance language, effecting coverage required by this contract. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements, required by these specifications, at any time.
Subcontractors
Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage subcontractors shall provide coverage with a format least as broad as CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01.
Surety Bonds
Contractor shall provide the following Surety Bonds:
1. Bid bond
2. Performance bond
3. Payment bond
4. Maintenance bond
The Payment Bond and the Performance Bond shall be in a sum equal to the contract price.
If the Performance Bond provides for a one-year warranty a separate Maintenance Bond is not necessary. If the warranty period specified in the contract is for longer than one year a Maintenance Bond equal to 10% of the contract price is required. Bonds shall be duly executed by a responsible corporate surety, authorized to issue such bonds in the State of California and secured through an authorized agent with an office in California.
Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other circumstances. 94
EXHIBIT D
VERIFICATION OF INSURANCE
95
EXHIBIT E
ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE
96 ENGINEER'S PRELIMINARY BOND ESTIMATE August 18, 2023 SELLERS PROPERTY Job No.: 3247-000
MACHADO PROPERTY GRADING ESTIMATE
77 LOTS
OAKLEY, CALIFORNIA
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
GRADING
1 Mobilization 1 LS 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$
2 Clearing, Grubbing, Tree Removal, Irrigation Removal 19.1 AC 1,500.00$ 28,698.76$ 3 Earthwork 41,200 CY 3.00$ 123,600.00$
4 Finish Lot Grading 77 EA 700.00$ 53,900.00$
5 Erosion Control 19.1 AC 5,000.00$ 95,662.53$
SUBTOTAL MACHADO PROPERTY GRADING ESTIMATE CONSTRUCTION COSTS 321,861.29$ 10% CONTINGENCY 32,186.13$
TOTAL MACHADO PROPERTY GRADING ESTIMATE CONSTRUCTION COSTS 355,000$ (to the nearest $1,000)
COST PER LOT 4,600$
(to the nearest $100)
Notes / Assumptions:
1. This estimate is based on information available at this time. Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. (CBG) assumes no liability for changes in prices, fees or costs due to unforeseen conditions or changes required by Governing Agencies, Market Conditions, or other issues beyond the control of this office.
2. This estimate is based upon the latest Sellers Improvement Plans, prepared by CBG, dated August 2023.
3. This estimate applies and includes a 10% contingency to all infrastructure construction costs.
4. This estimate excludes costs associated with environmental remediation, corrective geotechnical measures, and archeological costs.
5. This estimate excludes all soft costs (i.e. professional services, plan check and inspection, development impact fees, etc.).
P:\3200 - 3299\3247-000\Estimates\Bond\SUB01-Sellers Bond.xlsGRADING ONLY Page 1 of 1 97 ENGINEER'S QUANTITY ESTIMATE July 25, 2024
SELLERS PROPERTY Job No.: 3247-000
OAKLEY, CALIFORNIA
Description Amount
IMPROVEMENTS
SELLERS AVENUE (PUBLIC) $ 461,000
ONSITE (77 UNITS) $ 2,171,000
TOTAL SELLERS PROPERTY - CONSTRUCTION COSTS 2,632,000 $ (to the nearest $1,000)
Notes / Assumptions:
1. This estimate is based on information available at this time. Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. (CBG) assumes no liability for changes in prices, fees or costs due to unforeseen conditions or changes required by Governing Agencies, Market Conditions, or other issues beyond the control of this office.
2. This estimate is based upon the latest Sellers Improvement Plans, prepared by CBG, dated May 2024.
3. This estimate applies and includes a 10% contingency to all infrastructure construction costs.
4. This estimate excludes costs associated with environmental remediation, corrective geotechnical measures, and archeological costs.
5. This estimate excludes all soft costs (i.e. professional services, plan check and inspection, development impact fees, etc.).
P:\3200 - 3299\3247-000\Estimates\Bond\SUB04-Sellers Bond.xlsSELLERS COVER Page 1 of 4 2633 CAMINO RAMON, SUITE 350 I SAN RAMON, CALIFORNIA 94583 I (925) 866-0322 1430 BLUE OAKS BOULEVARD, SUITE 110 I ROSEVILLE, CALIFORNIA 95747 I (916) 788-4456 www.cbandg.com
CIVIL ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS I PLANNERS
98 ENGINEER'S QUANTITY ESTIMATE July 25, 2024
SELLERS PROPERTY Job No.: 3247-000
SELLERS AVENUE (PUBLIC)
OAKLEY, CALIFORNIA
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
STREET WORK (SELLERS AVENUE)
1 Finish Grading 45,960 SF 0.35 $ 16,086.00 $
2 3.5" AC Paving 36,350 SF 2.50 $ 90,875.00 $
3 13" Aggregate Base 36,350 SF 2.35 $ 85,422.50 $
4 Fog Seal 36,350 SF 0.10 $ 3,635.00 $
5 Sub Grade Fabric or Lime Treat (Budget) 36,350 SF 0.40 $ 14,540.00 $ 6 Curb and Gutter with Cushion 655 LF 25.00 $ 16,375.00 $ 7 Sidewalk with Cushion 0 SF 5.00 $ - $
8 Handicap Ramps with Detectable Warning Surface 2 EA 2,200.00 $ 4,400.00 $ 9 Gravel Pavers (EVA) 640 SF 4.00 $ 2,560.00 $
10 Parkway Landscape 21,630 SF 5.00 $ 108,150.00 $
11 Monuments 1 EA 500.00 $ 500.00 $
12 Signing and Striping 1 LS 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $
STORM DRAIN (SELLERS AVENUE)
13 18" Storm Drain 480 LF 97.00 $ 46,560.00 $
14 Catch Basins (With Type I Manhole Base) 3 EA 4,000.00 $ 12,000.00 $ 15 Manholes (Type I) 1 EA 4,500.00 $ 4,500.00 $
Subtotal Storm Drain 63,060.00 $
ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS (SELLERS AVENUE)
16 Electrolier (Assume 1 Every 150') 4 EA 2,500.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 17 Pull Box 4 EA 100.00 $ 400.00 $
Subtotal Electrical Improvements 10,400.00 $
SUBTOTAL SELLERS AVENUE (PUBLIC) CONSTRUCTION COSTS $ 419,003.50 10% CONTINGENCY $ 41,900.35
TOTAL SELLERS AVENUE (PUBLIC) CONSTRUCTION COSTS $ 461,000 (to the nearest $1,000)
P:\3200 - 3299\3247-000\Estimates\Bond\SUB04-Sellers Bond.xlsOFFSITE Page 2 of 4 99 ENGINEER'S QUANTITY ESTIMATE July 25, 2024
SELLERS PROPERTY Job No.: 3247-000
ONSITE (77 UNITS)
OAKLEY, CALIFORNIA
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
ON-SITE STREET WORK
1 Finish Grading 203,030 SF 0.35 $ 71,060.50 $
2 3" AC Paving 125,220 SF 1.35 $ 169,047.00 $
3 10" Aggregate Base 125,220 SF 1.80 $ 225,396.00 $
4 Fog Seal 125,220 SF 0.02 $ 2,504.40 $
5 Sub Grade Fabric or Lime Treat (Budget) 125,220 SF 0.40 $ 50,088.00 $ 6 Curb and Gutter with Cushion 6,710 LF 23.00 $ 154,330.00 $ 7 Temporary AC Dike 680 LF 23.00 $ 15,640.00 $
8 Thru Curb Drains 154 EA 50.00 $ 7,700.00 $
9 Sidewalk with Cushion 32,050 SF 4.50 $ 144,225.00 $
10 Handicap Ramps with Detectable Warning Surface 14 EA 1,500.00 $ 21,000.00 $ 11 Gravel Pavers (EVA) 2,200 LF 4.00 $ 8,800.00 $
12 Monuments 14 EA 650.00 $ 9,100.00 $
13 Signing and Striping 1 LS 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $
14 Driveway Approaches 77 EA 800.00 $ 61,600.00 $
Subtotal On-Site Street Work 945,490.90 $
STORM DRAIN
15 12" Leech Line 800 LF 75.00 $ 60,000.00 $
16 18" Storm Drain 3,345 LF 55.00 $ 183,975.00 $
17 24" Storm Drain 600 LF 70.00 $ 42,000.00 $
18 Catch Basins (With Type I Manhole Base) 28 EA 3,000.00 $ 84,000.00 $ 19 Field Inlets (Type III Inlet with Type III Manhole Base) 3 EA 3,500.00 $ 10,500.00 $ 20 Field Inlets (Type III Inlet with Type I Manhole Base) 1 EA 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 $ 21 Dual Vortex Separator 1 EA 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $
22 Pond Inlets (Oldcastle CB2436TE) 6 EA 4,500.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 23 Manholes (Type I) 4 EA 4,500.00 $ 18,000.00 $
Subtotal Storm Drain 408,975.00 $
ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS
24 Electroliers (Decorative) 12 EA 4,500.00 $ 54,000.00 $ 25 Pull Box 12 EA 100.00 $ 1,200.00 $
Subtotal Electrical Improvements 55,200.00 $
P:\3200 - 3299\3247-000\Estimates\Bond\SUB04-Sellers Bond.xlsIn-Tract-Sellers Page 3 of 4 100
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Amount
WATER QUALITY
26 Infiltration Basin (Includes Fine Grading & Landscaping) 75,225 SF 4.00 $ 300,900.00 $ Subtotal Water Quality 300,900.00 $
LANDSCAPING
1 Parcel B Landscaping (Park) 40,540 SF 5.00 $ 202,700.00 $ Subtotal Water Quality 202,700.00 $
SUBTOTAL ONSITE (77 UNITS) CONSTRUCTION COSTS 1,973, $ 265.90 10% CONTINGENCY 197,326.59 $
PG&E REIMBURSEMENT ($1,200 per Unit)
TOTAL ONSITE (77 UNITS) CONSTRUCTION COSTS 2,171,000 $
(to the nearest $1,000)
COST PER LOT 28,200 $
(to the nearest $100)
P:\3200 - 3299\3247-000\Estimates\Bond\SUB04-Sellers Bond.xlsIn-Tract-Sellers Page 4 of 4 101
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11 1
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
OWNER'S STATEMENT
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT
COUNTY RECORDER'S STATEMENT
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT
CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS '
STATEMENT
VICINITY MAP
SITE
102
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11 2
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT
CITY CLERK'S STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL STATEMENT
CERTIFICATE OF DEDICATION FOR SAME
PUBLIC PURPOSE
CITY SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
PRELIMINARY
SURVEYOR'S STATEMENT
103
SELLERS AVENUE
B.N.S.F. RAILROAD
SELLERS AVENUE
3 100'
GRAPHIC SCALE
100' 0' 50' 100' 200' 400'
PRELIMINARY
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
LEGEND
REFERENCES: NOTES:
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
CYPRESS ROAD
104
PARCEL C
29 30
27 28
26 31
35 32
33 34
37 36
45 44
42 43
39 41
40 38
49 46
47 48
52 50
51 53
58 61
60 59
55 57
56 54
66 63
64 65
68 67
69 62 77
76 75
74 71
72 70
73 2
1 4
3 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
5 7
6 8
5 SELLERS AVENUE
B.N.S.F. RAILROAD
6 8
7 9
10 11 SPRUCE WAY MAPLE LEAF WAY JUNIPER WAY BUCKEYE WAY
TORREY PINE WAY
FIR DRIVE SELLERS AVENUE
LAUREL ROAD
PARCEL B
25 WAY
ASPEN
PARCEL A
TORREY PINE
COURT
4 GRAPHIC SCALE
100' 0' 50' 100' 200' 400'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
LEGEND
REFERENCES: NOTES:
1 PRELIMINARY
100'
105
SELLERS AVENUE
PARCEL C
63 64
65 62 77
76 75
74 2143
66 73
SEE SHEET 6 SEE SHEET 8 JUNIPER WAY
FIR DRIVE SELLERS AVENUE BUCKEYE WAY
ASPEN WAY 5
GRAPHIC SCALE
30' 0' 15' 30' 60' 120'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
REFERENCES:
PRELIMINARY
NOTES:
30'
106
SELLERS AVENUE
67 72
5 68 71
69 70
7 6
8 13 12 11 10 9
SEE SHEET 5 SEE SHEET 7
TORREY PINE WAY SELLERS AVENUE
LAUREL ROAD JUNIPER WAY BUCKEYE WAY
ASPEN WAY
6 PRELIMINARY
30'
GRAPHIC SCALE
30' 0' 15' 30' 60' 120'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
REFERENCES:
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
NOTES:
107
55 56
54 18 17 16 15 14
39 40
38 52
51 53
SEE SHEET 8 SEE SHEET 10 SEE SHEET 6 MAPLE LEAF WAY
LAUREL ROAD JUNIPER WAY
TORREY PINE WAY 7
GRAPHIC SCALE
30' 0' 15' 30' 60' 120'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
PRELIMINARY
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
REFERENCES:
NOTES:
30'
108
B.N.S.F. RAILROAD
49 46
47 48
50 58
61 60
59 57
42 43
41 45
44 SEE SHEET 7 SEE SHEET 9 SEE SHEET 5 MAPLE LEAF WAY JUNIPER WAY FIR DRIVE 8
GRAPHIC SCALE
30' 0' 15' 30' 60' 120'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
REFERENCES:
NOTES:
30'
109
B.N.S.F. RAILROAD
SEE SHEET 10 SEE SHEET 8 SEE SHEET 11
29 30
28 31
35 32
33 34 SPRUCE WAY
FIR DRIVE 9
30'
GRAPHIC SCALE
30' 0' 15' 30' 60' 120'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
REFERENCES:
NOTES:
110
37 27 36
26 24 23 22 21 20 19
SEE SHEET 11 SEE SHEET 11
SEE SHEET 9 SEE SHEET 7
TORREY PINE WAY
LAUREL ROADSPRUCE WAY
25 TORREY PINE COURT
10 30'
GRAPHIC SCALE
30' 0' 15' 30' 60' 120'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
PRELIMINARY
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
NOTES:
REFERENCES:
111
TORREY PINE COURT B.N.S.F. RAILROAD SEE SHEET 10 SEE SHEET 9 SEE SHEET 9 SEE SHEET 10 SPRUCE WAY
LAUREL ROAD
PARCEL B
PARCEL A
11 50'
GRAPHIC SCALE
50' 0' 25' 50' 100' 200'
SUBDIVISION 9614
SELLERS
SCALE: 1" =
CONSISTING OF 11 SHEETS
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED IN THAT GRANT DEED
RECORDED AS DOCUMENT NO. 2023-0073369,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
CITY OF OAKLEY, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 2024
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
ROSEVILLE
(925) 866-0322
(916)788-4456
JOB NO. 3247-000 SHEET OF 11
BASIS OF BEARINGS:
NOTES:
REFERENCES:
LEGEND
PRELIMINARY
112
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 13, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution for the Award of an On-Call agreement to Martell Water Systems, Inc. for Well and Pump Maintenance Services at various City Parks and Facilities for Fiscal Years 2024/25 and 2025/26 Background and Analysis
The City of Oakley utilizes a wide range of consultants and contractors across all departments to augment City staff as needed to accommodate the workload activities. One of the areas that this approach is used is in various public works maintenance operations (i.e.
Landscaping, Street Sweeping, Traffic Signals, Street Lights, etc.) to ensure the community receives high quality and timely maintenance services.
The City of Oakley uses wells to provide water for the irrigation of parks and landscaping throughout the City. City staff does not have the unique expertise and certifications for the maintenance of the wells and pump systems and needs to use the services of specialty maintenance contractors to keep these important infrastructure assets in good operating condition for the enjoyment of the community.
Martell Water Systems, Inc. has been a local company for the past 70 years, drilling water wells and installing pump systems throughout East Contra Costa County and has served the City of Oakley’s needs successfully on numerous projects. Martell Water Systems, Inc. have staff available in the East Contra Costa County area and can respond promptly in case of emergency service needs, in addition to regular maintenance services.
City staff have reviewed options for providing maintenance of the wells and pump systems and have determined that Martell Water Systems, Inc. is the most competent and professional company to provide this service to City of Oakley. Having wells and pump systems and its complex components work in coordination with each other and maintained by one contractor will provide a more effective and stable service.
Staff is recommending that an On-Call agreement with Martell Water Systems, Inc. be approved by the City Council for each fiscal year to provide maintenance services for wells and pumps and their associated infrastructure for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024/25 and 2025/26. If at the end of the term the services have been performed satisfactorily, the City Manager has the discretion to approve an extension of the agreement to June 30, 2028, under the same terms as the original agreement. The award of the Agreement is exempt from competitive bidding under Section 3.6.010 of the Oakley Municipal Code paragraph 1) which provides an exception for competitive bidding on “Contracts involving the Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
113
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US acquisition of professional or specialized services, such as, but not limited to, services rendered by architects, attorneys, engineers, and other specialized consultants”.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goal.
Fiscal Impact
Funding for the above referenced maintenance service is included in the City of Oakley Storm Drain Community Facility District (CFD) budget allocations, and there is no impact to the City’s General Fund for this maintenance service contract.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution approving the agreement with Martell Water Systems, Inc. for On-Call well and pump maintenance and service for FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 and to authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement.
Attachments
1. Resolution
2. Proposal from Martell Water Systems, Inc.
114
Resolution No. ___-24 1
RESOLUTION NO. ___-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING THE AWARD OF AN ON-CALL CONTRACT WITH MARTELL WATER SYSTEMS, INC.
FOR IRRIGATION WELL AND PUMP SYSTEM MAINTENANCE AT CITY PARKS AND
FACILITIES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2024/25 AND 2025/26
WHEREAS, the City of Oakley Public Works Department is responsible for the overall maintenance and operation of all City’s Parks and Facilities; and WHEREAS, City staff does not have the unique expertise and certifications for the maintenance of irrigation wells and pump systems and its associated infrastructure and as a result have researched outside resources for this specialty maintenance service; and WHEREAS, Martell Water Systems, Inc. is a contractor specializing in well and pump systems service and maintenance with over 70 years of experience in Contra Costa County and are the best suited to provide the City this service; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the On-Call Maintenance Services agreement with Martell Water Systems, Inc. for Well and Pump Maintenance for FY 2024/25 and 2025/26 is hereby approved, and the City Manager is authorized to execute said agreement. If at the end of the term the services have been performed satisfactorily, the City Manager has the discretion to approve an extension of the agreement to June 30, 2028, under the same terms as the original agreement.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley at a meeting held on the 13th of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________ ________________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
115
116
Labor Fee Schedule 2024
Regular Labor Fees
Service call incl. ½ hr. on site $350.00
Field Labor hourly $220.00/hr.
Service call (three man) incl. ½ hr. on site $450.00
Field Labor (three men) hourly $285.00/hr.
Emergency (Same Day) Labor Fees
Service call incl. ½ hr. on site $450.00
Field Labor hourly $220.00/hr.
Service call (three man) incl. ½ hr. on site $550.00
Field Labor (three men) hourly $285.00/hr.
Overtime / Weekends / Holidays Labor Fees
Service call incl. ½ hr. on site $450.00
Field Labor hourly $300.00/hr.
Service call (three man) incl. ½ hr. on site $550.00
Field Labor (three men) hourly $355.00/hr.
Shop rate (one man) $250.00/hr.
Shop rate (two man) $350.00/hr.
*Excludes bid work/new installs.
MARTELL WATER SYSTEMS, INC.
1818 Loveridge Road/Pittsburg, CA 94565-4111
(800) 498-4282 (925) 432-4282 Fax (925) 432-8149
117
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 13, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Danielle Navarro, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Authorize the City Manager to Execute an Agreement with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. for On-Call Grant Writing and Legislative Advocacy Services
Background and Analysis
In June 2022, staff issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for on-call grant writing services and after a thorough review by the City Manager, Community Development Director, and Public Works Director, staff recommended Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. In September 2022 and again in September 2023, the City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into one-year agreements with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. (“Townsend”) for grant writing and submission services, grant administration, and post-grant services.
With Townsend’s assistance and Assemblymember Wilson’s advocacy, $2,000,000 was included in the State budget for the City’s East Cypress Road Widening project.
Townsend also guided the City in securing an $850,000 federal earmark put forward by Congressman DeSaulnier for the rehabilitation of Enrico Cinquini Park and assisted the City in securing $45,000 in Transportation Development Act funds from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the installation of a Pedestrian Crossing Light System on Live Oak Road and O’Hara Avenue at Delta De Anza Trail Crossing.
In March 2024, the City Council authorized an amendment to the agreement to add legislative advocacy services for assistance with statewide bond proposals, housing and land use issues, transportation infrastructure funding measures, and any other legislation that could impact the City.
The existing agreement terminates on August 31, 2024. Staff has been satisfied with the services provided by Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. and recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an 18-month agreement for a not-to-exceed amount of $117,000 to provide grant and legislative advocacy services from September 1, 2024 through the following fiscal year ending June 30, 2026. The full scope of the services offered to the City is included as an attachment to the contract included with this staff report.
The agreement model is for a mixed monthly fee over the term of the agreement; there are no limits on the number of grants Townsend will pursue, lobby, and help administer for the City.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
118
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the following Oakley Strategic Plan 27+ goals: Community Health and Safety, Parks and Open Space, Finance and Fiscal Responsibility, and Sustainable Organization.
Fiscal Impact
Staff recommends the Council adopt the proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. for grant and legislative advocacy services for a new total not-to-exceed amount of $117,000. Staff proposed 12 months of funding ($78,000 for another September 1 to August 31 term) in the FY 2024/2025 budget which was adopted by the City Council in June 2024. Approving this 18-month agreement would shift future contract terms to align with the City’s fiscal year (July 1 to June 30). Staff will request the $39,000 for the remaining six months of the agreement as part of the FY 2025/2026 budget process.
Townsend’s extensive experience in grant writing, submission, and administration, as well as legislative advocacy, will continue to augment City staff’s ability to seek out and be more competitive for grant funding and assess and address the positive and negative impacts to the City for proposed legislation.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Council adopt the proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. for grant and legislative advocacy services for a total not-to-exceed amount of $117,000.
Attachments
1. Proposed Resolution
2. Proposed Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. Agreement
119
RESOLUTION NO. XX-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY, AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC. FOR ON-CALL GRANT WRITING AND LEGISLATIVE
ADVOCACY SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City desires to continue engaging outside assistance in seeking and obtaining grants to support City services as well as assistance with legislative advocacy services; and
WHEREAS, the City has contracted with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc.(“Townsend”), since September 2022 for grant writing, submission, and administration services and since March 2024 for legislative advocacy services; and WHEREAS, the current agreement with Townsend expires on August 31, 2024 and staff has been satisfied with the services provided by Townsend and recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an 18-month agreement effective September 1, 2024 for a not-to-exceed amount of $117,000.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDERED, that the City Council of the City of Oakley does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Townsend Public Affairs, Inc., for on-call grant writing and legislative advocacy services.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
________________
ATTEST: Anissa Williams, Mayor
______ _____
Date
120
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY
OF OAKLEY AND TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, INC. FOR
CONSULTANT SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH GRANT
WRITING AND LEGISLATIVE ADVOCACY
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is entered into by and between the City of Oakley, a municipal corporation in the State of California (hereinafter referred to as “City”) and Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “Consultant”), collectively sometimes referred to hereinafter as the “Parties”, as of September 1, 2024 (the “Effective Date”).
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work or proposal letter attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall end on June 30, 2026, the date of completion specified in Exhibit A, and Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A prior to that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8. Should this Agreement be amended to include additional tasks as contemplated in Section 1, the term of services shall be extended as mutually agreed upon by City and Consultant.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a substantial, first-class manner and shall conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.
1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant a sum not to exceed $117,000, notwithstanding any contrary indications that may be contained in Consultant’s proposal, for services to be performed and reimbursable costs incurred under this Agreement. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Consultant’s proposal, attached as Exhibit A, regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City
EXHIBIT A
121
to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.
Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this Agreement is based upon Consultant’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.
2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services hereunder, as well as separate notice which shall include an estimate of the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A.
At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense;
The Consultant’s signature.
2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Consultant.
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this Agreement within 60 days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or amendment approved by the City Manager, which shall not exceed the maximum amount allowed by the Oakley Municipal Code.
122
2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant shall not exceed the amounts shown on the Compensation Schedule attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses are specified in Exhibit A, and expenses not listed in Exhibit A are not chargeable to the City.
2.7 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8 of this Agreement, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Contract Administrator.
Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed in this section, and only under the terms and conditions set forth herein.
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Consultant’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.
Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any work under this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall procure the types and amounts of insurance listed below and in Exhibit B against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant and its agents, representatives, employees, and subcontractors. Consistent with the following provisions, Consultant shall provide proof satisfactory to City of such insurance that meets the requirements of this section and under forms of insurance satisfactory in all respects to the City, and that such insurance is in effect prior to commencing work under this Agreement.
Consultant shall maintain the insurance policies required by this section throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Consultant's bid. Consultant shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work on any subcontract until Consultant has obtained all insurance required herein for the subcontractor(s) and provided evidence thereof to City. Verification of the required insurance shall be submitted and made part of this Agreement prior to execution. Verification of the required insurance is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C. 123
4.1 Variation. The City may approve a variation in the insurance requirements, upon a determination that the coverage, scope, limit, and form of such insurance is either not commercially available, or that the City’s interests are otherwise sufficiently protected.
4.2 Notice of Reduction in Coverage. In the event that any coverage required by this section is reduced, limited, or materially affected in any other manner, Consultant shall provide written notice to City at Consultant’s earliest possible opportunity and in no case later than five days after Consultant is notified of the change in coverage.
4.3 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option, exercise any of the following remedies, which are alternatives to other remedies City may have and are not the exclusive remedy for Consultant’s breach:
Order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement or withhold any payment that becomes due to Consultant hereunder, or both stop work and withhold any payment, until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or Terminate this Agreement.
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND CONSULTANT’S RESPONSIBILITIES. Consultant shall to the fullest extent allowed by law, with respect to all Services performed in connection with this Agreement, defend with counsel acceptable to the City, and indemnify and hold the City and its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against any and all losses that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant (“Claims”).Consultant will bear all loses, costs, damages, expense and liability of every kind, nature and description that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to such Claims, whether directly or indirectly (“Liability”). Such obligations to defend, hold harmless and indemnify the City shall not apply to the extent that such Liability is caused by the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful misconduct of the City or any third party.
With respect to third party claims against the Consultant, the Consultant waives any and all rights of any type of express or implied indemnity against the indemnitees.
However, notwithstanding the foregoing, in accordance with California Civil Code Section 1668, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to exempt the City from its own fraud, willful injury to the person or property of another, or violation of law. In addition, and notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent this Agreement is a “construction contract” as defined by California Civil Code section 2783, as may be amended from time to time, such duties of Consultant to indemnify shall not apply when to do so would be prohibited by California Civil Code Section 2782.
Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.
6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, 124
otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
6.2 Consultant, Not Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent.
Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder, including but not limited to, the California Building Code, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and any copyright, patent or trademark law. Consultant’s failure to comply with any law(s) or regulation(s) applicable to the performance of the work hereunder shall constitute a breach of contract.
7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program.
7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid business licenses from City.
7.5 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the basis of a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this Agreement.
Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and 125
requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement.
Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract Administrator of this Agreement.
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Consultant.
Consultant may cancel this Agreement upon 30 days written notice to City and shall include in such notice the reasons for cancellation.
In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.
8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. This Agreement may be extended at the option of the City. Should City decide to exercise its option to extend this Agreement, City shall provide written notice to Consultant at least sixty (60) days prior to the end date of this Agreement. Any such extension shall require a written amendment to this Agreement, as provided for herein. Consultant understands and agrees that, if City grants such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this Agreement, unless City agrees to do so by written amendment to this Agreement. Similarly, Consultant understands and agrees that, City shall have no obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred during the extension period, unless City agrees to do so by written amendment to this Agreement.
8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.
8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a determination of Consultant’s unique personal competence, experience, and specialized personal knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant.
Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the Contract Administrator. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the Contract Administrator. 126
8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall include, but not be limited to the following:
8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;
8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Consultant; or
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 of this Agreement if Consultant had completed the work.
Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant’s Performance. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.
9.2 Consultant’s Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.
9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request 127
of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Agreement.
Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.
10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Contra Costa or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.
10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.
10.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Consultant in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.
Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months, Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement.
Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code 128
§1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.
10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Danielle Navarro, Assistant City Manager ("Contract Administrator"). All correspondence shall be directed to or through the Contract Administrator or his or her designee.
10.10 Notices.
Any written notice to shall be sent to:
Consultant: City of Oakley
Townsend Public Affairs, Inc. Attn: Danielle Navarro, Assistant City Manager 1401 Dove Street, Suite 330 3231 Main Street
Newport Beach, CA 92260 Oakley, CA 94561
10.11 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.
10.12 Authorized Signature. Each person and party signing this Agreement warrants that he/she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the principal and that the party will be bound by such signature.
The parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.
CITY CONSULTANT
City of Oakley, a municipal corporation Townsend Public Affairs, Inc., a California corporation in the State of California
By: ____________________________ By: _____________________________ Joshua McMurray, City Manager Christopher Townsend, President Attest: Approved as to Form:
_______________________________ ________________________________ Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Derek P. Cole, City Attorney
129
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES AND COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
130
Proposal for State Legislative Advocacy and Grant Writing Services | City of Oakley TPA will utilize the following strategic and comprehensive approach to continue to provide state legislative advocacy services to the City:
Conduct Detailed Orientation: TPA utilizes a comprehensive onboarding process that includes extensive meetings with various relevant members of City leadership and key City departments to help develop a strategic plan that is carefully tailored to satisfy the needs of the City and is designed for maximum success in the current political climate and funding environment. Develop Legislative Strategy: Utilizing the information gathered during the onboarding process, TPA will coordinate with the City to develop an official legislative platform and strategy that represents the City’s priorities in Sacramento. This blueprint will be shared with key stakeholders in the State Legislature and Governor’s Administration.
Implement the Legislative Strategy: TPA will advocate for the City’s legislative agenda utilizing the following methods:
o Build and Strengthen Relevant Relationships: TPA has cultivated a network of valuable relationships that will be leveraged to promote the City’s legislative agenda. o Leverage Relationships for Strategic Advocacy Plan: TPA will engage various techniques to leverage our network of key relationships on behalf of the City:
Schedule meetings for the City to discuss relevant legislation Prepare all briefing materials and talking points for the City Brief legislative offices and stakeholders on the City’s legislative agenda Follow-up on meetings to ensure commitments and deliverables are being met o Coordinate Advocacy Trips: TPA will work with the City to coordinate advocacy trips to Sacramento to meet with the City’s legislative delegation, as well as legislators that serve on committees relevant to the City’s agenda. Furthermore, whenever possible, TPA will also schedule site visits by legislators to the City.
o Track Legislation: TPA will identify, analyze, and monitor all bill introductions and amendments relevant to the City’s legislative platform and assess their potential impact on the City. o Craft Testimony and Position Letters: TPA will prepare and submit written and verbal testimony regarding legislation relevant to the City. TPA will also draft and deliver position letters to legislators and key officials on specific bill language. o Draft Bill Language: TPA will draft language and amendments for relevant legislation, as required to protect and promote the City’s agenda.
o State Budget Funding Opportunities: In an effort to maximize state funding, TPA will work with the City to identify projects and other funding priorities that may be suitable for funding through the State Budget. TPA will coordinate with the City to develop supporting materials for the budget request. TPA will also work with members of the City’s state legislative delegation, along with the Assembly and Senate Budget Committees, to gain support for the inclusion of the City’s project in the final State Budget approved by the Legislature.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
131
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Proposal for State Legislative Advocacy and Grant Writing Services | City of Oakley Provide Progress Reports: TPA will confer regularly with the City on our activities. TPA will provide timely electronic reports on the status of all legislative activity, such as bill language, amendments, and committee analyses. In addition to written reports, TPA will be available to the City for conference calls, in-person briefings, and meetings.
Prepare and File Lobbying Disclosure Reports: TPA will prepare and file, on behalf of the City, all applicable state lobbying disclosure reports.
TPA will utilize the following strategic and comprehensive approach to continue to provide grant writing services to the City:
Craft Strategic Funding Plan: Utilizing the information gathered during the onboarding process, TPA will coordinate with the City to develop a proactive and comprehensive strategic funding plan that serves the needs of the City’s priorities. The plan will do more than simply identify City projects; it will outline and prioritize multiple funding options for each project and develop a specific plan of work tailored for each project. It will also identify key “strings attached” to help assess the cost/benefit ratio for each grant opportunity.
Identify, Research, and Monitor Grant Funding Opportunities: TPA will utilize list-serve subscription programs, funding workshops, agency canvassing, and other networking tactics to ensure every potential opportunity is identified and reviewed for relevance with the City’s projects. TPA will then share these opportunities with the City for further assessment and determination if a grant application is warranted.
The City will also receive a grant matrix of funding programs that is updated regularly as new opportunities arise.
Community Outreach: TPA will assist the City with community outreach required for grant applications by ensuring the City is aware of specific requirements, helping develop materials that capture all elements required by the grant, and compiling the outreach data for inclusion in the application. Grant Application Development and Submittal: TPA will develop, draft, submit, and follow up on each City grant application through the following process:
o Establishment of Clear Accountabilities: TPA will coordinate with the City to ensure the assignment of responsibilities and tasks are made clear so that confusion and inefficiency are avoided, and the City is burdened as little as possible while TPA pursues a grant opportunity. o Provide Overview of Full Application Requirements: For each grant application, TPA will provide the City with a detailed overview of the requirements for the grant program and corresponding application to ensure that the program is a strong fit for the City’s project. This will include:
Application timeline
Eligible project types
Funding availability and award maximums and minimums
List of application components, including proposal questions and any required attachments
132
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Proposal for State Legislative Advocacy and Grant Writing Services | City of Oakley o Assemble Project Background and Details: TPA will conduct a detailed informational interview with City staff most involved with each project in order to gain a full understanding of the project background and scope details necessary for developing the grant proposal and addressing all application questions.
o Coordinate Technical Project Details: For technical application components such as site plans, detailed cost estimates, project timelines, engineering plans, and cost- benefit analyses, TPA will coordinate with City staff to compile all necessary attachments and ensure consistency across all elements of the application.
o Draft Written Proposal: TPA will fully draft all narrative components of the application and, when applicable, will indicate where additional input or project detail from the City could be provided during the proposal review process.
o Incorporate Feedback to Finalize Proposal: Well ahead of the application deadline, TPA will provide the City with a full draft for review and feedback. TPA will incorporate any additional details or revisions provided during this process to finalize the grant application and will obtain City approval for the final version of the application prior to submission. o Submit Completed Application: TPA will ensure that applications are submitted prior to the deadline, whether the submission is electronic or through hard copies, in accordance with submission instructions for each individual program. For hard copy submissions, TPA will print and package applications according to submission instructions and will ship applications through a reliable carrier service such as FedEx in order to provide the City with tracking and delivery confirmation for the application. TPA will also obtain a receipt for proof of submission and provide the City with a final copy of all submitted application documents. o Funding Advocacy: Throughout the grant application process TPA will leverage relationships with relevant officials and program officers in various state and federal funding agencies to ensure that City grant applications are aligned with the goals of the specific grant program and that the applications are well-crafted and well- positioned for funding. Post-Grant Submittal Advocacy: TPA will frequently contact legislators and agency officials to follow up on the status of a grant application and promote its need and urgency. This will include drafting letters of support after grant submissions and distributing them to legislators for their consideration. In addition, TPA will work with legislators to reach out to individual granting agencies to provide background on City’s projects and convey their support for those projects.
Post-Award Grant Administration and Compliance: TPA will also assist, as needed, with post-award administration and compliance for all grant applications submitted by TPA on behalf of the City. This assistance will include interacting with granting agencies on behalf of the City, providing support for the drafting and submission of required reports and evaluations, and other tasks related to the successful monitoring of and compliance with the program requirements. Post-Award Services—Above and Beyond Advocacy: TPA has a track record of success with postaward grant administration and retention. TPA has worked on behalf of clients who, due to unforeseen circumstances, have needed to request an extension of the grant performance period to accomplish project deliverables. TPA is prepared to engage in the legislative process and work with legislators to get bills passed that would allow for the City to retain its grant funding after the performance periodwould have 133
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Proposal for State Legislative Advocacy and Grant Writing Services | City of Oakley otherwise ended. Additionally, TPA is prepared to work directly with the City and agencies to secure scope of work changes to already awarded projects to ensure the City will not have to return any hard-won grant funding.
Comprehensive Follow-Up on Unsuccessful Applications: Despite all best efforts, some grant applications are not selected for funding. In those instances where grant applications are unsuccessful, TPA will work with the relevant state and federal funding agencies to set up in-person or telephone debriefing sessions to discuss the grant applications and how to best revise the grant applications for the next funding round to ensure success.
Provide Monthly Progress Reports: TPA will confer regularly with the City on our activities. TPA will provide timely electronic monthly reports on the status of all funding activity, such as current funding opportunities, current applications, submitted applications, and post-grant submittal advocacy. In addition to written reports, TPA will be available to the City for conference calls, in-person briefings, and meetings. 134
Proposal for State Legislative Advocacy and Grant Writing Services | City of Oakley
SCOE OF SERVICES
ALL-INCLUSIVE RETAINER:
DESCRIPTION OF SERVICES MONTHLY FEE
State Legislative Advocacy and Grant Writing Services $6,500** State Legislative Advocacy
Conduct Detailed Orientation Included
Develop Legislative Strategy Included
Implement the Legislative Strategy Included
Build and Strengthen Relevant Relationships Included
Leverage Relationships for Strategic Advocacy Plan Included Coordinate Advocacy Trips Included
Track Legislation Included
Craft Testimony and Position Letters Included
Draft Bill Language Included
State Budget Funding Opportunities Included
Provide Progress Reports Included
Prepare and File Lobbying Disclosure Reports Included Grant Writing
Craft Strategic Funding Plan Included
Identify, Research, and Monitor Grant Funding Opportunities Included Grant Application Development and Submittal Included
Establishment of Clear Accountabilities Included
Provide Overview of Full Applications Requirements Included Assemble Project Background and Details Included
Coordinate Technical Project Details Included
Draft Written Proposal Included
Incorporate Feedback to Finalize Proposal Included
Submit Completed Application Included
Funding Advocacy Included
Post-Grant Submittal Advocacy Included
Post-Award Grant Administration and Compliance Included Post-Award Services—Above and Beyond Advocacy Included Comprehensive Follow-Up on Unsuccessful Applications Included *The monthly fee includes all reasonable business and travel expenses. *Contract duration from September 1, 2024 – June 30, 2026.
FEE SCHEDULE
135
SCOE OF SERVICES
EXHIBIT B
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONTRACTS:
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, or employees.
MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Offer Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, 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: Insurance Services Office Form Number CA 0001 covering, Code 1 (any auto), or if Consultant has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and 9 (non-owned), with limit no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
(not required if consultant provides written verification it has no employees)
4. Professional Liability (Errors and Omissions) Insurance appropriates to the Consultant’s profession, with limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate.
If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
Additional Insured Status
The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations.
General liability coverage should be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10 11 85 or both CG 20 10 and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used). 136
SCOE OF SERVICES
Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this contract, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall state that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.
Waiver of Subrogation
Consultant hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which Consultant or any insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.
Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions
Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. The City may require the Consultant to provide proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention.
Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.
Claims Made Policies
If any of the required policies provide coverage on a claims-made basis:
1. The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.
2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.
3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.
Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time. 137
SCOE OF SERVICES
Subcontractors
Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors.
Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances. 138
SCOE OF SERVICES
EXHIBIT C
VERIFICATION OF REQUIRED INSURANCE
139
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 13, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt a Resolution approving the Parcel Map for Minor Subdivision 24- 976 for Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields located at 998 Laurel Road (APN 035-220-028)
Background and Analysis
On March 7, 2024, Regency Center, LP ("Applicant") filed an application requesting approval of a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 01-24) to subdivide 8.77 acres into two parcels (Parcel 1 = 7.72 acres and Parcel 2 = 1.05 acres). Parcel 1 is proposed to include a Safeway grocery store as an anchor with five additional retail buildings.
Parcel 2 is located on the southwest corner of the site and is proposed for a gas station with a convenience store. The project site is located at 998 Laurel Road, APN 035- 220-028.
On July 2, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Oakley approved the Tentative Parcel Map of the project known as “Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields Tentative Parcel Map TPM 01-24 (MS 24-976)”, Resolution Number 16-24.
The developer is currently working with their design team to complete the improvement plans for this project and working with the Building Department towards the review and approval of the project plans. Site improvements for this development will be constructed with the building improvements consistent with the commercial development construction process. Security bonds will be collected at the time of the Grading Permit and Encroachment Permit issuance when requested by the developer.
No improvements are required prior to the recording of this parcel map.
Minor Subdivision MS 24-976 was prepared by Ziebatech Land Surveying at the request of the applicant, Regency Center, LP, in preparation of the land transaction for the Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields. Safeway Inc., a Delaware Corporation is the owner of the parcel: APN 035-220-028.
The Community Development Director and City Engineer have reviewed the parcel map and have found it to be in substantial conformance with the Planning Commission approval of the tentative parcel map.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
140
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US The City Surveyor has reviewed the parcel map and has found it to be technically correct.
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community & Economic Development goals.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of this Parcel Map.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the Parcel Map entitled “Minor Subdivision MS 24-976 Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields” prepared by Ziebatech Land Surveying.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – Resolution for Parcel Map approval
Attachment 2 – Vicinity Map
Attachment 3 – Reduced size copy of MS 24-976
141
Resolution No. __-24 Page 1 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PARCEL MAP TITLED “MINOR SUBVISION MS 24-976 OAKLEY SHOPS AT LAUREL FIELDS” LOCATED AT 998 LAUREL ROAD (APN 035-220-028) WHEREAS, on March 7, 2024, Regency Center, LP ("Applicant") filed an application requesting approval of a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 01-24) to subdivide 8.77 acres into two parcels (Parcel 1 = 7.72 acres and Parcel 2 = 1.05 acres). Parcel 1 is proposed to include a Safeway grocery store as an anchor with five additional retail buildings. Parcel 2 is located on the southwest corner of the site and is proposed for a gas station with a convenience store.
The project site is located at 998 Laurel Road, APN 035-220-028; and WHEREAS, on July 2, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Oakley approved the Tentative Parcel Map of the project known as “Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields Tentative Parcel Map TPM 01-24 (MS 24-976)”, Resolution Number 16-24; and WHEREAS, Minor Subdivision MS 24-976 was prepared at the request of the applicant, Regency Center, LP, in preparation of the construction of Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields.
Safeway Inc., a Delaware Corporation is the owner of APN 035-220-028; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director and City Engineer have determined that the Parcel Map is in substantial compliance with the approved tentative parcel map; and
WHEREAS, the City Surveyor has determined that the map is technically correct.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the parcel map labeled “Minor Subdivision MS 24-976 Oakley Shops at Laurel Fields”, as prepared by Ziebatech Land Surveying is hereby approved.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTION:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
___________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
142
Resolution No. __-24 Page 2 of 2
ATTEST:
____________________ ________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
143
Vicinity Map
MS 24-976
Safeway
Maxa
¯
2 1
144
145
146
147
STAFF REPORT
City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 13, 2024
TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager
FROM: Kevin Rohani, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Adopt two Resolutions approving a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and Final Map for Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 Subdivision 9619 located at the northeast corner of East Cypress Road and Bethel Island Road (Large Lot 4 of Subdivision 9307)
Background and Analysis
On October 25, 2011, the City Council approved the Summer Lake North Subdivision 9307 (TM 01-11) Vesting Tentative Map Subdividing 409 acres into 824 residential lots, a 70-acre man-made lake, open space, parks, a commercial area, and other associated improvements, including construction of levee improvements.
On April 23, 2021, the Community Development Director prepared a letter of substantial conformance letter stating that the updated Vesting Tentative Map presented to the city is in substantial conformance to the originally approved Vesting Tentative Map.
On October 31, 2022, DeNova Homes LLC filed an application requesting Design Review approval for the Summer Lake North Subdivision. Plans consist of floor plans, architectural elevations, colors and materials schemes, and village preliminary development plans for 817 new single-family residential three architectural types preselected from five architectural types used throughout the entire subdivision (Spanish, Tusca, Farmhouse, Traditional, and Prairie). Livable area of the homes is between 1,927 sf and 3,479 sf. The site is in the Summer Lake North Subdivision 9307 located east of Bethel Island Road and north of East Cyress Road. The site is zoned SP-1 (East Cypress Corridor Specific Plan) District. APNs 032-370-033 and 032-370-035.
On March 7, 2023, Resolution 5-23, the Planning Commission made findings and approved the Summer Lake North Design Review (DR 09-22) within the Summer Laker North Subdivision 9307.
On February 27, 2024, Resolution 19-24 and 20-24, the City Council approved the large lot Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement of Subdivision 9307 Summer Lake North, which subdivided the property carving out the various parcels for the park, lake, pump station, sewer lift station, levee, backbone roadway infrastructure, and parcels for future villages within this master planned community.
Approved and
Forwarded to the
City Council
148
STAFF REPORT
CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 2
O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Civic Summer Lake North, LLC, is now requesting approval for the City Council to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and approve the final map for Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4. In order to satisfy all remaining conditions of approval, a Subdivision Improvement Agreement must be approved with the recordation of the final map.
The City Engineer and City Surveyor have reviewed the tentative map approval documents and the final map, and have found the map to be technically correct, in substantial compliance with the conditionally approved tentative map, development agreement, and all final map conditions of approval have been met (or are being secured by way of this agreement).
Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+
This item is consistent with the Strategic Plan 27+ Community Health and Safety goals to build safe streets and healthy neighborhoods.
Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action as all the work is being performed by the Developer.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolutions to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement and approve the Final Map for Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4.
Attachments
Attachment 1. Vicinity Map
Attachment 2. Resolution Approving the Final Map
Attachment 3. Resolution Approving the Subdivision Improvement Agreement Attachment 4. Subdivision Improvement Agreement (SIA)
Exhibit A – City Council Resolution No. 116-11 & Substantial Conformance Letter
Exhibit B – Engineer’s Estimate
Exhibit C – Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D – Verification of Required Insurance
Attachment 5. Reduction of Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 Final Map
149
Vicinity Map
Subdivision 9619
Summer Lake North - Village 4
1 3
4 8
13 7
6 5
9 10 11
12 Maxa
¯
2 150
RESOLUTION NO. ___-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY
APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR SUMMER LAKE NORTH (PHASE 1) VILLAGE 4 SUBDIVISION 9619
WHEREAS, On February 27, 2024, Resolution 19-24 and 20-24, the City Council approved the Final Map and Subdivision Improvement Agreement of Subdivision 9307 Summer Lake North Subdivision; and,
WHEREAS, Subdivision 9619 is Village 4 within Phase 1 of the master planned community of Summer Lake North; and,
WHEREAS, Civic Summer Lake North, LLC, has satisfied the necessary conditions of approval for Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 Subdivision, as approved by the City Council on October 25, 2011, Resolution Number 116-11; and,
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that the conditions of approval required prior to final map approval for Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 have been satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the City Surveyor has determined that the final map attached herein is technically correct.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the final map labeled “Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North Village 4”, as prepared by Carlson, Barbee, & Gibson, Inc. be approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley, California, this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
APPROVED:
_________________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
151
RESOLUTION NO. __-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OAKLEY APPROVING
THE SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT WITH CIVIC SUMMER LAKE NORTH, LLC, FOR SUBDIVISION 9619 SUMMER LAKE NORTH (PHASE 1) VILLAGE 4 AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN THE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Oakley, California, wishes to enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Civic Summer Lake North, LLC, for the development of a residential subdivision known as Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4; and,
WHEREAS, this agreement will require the developer to complete $1,553,000 for the Public Improvements in accordance with the project conditions of approval and City standard construction design.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Oakley that the Subdivision Improvement Agreement with Civic Summer Lake North, LLC, is hereby approved and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the development of Subdivision 9619 Summer Lake North (Phase 1) Village 4 in the form attached is made part of this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Oakley this 13th day of August 2024 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
APPROVED:
____________________
Anissa Williams, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________ _____________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk Date
152
CITY OF OAKLEY
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
SUBDIVISION 9619
This agreement is made and entered into this 13
th day of August 2024 by and
between the City of Oakley, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and Civic Summer Lake North, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER".
R E C I T A L S
WHEREAS, it has been determined by the City Council of the City of Oakley, State of California, that DEVELOPER, the subdivider of Subdivision 9619, desires to improve and dedicate those public improvements (hereafter “The Improvements”) required by the conditions of approval for the project as adopted by the City of Oakley City Council via Resolution Number 116-11, and further affirmed with the substantial conformance letter from City dated April 23, 2021, in accordance with the requirements and conditions set forth in approvals, the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and those certain plans and specifications for said development approved by CITY and titled “Summer Lake North - Phase 1 Village 4 Improvement Plans Subdivision 9619" prepared by Carlson, Barbee, and Gibson, Inc., now on file in the office of the City Engineer, which are hereby referred to for a more definite and distinct description of the work to be performed under this Agreement as though set forth at length herein; and
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER and CITY acknowledge that not all conditions of approval (“COA”) contained in Resolution Number 116-11, and further affirmed with the substantial conformance letter from City dated April 23, 2021, have been satisfied, but nevertheless, DEVELOPER desires to file a final map. The satisfaction of all COA are the subject of this Agreement. DEVELOPER’s agreement to satisfy all COA, unless mutually agreeable modifications are approved by City at a later date, and construct the Improvements identified in the aforementioned COA is a material part of the consideration for this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, DEVELOPER intends to satisfactorily complete The Improvements within the time hereinafter specified, and CITY intends to accept DEVELOPER's offer(s) of dedication of The Improvements in consideration for DEVELOPER's satisfactory performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, conditions and covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows:
1. Improvements.
DEVELOPER agrees to install the road improvements (both public and private), sewer and drainage improvements, signs, street lights, fire hydrants, landscaping, and such other improvements (including appurtenant equipment) as required as conditions of 153
approval of Tentative Map 9307 as set forth in Exhibit A to this Agreement, which is incorporated herein as if set forth at this point, or as otherwise required in the subdivision ordinance. In the event that any provision of this Agreement conflicts with the provisions of Exhibit A the provisions of Exhibit A shall prevail to the extent that the conflicting provision in Exhibit A requires a greater or more extensive improvement or expenditure, or to the extent that that provision extends DEVELOPER’s obligations over a greater period of time than the specific provision set forth herein. Such improvements shall also be made in conformance with the City of Oakley Municipal Code and Contra Costa County Ordinance Code as adopted and enforced by the City of Oakley.
DEVELOPER will commence construction of The Improvements within 30 days following the date on which CITY executes this Agreement. DEVELOPER shall complete said work not later than 36 months following said date of execution in a good workmanlike manner, in accordance with accepted construction practices and in a manner equal or superior to the requirements of the City of Oakley Municipal Code and Contra Costa County Ordinance Code and rulings made thereunder; and where there is a conflict between the improvement plans and the City Municipal Code or County Ordinance Code, the stricter requirements shall govern. It is understood that the City of Oakley was incorporated effective July 1, 1999, and as such continues to rely on certain laws, ordinances and design standards of the County of Contra Costa. References herein to the County Code or County Ordinance Code are understood to refer to such ordinances and codes as if adopted by the City of Oakley.
Time is of the essence in this Agreement. Upon completion, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY with a complete and reproducible set of final as-built plans of The Improvements, including any authorized modifications.
2. Estimated Cost of Improvements for Bonding Purposes.
The estimated cost of constructing The Improvements required by this Agreement as adjusted for inflation is agreed to be $1,553,000. Said amounts include costs and reasonable expenses and fees which may be incurred in enforcing the obligation secured, as set forth in Exhibit B. 154
3. Bonds Furnished.
Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall furnish CITY with the following security in the forms specified in Government Code sections 66499.1 and 66499.2 or in a form satisfactory to the CITY Attorney if different from said Government Code forms:
a. Faithful Performance. Either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond issued by a company duly and legally licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of California, or an instrument of credit equivalent to one hundred percent (100%) of the estimate set forth in Paragraph 2 and sufficient to assure CITY that The Improvements will be satisfactorily completed.
b. Labor and Materials. Either a cash deposit, a corporate surety bond issued by a company duly and legally licensed to conduct a general surety business in the State of California, or an instrument of credit equivalent to fifty percent (50%) of the estimate set forth in Paragraph 2 and sufficient to assure CITY that DEVELOPER'S contractors, subcontractors, and other persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment shall be paid therefor.
CITY shall be the sole indemnitee named on any instrument required by this Agreement. Any instrument or deposit required herein shall conform with the provisions of Chapter 5 of the Subdivision Map Act. DEVELOPER may request that portions or all of the bonds may be substituted by other parties in the event that portions or all of the Subdivision is sold to other parties, and such substitution shall not be unreasonably withheld by CITY.
4. Prevailing Wage.
To the extent required by Labor Code Section 1720, DEVELOPER and its contractors shall pay prevailing wages for all work performed for the construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair for construction of the Improvements required by this Agreement. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of workman needed to execute the work required by this Agreement from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations and on its website at http://www.dir.ca.gov/DLSR/DPreWageDetermination.htm. These rates are on file with the City Engineer. Copies may be obtained at cost at the City Engineer’s office, City of Oakley. DEVELOPER shall post a copy of such wage rates at the job site and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. DEVELOPER shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1773.8, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1777.6, and 1812 of the Labor Code.
155
5. Insurance Required.
Concurrently with the execution hereof, DEVELOPER shall obtain or cause to be obtained and filed with the CITY, all insurance required in this paragraph and as set forth in Exhibit C, and such insurance shall have been reasonably approved by the Finance Director of CITY, or its designee, as to form, amount and carrier. Prior to the commencement of work under this Agreement, DEVELOPER's general contractor shall obtain or cause to be obtained and filed with the Finance Director, all insurance required under this paragraph and as set forth in Exhibit C, evidenced herein as Exhibit D, and such insurance shall have been reasonably approved by the Finance Director of CITY, as to form, amount and carrier. DEVELOPER shall not allow any contractor or subcontractor to commence work on this contract or subcontract until all insurance required for DEVELOPER and DEVELOPER's general contractor shall have been so obtained and approved. Said insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect until the completion of work under this Agreement and the final acceptance thereof by CITY.
All requirements herein provided shall appear either in the body of the insurance policies or as endorsements and shall specifically bind the insurance carrier.
6. Work Performance and Guarantee.
Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, and excepting only items of routine maintenance, ordinary wear and tear and unusual abuse or neglect (including acts of vandalism), DEVELOPER guarantees all work executed by DEVELOPER and/or DEVELOPER's agents, and all supplies, materials and devices of whatsoever nature incorporated in, or attached to the work, or otherwise delivered to CITY as a part of the work pursuant to the Agreement, to be free of all defects of workmanship and materials for a period of one (1) year after initial acceptance of the entire work by CITY. DEVELOPER shall repair or replace any or all such work or material, together with all or any other work or materials which may be displaced or damaged in so doing, that may prove defective in workmanship or material within said one-year guarantee period without expense or charge of any nature whatsoever to CITY. DEVELOPER further covenants and agrees that when defects in design, workmanship and materials actually appear during the one-year guarantee period, and have been corrected, the guarantee period shall automatically be extended for an additional year as to those specific corrections to insure that such defects have actually been corrected.
In the event the DEVELOPER shall fail to comply with the conditions of the foregoing guarantee within thirty (30) days time, after being notified of the defect in writing, CITY shall have the right, but shall not be obligated, to repair or obtain the repair of the defect, and DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY on demand all costs and expense of such repair, including all administrative costs incurred by the City to administer such repair(s).
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, in the event that any defect in workmanship or material covered by the foregoing guarantee results in a condition which constitutes an immediate hazard to the public health, safety, or welfare, CITY shall have the right to immediately repair, or cause to be repaired, such defect, and DEVELOPER shall pay to CITY on demand all costs and expense of such repair. The foregoing 156
statement relating to hazards to health and safety shall be deemed to include either temporary or permanent repairs which may be required as determined in the sole discretion and judgment of CITY.
7. Inspection of the Work.
DEVELOPER shall guarantee free access to CITY through its City Engineer and his designated representative for the safe and convenient inspection of the work throughout its construction. Said CITY representative shall have the authority to reject all materials and workmanship which are not in accordance with the plans and specifications, and all such materials and or work shall be removed promptly by DEVELOPER and replaced to the satisfaction of CITY without any expense to CITY in strict accordance with the improvement plans and specifications.
8. Agreement Assignment.
This Agreement shall not be assigned by DEVELOPER without the written consent of CITY, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
9. Abandonment of Work.
Neither DEVELOPER nor any of DEVELOPER's agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of DEVELOPER's obligations under this Agreement.
If DEVELOPER refuses or fails to obtain prosecution of the work, or any severable part thereof, with such diligence as will insure its completion within the time specified, or any extension thereof, or fails to obtain completion of said work within such time, or if DEVELOPER should be adjudged as bankrupt, or should make a general assignment for the benefit of DEVELOPER's creditors, or if a receiver should be appointed, after notice and an opportunity to cure, which notice shall give no fewer than ten (10) business days to address any claim of default, the CITY through its Public Works Director may serve written notice on DEVELOPER and DEVELOPER's surety or holder of other security of breach of this Agreement, or of any portion, thereof, and default of DEVELOPER.
In the event of any such notice of breach of this Agreement, DEVELOPER's surety shall have the duty to take over and complete The Improvements herein specified; provided, however, that if the surety, within thirty (30) days after the serving upon it of such notice of breach, does not give CITY written notice of its intention to take over the performance of the contract, and does not commence performance thereof within thirty (30) days after notice to CITY of such election, CITY may take over the work and prosecute the same to completion, by contract or by any other method CITY may deem advisable, for the account and at the expense of DEVELOPER and DEVELOPER's surety shall be liable to CITY for any damages and/or reasonable and documented excess costs occasioned by CITY thereby; and, in such event, CITY, without liability for so doing, may take possession of, and utilize in completing the work, such materials, appliances, plant 157
and other property belonging to DEVELOPER as may be on the site of the work and necessary therefor.
All notices herein required shall be in writing, and delivered in person or sent by registered mail, postage prepaid.
Notices required to be given to CITY shall be addressed as follows:
City Manager and City Engineer
City of Oakley
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
Notices required to be given to DEVELOPER shall be addressed as follows:
David B. Sanson and Trent Sanson
Civic Summer Lake North, LLC
1500 Willow Pass Court
Concord, CA 94520
With a copy to:
Dana Tsubota
Civic Summer Lake North, LLC
1500 Willow Pass Court
Concord, CA 94520
Notices required to be given surety of DEVELOPER shall be addressed as follows:
Attn: Daniel Livsey
The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company
1340 Treat Blvd., Suite 400
Walnut Creek, CA 94597
Any party or the surety may change such address by notice in writing to the other party and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, DEVELOPER has executed and has caused to be acknowledged an abstract of this Agreement. DEVELOPER agrees CITY may record said abstract in the Official Records of Contra Costa County.
10. Use of Streets or Improvements.
At all times prior to the final acceptance of the work by CITY, the use of any or all streets and improvements within the work to be performed under this Agreement shall be at the sole and exclusive risk of DEVELOPER. The issuance of any building or occupancy permit by CITY for dwellings located within the tract shall not be construed in any manner 158
to constitute a partial or final acceptance or approval of any or all such improvements by CITY. DEVELOPER agrees that CITY's Building Official may withhold the issuance of building or occupancy permits when the work or its progress may substantially and/or detrimentally affect public health and safety.
11. Safety Devices.
DEVELOPER shall provide and maintain such guards, watchmen, fences, barriers, regulatory signs, warning lights, and other safety devices adjacent to and on the tract site as may be necessary to prevent accidents to the public and damage to the property.
DEVELOPER shall furnish, place, and maintain such lights as may be necessary for illuminating the said fences, barriers, signs, and other safety devices. At the end of all work to be performed under this Agreement, all fences, barriers, regulatory signs, warning lights, and other safety devices (except such safety items as may be shown on the plans and included in the items of work) shall be removed from site of the work by the DEVELOPER, and the entire site left clean and orderly.
12. Acceptance of Work.
Upon notice of the completion of the work covered by this agreement and the delivery of a set of final as-built plans to CITY by DEVELOPER, CITY, through its City Engineer or his designated representative, shall examine the work without delay, and, if found to be in accordance with said plans and specifications and this Agreement, shall recommend acceptance of the work to the City Council and, upon such acceptance, shall notify DEVELOPER or its designated agents of such acceptance.
13. Patent and Copyright Costs.
In the event that said plans and specifications require the use of any material, process or publication which is subject to a duly registered patent or copyright, DEVELOPER shall be liable for, and shall indemnify CITY from any fees, costs or litigation expenses, including attorneys' fees and court costs, which may result from the use of said patented or copyrighted material, process or publication.
14. Alterations in Plans and Specifications.
Any alteration or alterations made in the plans and specifications which are a part of this Agreement or any provision of this Agreement shall not operate to release any surety or sureties from liability on any bond or bonds attached hereto and made a part hereof, and consent to make such alterations is hereby given, and the sureties to said bonds hereby waive the provisions of Section 2819 of the Civil Code of the State of California.
159
15. Liability.
a. DEVELOPER Primarily Liable. DEVELOPER hereby warrants that the design and construction of The Improvements will not adversely affect any portion of adjacent properties and that all work will be performed in a proper manner. DEVELOPER agrees to indemnify, defend, release, and hold harmless CITY, and each of its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers agents and employees, from and against any and all loss, claims, suits, liabilities, actions, damages, or causes of action of every kind, nature and description, directly or indirectly arising from an act or omission of DEVELOPER, its employees, agents, or independent contractors in connection with DEVELOPER'S actions and obligations hereunder; provided as follows:
1. That CITY does not, and shall not, waive any rights against DEVELOPER which it may have by reason of the aforesaid
hold harmless agreement, because of the acceptance by
CITY, or the deposit with CITY by DEVELOPER, of any of the insurance policies described in Paragraph 5 hereof.
2. That the aforesaid hold harmless agreement by DEVELOPER shall apply to all damages and claims for damages of every kind suffered, or alleged to have been suffered, by reason of any of the aforesaid operations referred to in this paragraph, regardless of whether or not CITY has prepared, supplied, or approved of plans and/or specifications for the subdivision, or regardless of whether or not such insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any of such
damages or claims for damages.
b. Design Defect. If, in the reasonable opinion of the CITY, a design defect in the work of improvement becomes apparent during the course of construction, or within one (1) year following acceptance by the CITY of the improvements, and said design defect, in the reasonable opinion of the CITY, may substantially impair the public health and safety,
DEVELOPER shall, upon order by the CITY, correct said
design defect at DEVELOPER’s sole cost and expense.
c. Litigation Expenses. In the event that legal action is instituted by either party to this Agreement, and said action seeks damages for breach of this Agreement or seeks to specifically enforce the terms of this Agreement, and, in the event
judgment is entered in said action, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its attorneys' fees and court costs. 160
16. Recitals.
The foregoing Recitals are true and correct and are made a part hereof.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement in duplicate at Oakley, California, the day and year first above written.
CITY OF OAKLEY
By:
___________________
Joshua McMurray
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO
FORM:
Derek P. Cole
City Attorney
ATTEST:
_____________________
Libby Vreonis, City Clerk
DEVELOPER
By:___________________________
Exhibits: Exhibit A – City of Oakley, City Council, Resolution 116-11 & Substantial Conformance Letter
Exhibit B – Engineer’s Estimate
Exhibit C - Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D - Verification of Required Insurance
161
EXHIBIT A
(RESOLUTION 116-11 & Substantial Conformance Letter)
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
CITY COUNCIL
Sue Higgins, Mayor
Randy Pope, Vice Mayor
Aaron Meadows
Anissa Williams
George Fuller
CITY HALL
3231 Main Street
Oakley, CA 94561
925.625.7000 tel
925.625.9859 fax
www.ci.oakley.ca.us
April 23, 2021
Glen Martin, President
Danville Development and Real Estate
1600 S. Main Street, #380
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
SUBJECT: Summer Lake North Conformance Exhibit Consistency with Approved Entitlement (Summer Lake North Vesting Tentative Map 9307 (TM 01‐11)) Dear Mr. Martin:
Thank you for submitting your request for City concurrence on the consistency of the updated Conformance Exhibit (Exhibit) dated February 17, 2021 with the approved entitlement associated with the Summer Lake North Vesting Tentative Map 9307 (TM 01‐11). Staff has reviewed your request and finds the Exhibit to be consistent with the approved entitlement and any final subdivision map(s) that are consistent with the Exhibit would also be in substantial conformance with the Vesting Tentative Map identified above. In summary, the updates will provide for a master planned community with greater connectivity, while staying within the current density limits of the approved Vesting Tentative Map and increasing open space and park acreage, all while maintaining the same road circulation with slight exceptions.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at (925) 625‐7004 or by email at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Joshua McMurray
Community and Economic Development Director
Attachments: Conformance Exhibit dated February 17, 2021 C: Bryan Montgomery, City Manager
Kevin Rohani, City Engineer
Ken Strelo, Principal Planner
Billilee Saengchalern. Principal Engineer
Dave Sanson, De Nova Homes, Inc.
Trent Sanson, De Nova Homes, Inc.
Dana Tsubota, De Nova Homes, Inc.
183
PARCEL U
(OPEN SPACE) BETHEL ISLAND ROAD
CYPRESS ROAD
SANDMOUND BOULEVARD
SANDMOUND BOULEVARD
EXISTING LEVEE EXISTING
LEVEE
LEVEE
LEVEE LEVEE
SUMMER
DRIVE
LAKE
E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE
CYPRESS ROAD
PATHFINDER COURT
TALARIA DRIVE
MA N
R
E S A
S
H
O R E
L A N E
PARCEL C BETHEL ISLAND ROAD
PARCEL N
(SS PUMP STATION)
PARCEL V
(SS PUMP STATION)
PARCEL M
(SD PUMP STATION)
'B STREET
PARCEL BB
(AGRICULTURE
LIMITED)
PARCEL AA
(AGRICULTURE
LIMITED)
PARCEL Z
(LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
PARCEL Y
(LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
PARCEL S
(COMMERCIAL)
PARCEL P
(PARK)
PARCEL O
(WETLAND)
PARCEL L
(SCHOOL)
PARCEL K
(PARK)
PARCEL J
(LAKE)
PARCEL B PARCEL A
PARCEL F
(WETLAND)
WETLAND
PARCEL B
49 48
47 46
45 44
43 42
41 40
39 38
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
51 2 1
821
820
819
818
822
824
'B' STREET
PARCEL X 'B' STREET
'C' STREET
4 3
6 5
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16 17
18 19
20 21
50 52
53 57
55 54
56 62
61 60
59 58
64 65
66 67
68 63
69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76
77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95
96 97 98 99
102 103 104 105 106
87 86
100 101
111
110
109
108
107
112
114
115
116
117
118
113
119
121
122
123
124
125
120
126
127
128 129 130 131 132
133
134
135
136
137
138
140 139
141
142
143 144 145
146
148 147 149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181 183 182 185 184 187 186 189 188
190
191
192
193
194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201
211 210 209 208 207 206 205 204 203 202
212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221
231 230 229 228 227 226 225 224 223 222
232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257 258 259 260 261 262 263
269 268 267 266 265 264
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
290 289 288 287 286 285 284 283
291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298
306 305 304 303 302 301 300 299
307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314
322 321 320 319 318 317 316 315
323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351 352 353 354 355
356
357
358 359 360 361
362
363
364
365
366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373
374
375
376
377
378
379 380 381 382
383
384
385
386
388 387
389 390
391
392 393 394 395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
413
414
415
406 407 408 409 410
411 412
416 417 418 419
420
421 422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431 432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447 448
449
450
451
452
454 453 457 456 455
459 458
461 460
463 462
465 464
467 466 469 468 471 470 472 473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491 492 493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510 511
512
513
514
515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560
561 562 563 564 565 566 567
574 573 572 571 570 569 568
575
576 577 578 579 580 581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597 598 599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613 614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658 659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
691
690
689
688
687
686
685
684
683
682
681
680
679
692
693
694
695
696
701
700
699
698
697
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
710
709
711
712
713
716
715
714
717
718
719
720
721
722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742 743
744
745
746
748 747
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785 786
787
788
795
794
793 792
791
790
789
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806 807
808
809 810 811 812 813 814 815
816
817
823
(S
UMMER
LAKE
DRIVE)
'A ' STRE
T
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
'B STREET
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
(E. SUM
ER
LAKE
DRIVE)
'E' STREET
'D' STREET
'F' COURT 'G' STREET 'H' STREET
'I' STREET
'J' STREET
'K' STREET
'L' STREET 'M' STREET 'N' STREET
'N' STREET
'O' COURT
'Q' STREET 'R' STREET 'S' STREET
'T' STREET
'U' STREET
'V' STREET 'W' STREET 'Q' STREET
'X' STREET
'Y' STREET
'Z' STREET 'BB' STREET
'AA' STREET
'CC' STREET 'DD' STREET
'DD' STREET
'DD' STREET
'EE' STREET
'FF' STREET 'FF' STREET
'FF' STREET
'GG' STREET
'HH' COURT
'II' STREET
'JJ' STREET
'KK' COURT
'LL' STREET 'MM' STREET
'P' STREET 'NN' STREET
'OO' STREET
'UU' STREET
'VV' STREET 'WW' STREET
'XX' STREET
'PP' STREET 'QQ' STREET 'RR' STREET
'SS' STREET
'TT' STREET
'YY' STREET
'ZZ' STREET
'AAA' STREET
'BBB' COURT
'CCC' COURT
'DDD' COURT
'EEE' COURT
'FFF' STREET 'GGG' STREET PARCEL D (OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL E
(PARK)
PARCEL G
(PARK)
PARCEL H
(OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL I
(OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL Q (PARK)
PARCEL R
(PARK)
PARCEL U
PARCEL T (OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL W
(PARK)
'HHH' STREET 'III' STREET
'JJJ' STREET
'LLL' STREET 'NNN' COURT
'MMM' STREET
'OOO' STREET
'PPP' STREET
'QQQ' STREET
'JJJ' STREET
'RRR' COURT
'SSS' STREET
'GGG' COURT
'H' COURT
LEVEE
PARCEL B
N1
N5
N4
N6
N3
N3
N5
N2
G:\1292-032\ACAD\CONFORMANCE EXHIBITS\CONFORM_01.DWG
SUBDIVISION 9307
SUMMER LAKE NORTH
CONFORMANCE EXHIBIT
OVERALL SITE PLAN
CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 200' DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2021
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SACRAMENTO
(925) 866-0322
(916) 375-1877
0 200 400 600
OF SHEET
SHEET NO.
1 5
CONTACTS
GENERAL NOTES
VICINITY MAP
LEGEND
581
EXISTING PROPOSED
ABBREVIATIONS
TYPICAL PARK / LAKE SECTION
TYPICAL LEVEE SECTION
LAND USE SUMMARY
LAND USE AREA (AC±)
OVERALL LOTTING SUMMARY
NEIGHBORHOOD
LOT TYPE
(TYP.)
NUMBER OF
LOTS
LOT NUMBER
RANGE
AREA
(AC±)
AVG LOT
SIZE (SF±)
MIN LOT
SIZE (SF±)
MAX LOT
SIZE (SF±)
SHEET INDEX
SHEET NO. SHEET DESCRIPTION
184
SANDMOUND BOULEVARD
LEVEE LEVEE BETHEL ISLAND ROAD LEVEE LEVEE
1 2
5 4
1 3
PARCEL B
PARCEL B
822
824 'B' STREET
'C' STREET
168
169
170
255
257 258 259 260 261 262 263
269 268 267 266 265 264
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
290 289 288 287 286 285 284 283
291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298
306 305 304 303 302 301 300 299
307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314
322 321 320 319 318 317 316 315
323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
345
347
357
362
379 384 399 402
416
459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470
471
472
473 474
823
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
'V' STREET 'W' STREET 'Q' STREET
'X' STREET
'Y' STREET
'Z' STREET 'BB' STREET
'AA' STREET
'CC' STREET
'DD' STREET
'DD' STREET 'MM' STREET
PARCEL G
(PARK)
PARCEL H
(OPEN SPACE) PARCEL B
PARCEL B PARCEL A
344 PARCEL A
LEVEE
LEVEE
4 3 LEVEE ACCESS ROAD LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
5 G:\1292-032\ACAD\CONFORMANCE EXHIBITS\CONFORM_02-05.DWG SUBDIVISION 9307
SUMMER LAKE NORTH
CONFORMANCE EXHIBIT
LOTTING PLAN
CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2021
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SACRAMENTO
(925) 866-0322
(916) 375-1877
0 100 200 300
OF SHEET
SHEET NO.
2 5
KEY MAP
LOOP ROAD LOCAL STREET
FUTURE BETHEL ISLAND ROAD
SHEET LOCATION
EXISTING EASEMENTS
1 2
3 4
5 6
SEE SHEET 3 SEE SHEET 4 'MM' STREET
'LL' STREET
'JJ' STREET
PROJECT COLLECTOR ROAD
SANDMOUND BOULEVARD
185
BETHEL ISLAND ROAD
CYPRESS ROAD LEVEE EXISTING
LEVEE
CYPRESS ROAD
CYPRESS ROAD
SUMMER LAKE DRIVE
MANRE
S
A
S
H
OR
E
LA
TALARIA DRIVE
2 4
6 1
6 6
8 9
PARCEL N
(SS PUMP STATION) PARCEL A
PARCEL M
(SD PUMP STATION) LEVEE
CYPRESS ROAD LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD LEVEE ACCESS ROAD BETHEL ISLAND ROAD
PARCEL C
'B' STREET
PARCEL S
(COMMERCIAL)
PARCEL J
(LAKE)
PARCEL F
(WETLAND)
49 48
47 46
45 44
43 42
41 40
39 38
37 36
35 34
33 32
31 30
29 28
27 26
25 24
23 22
51 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16 17
18 19
20 21
50 52
53 57
55 54
56 62
61 60
59 58
64 65
66 67
68 63
69 70 71
72 73
74 75
76 77
78 79 80
81 82 83
84 85
88 89
90 91
92 93
94 95
96 97
98 99
102
103 104 105 106
87 86
100 101
111
110
109
108
107
112
114
115
116
117
118
113
119
121
122
123
124
125
120
126
127
128
129 130 131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139 140
141
142
143 144
145
146
147
148 149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189
190
191
192
193
194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201
211 210 209 208 207 206 205 204 203 202
212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221
231 230 229 228 227 226 225 224 223 222
232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257 258 259 260 261 262 263 345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353 354
355
356
357
362
363
364
365
366
367 368 369
370 371 372 373
374
375
376
377
379 384
385
386
387 388
389
390
391
392 393 394 395
396
397
398
399 402
403
404
405
416
459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471
472
473 474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492 493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
574
573 572 571 570 569
568
575
576
577
578 579 580
581
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
685
684
683
682
681
680
679
( S
U
M
M
E
R LA
K
E
D
R I V
E )
' A ' STREET
(
E . SUM
ER
LAKE
DR I VE )
'E' STREET
'D' STREET
'F' COURT 'G' STREET 'H' STREET
'I' STREET
'J' STREET
'K' STREET
'L' STREET 'M' STREET 'N' STREET
'N' STREET
'O' COURT
'Q' STREET 'R' STREET 'S' STREET
'T' STREET
'U' STREET
'V' STREET 'W' STREET
'CC' STREET
'DD' STREET
'DD' STREET
'FF' STREET
'FF' STREET
'II' STREET
'JJ' STREET
'KK' COURT
'LL' STREET 'MM' STREET
'P' STREET
'NN' STREET
'OO' STREET
'UU' STREET
'VV' STREET
'WW' STREET
'XX' STREET
'PP' STREET
'QQ' STREET
'RR' STREET
'SS' STREET
'TT' STREET
'YY' STREET
'ZZ' STREET
'DDD' COURT
PARCEL D (OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL E
(PARK)
PARCEL G
(PARK)
PARCEL Q
(PARK)
PARCEL T
(OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL J
(LAKE)
495
'H' COURT
3 7
7 1
346
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
5 G:\1292-032\ACAD\CONFORMANCE EXHIBITS\CONFORM_02-05.DWG SUBDIVISION 9307
SUMMER LAKE NORTH
CONFORMANCE EXHIBIT
LOTTING PLAN
CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2021
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SACRAMENTO
(925) 866-0322
(916) 375-1877
0 100 200 300
OF SHEET
SHEET NO.
3 5
SEE SHEET 5
KEY MAP
LOOP ROAD
LOCAL STREET
SHEET LOCATION
EXISTING EASEMENTS
1 2
4 5
6 7
8 9
SEE SHEET 4
SEE SHEET 2
'DD' STREET SEE SHEET 4
PARCEL L
(SCHOOL)
3 FUTURE BETHEL ISLAND ROAD
186
PARCEL M
(SD PUMP STATION)
LEVEE
4 1
2 PARCEL N
(SS PUMP STATION)
PARCEL L
(SCHOOL)
PARCEL K
(PARK)
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
'B' STREET
PARCEL Y
(LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
PARCEL P
(PARK)
PARCEL O
(WETLAND)
PARCEL J
(LAKE)
PARCEL B 'B' STREET
132
133
134
135
136
137
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
339
340
341
344
345
347
348
349
350
351
352
353 354
355
356
357
358 359 360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367 368 369 370 371 372 373
374
375
376
377
378
379 380 381 382
383
384
385
386
387 388
389
390
391
392 393 394 395
396
397
398
399
400 401
402
403
404
405
413
414
415
406 407 408 409 410 411 412
416 417 418
419
420
421 422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430 431 432 433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453
455 454
457 456 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472
473 474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
495
496
497
533
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
574
573 572 571 570 569
575
576
577
578 579 580
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
691
763
764
765
766
767
778
779
780
781
782
783 784 785 786 787
788
795 794 793 792
791
790
806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815
816
817
' A ' STRE
T
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
(
E . SUM
ER
LAKE
DR I VE )
'N' STREET
'CC' STREET 'DD' STREET
'DD' STREET
'DD' STREET
'EE' STREET
'FF' STREET
'FF' STREET
'FF' STREET
'GG' STREET
'HH' COURT
'II' STREET
'JJ' STREET
'KK' COURT
'LL' STREET 'MM' STREET
'P' STREET
'NN' STREET
'OO' STREET
'PP' STREET
'QQ' STREET
'RR' STREET
'TT' STREET 'AAA' STREET
'PPP' STREET
'QQQ' STREET
'JJJ' STREET
'RRR' COURT
346
495
'SSS' STREET
LEVEE
PARCEL B
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
PARCEL I
(OPEN SPSACE)
G:\1292-032\ACAD\CONFORMANCE EXHIBITS\CONFORM_02-05.DWG SUBDIVISION 9307
SUMMER LAKE NORTH
CONFORMANCE EXHIBIT
LOTTING PLAN
CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2021
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SACRAMENTO
(925) 866-0322
(916) 375-1877
0 100 200 300
OF SHEET
SHEET NO.
4 5 SEE SHEET 3
KEY MAP
LOOP ROAD
LOCAL STREET
SHEET LOCATION
EXISTING EASEMENTS
1 2
SEE SHEET 5
SEE SHEET 2
'ZZ' STREET
'BBB' COURT
187
CYPRESS ROAD
SANDMOUND BOULEVARD
EXISTING LEVEE
LEVEE
CYPRESS ROAD
PATHFINDER COURT
TALARIA DRIVE
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11
12 14
13 15
16 818
819
820 821
PARCEL N
(SS PUMP STATION)
PARCEL Z
(LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
PARCEL L
(SCHOOL)
PARCEL K
(PARK)
'B' STREET
LEVEE
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
PARCEL X PRIVATE DRIVEWAY
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
E . SUM
ER
LAKE
DR I VE
PARCEL U
(OPEN SPACE)
'B' STREET
PARCEL BB
(AGRICULTURE
LIMITED)
PARCEL AA
(AGRICULTURE
LIMITED)
PARCEL Y
(LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
PARCEL P
(PARK)
PARCEL O
(WETLAND)
WETLAND
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
558
559
560
562
563
572 571 570 569
577
578 579 580
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613 614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
691
690
689
688
687
686
685
684
683
682
681
680
679
692
693
694
695
696
701
700
699
698
697
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
710
709
711
712
713
716
715
714
717
718
719
720
721
722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742 743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772 773 774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783 784 785 786 787
788
795 794 793 792
791
790
789
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815
816
817
(E. SUMMER LAKE DRIVE)
'WW' STREET
'XX' STREET
'PP' STREET
'QQ' STREET
'SS' STREET
'TT' STREET
'YY' STREET
'ZZ' STREET
'AAA' STREET
'BBB' COURT 'CCC' COURT
'DDD' COURT
'EEE' COURT
'FFF' STREET
'GGG' STREET
PARCEL Q (PARK)
PARCEL R
(PARK)
PARCEL U
PARCEL T
(OPEN SPACE)
PARCEL W
(PARK)
'HHH' STREET
'III' STREET
'JJJ' STREET
'LLL' STREET 'NNN' COURT
'MMM' STREET
'OOO' STREET
'PPP' STREET
'QQQ' STREET
'JJJ' STREET
'RRR' COURT
PARCEL V
(SS PUMP STATION)
495
494
'SSS' STREET
MANR
E
SA
SHORE
LANE
'GGG' COURT
PARCEL B
PARCEL B EXISTING LEVEE
1 1 PRIVATE DRIVEWAY
G:\1292-032\ACAD\CONFORMANCE EXHIBITS\CONFORM_02-05.DWG SUBDIVISION 9307
SUMMER LAKE NORTH
CONFORMANCE EXHIBIT
LOTTING PLAN
CITY OF OAKLEY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALIFORNIA
SCALE: 1" = 100' DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2021
CIVIL ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS
SAN RAMON
WWW.CBANDG.COM
SACRAMENTO
(925) 866-0322
(916) 375-1877
0 100 200 300
OF SHEET
SHEET NO.
5 5
SEE SHEET 3
KEY MAP
LOOP ROAD
LOCAL STREET
SHEET LOCATION
EXISTING EASEMENTS
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
LEVEE ACCESS ROAD
SEE SHEET 4
CYPRESS ROAD
188