Agenda — Pacifica City Council, March 28, 2022 (part 1 of 4)

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Mary Bier
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Mike O'Neill
Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 1 March 28, 2022
March 28, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Off-street parking is allowed by permit for attendance at official public meetings.

Vehicles parked without permits are subject to citation. You should obtain a permit from the rack in the lobby and place it on the dashboard of your vehicle in such a manner as is visible to law enforcement personnel.

PLEASE SILENCE CELL PHONES DURING MEETING
Alternative Ways to Observe and Participate in the Meeting:

The primary method for observing and participating in the meeting is in-person at the meeting location published in the meeting agenda. However, there are alternative ways to observe and participate in the meeting:
• Watch on TV on local cable channel 26
• Watch a Live Stream of the meeting by following https://www.cityofpacifica.org/LiveStream or www.pacificcoast.tv
• Call-In Public Comments (offered on a pilot basis):
• When the Mayor announces the Agenda Item on which you would like to comment, dial-in to the number and enter the Conference ID listed below. You will be placed on hold in a call-queue.

Please mute any background sound and listen through your phone to be called upon by the last 4-digits of your phone number. State your full name at the start of your public comment. • Dial-in: 1-650-898-6965 | Conference ID: 383 609 442 # o Press * 5 to raise your hand in the call queue.
o Press * 6 to unmute when called upon to speak by the last 4-digits of your phone number.
o If you are not able to join the call-queue due to maximum capacity limit, please attempt to call back until you are able to be placed in the queue.

Please note that Alternative platforms for participation are subject to underlying technology functionality and may be modified or interrupted at any time without notice. • Written Public Comments:

BEFORE THE MEETING: Written public comments for the record may be submitted in advance by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date by email to: [email protected] and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments submitted by email should adhere to the following:
• Clearly indicate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Oral Communications” in the Subject Line for items not on the agenda
• Include the submitter’s full name
Written public comments received by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting date will be provided in their entirety to the City Council prior to the meeting and will be made part of the written record but will not be City Council Regular Meeting 2 March 28, 2022
read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments will be posted to the City’s website for review prior to the meeting.

AT THE MEETING: Materials in writing provided at the meeting should provide seven (7) copies to provide for each Councilmember, City Clerk and City staff. 7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Call to Order
Roll Call
Reading of Land Acknowledgment
The City of Pacifica acknowledges that we occupy the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. We honor the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples for their enduring commitment to Mother Earth. As the Indigenous protectors of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. We affirm their sovereign rights as First Peoples and wish to pay our respects to the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Ohlone peoples.

Salute to the Flag led by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck

SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
A. Proclamation - National Poetry Month - April 2022

CONSENT CALENDAR
Persons wishing to address the Council on any Consent Calendar item may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any item listed on the agenda should submit a speaker card to the City Clerk.

Items on the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion unless a Councilmember requests, before the vote on the motion, to have an item discussed. Time limit on comments is three minutes or less.

1. Approval of Disbursements for 2/01/22 through 2/15/22.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 2/01/22 through 2/15/22.

2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on March 14, 2022.

3. FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for the FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project:

A. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement City Council Regular Meeting 3 March 28, 2022
with DRYCO Construction Inc. (Attachment "A") in an amount not to exceed $1,084,188.10 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $1,246,816.10, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Construction Services Agreement amount; and B. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Master Services Agreement and Task Order No. 1 with Ghirardelli Associates, Inc. (Attachment "B") to provide Construction Management Services in the amount not exceed of $116,684.00 and authorize a budget authority for construction management in an amount not to exceed $128,352.00, which includes contingencies in the amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of Task Order No. 1; and
C. Authorize staff to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amounts.

4. Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” to Repeal and Replace Section 2-9.02 “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Adopt the “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” by Repealing and Replacing Section 2-9.02, “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data; and finding ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the Agenda is available for the public to address the City Council on any issue that is not on the Agenda. Any person wishing to address the Council shall be recognized by the Mayor during Oral Communications, provided, however, that during the Oral Communications portion of the agenda, only items not on the agenda for that meeting may be addressed. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any member thereof. Councilmembers shall not enter into debate with speakers under Oral Communications. A maximum time of three minutes will be allowed for any speaker. Pursuant to Pacifica Municipal Code Title 2, Chapter 1, Section 2-1.118 any person making impertinent, slanderous, or profane remarks or who becomes boisterous while addressing the Council shall be called to order by the presiding officer and, if such conduct continues, may, at the direction of the presiding officer, be ordered barred from further audience before the Council during the meeting.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of Council Communications is for Councilmembers to inform each other of items of potential interest to other Councilmembers, such as interagency meetings.

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of Staff Communications is for the City Manager to offer announcements as appropriate.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

5. Adoption of a Resolution to approve General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21 to change the General Plan land use designation from Low Density Residential to Very Low City Council Regular Meeting 4 March 28, 2022
Density Residential, and introduction of an Ordinance to approve Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-18 to rezone from the R-1/B-4/HPD zoning district to the P-D/HPD zoning district and to authorize a single-family residential use, filed by Matthew and Margaret Murphy, at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110) in Pacifica (File No. 2018-057). Recommended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) status: Class 3 Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Resolution and Ordinance, and approved Specific Plan SP-169-18, Variance PV-526-18, and Parking Exception PE191-21 for construction of a 2,406-square foot (sf) single-family residence with a two-car garage on the 24,149-sf undeveloped parcel, by a vote of 7-0 on January 18, 2022.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a Resolution to approve General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21 and to introduce, waive the first reading, and read by title only, an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-18 to establish a Planned Development (P-D) zoning district with development plan at TBD Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110).”

CONSIDERATION

6. Discussion Regarding Updates to the Park Development Impact Fee PROPOSED ACTION: Receive Report Regarding Park Development Facilities Impact Fee and the Quimby Act Parkland Dedication Requirements and In Lieu Fees within the City of Pacifica and Provide Direction to Staff Regarding Potential Fee Reductions for Affordable Housing Units and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU).

7. Consider Approval of a Preliminary Concept of a Bike Park at Lower Frontierland Park PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the preliminary concept of a Bike Park in Pacifica at the lower Frontierland Park site.

8. Construction of Anza Pump Station Repair Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for the Anza Pump Station Repair Project (C036):

A. Authorize the City Manager to Award and Execute a Construction Services Agreement with DW Nicholson Corporation (Attachment “A”) in an amount not to exceed $2,326,000.00 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $2,791,200.00, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed Twenty Percent (20%) of the Construction Contract amount; and
B. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement with Pump Repair Service Co. (Attachment “B”) to furnish and install a new third stormwater pump in an amount not to exceed $207,394.22 and authorize a budget authority for pump furnishing and installation in the amount of $228,133.64, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed Ten Percent (10%) of the Construction Contract amount; and
C. Authorize the City Manager to Award and Execute a Purchase Agreement with Peterson Power Systems Inc. (Attachment “C”) to furnish and support installation of a new third natural gas engine in an amount not to exceed $326,087.93 and authorize a budget authority for engine furnishing and installation support in the amount of $358,696.72, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed Ten Percent City Council Regular Meeting 5 March 28, 2022
(10%) of the Purchase Agreement amount; and
D. Authorize the City Manager to approve and execute Task Order No. 2 (Attachment “D”) with Schaaf & Wheeler Consulting Civil Engineers, Inc. for Engineering Services During Construction (ESDC) in an amount not to exceed $105,630; and E. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Master Services Agreement (Attachment ‘E”) and Task Order No. 1 (Attachment “F”) with Ghirardelli Associates, Inc. to provide Construction Management Services in an amount not to exceed $220,600.00 and authorize a budget authority for Construction Management in an amount not to exceed $242,660.00 which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed Ten Percent (10%) of the of Task Order No. 1; and
F. Authorize City Staff to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amounts specified above.

9. Appointments to the Planning Commission; Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission; Beautification Advisory Committee; Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission; and Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee
PROPOSED ACTION:
1) Move to appoint three (3) applicants to the Planning Commission: for one partial term to expire March 2025 and two full terms to expire March 2026; 2) Move to appoint one (1) applicant to the Beautification Advisory Committee for a full term to expire March 2026, and seek to fill a second full term during a future recruitment; 3) Move to appoint one (1) applicant to the Emergency Preparedness & Safety Commission for a partial term to expire October 2023; and 4) Move to appoint one (1) applicant to the Open Space & Parkland Advisory Committee for a partial term to expire May 2024.

ADJOURN
NOTICE: If you challenge a city's zoning, planning or other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Judicial review of any city administrative decision may be had only if a petition is filed with the court not later than the 90th day following the date upon which the decision becomes final. Judicial review of environmental determinations may be subject to a shorter time period for litigation, in certain cases 30 days following the date of the final decision The City of Pacifica will provide assistance for disabled citizens upon at least 24 hours advance notice to the City Manager’s Office (650) 738-7301, or send request via email to:
[email protected] if you need sign language assistance or written material printed in a larger font or taped, advance notice is necessary. All meeting rooms are accessible to the disabled.

The Pacifica Municipal Code is available on line at the City’s website (www.cityofpacifica.org/municode);

HOW TO OBTAIN CITY COUNCIL AGENDAS
Posted agendas:

Agendas are posted no later than Friday prior to the City Council meeting date, at the entrance to the City Hall location at the Pacifica Community Center, 540 Crespi Drive.

View on the Internet:

Follow the link to Council agenda, at www.cityofpacifica.org E-mail subscription:

Send a request to Sarah Coffey, at [email protected] City Council Regular Meeting 6 March 28, 2022
City Clerk’s Office/City Manager’s Office
City Hall, 540 Crespi Drive
Council meetings:

Agendas are available at the City Council meeting

HOW TO REACH YOUR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
• Governor Gavin Newsom, State Capitol Building, Sacramento CA 95814 (916) 445-2841 • State Senator Josh Becker, 1528 So. El Camino Real, Suite 303, San Mateo CA 94402 (650) 212-3313
• Assembly Member Kevin Mullin, 1528 South El Camino Real, Suite 302 San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 349-2200
• Congresswoman Jackie Speier, 155 Bovet Road, Suite 780, San Mateo CA 94402 (650) 342-0300
• Senator Alex Padilla, B03 Russell Senate Office Building, Washington DC 20510 (202) 224-3553
• Senator Dianne Feinstein, #1 Post Street, Suite 2450, San Francisco CA 94104 (415) 393-0707
• President Joseph R. Biden, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington DC 20500

CITY COUNCIL
• Mayor Mary Bier, [email protected]
• Mayor pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck, tbigstyck@ pacifica.gov • Councilmember Mike O’Neill, mo’[email protected]
• Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus, [email protected]
• Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer, [email protected]

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3/28/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Disbursements for 2/01/22 through 2/15/22.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 2/01/22 through 2/15/22.

STAFF CONTACT:

Yulia Carter, Chief Financial Sustainability Officer
(650) 738-7402
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Staff has submitted the following disbursements for Council approval:
• Disbursements dated 2/01/22 through 2/15/22 in the amount of $913,280.51 as written on regular checks numbered 59020-59070 & 59072-59178 (Attachment 1). These disbursements are for Fiscal Year 2021-2022.

FISCAL IMPACT:

These disbursements are within budgeted appropriations.

ORIGINATED BY:

Finance Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59020-59070 & 59072-59178 -2-1 to 2-15-22 (PDF) 1 Packet Pg. 7
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 1

REPORT PARAMETERS
---------------------------
ORGANIZATION : 001
BANK : 1
PRINT BY : CHECK #
SORT OPTION : CHECK #
PRINT DETAILS : N
ORG NAME FOR EXTRACT FILE : PACIFICA
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 2

CITY OF PACIFICA

CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59020 - 59070
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59020 $1015.05 02/03/22 00094 0 ADAM-HILL COMPANY, THE S OUTSTANDING 1 59021 $165.13 02/03/22 00002 56 AGUILAR, MARIA (PETTY CASH) S OUTSTANDING 1 59022 $118.00 02/03/22 04066 0 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPANY INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59023 $143.74 02/03/22 00136 0 ALHAMBRA S OUTSTANDING 1 59024 $252.40 02/03/22 04980 1 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59025 $228.65 02/03/22 03895 0 AMERICAN FIDELITY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59026 $1304.86 02/03/22 05352 0 ANKAR CYCLES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59027 $317.90 02/03/22 00009 2 AT&T MOBILITY S OUTSTANDING 1 59028 $200.00 02/03/22 04561 0 AVINA, ANGEL S OUTSTANDING 1 59029 $1000.00 02/03/22 05448 0 BALCIONI, RAY S OUTSTANDING 1 59030 $170.35 02/03/22 04564 0 BERGDAVIS S OUTSTANDING 1 59031 $250.00 02/03/22 00001 28 BROWN, HOWARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59032 $348.08 02/03/22 04524 0 BRUECK, CYNTHIA S OUTSTANDING 1 59033 $132.00 02/03/22 01690 0 CALTEST ANALYTICAL LAB S OUTSTANDING 1 59034 $1077.07 02/03/22 00510 0 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 S OUTSTANDING 1 59035 $1221.00 02/03/22 05082 1 COLUMN, PBC S OUTSTANDING 1 59036 $78.65 02/03/22 02168 1 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 59037 $64753.15 02/03/22 00611 2 CSG CONSULTANTS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59038 $23359.77 02/03/22 05442 0 EDGES ELECTRICAL GROUP, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59039 $954.98 02/03/22 03458 0 EOA INC S OUTSTANDING
1 59040 $10.08 02/03/22 00773 0 FEDEX S OUTSTANDING
1 59041 $133826.50 02/03/22 04600 0 GSE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59042 $23489.76 02/03/22 00906 0 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS S OUTSTANDING 1 59043 $42.05 02/03/22 02252 0 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER S OUTSTANDING 1 59044 $1653.10 02/03/22 05322 0 JDA ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59045 $171.62 02/03/22 00001 329 LECHLEITNER, RICHARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59046 $52.45 02/03/22 01007 0 MATCO TOOLS S OUTSTANDING 1 59047 $351.69 02/03/22 01154 0 METRO MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS S OUTSTANDING 1 59048 $363.89 02/03/22 01217 0 OFFICE DEPOT S OUTSTANDING 1 59049 $437.81 02/03/22 01239 0 PACIFIC FIRE SAFE S OUTSTANDING 1 59050 $25788.99 02/03/22 01240 1 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. S OUTSTANDING 1 59051 $2252.66 02/03/22 01250 0 PACIFICA COMMUNITY TELEVISION S OUTSTANDING 1 59052 $12397.00 02/03/22 01309 0 POLYDYNE INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59053 $184.04 02/03/22 01317 0 PREFERRED ALLIANCE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59054 $112.95 02/03/22 01336 0 QUILL CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59055 $4476.64 02/03/22 04026 0 RANEY PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59056 $9578.12 02/03/22 03306 1 ROBERT HALF MANAGEMENT RESOURCES S OUTSTANDING 1 59057 $1040.00 02/03/22 02049 0 ROY COTO PLUMBING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59058 $1499.80 02/03/22 05445 1 SAFEWARE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59059 $70.51 02/03/22 05197 0 SAN MATEO COUNTY MOSQUITO & VECTOR CONTROL S OUTSTANDING 1 59060 $1644.00 02/03/22 05124 0 SCAPES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59061 $542.08 02/03/22 01513 0 SOUTH CITY LUMBER S OUTSTANDING 1 59062 $171132.50 02/03/22 00049 5 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CITY OF S OUTSTANDING 1 59063 $297.84 02/03/22 01546 0 STERICYCLE S OUTSTANDING 1 59064 $64.98 02/03/22 04874 0 THE DIRECTV GROUP, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59065 $628.40 02/03/22 01599 0 THOMAS FISH COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59066 $2602.75 02/03/22 03835 0 US FOODS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59067 $248.80 02/03/22 02899 1 UTILITY TELECOM GROUP, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59068 $968.98 02/03/22 01684 0 VERIZON WIRELESS S OUTSTANDING 1 59069 $503.54 02/03/22 01673 0 VWR INTERNATIONAL S OUTSTANDING 1 59070 $2000.00 02/04/22 05426 0 YIFTEE INC. S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 3

CITY OF PACIFICA

Page 1 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 3/2/2022

1.a
Packet Pg. 8
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59020-59070 & 59072-59178 -2-1 to 2-15-22 (4906 : Disbursements - Dated 2/01/22 through 2/15/22) TOTAL # OF VOIDED/REISSUED/UNCLAIMED CHECKS: 0 TOTAL AMOUNT: 0.00 TOTAL # OF ACH CHECKS: 0 TOTAL AMOUNT: 0.00
TOTAL # OF UNISSUED CHECKS: 0
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 4

FUND TOTALS
-----------

FUND FUND NAME ISSUED TOTAL VOIDED/REISSUED TOTAL
------ ------------------------------ --------------- ---------------------- 001 GENERAL FUND 289,456.17 0.00
016 NPDES STORMWATER FUND 2,598.98 0.00
018 SEWER CHARGE FUND 17,641.11 0.00
031 PACIFICA LIBRARY FUND 170.35 0.00
034 SEWER FACILITY CONSTRUCT. FUND 184,105.25 0.00
071 MOTOR POOL OPERATIONS FUND 247.59 0.00
072 MOTOR POOL REPLACEMENT FUND 1,304.86 0.00
================ ================
TOTAL - 495,524.31 0.00
Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 5

CITY OF PACIFICA

CHECK REGISTER
CHECK RANGE: 59072 - 59178
CHECK
BANK CHECK # CHECK AMT CHECK DATE VENDOR # ADDRS # VENDOR NAME TYPE STATUS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 59072 $9009.39 01/21/22 03741 0 BENEFIT COORDINATORS CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59073 $242.76 01/21/22 00814 1 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT S OUTSTANDING 1 59074 $116.33 01/21/22 00814 1 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT S OUTSTANDING 1 59075 $240.00 01/21/22 00814 1 CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT S OUTSTANDING 1 59076 $661.50 01/21/22 01757 0 CLEA S OUTSTANDING
1 59077 $50.00 01/21/22 00814 0 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59078 $350.00 01/21/22 00814 0 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59079 $100.00 01/21/22 00814 0 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD S OUTSTANDING 1 59080 $4.00 01/21/22 01764 3 NATIONAL D.R.I.V.E S OUTSTANDING 1 59081 $831.92 01/21/22 01758 1 PACIFICA FIREFIGHTERS UNION S OUTSTANDING 1 59082 $800.00 01/21/22 01759 0 PACIFICA POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59083 $200.00 01/21/22 01760 0 PACIFICA POLICE OFFICERS SAVINGS S OUTSTANDING 1 59084 $420.00 01/21/22 01769 0 PACIFICA POLICE SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59085 $1401.16 01/21/22 01758 5 SMC FIREFIGHTERS IAFF Local 2400 S OUTSTANDING 1 59086 $92.00 01/21/22 01758 4 SMC FIREFIGHTERS PAC S OUTSTANDING 1 59087 $992.00 01/21/22 01768 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #350 S OUTSTANDING 1 59088 $2665.50 01/21/22 01764 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL #856 S OUTSTANDING 1 59089 $64355.00 01/21/22 01771 0 TEAMSTERS LOCAL 856 S OUTSTANDING 1 59090 $3109.25 01/21/22 01766 0 VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA S OUTSTANDING 1 59091 $17.32 01/21/22 01766 0 VISION SERVICE PLAN-CA S OUTSTANDING 1 59092 $2756.73 02/11/22 05446 0 A1 TRANSMISSION & MARINE INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59093 $3198.00 02/11/22 00001 2 AGUILAR, MARIA S OUTSTANDING 1 59094 $138.69 02/11/22 00122 0 AIRGAS USA, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59095 $132.75 02/11/22 04066 0 ALERT PEST CONTROL COMPANY INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59096 $2994.57 02/11/22 00138 0 ALL INDUSTRIAL ELECTRIC SUPPLY, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59097 $196.47 02/11/22 04980 1 AMAZON.COM SALES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59098 $675.00 02/11/22 05452 0 AMERICAN SOCIETY ON AGING S OUTSTANDING 1 59099 $4299.28 02/11/22 00217 3 ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS S OUTSTANDING 1 59100 $678.00 02/11/22 00009 9 AT&T S OUTSTANDING
1 59101 $42.39 02/11/22 00009 1 AT&T LONG DISTANCE S OUTSTANDING 1 59102 $728.65 02/11/22 00225 0 ATCO INTERNATIONAL S OUTSTANDING 1 59103 $2304.00 02/11/22 02253 0 ATLAS TOWING SERVICES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59104 $15234.00 02/11/22 00258 0 BARTLE WELLS ASSOCIATES S OUTSTANDING 1 59105 $285.00 02/11/22 05127 0 BLEYLE ELEVATOR, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59106 $1417.39 02/11/22 00365 0 BROADMOOR LANDSCAPE SUPPLY S OUTSTANDING 1 59107 $452.00 02/11/22 02692 3 CABLECOM LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59108 $12925.00 02/11/22 00014 6 CAL TRANS S OUTSTANDING 1 59109 $6621.00 02/11/22 01690 0 CALTEST ANALYTICAL LAB S OUTSTANDING 1 59110 $2441.00 02/11/22 03814 1 CAPPSTONE, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59111 $4085.95 02/11/22 05449 0 CFI SALES INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59112 $322.90 02/11/22 00510 0 CINTAS CORPORATION #464 S OUTSTANDING 1 59113 $55.60 02/11/22 02822 0 CITY AUTO SUPPLY S OUTSTANDING 1 59114 $45.72 02/11/22 03246 0 COAST COUNTIES PETERBILT & COAST COUNTIES PAC S OUTSTANDING 1 59115 $225.00 02/11/22 05082 0 COASTSIDE NEWS GROUP, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59116 $808.50 02/11/22 05082 1 COLUMN, PBC S OUTSTANDING 1 59117 $713.52 02/11/22 02168 1 COMCAST S OUTSTANDING
1 59118 $2405.67 02/11/22 00595 0 COTTON, SHIRES & ASSOCIATES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59119 $3200.64 02/11/22 00025 0 DALY CITY/CITY OF S OUTSTANDING 1 59120 $2777.72 02/11/22 00653 0 DELL MARKETING L.P. S OUTSTANDING 1 59121 $951.35 02/11/22 04397 2 DENTONI WELDING WORKS, INC.-SAN LEANDRO S OUTSTANDING 1 59122 $242.00 02/11/22 00014 11 DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 6

CITY OF PACIFICA

Page 2 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 3/2/2022

1.a
Packet Pg. 9
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59020-59070 & 59072-59178 -2-1 to 2-15-22 (4906 : Disbursements - Dated 2/01/22 through 2/15/22) 1 59123 $5400.00 02/11/22 02201 0 DISCOUNT PLUMBING, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59124 $84.00 02/11/22 00001 357 DIXON, ALYSSA S OUTSTANDING 1 59125 $1200.00 02/11/22 04277 0 EASTMAN INVESTIGATIVE SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59126 $1197.51 02/11/22 05451 0 EDUARDO BARBA S OUTSTANDING 1 59127 $109.95 02/11/22 00489 0 ENTERSECT S OUTSTANDING 1 59128 $9719.83 02/11/22 02767 0 FLYERS ENERGY, LLC S OUTSTANDING 1 59129 $1800.00 02/11/22 03930 0 FREYER & LAURETA, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59130 $14270.00 02/11/22 05269 0 GOOD CITY COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59131 $124.96 02/11/22 00870 0 GOVCONNECTION, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59132 $114.13 02/11/22 00871 0 GRAFIX SHOPPE S OUTSTANDING 1 59133 $2151.74 02/11/22 00872 0 GRAINGER S OUTSTANDING 1 59134 $750.00 02/11/22 03947 1 GRANICUS, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59135 $2054.91 02/11/22 00875 0 GRANITE ROCK COMPANY #26577 S OUTSTANDING 1 59136 $150.76 02/11/22 00892 0 HACH COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59137 $3725.21 02/11/22 00927 2 HDL COREN & CONE S OUTSTANDING 1 59138 $12249.00 02/11/22 00936 0 HEART OF SAN MATEO COUNTY S OUTSTANDING 1 59139 $811.63 02/11/22 04859 1 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59140 $482.55 02/11/22 05447 1 HORIZON SCIENTIFIC INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59141 $61.52 02/11/22 01812 4 KBA DOCUSYS S OUTSTANDING 1 59142 $563.48 02/11/22 01055 2 KONE INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59143 $533.21 02/11/22 00001 285 LAVEZZO, GIORGIO S OUTSTANDING 1 59144 $91.00 02/11/22 00001 244 MAGISTRADO, ANTHONY S OUTSTANDING 1 59145 $737.00 02/11/22 03790 0 MAZE & ASSOCIATES S OUTSTANDING 1 59146 $250.00 02/11/22 02662 0 MEALS ON WHEELS OF AMERICA S OUTSTANDING 1 59147 $31366.65 02/11/22 04077 0 METROPOLITAN PLANNING GROUP S OUTSTANDING 1 59148 $178.20 02/11/22 01194 0 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS, INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59149 $951.87 02/11/22 04207 0 NATIONWIDE S OUTSTANDING 1 59150 $7216.50 02/11/22 01206 0 NORTH COAST COUNTY WATER DIST. S OUTSTANDING 1 59151 $143.73 02/11/22 01217 0 OFFICE DEPOT S OUTSTANDING 1 59152 $105.00 02/11/22 01758 3 PACIFICA FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59153 $12480.00 02/11/22 01261 0 PACIFICA SCHOOL DISTRICT S OUTSTANDING 1 59154 $109.81 02/11/22 01295 1 PETERSON S OUTSTANDING 1 59155 $1345.27 02/11/22 03160 0 PUBLIC PARKING ASSOCIATES, INC. S OUTSTANDING 1 59156 $279.08 02/11/22 01336 0 QUILL CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59157 $2287.50 02/11/22 03281 0 REGIONAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES S OUTSTANDING 1 59158 $6749.83 02/11/22 03306 1 ROBERT HALF MANAGEMENT RESOURCES S OUTSTANDING 1 59159 $1460.00 02/11/22 00055 0 SAN MATEO COUNTY FORENSIC LAB S OUTSTANDING 1 59160 $317.97 02/11/22 00001 266 SCHRIVER, ANTHONY S OUTSTANDING 1 59161 $263.93 02/11/22 01498 0 SMART & FINAL S OUTSTANDING 1 59162 $15532.32 02/11/22 01503 0 SMITH-EMERY COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59163 $155.81 02/11/22 00002 35 SOLIS, ELIZABETH ( PETTY CASH ) S OUTSTANDING 1 59164 $4250.00 02/11/22 00044 5 SWRCB - ELAP FEES S OUTSTANDING 1 59165 $610.44 02/11/22 02642 2 T-MOBILE CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59166 $1352.00 02/11/22 05087 0 TECTONICS S OUTSTANDING 1 59167 $340.28 02/11/22 04299 0 THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY S OUTSTANDING 1 59168 $500.00 02/11/22 05075 0 TRAFFIC LOGIX CORPORATION S OUTSTANDING 1 59169 $265.00 02/11/22 01657 1 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE S OUTSTANDING 1 59170 $8792.69 02/11/22 04670 0 U.S. TELEPACIFIC CORP. S OUTSTANDING 1 59171 $146.66 02/11/22 01647 0 ULINE SHIPPING SUPPLY SPECIALISTS S OUTSTANDING 1 59172 $902.34 02/11/22 04576 1 UNIVAR SOLUTIONS USA INC S OUTSTANDING 1 59173 $2979.71 02/11/22 03835 0 US FOODS, INC S OUTSTANDING Report: CHECKREG Generated: 18DEC20 13:17 Run: WEDNESDAY MAR0222 11:35 Page: 7

CITY OF PACIFICA

FUND TOTALS
-----------

FUND FUND NAME ISSUED TOTAL VOIDED/REISSUED TOTAL
------ ------------------------------ --------------- ---------------------- 001 GENERAL FUND 227,065.16 0.00
009 STREET CONSTRUCTION FUND 83,985.04 0.00
010 GAS TAX MAINTENANCE FUND 2,575.41 0.00
018 SEWER CHARGE FUND 32,295.81 0.00
019 PLANNED LOCAL DRAINAGE FUND 15,532.32 0.00
022 GENERAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 214.50 0.00
034 SEWER FACILITY CONSTRUCT. FUND 21,142.73 0.00
035 BEACH PARKING FUND 1,405.35 0.00

Page 3 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 3/2/2022

1.a
Packet Pg. 10
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59020-59070 & 59072-59178 -2-1 to 2-15-22 (4906 : Disbursements - Dated 2/01/22 through 2/15/22) 038 DISASTER ACCOUNTING FUND 178.20 0.00
065 SELF-FUNDED DENTAL PLAN FUND 15,520.61 0.00
071 MOTOR POOL OPERATIONS FUND 17,841.07 0.00
================ ================
TOTAL - 417,756.20 0.00

Page 4 of 4 ends

http://pac-gems/fms/BISystem/ReadROCFile.asp?sWC=C&iIdx=&FileName=D:\GemsEnv... 3/2/2022 NO FY 2021-2022 CHECKS ISSUED ON 2/1/22-2/2/22.

TOTAL AMOUNT OF CHECKS= $495,524.31 + $417,756.20 = $913,280.51

1.a
Packet Pg. 11
Attachment: FY 2021-2022 Disbursements 59020-59070 & 59072-59178 -2-1 to 2-15-22 (4906 : Disbursements - Dated 2/01/22 through 2/15/22)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3/28/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on March 14, 2022.

STAFF CONTACT:

Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on March 14, 2022 (Attachment A).

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (PDF) 2 Packet Pg. 12

CITY OF PACIFICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Council Chambers
2212 Beach Blvd
Pacifica, CA 94044
Mayor Mary Bier
Mayor Pro Tem Tygarjas Bigstyck
Councilmember Mike O'Neill
Councilmember Sue Vaterlaus
Councilmember Sue Beckmeyer
City Council Regular Meeting 1 March 14, 2022
SPECIAL and REGULAR MEETING
March 14, 2022 (MONDAY)
www.cityofpacifica.org
Mayor Mary Bier called the meeting to order on March 14, 2022 at 6:05 PM 6:00 PM STUDY SESSION
Mayor Bier called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m., stating that all councilmembers were present and announced that the Council would hold a Study Session and announced the business to be discussed.

A. Study Session on Utility Pavement Cut and Construction/Waste Truck Roadway Impact Fee Studies
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive Report on Utility Pavement Cut and Construction/Waste Truck Roadway Impact Fee Studies
PW Director Petersen stated that they had in attendance, President Margot Yapp of NCE Consulting Engineers who helped with the presentation, as well Assoc. Civil Engr. Ryan Marquez who also helped on the project. She then began the presentation.

NCE Pres. Yapp continued the presentation.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if the $952 was per unit.

NCE Pres. Yapp agreed, clarifying that they are all annual fees.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that she reported that they had 800 sq. foot multi-family unit and the figure of $952, and he asked if that was per unit.

NCE Pres. Yapp agreed, clarifying that it was the construction fee impact per unit. She then continued the presentation.

PW Director Petersen completed the presentation.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to Attachment 4, stating there was a whole gamut of different ways fees are charged. He mentioned that, in San Bruno, a single family unit is $4,615 per unit which he thought was higher than what they are talking about for our Attachment 4 that is being proposed. He stated that Santa Cruz County has $697 per mile, and he asked how they figured that.

2.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 2 March 14, 2022
PW Director Petersen stated that different cities imposed fees in different ways, and in Santa Cruz County, they were making a determination for residents or a developer to tell them how far they are traveling back and forth to their development and they will charge per mile. She stated that it is the same fee but cities are choosing to charge it differently, and Santa Cruz’ process was more time intensive as they will be figuring back and forth for each development and how far it is from that development. She stated that, with the difference in the San Bruno fee, it was important to note that for these fees there is not an apple to apple comparison between the fees, and they can only be charged based on a scientific study specific to Pacifica’s pavements, how many they have, how far people are going to be driving back and forth approximately two developments in the city. She reiterated that cities choose to implement it in different ways. She stated that Council could decide to choose to implement it a different way other than per square foot such as per unit or even per mile.

Councilmember O’Neill thought the $500 sewer lateral compliance certificate was if someone’s sewer breaks down because it is old and is an emergency type of situation.

PW Director Petersen agreed, stating that they would be the same people eligible for the grant program.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that there are a lot streets in Pacifica where the PCI index is zero.

He stated that there is only one road in, such as East Sharp Park Rockaway, Vallemar, and it is not that they are driving in and stopping but on a street that has a PCI of zero and they are wearing out the entire street as they drive, in theory. He asked if that would argue that they would have something like Santa Cruz County in those areas of Pacifica.

PW Director Petersen stated that they can look into that if Council desires, but she thought part of the problem is the staff capacity issue in needing to look at each development and calculate the distance to and from the development for each permit that comes in as they do go through a lot of permits and it would be more staff intensive. She stated that, if Council is interested in seeing that, they can come back when they talk about the adoption and provide something that would be based on a per mile rate.

Councilmember O’Neill mentioned that, if going into Linda Mar, there are a lot of different ways to get there, i.e., Linda Mar, Crespi, Terra Nova, Fassler, etc., but if going to Rockaway, there is only one road in there and he asked if they could adopt an ordinance where only certain specific areas have an extra fee to charge, such as per square foot fee plus $500 or $1000 to drive down that road to get to that house.

PW Director Petersen stated that there are impacts to all streets when construction vehicles drive on those roadways. She stated that, in discussing this previously with the team, it was also discussed with the attorney’s office and there was a discussion related to how it needs to be equally applied to everyone. If you are in one area of town and having trucks going across the street and impacting them versus other areas of town, all of them would need to be treated similarly.

Councilmember O’Neill thought that even if there is a difference, and he understood what she was saying but disagreed with it. He stated that the older the street, the worse the effects and if a street is rated zero, he asked if there was any way to do a higher fee on that street or is it due to labor and staff shortages that it would be harder to calculate.

2.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 3 March 14, 2022
PW Director Petersen stated that it would be staff intensive. She thought the way the fee was developed was based on newer pavements and older pavements, and putting them in those two buckets. She stated that, with pavements that are older, they see a different fee related to cuts versus newer pavement, and that is the way a number of cities actually implement it.

Councilmember Vaterlaus asked how many garbage customers are there.

PW Petersen thought, just having spoken with someone in the know, she heard it was around 20,000 customers.

Councilmember Vaterlaus sees that charge going directly to the customers and with gas prices so high, she can see additional charges the public is going to pay because of those prices. She was concerned that there are many new fees that they have added lately and she thought this one could rise up fairly quickly. She stated that most of the cuts are due either sewer long cuts or sewer lateral replacement, and sewer lateral replacement is a city mandated item for point of sale, and you are already charging the people to do a new sewer lateral at point of sale. She suggested that, instead of doing it in that manner, you take one street, go down the street, camera every single line, find out which ones need to be replaced and do a bond on their taxes and go through and pave that street after every sewer lateral has been fixed. She stated that this will keep happening because it is random, about 300 houses sell every year, so there are going to be cuts in the street again and it will bring down the pavement index. She referred to other trucks, UPS, Amazon, stating she sees Amazon going by up to 30 times a day and she didn’t think there was any way they can charge Amazon, but Amazon and UPS drive way more in Pacifica than our garbage vehicles and it is likely not a way to charge them to come here, but the vehicle trips are much larger.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that over years of hearing Councilmember O’Neill on occasion bringing up the idea of assessment districts and personally knowing less on the topic than him, he asked if they considered that as a means by which to raise revenue for specific areas, such as Vallemar. He mentioned Wynona which he thinks is a paper street but literally has no pavement whatsoever or in Rockaway with a hyperbolic trench down the middle of the street that clearly needs to be repaved. He asked, in those neighborhoods, if the neighbors have the interest of getting together and raising those funds, if that was an avenue they have approached.

PW Director Petersen stated that the City Manager during their Vision 2025 discussion has been talking about discussing some of the bigger picture items, such as assessment districts. They are relatively complicated and take a long time and residents have to agree to it, but she felt it could be looked at. She asked the City Manager if he wanted to respond to that regarding Vision 2025.

City Manager Woodhouse stated, not specifically regarding Vision 2025, but the difference between large capital funding for reconstruction of streets which the city needs, over $100 million, to raise our PCI to a good level. He stated that the impact fees they are discussing now is to maintain an annual revenue that can be applied to street repair and maintenance, adding that tools like assessment districts or other bond measures are the property tax levies that are financing mechanisms for large capital improvements, thus a different financing approach for a different level of projects and the assessment districts are a possibility and they have information on how a neighborhood could pursue them. He stated that it is like apples to oranges as a financing tool to what they are talking about at this meeting.

2.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 4 March 14, 2022
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if it was accurate that they talk about pavements every couple of years or so.

PW Director Petersen responded affirmatively.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if this was that conversation or will they be talking about it other than this meeting.

PW Director Petersen stated that it is definitely the conversation having on pavements, and they could schedule another conversation on pavements at a later date if Council wants that.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that the last time they had that discussion they were talking about implementing the system under which they determine which streets they would be repaving so they catch the ones that are in better quality from falling into disrepair and it is less expensive so they can do more of them and it might lend itself to grant opportunities if they take that approach, asking if he recalls that correctly.

PW Director Petersen stated that he was correct and, when they put the five-year street maintenance program in place and there was minimally funding for the program, the goal would be to try to continue to keep those streets in good condition as that being the most cost effective way to deal with the streets and to take streets that were about to fall into complete reconstruction and cap them to prevent them from falling into complete reconstruction for several years while they try to identify other forms of funding.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if they have begun to identify other forms of funding or still too nascent in the program that it would begin to appear.

PW Director Petersen stated that other forms of funding are the fees they are talking about at this time, and is the way many cities do to care of impacts to their pavements that are causing the pavements to degrade. She stated that, regarding getting grant funding, it was difficult to get grant funding for pavements. She stated that they do get money from SB1 that comes to the city every year automatically and Measure W which is a county pavement fund. She stated that they applied for a grant on Sharp Park Road and Francisco, getting them into their priority development area but unfortunately they did not receive grant funds for that. She stated that they look for opportunities when they can, but they tend to be few and far between.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that, when driving down a street on Rockaway, he wishes that they could pave it asap, and knowing the effort from neighbors who feel exactly the same way.

He was ready to help in any way to find money for the projects, and was looking forward to hearing about opportunities as they present.

Mayor Bier check the time and stated that they have a couple of other questions from Councilmembers O’Neill and Beckmeyer and she thought it was also important that they hear from Ms. Porter.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that he has already spoken and passed to Councilmember Beckmeyer.

Councilmember Beckmeyer had one question, asking their expert if he has heard of cities that are charging some kind of surcharge for the delivery companies, such as Amazon, etc.

2.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 5 March 14, 2022
Ms. Yapp stated that those delivery trucks are smaller than and weigh less than the garbage trucks and construction vehicles, and even though they see a lot of them, the impacts are not as high as they would expect.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if there are any policies in cities that mandate a certain size and limit the size of vehicles and not leave it to the delivery company but state as nothing above a certain size and weight. She knows we have a weight limit in Pacifica, but she was talking about making it more granular.

Ms. Yapp stated that there is a legal load limit that is identified for freeways and that would be like 18-wheeler type trucks and most all other vehicles would probably be a lot less on the city streets.

She stated that the garbage trucks can get pretty heavy because they pack it all in, but it would be unusual for them to exceed a legal load limit.

Mayor Bier wanted to ask Ms. Porter a couple of quick questions as she felt it was really important to hear from her.

City Attorney Kenyon suggested that it was a good time to open public comment.

Mayor Bier agreed and opened public comment.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck reminded that they will need to fill out cards.

Mayor Bier agreed, and suggested that they fill out the card and give it to Chief Steidle.

City Clerk Coffey stated that they need to check to see if there are any call-ins for public comment.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated they had one call-in.

Mayor Bier suggested they take the caller before the in-house commenter.

Mayor Bier stated, as the caller did not respond, that they be patient as they figure out this process.

Cheryl Ammeter, Pacifica, stated she was a Pacific Coast TV board member.

Mayor Bier stated that she had to stop her as they were taking public comment on the study session about pavements, and she can call back when she lets them know when Oral Communications begins.

Ms. Ammeter apologized and stated she would call back.

Mayor Bier stated that they have one card, announcing the speaker.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated that she supports the fees, and commented on truck load impacts, specifically concerns in her neighborhood.

Mayor Bier closed public comments and stated that she would like to hear from Chris Porter, asking her to inform them if she has dealt with this before and how she did deal with it, etc.

2.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 6 March 14, 2022
Chris Porter, GM of Recology of the Coast, stated that a couple of her sister cities have dealt with this, such as San Bruno, and she has worked on this with PW Dir. Petersen from the beginning and they are still in the discussion stage and will continue discussing it.

Mayor Bier asked if there were any more questions from Council, and seeing none, she stated she will open the regular Council meeting.

RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED
7:00 PM OPEN SESSION
Mayor Bier reconvened the meeting at 7:04 p.m. She encouraged everyone to put a parking pass on their car in the lot and explained the process of filling out a card to speak for public comments.

Call to Order
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Mary Bier Mayor Present
Tygarjas Bigstyck Mayor Pro Tem Present
Mike O'Neill Councilmember Present
Sue Vaterlaus Councilmember Present
Sue Beckmeyer Councilmember Present
Staff Present: Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager; Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney; Tina Wehrmeister, Asst. City Manager/Planning Director; Lisa Petersen, PW Director; Christian Murdock, Dep. Planning Director; Dan Steidle, Police Chief; Sam Bautista, PW Dep. Director; Ryan Marquez, Assoc. Civil Engineer; Michael Perez, PB&R Director; Yulia Carter, Chief Financial Sustainability Officer; Bonny O’Connor, Sr. Planner; Josh Montemayor, Management Analyst; Sarah Coffey, City Clerk.

Reading of Land Acknowledgment
Salute to the Flag led by Mayor Bier

CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor asked if any Councilmembers want to pull anything from the consent calendar, and seeing no one, she opened up public comments.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that, during the study session, they had their first pilot test for the phone in comment, and it was apparent, as anticipated, there is probably about a minute delay between the video and the streaming and what the person hears as to what is actually happening, which is why her response and comment came late. He suggested that as they are dealing with public comment cards for people in person, he explained that those who have called in should be prepared that after in person comments they will go to that queue and introduce the call-ins.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if he was saying, as long as they dial in, they will be in a queue as

2.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 7 March 14, 2022
Caller 1, Caller 2, etc., and not like their phone gets a busy signal and they dial back.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that they will be in the queue and Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor is monitoring the call in queue.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that staff will also tell Council, as soon as public comment opens how many cards they have and how many people are on queue so the Mayor can decide if they need to lower the amount of time for each comment or not, and that will happen when the Mayor opens the item for public comment.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that they are learning as they go.

Mayor Bier concluded that it will work better for them to take the cards first.

City Attorney Kenyon responded affirmatively.

City Clerk Coffey added for the call-in users who are called by their last four digits of their phone number and they would press Star 6 to unmute themselves to begin public comment and state their full name for the record.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, referred to Item #9, stating that she believe there were some mathematical errors and asked to pull it from Consent so they can have a presentation and mentioned the importance to discuss the concerns and ask questions, then mentioned some specific concerns in this item.

Suzanne Moore, Pacifica, stated she needed clarification as she wanted to make comments on Items #9 and #11, and she asked if she does #9 and #11 or wait.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that she does both, with her three minutes to comment on all consent items.

Ms. Moore understood, then asked if she could restart.

Mayor Bier responded affirmatively.

Ms. Moore then addressed the Pacifica’s sixth housing element that was different from past cycles in Pacifica and challenged to build 1,900 units and accommodate fair housing and made specific comments on where we were and what we needed to do to be more successful and keep us safe and was truly for the safe parking item and expressed her thoughts.

Chris Redfield, Pacifica, stated that safe parking should have been implemented when presented two years ago, and gave his thoughts on the process.

Carolyn Jaramillo, Pacifica, stated she is a homeowner and a member of several groups of the Pacifica Progressive Alliance, and is speaking in praise of the safe parking program designed by PRC and grateful that Council is willing to accept and implement it, giving her thoughts on the issue.

Therese Dyer, Pacifica, stated she didn’t have time to speak on all her issues, and stated that #7 was not clear, mentioning her thoughts and questions on the issue.

Mayor Bier stated that she can’t answer her as they are not allowed to do that.

2.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 8 March 14, 2022
Ms. Dyer stated that it should be clear in the report or she wouldn’t be asking questions. She asked if they will get back to her with an answer.

Mayor Bier stated that she will personally get back to her.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated that there was one call-in and unmuted the speaker.

Clifford Lawrence, Pacifica, stated he was addressing Items #9 and #11. He commented on the ongoing process of #9 and some concerns on the accuracy in Item #9 and willingness to help the process. He stated #11 on parking was long overdue, expressing his thoughts on the process.

Sally Liu, Pacifica, stated she is a member of Reusable San Mateo County and was commenting on Item #10, mentioning the group’s support of the ordinance and shared their thanks for Council working with them, as well as their conversations with restaurants.

Mayor Bier closed public comments.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to comments, first, on Item #7 and stated that it was common language when passing these with a contingency amount and he asked if staff why they put a contingency amount regularly as a matter of best practice and where the various improvements are located, such as on the website.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that, regarding when contingencies become necessary, it was a standard practice when bidding a project and can handle that flexibility as there are often unanticipated necessary changes to projects.

PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that, in regard to contingencies, they put them on projects for unforeseen conditions. He stated that there were times when they will dig something up and they didn’t know there was something, such as a waterline, that they might have to relocate. They put the contingencies into the budget to pay for the unforeseen. He stated that this project happens to install 37 ADA compliant programs and he has a list of locations, with most of them on Gateway, Catalina Avenue, Rutland Drive, etc.

Mayor Bier asked confirmation that there is an attachment connected to the documents at this time.

PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that there is not a document in the attachment, but they can provide that through the City Manager.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to Item #9, with comments on it regarding questions raised may be better presented for Council goal setting session, and he thought they will be discussing the housing element in the next goal year. He referred to what this item is.

Mayor Bier stated that Dep. Planning Director Murdock was present, and asked of the City Attorney was calling attention to that.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck didn’t have a chance to complete his question, but he was present to answer any specific items of interest.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he was going to make a general statement for the purpose

2.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 9 March 14, 2022
of this, and since he is present and wiser than he is on things of this nature, he will let him speak.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that this item comprises two different reports on the city’s General Plan. First is the housing element annual progress report (APR), and is a report on the city’s implementation of goals and policies in the housing element, as well as a report on the city’s applications received and approvals granted to housing projects and it summarizes the city’s activity which is a cumulative report from year 1 through year 8 of the housing element cycle, and this is the 7th housing element APR of the current 2015-2023 housing element. He stated that, as in the report, the city saw significant uptick in housing related approvals of building permits, 142% increase over the prior year, with the prior year matching the city’s in first place prior to this year for the most number of housing related approvals. He stated that, related to the 801 Fassler housing project of condominium townhomes, as well as a 20-unit accessory dwelling or ADU project at the Villages at Pacifica apartment complex. He stated that those two combined help to explain the significant increase. He noted, as a final point on the housing element component, that all 20 of those ADUs that will be constructed will be affordable to persons of low income as a result of the affordable housing regulatory agreement that Council approved and entered into between the city and the property owner. He stated that it was an outgrowth of that important work Council approved in 2020. He stated that the second component of this item is an implementation report on other elements of the General Plan besides the housing element and outlines accomplishments to implement policies across a number of elements and they run the gamut from circulation and conservation through land use and safety and seismic safety, etc., other than the housing element. He stated that the city has a variety of programs and activities it undertakes to cross the entire spectrum of issues contained in the city’s General Plan.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought the primary purpose of the report is to send the report to the state.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock agreed, specifically to the Department of Housing and Community Development and the governor’s office of Planning and Research.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought they will be discussing the nuances of the housing element when they are past the General Plan updates.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that it was generally correct, adding that there are two key points to his thinking, one is to public comments or questions or concerns as to the level of implementation and resourcing of implementation of current housing element policies and programs and is a Council goal setting question. Regarding all the various issues and demands on staff time, to do something often requires them not to do something else, and where the weight of that effort and resources are placed is a question for Council and then for execution and implementation through the City Manager, and he thought the goal setting process was the most relevant place to set that high level of expectation on the part of the Council. He stated that the second component of that is related to the 2023-2031 housing element update which, as he mentioned, they will have to start in earnest following the comprehensive General Plan update because, as a public commenter noted, they need to plan for at least around 2000 new housing units, which will be a significant challenge based on the city’s prior progress through this point in time on the current housing element and will require some significant questions to be answered and policy direction from Council.

Mayor Bier stated that they had a motion (O’Neill) and a second (Bigstyck).

City Clerk Coffey asked them to cast their vote.

2.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 10 March 14, 2022
Vote: 5-0 (Consent Items #1-11)
City Manager Woodhouse stated that Mr. Anaya from PCT has conveyed that, for those who call in on the call-in queue, and once they are in the queue, they can hear the meeting through their phone with no delay. If they are listening by streaming, it is delayed by up to a minute and if listening on TV, it is delayed up to five seconds. He stated that, if they are watching, once they call into the queue and listen through their phone, they will be on time.

Mr. Anaya stated that they want to turn everything else down and listen to only the phone once they are in the queue and they won’t have any delays.

Mayor Bier thanked him for that information. She asked the City Manager to feel free to remind her and keep them going as they are figuring all of this out.

RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

1. Approval of Disbursements for 1/16/22 through 1/31/22.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve attached lists of disbursements for 1/16/22 through 1/31/22.

2. Approval of Minutes
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held on February 28, 2022.

3. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency of the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the End of Beach Boulevard.

PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist within the Pacifica Coastline from Westline Drive to the end of Beach Boulevard.

4. Continuation of Proclamation of Local Emergency at the Anza Pump Station.

PROPOSED ACTION: Accept Report and Make a Determination that Conditions of Local Emergency Continue to Exist at the Anza Pump Station at the Pacifica State Beach.

5. Continuation of Proclamation of the Existence of a Local Emergency Regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).

PROPOSED ACTION: Accept report and make a determination that conditions of local emergency continue to exist regarding Novel (new) Coronavirus ("COVID-19”).

6. Notice of Completion for the Emergency Sewer Repairs - SF RV Park PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Pacifica accepting completion and directing the City Manager to file Notice of Completion for the Emergency Sewer Repairs - SF RV Park Project; and authorize the City Manager to release the retention funds to the contractor.

2.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 11 March 14, 2022

7. North Pacifica Pedestrian Improvement Project
PROPOSED ACTION: Approve the following actions for North Pacifica Pedestrian Improvement Project:

A. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (Attachment "A") in an amount not to exceed $305,500.00 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $351,325.00, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Construction Contract amount; and
B. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Master Services Agreement and Task Order No. 1 with 4Leaf, Inc. (Attachment "B") to provide Construction Management Services in the amount not exceed of $50,534 and authorize a budget authority for construction management in an amount not to exceed $55,389, which includes contingencies in the amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of Task Order No. 1; and C. Authorize staff to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amount.

8. Approval of the Final Map for 580 Crespi Drive
PROPOSED ACTION:

Approval of the Final Map to subdivide the airspace of an existing 100,846 square foot (2.3151 acres) parcel into twenty-five (25) commercial condominiums on the project site located south of the intersection of Crespi Drive and Roberts Road.

9. 2021 Annual Progress Reports on Implementation of the 2015-2023 Housing Element of the General Plan, and the City of Pacifica General Plan PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt a Resolution approving the City’s 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report on Implementation of the 2015-2023 Housing Element and the 2021 General Plan Annual Progress Report on Implementation of Other Elements of the General Plan, and directing the City Manager to transmit the reports to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR).

10. Adoption of an ordinance repealing and replacing Article 4, “Sustainable Food Service Ware and Prohibited Plastic Products” within Chapter 5 of Title 6 of the Municipal Code to adopt new regulations regarding the use of disposable food service ware PROPOSED ACTION: Move to adopt the ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Repealing and Replacing Article 4, “Sustainable Food Service Ware and Prohibited Plastic Products” within Chapter 5 of Title 6 to add a New Article 4, “Regulating the Use of Disposable Food Service Ware by Food Facilities” to Regulate the Use of Disposable Food Service Ware; and find the ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act.

11. Adoption of an Ordinance amending sections of Titles 4 and 5 the Pacifica Municipal Code related to on-street parking regulations in order to allow participants of the Safe Parking Program to park on the street for more than 72 hours.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to Adopt an Ordinance titled “Ordinance of The City Council of The City of Pacifica To Amend Article 12 of Chapter 7 "Traffic" Within Title 4 of The Pacifica Municipal Code To Add Section Sec. 4-7.1207 and to Amend Section 5-

2.03, “Violations: Abatement” Within Chapter 2, "Vehicles Parked For Seventy-Two Hours Or More”, Within Title 5 Of The Pacifica Municipal Code Relating To Temporary Safe Parking Permit; and find the Ordinance exempt under the California Environmental

2.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 12 March 14, 2022
Quality Act.
7:15 PM - PUBLIC HEARINGS

12. Redistricting - Public Hearing #4 to Receive Input Regarding Proposed Draft District Maps, Composition of Council District Boundaries; Affirm Selection of Map 505b and Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” to Repeal and Replace Section 2-9.02 “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data
PROPOSED ACTION:

1. Conduct the Public Hearing to Receive Input Regarding Composition of Council District Boundaries and Affirm Selection of Map 505b; and

2. Introduce by Title Only and Waive the First Reading of an “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” by Repealing and Replacing Section 2-9.02, “City Council Districts Established” of the City Of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data; and finding ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

City Clerk Coffey presented the staff report.

Mayor Bier opened the public hearing.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the speaker.

Cheryl Ammeter stated that she thought she may not be in the appropriate place as she is making a general comment.

Mayor Bier stated that she can come back when they announce oral communications which is after the public hearings.

Clif Lawrence, Pacifica, stated that he was pleased that they went back to map 505b and he looked forward to its adoption.

Mayor Bier closed the public hearing.

Councilmember O’Neill moved to introduce an ordinance to the City Council of the City of Pacifica amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” to Repeal and Replace Section 2-9.02, “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data; seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck.

City Clerk Coffey asked them to cast their vote.

Vote: 5-0

2.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 13 March 14, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Tygarjas Bigstyck, Mayor Pro Tem
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

13. Adoption of a Resolution to approve General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21 to change the General Plan land use designation from Low Density Residential to Very Low Density Residential, and introduction of an Ordinance to approve Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-18 to rezone from the R-1/B-4/HPD zoning district to the PD/HPD zoning district and to authorize a single-family residential use, filed by Matthew and Margaret Murphy, at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110) in Pacifica (File No. 2018-057). Recommended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) status: Class 3 Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Resolution and Ordinance, and approved Specific Plan SP-169-18, Variance PV-526-18, and Parking Exception PE-191- 21 for construction of a 2,406-square foot (sf) single-family residence with a two-car garage on the 24,149-sf undeveloped parcel, by a vote of 7-0 on January 18, 2022.

PROPOSED ACTION: Move to continue the public hearing to the City Council meeting of March 28, 2022.

Asst. City Manager/Planning Director Wehrmeister presented the staff report.

Councilmember Vaterlaus moved to continue the public hearing to the City Council meeting of March 28, 2022; seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if they were going to have public comment.

Mayor Bier stated that they do have one public comment, and she welcomed Commissioner Godwin for being at the meeting.

City Attorney Kenyon clarified that the public comment will only be on the continuance of the item.

Mayor Bier clarified to the speaker that he understood that he is commenting only on the continuance.

Gerald King, Pacifica, stated that he wanted to comment on the property at the terminus at the end of Talbott Avenue that is proposed and he has a concern because of living downslope.

Mayor Bier stated that they wanted to make sure that he understood that he can comment only on the continuance and not the project.

Mr. King understood and then mentioned that he lives downslope from that property and there are six properties on Talbot that were built after he moved into his property and expressed his concerns regarding their impact on his property.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that she was sorry to interrupt but the motion is not to hear the appeal but to continue it until the next meeting. She stated that it will be back on the Council.

Mr. King stated that he got a letter that said he could come to the meeting and discuss this.

City Attorney Kenyon understood, and reiterated that now the Council was only deciding on

2.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 14 March 14, 2022
whether or not they should continue this item to March 28 and they will not hear it at this meeting.

Mayor Bier told him to submit his letter.

Mr. King stated that he had three minutes.

Mayor Bier stated that, if he sends an email with his comment, she will gladly communicate with him.

Mr. King stated that he would rather submit the letter.

Mayor Bier thanked him for understanding their process. She then stated that they had a motion and a second.

City Clerk Coffey asked Councilmembers to cast their vote.

Vote: 5-0
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Vaterlaus, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

14. Consideration of an appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval with conditions of Coastal Development Permit CDP-430-21 and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization for construction of a single-family residence on an undeveloped lot known as TBD Olympian (APN 023-037-030); and finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (File No. 2021-018)
PROPOSED ACTION: Move to DENY the appeal and UPHOLD Planning Commission approval of Coastal Development Permit CDP-430-21 and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization and finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by adopting the resolution included as Attachment A, including conditions of approval in Exhibit A to the resolution.

Sr. Planner O’Connor presented the staff report.

Mayor Bier asked Councilmembers to disclose any conflicts of interest or ex parte communications.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that she communicated with Mike O’Connell, the builder, and with John Hanley, one of the appellants.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he also communicated with Mike O’Connell and a handful of the appellants.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that he met with several of the appellants, but not Mr. O’Connell.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she had a phone conversation with Mike O’Connell and a brief meeting with several of the appellants.

Mayor Bier stated that she also met with the appellant. She then asked if Council had any

2.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 15 March 14, 2022
questions of staff.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to coverage, and when they were talking about the house itself and the garage as being what brings them to the calculation of 29% but, as he is looking at the schematics, it is hard for him to wrap his brain around the idea that it is less than 40%, let alone 29%. He thought it might be because of the ADU but a part of what plays into that question is the driveway to the garage and whether that constitutes coverage. He asked to be walked through that in detail.

Sr. Planner O’Connor asked to put up slide 1, and agreed that some of the sheets are so busy that it looks like there is a lot more coverage on it than may be proposed. She pointed out the landscaping plan of the project which she thought represents a simplified version of the actual coverage. She stated that the light grade areas are the areas that are generally being counted as coverage with the exception of the retaining wall structure. She stated that the driveway does not count as coverage and if they look at a more simplified version of what the site will look like, that may help.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if the patios do not count as coverage either.

Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that driveways and hardscapes are not considered enough lot coverage calculations.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked her to elaborate why that is the case.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that, as it relates to the percentage calculation of coverage for a project, that term is defined in the Pacifica Municipal Code which specifically provided for building coverage and excludes certain other types of coverage. He stated that it could be possible that, if Council wanted to regulate other types of coverage at some point, the current definition and standard includes only coverage related to buildings, including cantilevered floor area from second or third stories as mentioned by Sr. Planner O’Connor.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that it might be a question for the applicant, but he asked if the driveway was to be constructed with permeable material.

Sr. Planner O’Connor thought it was impermeable.

Mayor Bier invited the appellant to speak, but she asked if he wished to reserve up to three minutes for rebuttal.

Leo Leone, applicant, stated that he could say he would like to reserve a minute if he has that much left. If he finishes his presentation and goes over, he didn’t want to risk being cut off at nine minutes. He stated that, if he can reserve what he has left over when he is done, he would appreciate that.

Mayor Bier stated that she will see if that is okay to do.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that it was clearly up to the appellant on how he wants to divide his time, and the Mayor explained that he has ten minutes in total for the presentation as well as rebuttal and he can use however he wants.

Mr. Leon stated that he will reserve 30 seconds.

2.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 16 March 14, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill wanted to clarify that, if he does his presentation and finishes in six minutes, he would get the additional four for rebuttal if he wishes.

Mr. Leone thought that was fair, and that was what he was trying to get at. He stated that he heard talks earlier about buttons and trying to get familiar with buttons. He stated that he spent eight years in the room as a Planning Commissioner and a Planning Chair and he knows what they are talking about. He stated that, after two years of not being there, he was not familiar with the buttons either. He stated that City Clerk Coffey informed him that he would be operating a little clicker to operate the slide show and he didn’t know where it and what buttons to push. He asked how it works.

Mayor Bier stated that they will begin the timer.

City Clerk Coffey stated that they will set the timer for nine minutes and 30 seconds as he wishes to reserve 30 seconds.

Mr. Leone stated that he said that, and he understood from the City Attorney that, if he finishes earlier and says stop, he will have what is left.

City Clerk Coffey responded affirmatively.

Mr. Leone stated that he won’t reserve anything and wait and see what he has left which he thought was a better option. He asked her to set the timer for the full ten minutes. He is presenting the appeal on behalf of the appellants who happen to be him, and the adjoining properties to the project. He pointed out that the project has commanding views of the skyline, ocean, coastline and all the hillsides, virtually the entire site. He stated that the area below adjacent to the main structure looks really nice but it belongs to the property next door at 135 Sussex Way and he didn’t want them to be misled. He stated that, as neighbors, they were not opposed to a new home and the building site itself is in an area of historic landslides which has been documented, with all kinds of issues, and they desire a project that thoroughly addresses potential impacts and mitigation issues prior to project approval. He stated that they want to be consistent with Coastal Act 3006 policy and the public should participate in the building and project. They want to do that and comply with the Coastal Act. He stated that their main concerns are drainage issues, potential alternate designs, safety and accessibility and project approval needs to be consistent with neighborhood character, which this does not, and adhere to all the rules and regulations governing development which are numerous with many listed there. He stated that Olympian Way is an unimproved street and has no sidewalks. He stated that, in many places, you can only drive one vehicle through the street at a time. It has a history of incidents of trucks being stranded and they have asked for city’s help which was granted, and access for police and fire. He stated that one slide shows a truck with its wheels off the road just hanging in the air and they had to bring in a gigantic piece of equipment and it is next door to the project site and the wheels are hanging over into the yard. He stated that the current drainage system does not meet the recommendation of the geotechnical investigation and the geoforensic report said a percolation style dissipation system is not permitted for use at this site. He stated that they hired their own geotech professional engineer who said that same thing. He stated that Pacifica’s Public Works has guidelines for drainage review and they are very good and extensive and no additional runoff caused by development can cross the property lines and the storm drain systems shall provide protection of vetting outside properties. He stated that a discussion of rationale used to design the system and discussion of methods and tabulations, description of how excess drainage will be detained with no water off the site and descriptions of how discharge will be controlled to comply with city policy. He stated that, when looking at the Planning Commission’s package, they

2.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 17 March 14, 2022
found that the guidelines weren’t in it. He didn’t think the Planning Commission even considered these as they didn’t have it to review for approval and the result was the drainage plan that was not permitted was approved and Condition 17 which speaks to those conditions and says it will comply with the recommendations of the geotech but it was not followed because he said it was not permitted. He then referred to the Coastal Act policy, which stated the development will be clustered and contoured into the existing natural slope of the design and scale which is subordinate to the land form that minimizes grading for access and for fire safety and grading will be regulated to protect the appearance of a land form and limit potential runoff. He stated that a structure on a scale with the site and neighborhood, particularly a single family dwelling which are much larger than neighboring structures are discouraged. He referred to a house on Sussex Way that is at the bottom of that main structure and is 34.5 feet next to a one-story building in a back yard. He then referred to visual impact and stated that a hillside development also has a potential to block or impair established views from existing development. He stated that a horizontal potential of a site should be fully exploited before increasing building height. He stated that the current location of that building cannot be moved because it occupies the entire footprint. He stated that, where feasible, they locate new buildings to minimize view blockage from primary viewing areas of existing development, and he stated that there are no visuals to determine where the project site sits in relation to its neighbors. He stated that they have an architect submit a conceptual plan and it was good, so he thought they should look at this and some other similar ones as this one removes all the retaining walls and improves access to the house, reduces grading and impervious surfaces and maintains the existing vegetation on the bottom part of the lot. He liked that, as it maintains the same living space as what the applicant was proposing. He stated that they also had site setbacks that are accessible for police, fire and safety. He stated that the 1980 General Plan conservation elements says new development should be designed to protect existing vegetation, particularly on slopes, and this was a 38% grade slope. He stated that the current design does not allow access to the lower portion of the home because they allowed the retaining walls to be built on the property lines and cross the entire project and there is no way the fire department could get down to the bottom of the property. He stated that the neighbors were not opposed to a new home, but they want the opportunity to participate on the traffic, drainage and grading before the project is approved. He stated that, once it leaves them, they have no input. He stated that they already made a couple of suggestions that were adopted and they could make more and help. They urged Council to send the Olympian Way TBD project back to Planning Commission, review and incorporate the Dept. Of Public Works guidelines for design review prior to project approval and ensure that all geotech recommendations from the geoforensics are followed and incorporated into the General Plan prior to project approval. He asked to not do it behind closed doors and create a plan for truck trips and vehicle turnarounds that ensure safety for the community and the project prior to approval. He asked that they consider alternative horizontal design and placement of structures on the property.

Mayor Bier saw no questions from Council, and then invited the applicant to speak for ten minutes, and can reserve three minutes for rebuttal.

Mike O’Connell, applicant, asked if he gets the same deal with the time.

Mayor Bier stated that he did.

City Clerk Coffey asked if he wanted to reserve time for rebuttal or wait to see what he has left.

Mr. O’Connell stated that he will wait to see what he has left. He stated that he did talk a few councilmembers earlier, as well as a couple of neighbors and they tried to have a larger meeting but schedules didn’t align, as well as some reluctance to meet without the whole group and they

2.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 18 March 14, 2022
didn’t get a chance to talk face to face before this forum, but they did some outreach. They were willing to talk to the neighbors. He stated that were some considerations they were thinking about when they designed this. He pointed out the views on the screen in the living room and master bedroom, and they wanted to utilize their extra frontage to allow them to create a driveway unlike the other houses on the street and allows them to create a nice usable yard on the same level as the main living area, pointing out the difference from existing homes. He stated that they are increasing the pavement and the existing pavement is 12 feet wide and they are making it 22 feet wide, which is the standard in Pedro Point and they are creating a turnout and the intention with Public Works is that it is a parking space but the pavement width there is 30 feet wide and this will create a condition where it easier for a typical passenger vehicle to make a three-point turn in the street. He stated that there was not much he can do about the box truck hanging over the side as that truck driver was not supposed to drive on the street which is why he got stuck. He also pointed out the yard is facing south and east and gets a ton of light and is important in Pedro Point because they lose the light early in the day due to the mountain. He stated that the retaining walls help them as they can take all the spoils from the foundations and footings and put them behind the walls. He stated that their goal was to limit outfall and not have a million trucks. He stated that the neighbors had bad experiences on two recent projects on the street where they had cleared the site without permits and a lot of trucks and equipment showed up with no notice, and at one house the contractor had a lot of issues and it was a painful build. He was from out of town and not interested in doing anything to work with the neighbors. He stated that he is local and his partner, Mike, is the contractor who lives in the neighborhood and they were there to be helpful as they know what it is like to live next to construction. He wants to be on the record that they are both super accessible and people can come to them with issues, actually demonstrating it to the neighbors, i.e., talking to Irma, Leone and Chuck Gust. He stated that, regarding drainage, the original proposal was all designed per the city’s specs, including a 100-year storm and they do it on every project with a detention pipe reviewed by the city, third party, etc., and they had a productive meeting with Mr. Gust who had an interest at 140 Essex, the site below them, and they agreed to double the size of the detention systems voluntarily and he understood they designed per the city’s spec but he asked them to increase the capacity and they split it into two systems and will take runoff from the garage and driveway and a portion of the house. He explained how detention works, i.e., with putting the detention further upstream the more it will attenuate the flow downstream, thus a majority of the site can drain to the upper pipe and they have the lower pipe at the bottom of the slope and the only way it works is when everyone behaves reasonably and he needs to be reasonable about the way he discharges his drainage as it goes across the property line to a neighbor’s site, and that neighbor needs to behave reasonably on how they accept the drainage. He stated that they can’t decide they don’t want to let it go through their property. He reiterated that they have two pipes and doubled the size of the system with a lot of redundancy, showing the site on his slide and explaining the process. He stated that it could change in the future when a site is redeveloped, thus, the need for people to act reasonably about the drainage. He then pointed out that the height of the house was roughly the same height as the neighbor. He stated that he had some renderings they put together today that he would pass out and they can see how the building fits relative to adjacent sites and the views which show they aren’t blocking anyone’s view. He stated that their geotechnical engineer was present and they can ask him any questions they may have.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he had questions for Dan Dyckman, his geotech engineer, as well. He referred to the added double size of the retention area following his conversation with Mr. Gust, and asked if that was referred to in COA #4 or attachment No. H.

Mr. O’Connell thought it was, but he would rely on staff to confirm that.

2.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 19 March 14, 2022
Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that it was condition of approval #17 which requires incorporation of the recommendations from the geotechnical report.

Mr. O’Connell thought there was a condition that says that it shall be as presented at this meeting or something to that effect on the drainage.

Sr. Planner O’Connor agreed, clarifying that it is condition of approval #4 that the design system shown, in terms of size and proposed discharge points, will match the system shown in Attachment H in this meeting’s staff report.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck concluded that Attachment H reflects the changes he made after he talked to Chuck Gust.

Mr. O’Connell responded affirmatively.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he has questions for Mr. Dyckman.

Dan Dyckman, geotechnical engineer, introduced himself.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated there was a statement in the geotechnical report about a percolation style dissipation system being absolutely not something they can do.

Mr. Dyckman stated that the hillside’s percolation systems are ingredients for the landslide and they didn’t want to do that. He stated that the original design, which they reviewed the first time, is a detention system and its primary goal is to hold water and meter it out at a rate that matches pre-development rates for flow and does not percolate water into the ground. He stated that there was one detail in the plans, the catch basin at the end which had a small 4-inch diameter hole with a little bit of gravel underneath it, and the intent of that was to allow after the rain storms are gone, a little bit left in the pipe to percolate out so it doesn’t sit and fester as the next time they get rain, it can get smelly if it gets some organics in there. He stated that it was reasonable and he didn’t have a problem with it through the first go-around. He saw the letter from John Vicunich, and he told him, if he thinks that will be a problem, he didn’t think so but was willing to get rid of it as it will make a little bit of stinky water for the first rainstorm after it has been a couple of months.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he watched the Planning Commission hearing and, as a layperson, he stated that they have bubble up boxes as part of the system and, as a layperson, he stated that bubble up box sounds a lot like percolation style dissipation system. He understood that his description of the percolation style system they are removing is very different than the bubble up box, but he wanted a deeper explanation as he was a layperson and they were two different things.

Mr. Dyckman stated that the concern he had as a geotechnical engineer, is that when they talk about percolation system, they talk about the whole large diameter holding storage facility being perforated with gravel around it and they are going to be percolating somewhere in the order of 90% of the water that comes in to that into the ground, and with the small bubblers and small percolation hole at the end of one of the catch basins, that is a very minute amount of the water that is actually going through the system that will actually make its way into the subsurface of the ground. He didn’t have a problem with it and didn’t see it causing a slope instability issue.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to the foot drain, which he had recommended as not essential, and he was wondering how much, in general, those cost.

2.a
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 20 March 14, 2022
Mr. Dyckman asked if it was footing drain.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck responded affirmatively.

Mr. Dyckman stated that it depends on whether they are doing it as part of an original construction or later on.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck clarified as part of the original construction.

Mr. Dyckman stated that, as part of the original construction, the costs are usually relatively nominal, probably in the order of $10,000 to $15,000. While he is not a contractor, he can tell them that the one thing about an engineer’s estimate is that it is always wrong. He stated that the only one that matters is the contractor’s and his estimates are right.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that will be a follow up question for Mr. O’Connell.

Mr. O’Connell stated that they always install the subdrains behind the retaining wall as it is a building permit level structural design issue and if they don’t have a footing drain or subdrain, they are then required to design the retaining wall for hydrostatic pressure in case the water builds up behind the wall and the extra cost for the concrete and the foundation elements is much greater than the cost of putting the subdrain in and he concluded that they will all be back drained.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck concluded that he is planning on using it and putting a drain in.

Mr. O’Connell responded affirmatively.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to staff report, page 6, regarding the site development having potential to block or impair established views. He stated that we don’t have a view ordinance, but that building is going to impact the views from a couple of the houses. He stated that he went through his presentation, and asked why he didn’t do like a Mediterranean style where it is out some, out some and down.

Mr. O’Connell stated “the wedding cake”, and stated that he didn’t know as it was a little bit architecturally not in now. He stated that there was a lot of that in there, especially with the Mediterranean, and when he thinks about the neighborhood, he thought it was an eclectic character and everything is different, not like a track subdivision. They were trying to have a simple structure that was elegant and why he pointed out the corner element on the slide where they got some articulation, a lot of glass, change in the siding halfway up on the upper floor which is not commonly done and is a little different. He concluded that they were trying to create a structure that was simple, elegant with a late feel to it.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that the street is only 14 feet wide, and he stated that there should be a real long haul, at least a quarter of a mile to get to Grand Avenue, the next major street to get there. He referred to Mr. O’Connell stating that they will widen the street at that point to 20 or 30 feet.

Mr. O’Connell stated that it was 22 feet except at the turnout at 30 feet.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to his statement that they didn’t go for a Mediterranean thing and they are putting all the development down at the bottom of the hill, and he stated that in looking

2.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 21 March 14, 2022
the guidelines from the Coastal Commission, they could locate developments below ridges and hilltops which they definitely did and he thought, if they had gone with the Mediterranean, his concern is the retaining walls would not need to have been done if there was a different style of construction there. He thought, with the retaining walls, they would have to haul in dirt.

Mr. O’Connell stated that they would not. He stated that is the goal and it is effectively balanced.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if, prior to their design, they got the 2020 Department of Public Works guidelines for drainage review.

Mr. O’Connell stated that he had not seen those guidelines until recently, but he has done 20 drainage projects in the city and they always do them the same way, and is consistent with what is in the guidelines.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if he was saying that what he is presenting and was approved by the Planning Commission is consistent with the guidelines.

Mr. O’Connell agreed, adding that it is consistent with the last two dozen projects he has designed in Pacifica.

Councilmember O’Neill thought, if he hasn’t seen them, it wasn’t fair to ask him if it is consistent.

Mr. O’Connell stated that, when he saw them, he reviewed them and made the determination that they were consistent with what they did.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if the city will be abandoning the right-of-way we have on that street, as the appellant told him that the city has right-of-way there and a lot of people have their driveway even into the city right-of-way, and again asked if the city will be abandoning the right-of-way.

Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that there is no proposal to abandon the right-of-way in that area, and they will just build within it, probably through the approval of an encroachment permit.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that they also mentioned that the water goes down, and at 140 Essex, it is now like parking but at some point someone might build a house there and he asked if they obtained an easement, encroachment, or whatever they want to call it so that the drainage to go through Essex at some point.

Mr. O’Connell stated they did not, adding that it is generally not required as it is a historical drainage pattern.

Councilmember O’Neill asked the city attorney for input.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that she didn’t know if there was a legal question.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that water flows downhill, and he said that the house at the bottom of the hill at 140 Essex, and the area this drains into is parking. He asked if, at some point 140 Essex wants to expand their house or redevelop that, is there any credence that there should be an encroachment or easement or something for his drainage to go through the other property.

He gave an example that he had a PG&E easement across his property.

City Attorney Kenyon stated, if there isn’t an easement that already exists, was he asking if there is a prescriptive easement or just an easement as a matter of law for drainage.

2.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 22 March 14, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill responded affirmatively.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that the answer was no except that she believes what the applicant was referring to from her understanding, and if there is an historical drainage pattern so the flow has historically flowed in that direction, it creates more liability if you change the natural flow of the drainage.

Councilmember O’Neill thought that would mean that 140 Essex would have to deal with whatever drainage issues might happen.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that her direct answer is that there are no legal issues associated with the drainage from the property at issue in this project to a lower property if the drainage has been an historical flow and they are not altering the historical drainage pattern.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock added that, as City Attorney Kenyon mentioned, that pre versus post development condition is also relevant in the sense that the evidence reviewed by the city is such that, consistent with the city’s drainage standards, the project would be designed so that the flow leaving the site, post development, would not exceed the pre-development flow based on the design storm. He stated that the engineer calculations provided by the applicant that the city has reviewed indicates that will be the case. He stated that the evidence that shows that this project would not increase the flow as compared to the pre-development condition, and beyond that, the applicant has expanded the capacity of that detention system even further than required to achieve that design bubble. He referred to his comment related to easements for drainage, and stated that this subdivision was subdivided in 1908 and it preceded the modern requirements of the subdivision map act in the city’s Municipal Code to provide easements for drainage in new subdivisions, and this historical existing condition exists throughout the neighborhood based on the age of the subdivision. He stated that the provisions for subdivision or lack thereof existed at the time in 1908 and this property is not unique in that existing storm water drainage patterns were not integrated into the design of the subdivision in all instances, and it is something that this applicant has to design around and he thought he has made a reasonable effort to do consistent with the city’s drainage standards.

Councilmember Beckmeyer thanked applicant for the document as it encapsulated a lot of what she wanted to ask, but having been just delivered, she wasn’t sure she was interpreting it correctly and wanted to ask a couple of questions. She referred to what it looks like for total truck trips for this project.

Mr. O’Connell asked if he can explain.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked if she can ask her question.

Mr. O’Connell responded affirmatively.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated, if she was understanding it correctly, total truck trips for this project are 90, however 82 involve cuts and then there are 8 that would need to be imported.

She asked if he can explain how the numbers work for her.

Mr. O’Connell suggested that she not think of the cut section as cut, as it was just a way that the engineers back out the earth work. He stated that, from the finished grade, there is an intermediate grade that is lower than that and accounts for the thickness of the concrete and base rock and

2.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 23 March 14, 2022
you have to account for that. On the next item of top soil, when they do their landscape areas they bring in some top soil, and the next item of slabs, which is the same as the concrete. He stated that there is a volume for the piers, which is material coming out of the pier holes for the foundations and an item for footings which is the volume of dirt that they are replacing with concrete and then they have utilities, and there is a volume of dirt there that they are replacing with utilities and sand with which they have to backfill the trenches. He stated that all of those items are material they need to bring to the site but it takes up space in between the existing grade and the final grade. He concluded that, when you look at the total fill of 1,413 yards, that is the difference between the existing grade and the finished grade, and they need to account for the items above it in their earth work analysis, otherwise they are essentially double counting. He hoped he explained that correctly. He then referred to the trucks, stating that these are trucks for these construction activities and concrete trucks and dump trucks and it is not meant to be a total number of trips because there are other deliveries, like lumbar, roofing material, tile, and specifically the lumbar truck costs $35 to have the lumber company send out a smaller truck and have them send two or three trucks and that is what they intend to do with deliveries like that. He stated that there was only so much they can do with the concrete truck as they only make them in one size, but for any delivery where they can get a smaller truck, that is what they intend to do.

Councilmember Beckmeyer appreciated his explanation as this isn’t her area of expertise and she may be a little simplistic and asked them to bear with her. She understood that we were not importing all of this material to the property as some exists on the property and will be dug up and moved around and used in a different way.

Mr. O’Connell responded affirmatively.

Councilmember Beckmeyer asked what the net number of trips for the materials of this nature only was.

Mr. O’Connell stated 90.

Councilmember Beckmeyer thought so, and then he stated there is lumber, tile, roof materials, etc. She stated that they heard earlier that they had a lot of talk about this and one of the items that was brought out was 20 truck trips for a single family home, and she thought that was more.

She did recognize that there were some site challenges, such as Olympian Way which is very narrow, and she understood that part of the agreement with the Planning Department in working through this plan, and was approved by the Planning Commission, is that they will be widening a portion of that road to 20 feet and 30 feet in certain parts.

Mr. O’Connell stated that it was 22 feet and 30 feet. He stated that there was a logistical component to this which was that they were interested in doing that portion of the work first because it provides a nice staging area for materials, deliveries, parking, and he and his partner discussed using a pilot car or shuttle car to reduce the number of cars from the laborers and other people on the site, and he thought that will be documented in the traffic control plan and logistics plan.

Councilmember Beckmeyer appreciated the visuals he provided with the large format documents, and she noted there were not visuals like this included in the applicant packet, and asked if she was correct.

Mr. O’Connell responded affirmatively.

2.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 24 March 14, 2022
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that there was one visual that did give a sense of the view from different points of view, adding that there have been discussions in town over time with different projects around story poles and different mechanisms which she realized were costly and time consuming, but she suggested that it would have been helpful to have a better sense of what this project looks like from different directions, including from the ocean since it is in the Coastal Zone, which she thought was a vantage point they have to factor in with this particular site.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that the appellant had an alternate design with no retaining walls, and she asked if he could explain why he has so many retaining walls and if this would work with no retaining walls.

Mr. O’Connell stated that he couldn’t say that it would work or not as he hasn’t seen that design and he can’t make it out from the screen and he didn’t feel it was appropriate to comment on it.

He stated that retaining walls are necessary on the portions of the site that require a cut and are beneficial to the project in the sense that they provide some usable level space and greatly reduce the truck trips as, instead of hauling off all that material, they have a place to keep it on site.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that it says they will have to make eight truck trips in terms of fill because what they will be doing is moving the cut that they take and moving it around and it isn’t going to require hauling off or bringing more on except for those eight truck trips for that.

Mr. O’Connell stated that is what they anticipate, being just a little bit short.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to lot coverage in terms of driveway specific, and he is trying to understand, when talking about the drainage, if they are factoring in all the actual impermeable surface on the lot or just talking about the drainage they think is coming off the 29% lot coverage as stated.

Mr. O’Connell stated that the drainage analysis includes the roof areas, impervious patios and driveways and accounts for landscaping as that still generates runoff even though it is pervious.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that the impression he got from the geotechnical report was that the driveway itself cannot be constructed of permeable pavers because of the geology of the hillside, and he asked if that was accurate.

Mr. O’Connell stated that you could construct it out of permeable pavers if you had adequate subdrainage beneath it so it doesn’t percolate into the native material below. He stated that it was possible there is another issue which is that initially the driveway as you come down is relatively steep and 15 or 16% and then levels out and good design practice with pervious pavers is to not have them on slopes that exceed 5% and you really need the concrete that tires can really grip to for that initial descent. He stated it would be possible to install them at the area of the driveway where the slope is less severe but he thought it creates a funny aesthetic to have it mix and match.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck added that the updated drainage plan in Attachment H that they have the potential to put through at this meeting takes into account all impermeable surfaces on the site.

Mr. O’Connell stated that he was correct.

2.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 25 March 14, 2022
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that there was a lot of discussion at the Planning Commission meeting about working with the neighbors in terms of drainage at the end of the day, and if this goes through at the meeting, he asked if he will still make that effort to reach out to the neighbors to further address drainage with them as a collaborative.

Mr. O’Connell stated that, outside of the scope of this project, he was willing to collaborate as he thinks staff wanted to virtually kick him when he brought that up at the last meeting as it created a lot of confusion. He was trying to convey to the neighbors, who feel that there is a drainage issue with the street and the area, was that the solution is not anything that happens or doesn’t happen on this lot and everyone needs to collect their drainage and it has to go through someone’s property and go to the existing drains and gutters and channels on Sussex.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that they still have public comments and deliberation, and he understands he is asking a question that is, ultimately, outside the scope of what they are discussing, but it was helpful for his understanding that, should they put this through, there will still be an ardent attempt made to collaborate with neighbors for the sake of the hillside, which he thinks is a mutual concern of Council.

Mr. O’Connell stated that he would be happy to lead that charge.

Mayor Bier stated that, going last, everyone already asked all her questions and she then opened the Public Hearing reiterating the process.

Robert Boles, Pacifica, stated that he felt this project was way overblown for the steep hillside, and mentioned his specific concerns, concluding it would be a good idea to send it back to the Planning Commission.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated her concerns about the project as well as the process and suggested they uphold the appeal, continue the item and give everyone a chance to look at the documents.

Mayor Bier stated that the next speaker was Kathy Gust.

City Clerk Coffey stated that she was an appellant and she can speak during the rebuttal period.

Mayor Bier thanked her for that information and asked if there were any call-ins.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated that there were no call-in speakers.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that they must have the rebuttal, with the appellants first then the applicant.

Mayor Bier asked the City Clerk how much time do the applicants have for rebuttal.

City Clerk Coffey stated that they had one minute and 21 seconds.

Mr. Leone stated that he will talk and then Kathy Gust is going to come in. He wants them to send it back because the Planning Commission and the applicant need to comply with Public Works and the drainage report must be submitted to the city for review. He stated that the Planning Commission did not review it and they want it all reviewed. He stated that all of the design elements in the Coastal Act policy 26, the development shall be clustered and contoured

2.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 26 March 14, 2022
into the existing slope and needs to be fully exploited for the horizontal possession and they didn’t even touch that. He then yielded to Kathy Gust.

Kathy Gust, appellant, stated that she was speaking for her brother who couldn’t be present.

She stated that her brother didn’t agree on anything with Mr. O’Connell, and he wanted to give to Mr. O’Connell that he had a plan B and if plan A worked for the drainage, why did he have a plan B except for hiring our own consultant.

Mayor Bier asked how much time the applicant had for rebuttal.

City Clerk Coffey stated that the applicant also has one minute and 21 seconds.

Mr. O’Connell stated he wanted to address 4-5 things he heard. He stated that Mr. Boles said the detention pipe length was deceptive and he stated that it is not. It is 30 feet, and there are two of them with 60 feet total. He stated that the heritage tree that was going to soak up all the water was dead as documented in the arborist report. The drainage report was submitted and was in the Planning Commission materials and reviewed by Public Works, by CSG and by their geotechnical consultant and it is in the record. He referred to a comment about submitting the extra materials. He stated that they know about the comments as they were shared with them, and the supplemental materials are meant to answer questions they know are coming and, while he heard that it wasn’t fair as no one saw it, he stated that he didn’t get to see the alternative design that was presented until it was on the screen. He referred to his meeting with Chuck Gust, and regardless of agreeing or not, they left the meeting with the understanding that he would go above and beyond on the drainage and voluntarily double the size of the system.

Mayor Bier closed the Public Hearing.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck referred to the issue of the drainage report, and asked if the drainage report was submitted to the city vis a vis the guidelines for drainage review that the appellant was referring to.

Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that those are guidelines that the Public Works Department have prepared and she will invite PW Dep. Director Bautista to fill in more details of how they use those.

She stated that those guidelines, as she understood them, have requirements that the reports be prepared by a qualified professional, meet the 100-year storm standards and the post construction drainage doesn’t result in a runoff rate that is greater than pre-construction. She turned it over to PW Dep. Director Bautista.

PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that engineering does look at the drainage report and all the calculations and reviews them as bodies in regard to all their standards, including 100-year storm and they reviewed to make sure that post-construction flows are either equal to or less than the pre-construction flows and concluded that they do review all aspects of drainage.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that his other questions are fire related as there were a couple of issues in regard to fire that were brought up. He asked if they had a representative from the fire department and, if not, he would defer to Dep. Planning Director Murdock.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that he has a sense of what the question may be and he thought it may have come up in a recent project and he would respond to that based on his question.

2.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 27 March 14, 2022
Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that his first question was, regarding other houses on Olympian, presumably the Fire Department has a plan for how to get their trucks in and out in worst case scenarios, with the second question regarding the length of the fire hose and whether or not it would be able to get to the property as shown.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated, regarding the first question, it would need to be addressed by Fire as to operationally how they respond. He stated that he has had detailed conversations with the prior Dep. Fire Chief Barry Biermann, with respect to fire access along Olympian in relation to a different project, and it was an area of concern as the streets are narrow and there is no fire turnaround, but it is an existing condition and they do their best to work within the limitations as they are. Regarding the second question, he stated that the 150-foot hose pull distance is the basic standard, however, if you read the fire code, there are exceptions for what is known as an R3 occupancy such as this proposed project. If that occupancy is proposed or if the building is fully sprinklered, as this building would be, then they can exceed that 50-hose pull length. He stated that, whether Fire reviewed that not, he cannot attest to that specific fact, but he can tell them that this project is not bound by a 150-foot hose pull length.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked, regarding the previous deputy chief expressing those concerns, if there were any suggestions about how to address those concerns or was it that they will deal with it when it happens.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that, from that conversation at a high level, the particulars of the other project were different and it provided an opportunity to potentially improve the fire turnaround condition and why they were engaged in that detailed conversation. He stated that, for this project, it was a different site configuration and he didn’t think it immediately lends itself to the same potential range of solutions that Dep. Chief Biermann and he discussed.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck mentioned how difficult it was to sign off on this when he feels like at every stage there are certain elements that are introduced in such a way that he is seeing it for the first time and wasn’t entirely comfortable with that. He was interested in his fellow Councilmembers think, but he has hesitancy now. He stated that they don’t need to require community meetings for any given project, they need public transparency and, in some of the data he is looking at is initially reassuring to him, it was close to feeling like a step was skipped to allow the public the full ability to comment on the particulars of this and this is the current fence on which he is sitting.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she was with him, as she has a lot of concerns about the project. She stated from the information that was brought forward with the renderings and data, and appreciated the clarification about how that occurred as an attempt to be responsive to questions from the public and she appreciated that. She would like the Planning Commissioners to have the opportunity to weigh in on this. She stated that, from her point of view, the specific request she would have is to send this back to Planning to specifically work the applicant or condition some kind of understanding of what the project is going to look like. She stated that the renderings she saw was in space and only during the presentation did she felt she had a good sense of the view from different points of view, not about protecting views, but the massing and size of the project, while meeting the city’s requirement for the lot size, etc., and she was not comfortable about how it fits in the neighborhood. She stated her next concern was about fire safety, and saw the location of the fire hydrant and noticed it was far away. She appreciated the clarification about the sprinkler system but, if there are alternate ways if siting the house on the property that addresses some of the concerns raised at this meeting, she would want the applicant to have the opportunity to explore all of those as well as the neighborhood to have the opportunity

2.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 28 March 14, 2022
to participate and understand what that looks like. She also commented that Mr. O’Connell and she had a conversation earlier and she used the phrase of construction fatigue and she thought the neighborhood had a certain amount of construction fatigue, and it doesn’t mean the project can’t go forward, but that there has been some unfortunate practices by some of the builders on this street. She thought it would be beneficial to have an opportunity to work through a safety and traffic plan that the neighborhood has an understanding of how it is going to work. She said the way she read the report was that it was going to be done later to the satisfaction of a specific staff member, but it didn‘t seem that the Planning Department was engaged with or the public had an opportunity to understand before it happened and would live with it after the fact. She stated that she contacted the City Attorney earlier as she wasn’t sure it was fair for her to ask for those things but that is what she thinks is needed for this project.

Councilmember Vaterlaus felt it was hypocritical for the appellant to say that the applicant submitted documents after when they just got this full packet from the appellant, stating that it goes both ways and both submitted items after the fact that they didn’t see prior to this meeting and was one of her concerns. She stated that one item said that the property doesn’t fit in with the neighborhood and she checked about 20 houses, mentioning specific addresses on the same street and the street right below and the great thing about Pedro Point is that there is a house that is 900 square feet and one that is 4,000 square feet, so to say that this one is oversized for the neighborhood is not true. She feels that it was cited off the street for less visual impact as, if they had a massive house at the street, there would be a lot more visual impact than setting it further down the hill. She will listen to others, and may come back.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that, regarding fire safety, he looked at the PUC map of fire zones, and this is not considered a high fire danger area which surprised him. He asked Planning when they take and do this, do they run it by North Coast Water.

Sr. Planner O’Connor clarified that he was asking about the water district.

Councilmember O’Neill responded affirmatively.

Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that these plans were not submitted to the water district.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to the fire issue, stating that one of the reasons they are rebuilding the water tank on Sheila is to provide better fire suppression water pressure to lower Linda Mar.

He was concerned about a 14-foot road with a pavement that has a useful life of zero, and he didn’t notice where the fire hydrant was, but he was concerned about the fire suppression. He thought, if they could see what the fire suppression is in these wooded areas, that could be put in the system as something we do. He was surprised that the floor area ratio, per the Municipal Code, doesn’t include driveways, etc.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that it was floor area.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that he was talking coverage.

Councilmember O’Neill agreed that he was talking lot coverage. He asked if they could have a floor area ratio and a separate one for total lot coverage would be helpful, especially with retaining walls. He stated that he thought the applicant said it was impervious pavement in some parts but, where the grade was real heavy, it was not. Then he thought staff said it was pervious. He asked if he heard someone wrong.

2.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 29 March 14, 2022
Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that she identified the driveway as impervious, i.e., a concrete driveway.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if the area was pervious where the hot tub and patio are.

Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that she did not comment on that but believes it is all impervious.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if a pervious area lessen the need for the drainage and put less burden on the drainage and the percolation issues or make it worse.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock thought it was something that city engineer and PW Dep. Director Bautista or the applicant would have to comment on. He stated that earlier mentioned was that pervious paving has particular design parameters and, given the steepness of the site, it may be appropriate in some places if supplemented with an under drain so it is not actually infiltrating into the hillside and it is something that could be explored, depending on the location on the site and the steepness of the area.

PW Dep. Director Bautista stated that, if it is impervious surface, the developer would have to take into consideration how much runoff is on that impervious surface to make sure that the detention on site will accommodate that flow. He is assuming that, in the consultations he gave them it was all reviewed in that respect and all that runoff was taken into consideration in the storm drain as planned.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated, if he understands the question, he thought he was trying to understand, if Council were to require additional pervious paving, could that reduce the off flows of storm water from the project.

Councilmember O’Neill agreed, asking if pervious paving increased or decreased the need for drainage systems.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that the big picture, suggesting that the applicant confirm, given the significant size of the detention system already designed at the end of the drainage system, they may not see a net difference in the outflows at the end of that system if they were to add pervious pavement to some component of the project but may have a localized impact on how the water is retained and how long it takes to get into the system but they may not see a difference in the overall outflow from the system.

PW Dep. Director Bautista agreed with what he just stated.

Councilmember O’Neill commented on a statement by Harry Truman saying you wish you could get two economists, one left-handed and one right-handed to agree on things.

Sr. Planner O’Connor stated that she needed to correct one statement she made, the plans were distributed to the water district for comment and the applicant did provide some documentation to show the water supply sufficiency for fire suppression.

Councilmember O’Neill thought more pressure was what the issue was with fire suppression.

Dep. Planning Director Murdock stated that the project will need to demonstrate, if approved prior to issuance of a building permit, there is typically a separate permit application directly to the fire authority where they review specifically the water pressure calculations provided by the water

2.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 30 March 14, 2022
district and the fire sprinkler system designer demonstrates that the system can provide the appropriate level of fire suppression, based on the available water pressure and it is a veery specific technical review that the city does perform before it would issue a building permit to ensure that the project is constructed safely and in accordance with the fire code.

Mayor Bier thanked everyone, stating that it has been her experience with Mr. O’Connell that he is very willing to collaborate and, when the comment came up that it was confusing to staff, she realized that they were not able to make them collaborate but it is the best practice for them to work together as a community. She thought there were opportunities to do that simply because there has been all the information given to them from both sides that haven’t been reviewed by the Planning Commission or each other. She stated that it was an opportunity to look at these things and start conversations again, and she agrees with Councilmember Beckmeyer that it needs to be sent back to Planning Commission because there is all this new information and there is an opportunity here.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that it was sounding like three votes for going back to Planning Commission and he apologized for not coming sooner to Commissioner Godwin. He asked if he might lend them any perspective that they don’t already have or any thoughts that may be flowing through him as he is observing.

Commissioner Godwin stated that, when they reviewed the project, it was an interesting and fairly complex one with a high degree of slope on the lot. He thought they went through everything they can realistically do looking at this, and he didn’t think there was any big concern about the project. He thought that, at this point, they have some new information but it is probably not going to change the outcome of a second review.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck appreciated his comments, adding that it was good to see him and he thanked him for being present.

Mayor Bier asked if they have a motion.

Councilmember O’Neill stated in regard to consideration of the appeal of the Planning Commission’s approval with conditions of Coastal Development Permits, CDP-430-21 and Heritage Tree Removal Authorization for construction of a single-family residence on an undeveloped lot, known as TBD Olympian (APN 023-037-030; and finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; he moved to remand back to Planning Commission.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that, if she can clarify that motion before it is seconded, the motion would be to refer it back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration.

Councilmember O’Neill responded affirmatively.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that they will need a second to discuss it.

Seconded by Councilmember Beckmeyer, and she asked if there was any specific direction that they would give to the Planning Commission about the areas in which they would want them to review.

Councilmember O’Neill heard that there are concerns about the traffic plan and he thought the traffic plan could be fleshed out, which he heard as the big issue and drainage. He thought they have done about everything they can for drainage.

2.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 31 March 14, 2022
Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that she meant that there has been some late amendments to what the Planning Commission had last seen.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that they have a motion on the floor. She stated that there is a second to that motion as stated, and she asked if there is going to be an amendment to that motion.

Councilmember O’Neill stated there was.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that the maker of the motion would like to make an amendment and they will check with the seconder to make sure the seconder is still seconding the motion.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if there were any other amendments.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thought it might be helpful to retract the motion for a moment and discuss what they would like to see before making a motion.

Councilmember O’Neill was okay with that.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if the seconder agree with that.

Councilmember Beckmeyer agreed with that.

City Attorney Kenyon stated that the maker of the motion is withdrawing his motion.

Mayor Bier asked what they want to see with it.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that she wanted to test them about it.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that was essentially what they were doing, i.e., talking about fire, about what the renderings look like, safety and traffic report and drainage. He stated that a big reason why he was inclined to send it back is because he has all these pieces that have done everything except for click into place and it looks like they do. He recommended that Mr.

O’Connell reach out to the neighborhood to have a discussion prior to that meeting. He didn’t think anyone agreeing with the size of the project itself but when it comes to something like drainage, just having a discussion of what their vision of drainage looks like so the neighbors aren’t concerned about the hillside falling out from under them might be a big piece to this. He stated that having a full package to bring to Planning Commission, drainage safety renderings, fire.

Mayor Bier also added the discussion about the views as it would also be a good discussion to have with the appellants as he brought them some images that they haven’t seen yet and it might be soothing for them to understand that he has looked at these things and the views are not obstructed and how it really plays out. She thinks those documents are really important to include in the packet going to the Planning Commission.

Councilmember O’Neill made a motion to remand this back to the Planning Commission with the amendments discussed by Council and the direction that they have given of issues that they would like to see.

2.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 32 March 14, 2022
City Attorney Kenyon asked if they can list what those issues are again.

Councilmember O’Neill listed the issues as fire, drainage, safety, traffic, and the renderings.

Councilmember Beckmeyer seconded the motion.

City Clerk Coffey stated that it passes with a vote of 4-1 with a no by Councilmember Vaterlaus.

Mayor Bier called for a break and then reconvened the meeting.

RESULT: ADOPTED AS AMENDED [4 TO 1]
MOVER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
SECONDER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Beckmeyer
NAYS: Vaterlaus

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Robert Hutchinson, Pacifica, referred to the budget approved in April and asked questions on specific funding items.

Therese Dyer, Pacifica, referred to the transferring of all the departments at the Community Center as well as location of future Council meetings, and expressed her concerns and questions on those, as well as various other issues.

Anita Rees, Pacifica, reminded the community that they are open with regular office hours and mentioned the process for appointments and gave update for various programs.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, apologized for her previous outbreak on the delay for Oral Communications, then mentioned her concerns on delays in her requests for information from the city and her suggestions to facilitate these requests and thanked Council for extending public comments for DEIR and General Plan.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor introduced the speaker.

Cheryl Ammeter, Pacifica, stated that she was a PCTV board member, and she was making a positive report regarding their plans to purchase their unit at 580 Crespi Drive, adding that they need public support. She also updated them on future plans and events with details.

COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Councilmember O’Neill stated that he got an email six hours ago that the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is holding a subcommittee hearing on aviation noise on Thursday, March 17, 7 a.m. our time, 10 am their time and he will not be available, but he will forward the link for the live hearing to the City Manager. He stated that it was their chance to talk to Congress, the boss of the FAA and see about doing something. He stated that they are developing the rules and regulations for supersonic transport which cannot go over land. He stated that they will look at it and mentioned that, at the corner of Crespi and Highway 1, they crush the button and go boom. He encouraged the community to watch it. He stated that he will be calling Anna Eshoo, our upcoming congressional person as she has always been very support as Jackie Speier was at the Airport Roundtable about this. The City Manager, mayor and he met

2.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 33 March 14, 2022
with Mitch Postel about hosting the Council of Cities dinner in August, and the mayor has it under control and it will be unique in the annuals of Council of Cities. He spoke with Stacy McLaughlin, their facility for Council Goal Setting. He was disappointed that Council will miss the PCT open house as they are all going to be in their goal-setting session on that day.

Councilmember Vaterlaus attended a phone meeting with Senator Becker and Assemblyman Mullin and they discussed a California rent registry, with bulk sales of foreclosers which is harmful to the people who live in them and giving the people who live in the foreclosers the first option to purchase instead of selling them in bulk. They also talked about the RHNA numbers, with Kevin Mullin would like all converted units to be considered in the RHNA numbers and he is pushing for that which is a positive thing for Pacifica. She had lunch in the senior Mardi Gras day and it was great food. She was really surprised as she thought it would be bland but was Mardi Gras style.

She stated that they will have another one coming up on St. Patrick’s Day but she didn’t think she can go. She went to the Fairmont Homeowners Association meeting which she does every month to let them know what is going on in the entire city as well as what is happing in Fairmont. She stated that they will have the pedestrian improvements going on in the north end of Pacifica starting soon and will get to some street improvements in the north end. She attended the CCAG legislative meeting where they discussed the latest bills that come forward about housing, storm water and transportation. She attended the CCAG regular board meeting where they had a presentation by 21 Elements which did our city housing meetings and they opened one of the 101 managed lanes. She attended the Chinese Real Estate Association installation and very briefly talked to Senator Weiner there.

Councilmember Beckmeyer had a Beautification and Advisory Committee meeting and notifications have gone out to groups that formerly adopted Palmetto Avenue bulb-outs and the response has been good with a waiting list She stated that they will be getting something coming forward to them very soon about the Beautification awards process which is being revamped and made more frequent. She stated that she didn’t bring her notebook and regarding the Economic Development meeting, she was trying to remember if there was anything urgent there. She stated it was a really productive meeting in terms of the subgroups and the subcommittees are working well together on their various charters regarding outreach to businesses and working well with Financial Sustainability Officer Carte and Alyssa Barranti, and it was great to see some movement from a lot of plans that have been going on for some time. She had a planning meeting with Mayor Bier and Jenny Walter from Coast Pride and Katy Brookshire from Table Wine, getting started on some plans for our Pride celebration in Pacifica this year, stating there will be more to come on that. She stated that, on upcoming Wednesday and Thursday, she has Research Management and Climate Protection committee meeting for the county and Coastal Cities group for the League of Cities.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that he didn’t have a lot of meetings scheduled and took that as an opportunity to get some much needed rest which is sometimes important. He attended the PRC board meeting on March 2 and they accepted and past their audit and their financials are in good shape. They passed the RV parking program on the board level where they had prior passed it on the City Council level. They were having a discussion about updating some website design. He stated it was good to know the hours of operation are back up in full swing. On the 9th, there was a meeting about sea level rise on the south coast. While it doesn’t directly pertain to Pacifica, at the end of the day, we are all sharing the same coastline and he wanted to be sure that he was staying up to date accordingly. He was invited to visit his family in Southern California, and regarding news not related to Pacifica, he stated that the Rotary Club in Idyllwild dedicated a bench to his late grandfather in front of the pharmacy he used to own and as a result, on very short notice, the entirety of the family was called home to Idyllwild to meet with the Rotary there.

2.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 34 March 14, 2022
Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that it was hard to hear someone speaking when people in the audience are speaking.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck thanked her, then stated that the local fire department showed up as well and it was a lovely moment to honor his grandfather and nice to see all his family on a spur of the moment. He received a text today that looks like Safeway decided to decline further negotiations with his union and he takes that to mean that they will be having an impending strike vote soon and he was looking forward to continuing his job as a picket coordinator after they take that strike vote if the company does not decide to come back to the table. He then stated that he is looking forward to goal-setting on the 25th and 26th. He thought it will be a great opportunity to be a little less formal with his fellow Councilmembers as they do development work and have the proper goal-setting session on the 26th to figure out what they are doing next year.

Mayor Bier met with Roy Earnst from Age Friendly Pacifica and they are looking at the upcoming workplan for this year, and see how they can continue the project on which they are already working and maybe come up with some new ones, and she is excited about that. She thanked him for all the work he does for our Age Friendly city. She went to read across America at Sunset Ridge and believes that Councilmember Beckmeyer also did that. She read to Ms. Freeman’s fifth grade class. She stated that she got a booklet of thank you cards from the fifth grade class and one of the girl’s said in her card “I can’t believe I met the mayor. I can’t believe that I saw you and you saw me.” She stated that it was beautiful and those are the things that fill her cup, going out in the community and she needed it. She thanked Sunset Ridge. She stated that she and her colleagues, Sara McDowell from San Carlos to Val Hale from Redwood City and Eddie Forrest from South San Francisco are the planning team for the Mayor’s Mental Health First Aid initiative.

She was proud of the work they are doing, as they are bringing mental health first aid training into all of our cities and all but four cities have signed on to their initiative and they will be doing activities all through May which is Mental Health Awareness Month and they will be having a mental health first aid training in Pacifica, with more news to come on that. She stated that all of the training has been paid for by San Mateo County and they are really lucky to live in a place and, as she loves to collaborate, it has been great for her and all of them to come together with something so important and have such huge support from the county by giving them money to do the training which is wonderful. She stated that she met with Councilmember O’Neill and the City Manager at the Sanchez Adobe to talk about our Council of Cities dinner which will be fun.

She was looking forward to that in August and she was very excited about Pacifica’s Pride event as they have never done this before and they are working partnership with Coast Pride and seeing what they can come up with. She has a meeting with Pacifica HotRodz coming up to see if they will be willing to do a car parade that day and get everyone involved, adding that Pacifica loves good car parades. She stated that she feels like she needs to say something, as a caveat, she does not have any responsibility to reply to emails that contain personal attacks and she would much rather go to the fifth grade classroom. She stated that she has attended two memorial services in the past two weeks for young people, one who was involved in one of her programs and one who is a recent graduate from Terra Nova High School, all killed by being hit by drunk drivers. She stated that, because of the work she has been doing for a very long time, it has hit her hard and she wanted to throw out there that drinking and driving is a really bad idea and our young people are dying. She would like to close the meeting in honor of T. J. Nilson. He and his mother, Jenna Gilman, and his father, Terry Nilson, were community members for a very long time here, and Jenna was a therapist and saw a lot of our young people and it was their son who was lost. She attended a beautiful service for him on the beach on Saturday followed by a reception by the Skate Park and she wanted to make sure to honor them the best that she can.

2.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 35 March 14, 2022

STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager Woodhouse started by giving thanks for the team that has worked to bring them back in person for Council meetings. He stated that it doesn’t seem like much but it was a big effort to do this and City Clerk Coffey was the foundation and Management Analyst Montemayor is spearheading the phone in pilot test they are conducting and it has gone pretty seamlessly at this meeting as they have adapted to the delays. He stated that the Public Works team came in and did a deep cleaning and signage and other work and the IT team did a lot of work and the entire staff has been working on this, as well as City Council who has given direction over numerous meetings dating months ago as they have navigated the roller coaster of Omicron. He stated that, in early March 2020, when they had their last meeting in the City Chambers, they were thinking how it was going to work when they are not going to meet in person, and two years later, they are back in person and trying to figure out how are they going to meet in person He felt it has been quite a roller coaster with a lot of effort from all staff, and the community members for bearing with the ins and outs and technological glitches. He stated that the patience and understanding was really appreciated on behalf of everyone so they can make this process work.

He was sure he missed some people, but they all work together as a team to make this happen.

He stated that mayor pro Tem Bigstyck mentioned that they do have Council annual goal-setting coming up on Friday afternoon, March 25, and all day Saturday, March 26. He has been working with the facilitator, Stacey McLaughlin, who conducted it last year as well as the Mayor and Mayor pro Tem in the design of that. He stated that it was likely to occur at the Community Center, both on Friday afternoon and Saturday, but they are still finalizing those details, and the agenda will be out and posted by March 22. He stated that, related to goal-setting, he wanted to draw attention to the status update on all of Council’s priorities that they just completed and was posted on the website under Council goals page. He stated that the update also includes a long list of non-discretionary projects, about 30, that the city is working on and undertaking and a total of about 50 projects are described in that status report. He stated that it provides background to Council’s goal-setting discussion that will occur.

Mayor Bier referred to the report that City Manager mentioned, stating that when she went to print it out at her house, she thought there was something wrong with her printer, and thought it printed a bunch of duplicate copies because it printed for so long, and there is a lot of information in that report.

CONSIDERATION

15. Fiscal Year 2021-22 Mid-Year Budget Update
PROPOSED ACTION: Adopt a resolution authorizing the adjustments to the FY 2021- 22 Operating and Capital Budget.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter presented the staff report.

Councilmember O’Neill referred to revised fiscal year 2020-21 General Fund revenues and revised budget of $42.1 and with a net increase of $2.3 million or 6%, and they have two of their major income sources, Cannabis and TOT, both showing negatives. He asked if the net increase should have been black as she has it as red.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated that he is correct. She listed everything that was changed in red.

2.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 36 March 14, 2022
Councilmember O’Neill stated that the color is wrong, not the numbers.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated that the numbers are correct. She thanked him for that good catch. She continued the staff report.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that senior meals and a lot of senior programs are something like 90% covered by grants, and when the cost of meals go up for senior lunches, he asked if the grant goes up.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated that it does, and stated that you can see increases in revenues and expenditures.

Councilmember O’Neill understood that the income is increasing with the expenses.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter responded affirmatively. She then continued the staff report.

Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to other funds, and asked about the $0.5 million fire overtime and whether there was a lag in our receiving the reimbursements from CalOES and do they carry that on their books for a time and then eventually they get the money or is pretty quick.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter stated that they typically don’t budget for that which is why you see the adjustment here. It wasn’t budgeted as expense or as reimbursement and now we are capturing it and you can see it is a wash.

Councilmember Beckmeyer referred to the TOT which was down by $55,000, and asked if they know what the occupancy rates are now, and are they receiving the information routinely or in another way.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter didn’t have the information, but she knows there is a BID meeting coming up and she can ask the question.

Councilmember Beckmeyer knows that the Fairfield Inn by Marriott just officially opened. She would love to go to those BID meetings but they seem to fall in the middle of her work day, but if there is a way for her to get that information early for projection’s sake so they can foresee when they are coming up. She stated that it starts to rebound which they know it is going to, and her question is when.

City Manager Woodhouse added for clarity that the reimbursement is for their mutual aid when they send crews to fight wildfires around the state and it is an impossible thing to budget for, and it happens, but it is all reimbursed through Cal OES.

Councilmember O’Neill added that there is a lag time, as at one point, it was six months to a year.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed, adding that he didn’t know what the timeline schedule is on that, but there was definitely lag time and not prompt.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that was why they have reserves because those funds don’t wash immediately.

City Manager Woodhouse agreed, adding that all those personnel was paid for by the city while

2.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 37 March 14, 2022
they are doing it and they don’t need reserves for that, and it does create overtime in Pacifica, but we get reimbursed and that balances it.

Chief Finan. Sustainability Officer Carter completed the staff report.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that, before they begin asking questions, he wanted to remind the mayor that it was now 10:50 p.m.

Mayor Bier stated that they need a motion.

Councilmember Vaterlaus moved to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m.; seconded by Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck. Vote: 5-0.

Mayor Bier opened public comments.

Christine Boles, Pacifica, stated she had a question about the transit occupancy tax and whether it includes Airbnb, sharing a resident’s situation, as well as her thoughts on the data and process for Airbnb issues..

Mayor Bier asked if we had call-ins.

Mgmt. Analyst Montemayor stated they did not have any call-ins..

Mayor Bier closed public comments..

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck asked if staff wanted to say anything about Airbnb, but thought they may not be prepared to. He stated that, as mentioned, what they might put on goal-setting, it’s taken even better at goal-setting. He thanked her for her comments and suggested she bring them again on March 25 and 26.

Mayor Bier asked if he wanted someone to talk about Airbnbs.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated yes, if they are prepared.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that they are in the process of auditing Airbnbs, and HDL is on board as of late last calendar year when they transitioned the audit contract from the previous provider to HDL who does most of their tax auditing. He stated that Council had raised the question earlier on wanting to get enough data about that in case it was time to revisit some policy aspects of that ordinance and why they are doing that work. He didn’t have an idea of the timeline now, and it hasn’t been the most pressing thing on their plans, but they realize they get a significant amount of revenue from Airbnb in TOT as well as hotels and it is important to be on top of that.

Mayor Bier thanked him for acknowledging that Council was concerned about it and asked about it.

Councilmember Beckmeyer moved to adopt a resolution authorizing the adjustments to the FY2021-22 Operating and Capital Budget as specified; seconded by Councilmember O’Neill.

City Clerk Coffey stated it passed with a vote of 5-0.

2.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 38 March 14, 2022
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Sue Beckmeyer, Councilmember
SECONDER: Mike O'Neill, Councilmember
AYES: Bier, Bigstyck, O'Neill, Vaterlaus, Beckmeyer

16. Follow-up Information about Council Chambers Improvements or Relocation of Meetings to an Alternate Location
PROPOSED ACTION: Receive follow-up information about Council Chambers’ improvements or relocation of City Council meetings to the Community Center or Oceana High School Theatre and provide direction to the City Manager about next steps.

City Manager Woodhouse presented the staff report.

Mayor Bier stated she would talk first as she was the one to bring this up, and her main reason is that she wanted a more welcoming space to our community and a space that allows them to work with each other seamlessly. She stated that the welcoming piece is important to her, and she felt, if they create a space where people want to come, feeling comfortable and welcome which she thinks is a win for everyone. She mentioned that there are a lot of things that are old and it would be great to have new ones, but her original idea for a replacement dais was to be able to see them. She can see them and she will add that to the discussion.

There were no public comments.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that, one of the things mentioned in discussing the idea of friendly-ing up this space was the opportunity that they might have to feature art, interesting things to look at and let people have an opportunity to submit things. She didn’t know what workload it would create or how it could be implemented, but she liked the idea. She discussed with someone that it looks like the last mayor they ever had was Len Stone, and she wasn’t sure how to address that. She thought there was some benefit to those pictures and some not benefitted, considering that the record is not complete. She stated that, utilizing that space for community art or something that might be more in keeping with where she was going with the original thoughts which she would support.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that, when art was mentioned, he immediately thought of Cindy Abbott. He stated that, depending on the improvements they make, it doesn’t necessarily need to be on the backs of staff. He thought Ms. Abbott could come up with something. He thought the chairs could be more inviting, more so than the carpet. He asked how the mayor was feeling about the dais, aside from it being old.

Mayor Bier stated that she feels that she can see him, so she didn’t think that was as important as she thought it was.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck didn’t feel the need to comment further on that. He thought he was someone who was easily satisfied, adding that the point is well taken to make this a warmer atmosphere.

Councilmember Vaterlaus thought some improvements in the Chambers are long overdue, and things such as paint and no wallpaper, different kind of carpet, would change the whole atmosphere. She stated that when it is hot, maybe windows that we might be able to open instead of them falling out if they tried to open them. She appreciated that they changed the lights at one

2.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 39 March 14, 2022
point and added heat as they didn’t have either in the past and now they can see people. She appreciated those improvements but she thought the physical improvement will do a lot for this building, and she thanked the mayor for bringing it up.

Mayor Bier thought they might have an opportunity to have an ad hoc committee to talk about the art or maybe the Beautification committee.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that he would rather see kids’ art. He stated that every school would get a month to put something up there. He didn’t have anything against Sanchez Art Center but bringing in youth.

Mayor Bier stated that they can do both.

Councilmember O’Neill suggested that they just have the current President photo on the wall there.

Mayor Bier thought it would be helpful if they had an ad hoc committee to talk about it and specifically the art programs.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that, regarding the committee suggestion, he thought the City Attorney would say that, for the Council to actually appoint an ad hoc committee formally, they would need to bring it back to Council. He offered that perhaps the way to start, not just for brainstorming a public art program, but if they were to do carpeting or other cosmetic improvements, what would those look like. He stated he could work informally with two Councilmembers, probably the Mayor being one of them, to brainstorm ideas and decide if there is a formal action Council needs to take on the next step and bring that back. He thought there might not be, and maybe it would be something the BAC would take up related to a rotating kids art program.

Councilmember O’Neill asked if the work would require a coastal development permit.

City Manager Woodhouse didn’t think so, but he would defer to Planning Director Wehrmeister.

He stated that she was shaking her head no. He stated that some of the cosmetic improvements might require a building permit, such as the windows, but not too involved if they are just doing cosmetic stuff. He thought one thing to seek would be maybe the cost of building a new dais, which might not be something that is being recommended, but they would need to get a sense from Council of the scope of improvements when talking about this building, as they haven’t talked about the Community Center or Oceana Theater, but it sounded like they were honing in on the Chambers which would be the easiest and quickest to move forward. He stated that a sense of the scope, such as doing the carpet, walls and windows.

Councilmember O’Neill thought the windows would be good because it would be nice to open them up when it is warm, and they are warmer when it’s cold as they now have heat. He thought they can get new carpeting. He stated that there is a place in San Francisco that, for non-profits, they get old chairs from hotels, etc., and maybe replace the chairs with that. He thought it would be nice to get ones on wheels for some of our older people.

Councilmember Vaterlaus thought these chairs were donated.

Councilmember O’Neill responded that they were. He thought the staff ones were donated.

2.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 40 March 14, 2022
Mayor Bier stated that there are chairs that don’t have an armrest and not everyone can sit in an armrest chair.

Councilmember O’Neill was okay with the dais being as it is, maybe new buttons.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated that getting rid of the armature of the monitors would be really good.

Mayor Bier asked if the screen doesn’t work for her.

Councilmember Beckmeyer stated the monitor should just go away. That was her two cents.

Councilmember Vaterlaus stated that, when they are on Planning Commission with seven people, it was interesting as it is tight.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that they only have five monitors for seven people.

Mayor Bier thought that was interesting.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated that his one comment on the dais was, if they are going to have a new one, it should be designed so that, if they ever wind up moving from this room, it can move with them, as in theory they will hopefully not be there forever or much longer. He thought, if they make that kind of investment, it should be capable of coming with them.

Councilmember O’Neill stated that they would then be faced with designing the new City Council Chambers around a piece of furniture. He stated that it is kind of like a fireplace and you have to put your furniture around the fireplace. He thought they should keep this one for the next 2-3 years, adding that he won’t be there, but he thought it was better to keep this dais as that is the big ticket item for the cost.

Mayor pro Tem Bigstyck stated, to Councilmember Beckmeyer’s point, it might be nice if the monitors could be a little bit more movable, if possible.

Councilmember O’Neill asked of the City Manager have direction.

Mayor Bier asked the City Manager if he had enough direction.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that, if Council wanted to select a second person to work informally with him in addition to the mayor, that would be great.

Mayor Bier stated that Councilmember Beckmeyer will fill that position.

City Manager Woodhouse stated that he will work informally with Mayor Bier and Councilmember Beckmeyer.

RESULT: NO VOTE REQUIRED

ADJOURN
Mayor Bier adjourned the meeting at 11:12 p.m. in honor of T. J. Nilsen and his family.

2.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes) City Council Regular Meeting 41 March 14, 2022
Transcribed by Barbara Medina, Public Meeting Stenographer.

Respectfully Submitted,
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
__________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor

2.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Attachment A: Minutes of March 14, 2022 Special and Regular City Council Meeting (4934 : Approval of Minutes)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3/28/2022
1 SUBJECT:

FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approve the following actions for the FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project:

A. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction Inc. (Attachment "A") in an amount not to exceed $1,084,188.10 and authorize a budget authority for construction in the amount of $1,246,816.10, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Construction Services Agreement amount; and B. Authorize the City Manager to award and execute a Master Services Agreement and Task Order No. 1 with Ghirardelli Associates, Inc. (Attachment "B") to provide Construction Management Services in the amount not exceed of $116,684.00 and authorize a budget authority for construction management in an amount not to exceed $128,352.00, which includes contingencies in the amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of Task Order No. 1; and
C. Authorize staff to execute future Change Orders not to exceed the contingency amounts.

STAFF CONTACT:

Raymund Donguines, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
(650) 738-3768
[email protected]
Sam Bautista, P.E., DPW Deputy Director
(650) 738-3771
[email protected]
Lisa Petersen, P.E., DPW Director
(650) 738-3770
[email protected]
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

On October 12, 2020, the City Council accepted the City’s 5-year Street Maintenance Program for FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25. As noted during the October 2020 Council meeting, the main goal of the City’s five-year pavement maintenance program is to both keep good streets in good condition and use a stop gap measure to prevent poor condition streets from falling into expensive reconstructions. A slurry seal (mixture of asphalt oil, water, and coarse sand) is used on good streets to keep them that way. This is the most cost-effective form of street maintenance. Cape seals (asphalt oil and small aggregate covered with a slurry seal) can be used as an inexpensive stop gap measure to keep poor streets from dropping into worse condition with targeted spot pavement repairs.
3 Packet Pg. 54
Pacifica City Council 2
March 28, 2022
The FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project will resurface approximately 4.5 miles (19 street sections) of City pavement and follows the Council approved 5-year Street Maintenance Program. The type of treatments used generally follow the 5-year pavement program with the exception of value engineering changes made by the pavement consultant to allow for project cost savings. These value engineering changes will allow the City to treat all the streets identified under the City’s FY 2022-23 pavement program. These changes include using two coats of slurry seal in place of a cape seal on appropriate streets and using a spot treatment called microsurfacing (similar to a thick slurry seal) to address areas of pavement distress. The overall project scope will include roadway cape seals, double slurry seals, slurry seals, asphalt concrete grinding and paving, microsurfacing base repairs, pavement striping and markings and other miscellaneous related work. The project will be funded by money the City receives from SB 1, Measure W and Measure A (Fund 09).

On October 25, 2021, the City Council approved the Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between the City of Pacifica and NCE for Design and Engineering Services related to the FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project. The project will resurface streets generally in the northern part of Pacifica (see Attachment “C” - Project Plans). A portion of Hickey Blvd. will receive a 2-inch asphalt overlay. Sections of Beachview Ave., Brookhaven Ct. and Catalina Ave. will receive cape seal; sections of Crestmoor Cir., Hamilton Ct. and Horizon Way will receive a double slurry seal and Foothill Dr., and a portion of Hickey Blvd. will receive a slurry seal. The project plans and specifications are also available to view on the City's website at:
<https://www.cityofpacifica.org/depts/pw/engr/capital_improvement_projects/default.asp>. NCE has been working in the Bay Area since 1990 and is highly regarded for their expertise in pavement design and rehabilitation and for their work with the pavement research branch of the Federal Highways Administration.

The Project was advertised on February 23, 2022, and March 2, 2022, in accordance with the formal bid process. Twenty-six (26) companies requested plans and specifications and five (5) companies submitted bids. On March 17, 2022, the bid opening was held via Zoom by the City Clerk and the result is as follows:

Company Base Bid
DRYCO Construction Inc. $ 1,084,188.10
O’Grady Paving Inc. $ 1,112,858.90
G. Bortolotto & Co., Inc. $ 1,149,622.37
VSS International, Inc. $ 1,208,901.59
Pavement Coatings Co. $ 1,210,372.20
The apparent low bidder is DRYCO Construction Inc. with a base bid amount of $1,084,188.10.

This is approximately 20% over the Engineer’s Estimate, which is related to the recent escalation in oil prices that directly impacts pavement oils used for resurfacing. All required documentation was submitted with their bid. DRYCO Construction Inc. has performed several of the City’s resurfacing projects in the past and their work has been satisfactory. As there are sufficient project funds from SB1, Measure W and Fund 09, the City Manager recommends the award of contract to the apparent low bidder, DRYCO Construction Inc. In addition, a 15% contingency is recommended to allow enough funding to handle any additional improvements that are identified during construction. Staff recommends authorizing a budget authority for construction in the amount of $1,246,816.32, which includes contingencies in an amount not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the Construction Services Agreement amount for any unforeseen conditions and/or additional street work required. 3 Packet Pg. 55
Pacifica City Council 3
March 28, 2022
Ghirardelli Associates is a full-service engineering firm that specializes in local agency staff augmentation work, including construction management and inspection work, and they are on the City’s on-call construction inspection list. Ghirardelli Associates have the expertise in construction inspection and management for this type of project; they are also familiar with the resurfacing procedures and reporting requirements. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between the City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates for the construction management, inspections and material testing of this project in the amount of $116,684.00. Staff recommends authorizing a budget authority for construction management in an amount not to exceed $128,352.00, which includes contingencies in the amount not to exceed ten percent (10%) of Task Order No. 1 for any unforeseen conditions and/or additional street work required or requested by the City.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

Council may choose not to approve these Agreements and Task Order No. 1. However, this will result in project delays and possible increase in construction costs. Staff does not recommend this alternate action.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Approval of the construction contract is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
• Stewardship of City Infrastructure: includes repairing/replacing outdated city facilities such as city hall, the libraries, fire stations, etc., improving streets, and responding to impacts of sea level rise. This construction project will improve existing City streets and roads.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The following is the Source and Use of Funds for the project:

Total Project Source and Use of Funds
SB1 $ 863,690.00*
Measure W $ 385,486.00*
Measure A/Fund 09 $ 350,000.00
Total Source of Funds $1,599,176.00
FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project $ 1,375,168.10
FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Design & Engineering $ 126,390.00 Total Use of Funds $ 1,501,558.10
Project End Balance $ 97,617.90
SB1 and Measure W funding increased for FY 2022/23. A portion of Measure W funds was recently encumbered for the upcoming Northern Pacifica Pedestrian Improvement Project. The remaining funds will go back to Street Construction Fund 09 to fund future resurfacing projects.

ORIGINATED BY:

Public Works
3 Packet Pg. 56
Pacifica City Council 4
March 28, 2022
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (PDF) Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (PDF)
Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans(PDF) 3 Packet Pg. 57

CITY OF PACIFICA
540 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA 94044

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AGREEMENT
FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT
DATE: MARCH 28, 2022

1. IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTOR:

CONTRACTOR: DRYCO CONSTRUCTION INC.

CALIFORNIA LICENSE NO: 540379 CLASS: A - General Engineering Contractor

2. SCOPE OF THE WORK
See Scope of Work attached as Appendix A.

COMPENSATION FOR WORK. Contractor’s total compensation for the Work performed under this Agreement (Contract Sum) is $1,084,188.10, to be paid as (check one): (1)  lump sum; (2)  lump sum with progress payments; (3)  per attached schedule of rates and charges, up to a guaranteed not-to-exceed amount of $__________. All payments (check one): shall  shall not be subject to a five percent (5%) retention.

3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE FOR THE WORK. Contractor shall commence and complete the Work by the following dates:

Commencement Date shall be on the date established in the Notice to Proceed. Owner reserves the right to modify or alter the Commencement Date of the Work.

Substantial Completion Date: Within 60 working days of Commencement Date.

Final Completion Date: Within 60 working days of Substantial Completion.

3.01 Liquidated Damage Amounts.

A. As liquidated damages for delay Contractor shall pay Owner Four Thousand dollars ($4,000.00) for each Day that expires after the time specified herein for Contractor to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work, until achieved.

B. As liquidated damages for delay Contractor shall pay Owner Four Thousand dollars ($4,000.00) for each Day that expires after the time specified herein for Contractor to achieve Final Completion of the entire Work, until achieved.

3.02 Scope of Liquidated Damages
Contractor and Owner agree that because of the nature of the Project, it would be impractical or extremely difficult to fix the amount of such actual damages incurred by Owner because of a delay in completion of all or any part of the Work. Contractor and Owner agree that specified measures of liquidated damages shall be presumed to be the amount of such damages actually sustained by

ATTACHMENT A

3.a
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 2 Owner, and that because of the nature of the Project, it would be impracticable or extremely difficult to fix the actual damages.

B. Liquidated damages for delay shall cover administrative, overhead, interest on bonds, and general loss of public use damages suffered by Owner as a result of delay. Liquidated damages shall not cover the cost of completion of the Work, damages resulting from Defective Work, lost revenues or costs of substitute facilities, or damages suffered by others who then seek to recover their damages from Owner (for example, delay claims of other contractors, subcontractors, tenants, or other third-parties), and defense costs thereof. Owner may deduct from any money due or to become due to Contractor subsequent to time for completion of entire Work and extensions of time allowed pursuant to provisions hereof, a sum representing then-accrued liquidated damages.

4. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

4.01 Contractor shall perform the Work in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the following attachments (together, Contract Documents):

Appendix A – Scope of Work
Appendix B – General Conditions
Appendix C – Insurance
Appendix D – Construction Labor and Materials Payment Bond Appendix E – Construction Performance Bond
Appendix F – Supplemental Conditions

4.02 The Contract Documents are the sole and exclusive provisions that govern the Work. Any provision contained in any Owner purchase order issued in connection with this Agreement or any Work shall be null and void and shall have no force or effect.

4.03 Agreement number must appear on all invoices and correspondence. Send invoices in duplicate immediately upon performance of Work ordered hereon or as otherwise provided in the Contract Documents to:

City of Pacifica, Department of Public Works,
540 Crespi Drive, Pacifica, CA 94044
CONTRACTOR: DRYCO Construction, Inc. OWNER: City of Pacifica _______________________________ __________________________________ Signature Signature
_______________________________ Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager Print Name & Title
______________________________ __________________________________ Date Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
_______________________________ __________________________________ Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney Sarah Coffey, City Clerk

3.a
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 3 Addresses for Notices: Addresses for Notices:

DRYCO Construction, Inc. City of Pacifica
42745 Boscell Road 540 Crespi Drive
Fremont, CA 94538 Pacifica, CA 94044

3.a
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 4 Appendix A to Construction Services Agreement

SCOPE OF WORK
The project includes pavement overlay, cape seal, double slurry seal, slurry seal, microsurfacing, base repair, pavement striping and markings and other miscellaneous related work described in the Plans and Specifications entitled: FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project.

3.a
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 5 Appendix B to Construction Services Agreement

GENERAL CONDITIONS
ARTICLE 1 TERMS OF PERFORMANCE
Construction Services Agreement (Agreement) Force and Effect. The provisions of the Agreement and other Contract Documents constitute the entire agreement between the Contractor and Owner regarding the Work described herein. No representation, term or covenant not expressly specified in the Contract Documents shall be a part of the parties’ agreement. The Agreement and other Contract Documents shall govern the Work (whenever performed), and shall supersede all other purchase orders and agreements between Contractor and Owner, and any proposal, with respect to the Work.

Construction Performance Bond; Construction Labor and Materials Payment Bond; Securities in Lieu of Retention Escrow Account.

If Contract Sum under the Agreement exceeds (or is expected to exceed) $25,000, Contractor shall provide (i) a construction labor and material payment bond, in accordance with Civil Code Section 9550 and in form attached hereto Appendix D – Construction Labor and Materials Payment Bond, and (ii) a construction performance bond in form attached hereto as Appendix E – Construction Performance Bond. Contractor may not substitute cash in lieu of the required bond(s).

If the Agreement specifies performance retention, Contractor may elect to substitute securities or direct payment to an escrow account, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300 (incorporated herein by this reference).

Records and Payment Requests. Contractor shall submit all billings with all necessary invoices or other appropriate evidence of proper performance, after which Owner shall make payment within 30 days. Upon Owner’s written request, Contractor shall make available to Owner, its authorized agents, officers, or employees, any and all ledgers, books of accounts, invoices, vouchers, cancelled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to the Work or the expenditures and disbursement charged to Owner, and all correspondence, internal memoranda, calculations, books and accounts, records documenting its Work under the Contract Documents, and invoices, payrolls, timecards, records and all other data related to matters covered by the Contract Documents.

Contractor shall furnish to Owner, its authorized agents, officers, or employees, such other evidence or information as Owner may require with regard to the Work or any such expenditure or disbursement charged by Contractor. Contractor shall maintain all such documents and records prepared by or furnished to Contractor during the course of performing the Work for at least five years following completion of the Work, except that all such items pertaining to hazardous materials shall be maintained for at least 30 years. Contractor shall permit Owner to audit, examine and make copies, excerpts and transcripts from such records. The State of California or any federal agency having an interest in the subject of the Contract Documents shall have the same rights conferred to Owner by this section. Such rights shall be specifically enforceable.

Use of Contract Documents and Other Information. Drawings, Specifications, and other Contract Documents are made available to Contractor solely for Contractor’s use under the Contract Documents. Further, all tangible and intangible property developed, produced and/or provided by Contractor under the Contract Documents, and all such items (other than Contract Documents) provided by Owner to Contractor in connection with the Contract Documents including, without limitation, drawings, specifications, sketches, models, samples, tools, computer programs, technical information, confidential business information, scripts, customer or personnel information and data, whether written, oral or otherwise (all hereinafter referred to as Information) shall be Owner’s sole property. Contractor may not use Contract Documents or Information for

3.a
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 6 any purpose unrelated to Contract Documents without Owner’s prior written consent. All copies of Information in written, graphic or other tangible form shall be delivered to Owner upon completion of Work, or earlier if otherwise provided in Contract Documents.

Performance of Work/No Assignment. Time is of the essence in the performance of the Work.

Contractor will perform the Work in a skillful and workmanlike manner; comply fully with criteria established by Owner, and with applicable laws, codes, and all applicable industry standards.

Contractor shall maintain its work area in a clean and sanitary condition, clear debris and trash at the end of each work day, and shall not damage or disrupt any property unless specifically part of the scope of the Contract Documents. Contractor shall not contract any portion of the Work or otherwise assign the Contract Documents without prior written approval of Owner. (Contractor shall remain responsible for compliance with all terms of the Contract Documents, regardless of the terms of any such assignment.) Contractor shall permit Owner (or its designees) access to the work area, Contractor’s shop, or any other facility, to permit inspection of the Work at all times during construction and/or manufacture and fabrication. The granting of any progress payment, and any inspections, reviews, approvals or oral statements by any Owner representative, or certification by any governmental entity, shall in no way limit or relieve Contractor from its obligations under the Contract Documents. Either party’s waiver of any breach, or the omission or failure of either party, at any time, to enforce any right reserved to it, or to require strict performance of any provision of the Contract Documents, shall not be a waiver of any other right to which any party is entitled, and shall not in any way affect, limit, modify or waive that party’s right thereafter to enforce or compel strict compliance with every provision hereof. Owner shall have, at all times, set-off rights with respect to any payment and Contractor’s failure to perform the terms of the Contract Documents.

Defective Work; Warranties. Contractor warrants that all construction services shall be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional standards of good and sound construction practices, all Contract Documents requirements, and all laws, codes, standards, licenses, and permits. Contractor warrants that all materials and equipment shall be new, of suitable grade of their respective kinds for their intended uses, and free from defects. Contractor hereby grants to Owner for a period of one year following the date of completion its unconditional warranty of the quality and adequacy of all of the Work including, without limitation, all labor, materials and equipment provided by Contractor and its Subcontractors of all tiers. If either prior to completion of the Work, or within one year after completion, any Work (completed or incomplete) is found to violate any of the foregoing warranties (Defective Work), Contractor shall promptly, without cost to Owner and in accordance with Owner’s written instructions, correct, remove and replace the Defective Work with conforming Work, and correct, remove and replace any damage to other Work or other property resulting therefrom. If Contractor fails to do so within five days of Owner’s written notice (or other time period specified in the notice), Contractor shall pay all of the Owner’s resulting claims, costs, losses and damages. Where Contractor fails to timely correct Defective Work, or defects are discovered outside the correction period, Owner shall have all rights and remedies granted by law.

Earthwork and Underground Facilities. If the Work involves digging trenches or other excavations that extend deeper than four feet below the surface, Contractor shall notify Owner in writing of any material that Contractor believes may be hazardous waste that is required to be removed in accordance law, subsurface or latent physical conditions at the site differing from those indicated by information about the site made available to bidders prior to the deadline for submitting bids, or unknown physical conditions at the site of any unusual nature, different materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally recognized as inherent in work of the character provided for in the Contract Documents, pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 7104. For any Work involving trench shoring that costs in excess of $25,000, Contractor shall submit and Owner (or a

3.a
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 7 registered civil or structural engineer employed by Owner) must accept, in advance of excavation, a detailed plan showing the design of shoring, bracing, sloping, or other provisions to be made for worker protection from the hazard of caving ground during the excavation of such trench or trenches, pursuant to Labor Code Section 6705. If such plan varies from the shoring system standards, the plan shall be prepared by a registered civil or structural engineer. Consistent with Government Code Section 4215, as between Owner and Contractor, Owner will be responsible for the timely removal, relocation, or protection of existing main or trunk line utility facilities located on the Site only if such utilities are not identified in the Contract Documents or information made available for bidding.

LEGAL
Compliance with Laws; Conflict of Interests. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and state laws, regulations and policies, as amended, including those regarding discrimination, unfair labor practices, anti-kick-back, collusion, prevailing wages, labor compliance, and the provisions of the Americans with Disability Act. Contractor, its officer, partners, associates, agents, and employees, shall not make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use the position afforded them by the Contract Documents to influence any governmental decision in which he or she knows or has reason to know that he or she has a financial interest under applicable state, federal and local conflict of interest regulations. Contractor warrants that no person or agency has been employed or retained, or will be employed or retained, to solicit or obtain any contract with Owner, upon an agreement or understanding for a contingent fee, except a bona fide employee or agency.

Licenses, Patents, Permits. Before commencing Work, Contractor shall apply for, obtain and maintain in current status, at its own expense, any license, permit or approval required from any agency for the performance of Work. To the greatest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall not be entitled to any compensation for any Work performed while not properly licensed, etc.

Employee Wages; Records; Apprentices. This Project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations. Contractor shall post job site notices as prescribed by regulation. Contractor shall pay prevailing wages to its employees on any Order in excess of $1,000.00. Copies of the prevailing rate of per diem wages are on file at Owner’s principal office. Contractor shall comply with the 8-hours per day/40 hours per week/overtime/working hours restrictions for all employees, pursuant to the California Labor Code.

Contractor and all subcontractors shall keep and maintain accurate employee payroll records for Work performed. The payroll records shall be certified and submitted as required by law, including Labor Code Section 1771.4 and 1776, including (if the Agreement is awarded on or after April 1, 2015 or continues on or after January 1, 2016) to the Labor Commissioner no less frequently than monthly. Contractor shall comply fully with Labor Code Section 1777.5 in the hiring of apprentices for work relating to the Agreement. If Contract Sum exceeds $2,000 and is funded with federal funds, then Contractor shall pay federal Davis Bacon wages and comply with applicable federal requirements.

Mandatory Contractor and Subcontractor Registration. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1771(a), Contractor represents that it and all of its Subcontractors are currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Labor Code Section 1725.5. Contractor covenants that any additional or substitute Subcontractors will be similarly registered and qualified.

Indemnity/Liability. Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and save harmless, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Owner and each of its officers, directors, representatives, agents and employees, against all claims, suits, actions, loss, cost, damage, expense, and liability arising from or related to bodily injury to or death of any person or damage to any property, or resulting from any breach and/or Contractor’s negligence in performing the Work pursuant to the Contract Documents.

Notwithstanding any provision of the Contract Documents, Owner shall not be liable to Contractor

3.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 8 or anyone claiming under it, in contract or tort, for any special, consequential, indirect or incidental damages arising out of or in connection with the Contract Documents or the Work. Owner’s rights and remedies, whether under the Contract Documents or other applicable law, shall be cumulative and not subject to limitation.

Worker’s Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Sections 1860 and 1861, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code, every contractor will be required to secure the payment of compensation to his employees. Contractor represents that it is aware of the provisions of Labor Code Section 3700 that require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and Contractor shall comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work.

MISCELLANEOUS
No Modification or Waiver; Severability. The Contract Documents may not be modified, nor may compliance with any of its terms be waived, except by written instrument executed and approved by fully authorized representatives of Owner and Contractor. Contract Documents headings are for convenience only and do not affect the construction of the Contract Documents. Should any part of the Contract Documents be declared invalid, void or unenforceable, all remaining parts, terms and provisions of the Contract Documents shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be invalidated, impaired or affected thereby.

Independent Contractor. Contractor is an independent Contractor and does not act as Owner’s agent in any capacity, whatsoever. Contractor is not entitled to any benefits that Owner provides to Owner employees including, without limitation, insurance, worker’s compensation benefits or payments, pension benefits, health benefits or insurance benefits. Terms within the Contract Documents regarding directives apply to and concern the result of the Contractor’s provision of Work not the means, methods, or scheduling of the Contractor’s Work. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures with respect to its provision of Work under the Contract Documents. Contractor shall pay all payroll taxes imposed by any governmental entity and will pay all other taxes not specifically identified in the Contract Documents as Owner’s responsibility.

Termination; Suspension; Disputes. Owner may direct Contractor to terminate, suspend, delay, interrupt or accelerate Work, in whole or in part, for such periods of time as Owner may determine in its sole discretion. Owner will issue such directives in writing, and may do so, in whole or in part, for its convenience or due to Contractor’s fault. Owner will compensate Contractor for extra costs resulting from such directives only to the extent that Owner issues such directives for its convenience and not due to Contractor’s fault (but Owner shall not compensate Contractor for costs, profit or overhead anticipated to be earned or incurred on Work terminated for Owner’s convenience.) Contractor shall continue its Work throughout the course of any dispute, and Contractor’s failure to continue Work during a dispute shall be a material breach of the Contract Documents. All claims by Contractor against Owner shall be submitted in writing to Owner, and shall be governed by Public Contract Code Sections 20104 – 20104.6, after which time the one year time period in Government Code Section 911.2 shall be, pursuant to Government Code Section 930.2, reduced to 90 days. Should Contractor be terminated for default, and such termination is subsequently determined to be wrongful, such termination will be converted to a termination for convenience as provided herein.

Notices. All notices between the parties hereto shall be in writing and may be served by commercial express/overnight courier service or by depositing the same in the United States mail, postage prepaid and certified receipt requested, and addressed as indicated beneath each party’s signature in the Master Agreement, or as either party may otherwise provide to the other.

3.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 9 Dispute Resolution. All Contractor claims not otherwise subject to Public Contract Code Sections 20104 et seq shall, as a condition precedent to litigation thereon, first be mediated. Mediation shall be confidential, non-binding, pursuant to the construction mediation procedures of JAMS in San Francisco, California, and utilize the services of a mediator mutually acceptable to the parties. If the parties are unable to agree, the mediator will be selected by JAMS from its panel of approved construction industry mediators, having a minimum of 10 years’ experience in the construction industry. The cost of mediation shall be equally shared by all parties to the mediation. The parties shall, prior to the commencement of a mediation pursuant to this Paragraph, upon notice of the other party, exchange relevant, non-privileged project documents in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2031.010 et seq. Additionally, the parties may agree mutually to engage in additional discovery prior to mediation. Should the parties proceed with additional discovery, they shall, unless mutually agreed otherwise, comply with Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2019, et. seq. The Mediator will undertake to resolve any discovery disputes relating to the Mediation.

Execution; Venue; Limitations. The Agreement shall be deemed to have been executed in San Mateo County, California. Enforcement of the Contract Documents shall be governed by the laws of the State of California, excluding its conflict of laws rules. Except as expressly provided in the Contract Documents, nothing in the Contract Documents shall operate to confer rights or benefits on persons or entities other than Owner and Contractor. As between the parties to the Agreement, any applicable statute of limitations for any act or failure to act shall commence to run on the date of Owner’s issuance of the final Certificate for Payment, or termination of the Contract Documents, whichever is earlier, except for latent defects, for which the statute of limitation shall begin running upon discovery of the defect and its cause.

3.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 10 Appendix C to Construction Services Agreement

INSURANCE

1. Commercial General Liability Insurance, written on an “occurrence” basis, which shall provide coverage for bodily injury, death and property damage resulting from operations, liability for slander, false arrest and invasion of privacy, blanket contractual liability, broad form endorsement, and completed operations, personal and advertising liability, with limits of not less than [$1,000,000] general aggregate and [$1,000,000] each occurrence, subject to a deductible of not more than [$1,000] payable by Contractor.

2. Business Automobile Liability Insurance with limits not less than [$1,000,000] each occurrence including coverage for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles, subject to a deductible of not more than [$1,000] payable by Contractor.

3. Workers’ Compensation Employers’ Liability limits not less than [$1,000,000] each accident, [$1,000,000] per disease and [$1,000,000] aggregate. Contractor’s Workers’ Compensation Insurance policy shall contain a Waiver of Subrogation against the City of Pacifica, its officers, directors, officials, agents, employees and volunteers. In the event Contractor is self-insured, it shall furnish Certificate of Permission to Self-Insure signed by Department of Industrial Relations Administration of SelfInsurance, State of California.

4. [If applicable] Builder’s Risk Insurance including, without limitation, coverage against loss or damage to the Work by fire, lightening, wind, hail, aircraft, riot, vehicle damage, explosion, smoke, falling objects, vandalism, malicious mischief, collapse, and other such hazards as are normally covered by such coverage. Such insurance shall be in amount equal to the replacement cost (without deduction for depreciation and subject to stipulated value in lieu of average clause) of all construction constituting any part of the Work, excluding the cost of excavations, of grading and filling of the land. [Alternatively, if applicable] An Installation Floater including, without limitation, coverage against loss or damage to the Work by fire, lightening, wind, hail, vandalism, malicious mischief, and other such hazards as are normally covered by such coverage. Such insurance shall be in amount equal to the replacement cost (without deduction for depreciation and subject to stipulated value in lieu of average clause) of the Work. [If either Builder’s Risk or an Installation Floater is required, continue] Such insurance may be subject to deductible clauses not to exceed [$10,000] for any one loss. Such insurance will not cover loss or damage to Contractor’s equipment, scaffolding or other materials not to be consumed in the performance of the Work. The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation against Owner.

5. Insurance policies in Appendix C shall contain an endorsement containing the following terms:

5.01 City of Pacifica, its officers, directors, officials, agents, employees, and volunteers, shall be named as additional insureds, but only with respect to liability arising out of the activities of the named insured, and there shall be a waiver of subrogation as to each named and additional insured.

5.02 The policies shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the company’s liability.

5.03 Written notice of cancellation, non-renewal or of any material change in the policies shall be mailed to Owner thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date thereof.

5.04 Insurance shall be primary insurance and no other insurance or self-insured retention carried or held by any named or additional insureds other than Contractor shall be called upon to contribute to a loss covered by insurance for the named insured.

3.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 11

6. Certificates of Insurance and Endorsements shall have clearly typed thereon the Project Name, shall clearly describe the coverage and shall contain a provision requiring the mailing of written notices of cancellation described in clause 5.03 above.

7. All policies of insurance shall be placed with insurers acceptable to Owner. The insurance underwriter(s) must be duly licensed to do business in the State of California and (other than for workers’ compensation) must have an A. M. Best Company rating of [A-,VII] or better. Required minimum amounts of insurance may be increased should conditions of Work, in the opinion of Owner, warrant such increase. Contractor shall increase required insurance amounts upon direction by Owner.

3.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 12 Appendix D to Construction Services Agreement

CONSTRUCTION LABOR AND MATERIAL PAYMENT BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

1. THAT WHEREAS, the City of Pacifica, a general law city and municipal corporation of the State of California (Owner) has awarded to DRYCO Construction, Inc. as Principal a Construction Services Agreement, dated the 28
th day of March, 2022 (Agreement), titled FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT located at the City of Pacifica in the amount of $1,084, 188.10 (Contract Sum), which Agreement is by this reference made a part hereof, for the work described as follows:

The project includes pavement overlay, cape seal, double slurry seal, slurry seal, microsurfacing, base repair, pavement striping and markings and other miscellaneous related work described in the Plans and Specifications entitled: FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project.

2. AND WHEREAS, Principal is required to furnish a bond in connection with the Agreement to secure the payment of claims of laborers, mechanics, material suppliers, and other persons as provided by law;

3. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Principal and ______________________________ as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Owner in the sum of 100% OF THE CONTRACT SUM ($_________________), for which payment well and truly to be made we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

4. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if Principal, or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns approved by Owner, or its subcontractors shall fail to pay any of the persons named in California Civil Code Section 9100, or amounts due under the State of California Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed under the Agreement, or for any amounts required to be deducted, withheld, and paid over to the State of California Employment Development Department from the wages of employees of Principal and subcontractors pursuant to California Unemployment Insurance Code Section 13020 with respect to such work and labor, that Surety will pay for the same in an amount not exceeding the sum specified in this bond, plus reasonable attorneys’ fees, otherwise the above obligation shall become and be null and void.

5. This bond shall inure to the benefit of any of the persons named in California Civil Code Section 9100, as to give a right of action to such persons or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. The intent of this bond is to comply with the California Mechanic’s Lien Law.

6. Surety, for value received, hereby expressly agrees that no extension of time, change, modification, alteration, or addition to the undertakings, covenants, terms, conditions, and agreements of the Agreement, or to the work to be performed thereunder, shall in any way affect the obligation of this bond; and it does hereby waive notice of any such extension of time, change, modification, alteration, or addition to the undertakings, covenants, terms, conditions, and agreements of the Agreement, or to the work to be performed thereunder.

7. Surety’s obligations hereunder are independent of the obligations of any other surety for the payment of claims of laborers, mechanics, material suppliers, and other persons in connection with Agreement; and suit may be brought against Surety and such other sureties, jointly and severally, or against any one or more of them, or against less than all of them without impairing Owner’s rights against the other.

3.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 13

8. Correspondence or claims relating to this bond shall be sent to Surety at the address set forth below.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this __________ day of ____________________, 20___.

CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL SURETY
Company: (Corp. Seal) Company: (Corp. Seal)
Signature Signature
Name Name
Title Title
Street Address Street Address
City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip Code

END OF DOCUMENT

3.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 14 Appendix E to Construction Services Agreement

CONSTRUCTION PERFORMANCE BOND
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

1. THAT WHEREAS, City of Pacifica, a general law city and municipal corporation of the State of California (Owner) has awarded to DRYCO Construction, Inc. as Principal a Construction Services Agreement, dated the 28th day of March, 2022 (Agreement), titled FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT in the amount of $1,084,188.10 (Contract Sum), which Agreement is by this reference made a part hereof, for the work described as follows:

2. AND WHEREAS, Principal is required to furnish a bond in connection with the Agreement, guaranteeing the faithful performance thereof;

3. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the undersigned Principal and _________________________ as Surety are held and firmly bound unto Owner in the sum of 100% OF THE CONTRACT SUM to be paid to Owner or its successors and assigns; for which payment, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

4. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if Principal, or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns approved by Owner, shall promptly and faithfully perform the covenants, conditions, and agreements of the Agreement during the original term and any extensions thereof as may be granted by Owner, with or without notice to Surety, and during the period of any guarantees or warranties required under the Agreement, and shall also promptly and faithfully perform all the covenants, conditions, and agreements of any alteration of the Agreement made as therein provided, notice of which alterations to Surety being hereby waived, on Principal’s part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify, defend, protect, and hold harmless Owner as stipulated in the Agreement, then this obligation shall become and be null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

5. No extension of time, change, alteration, modification, or addition to the Agreement, or of the work required thereunder, shall release or exonerate Surety on this bond or in any way affect the obligation of this bond; and Surety does hereby waive notice of any such extension of time, change, alteration, modification, or addition.

6. Whenever Principal shall be and declared by Owner in default under the Agreement, Surety shall promptly remedy the default, or shall promptly:

6.01 Undertake through its agents or independent contractors, reasonably acceptable to Owner, to complete the Agreement in accordance with its terms and conditions and to pay and perform all obligations of Principal under the Agreement including, without limitation, all obligations with respect to warranties, guarantees, indemnities, and the payment of liquidated damages; or

6.02 Obtain a bid or bids for completing the Agreement in accordance with its terms and conditions, and, upon determination by Owner of the lowest responsible bidder, reasonably acceptable to Owner, arrange for a contract between such bidder and Owner and make available as work progresses (even though there should be a default or a succession of defaults under the contract

3.a
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 15 or contracts of completion arranged under this paragraph) sufficient funds to pay the cost of completion less the balance of the Contract Sum, and to pay and perform all obligations of Principal under the Agreement including, without limitation, all obligations with respect to warranties, guarantees, and the payment of liquidated damages; but, in any event, Surety’s total obligations hereunder shall not exceed the amount set forth in the third paragraph hereof. The term “balance of the Contract Sum,” as used in this paragraph, shall mean the total amount payable by Owner to the Principal under the Agreement and any amendments thereto, less the amount Owner paid to Principal.

7. Surety’s obligations hereunder are independent of the obligations of any other surety for the performance of the Agreement, and suit may be brought against Surety and such other sureties, jointly and severally, or against any one or more of them, or against less than all of them without impairing Owner’s rights against the others. Surety may not use Contractor to complete the Agreement absent Owner’s written consent.

8. No right of action shall accrue on this bond to or for the use of any person or corporation other than Owner or its successors or assigns.

9. Surety may join in any proceedings brought under the Agreement and shall be bound by any judgment.

10. Correspondence or claims relating to this bond shall be sent to Surety at the address set forth below.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this _________ day of ________________, 20___.

CONTRACTOR AS PRINCIPAL SURETY
Company: (Corp. Seal) Company: (Corp. Seal)
Signature Signature
Name Name
Title Title
Street Address Street Address
City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip Code

END OF DOCUMENT

3.a
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 16 Appendix F to Construction Services Agreement

SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS

1. Plans
See Plans, Specifications and Estimates.

2. Shop Drawings
Shop drawings will not be required on this project.

3. Dust Control and Cleanup
During the construction period, the dust level shall be kept at a minimum. The premises shall also be kept free from the accumulation of waste material or rubbish. Failure to meet this requirement may result in project shutdown.

The final cleaning shall leave the facilities ready for use with no additional cleanup. Use no cleaning materials which will contaminate the ocean. At the completion of the contract, the Contractor shall remove all remaining litter, debris, materials, temporary structures and equipment from the site.

The premises shall be left in a clean and orderly condition acceptable to the City Engineer.

In the event Contractor leaves the job overnight in an unclean condition, City may take action to provide necessary requirements and will deduct the cost of doing so from subsequent Contractor payments.

4. Public Safety
Contractor shall be responsible during all phases of work to provide for public safety and convenience. It shall be the Contractor’s responsibility to provide adequate provisions to assure the safety of the general public throughout the duration of the project, including periods when no work is being performed. The site shall be thoroughly fenced-off when work is not actively in progress, and lighted barricades shall be placed around any obstructions not encompassed by this fence.

In the event Contractor leaves the job overnight in an unsafe condition, or fails to provide for public safety and convenience, City may take action to provide necessary requirements and will deduct the cost of doing so from subsequent Contractor payments.

All applicable safety regulations shall be complied with to protect the public and the Contractor’s employees. Strict compliance with Cal/OSHA safety requirements in doing the work is required.

5. Prevailing Wage Rates
The Contractor shall post, in a location on the job site, the prevailing wage rate Determination which is applicable to this project.

6. Discrimination

3.a
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 17 No discrimination shall be made in the employment of persons upon public works because of the race, sex, age, color, national origin, creed, sexual orientation or marital status of such persons and every contractor for public works violating this section is subject to all the penalties imposed for a violation of Section 1735 of the California Labor Code.

7. Employment of Apprentices
Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 (Chapter 1411, Statutes of 1967) and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him.

The Contractor and any subcontractor shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices.

Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices.

8. Materials and Supplies
All materials and supplies called for by contractor’s scope and proposal and shall be new unless otherwise specified.

9. Protection
The Contractor shall provide adequate protection for the site and surroundings throughout the work.

All damage done to existing property shall be neatly repaired or replaced at the Contractor’s expense. Work shall be executed in a careful and orderly manner with the least possible disturbance to public and occupants of the area.

The Contractor shall conduct his operations in such a manner as to avoid damage to existing improvements and adjacent property. The Contractor shall, at its sole cost and expense, repair or replace any damage occurring from his operations to pursue completion of the contract. The repairs and replacement shall be to the satisfaction of the Engineer and according to City standards and practices. The minimum repair or replacement shall be equal to surrounding existing conditions or better, and the Engineer’s decision as to acceptable repair or replacement shall be final. The burden of proof as to whether there was existing damage by the Contractor shall rest with the Contractor.

The site shall be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all times. All existing facilities shall be protected and, if they are damaged or destroyed by the Contractor, shall be restored or replaced in kind at his expense, to their original conditions, or better, as approved by the City or other owner thereof. The site shall be secured at the conclusion of each work day.

10. Inspections
Inspectors, employed by the City, shall be authorized to inspect all work done and all materials furnished. Such inspection may extend to all or any part of the work on the project and to the preparation, fabrication or manufacture of the materials to be used. An inspector is not authorized to revoke, alter or waive any requirements of the specifications. He is authorized to call the attention of the Contractor to any failure of the work or materials to conform to the specifications and

3.a
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 18 contract. He shall have the authority to reject materials or suspend the work until any question at issue can be referred to and decided by the Engineer.

An inspector will in no case act as foreman or perform other duties for the Contractor, nor interfere with the Contractor’s management of the work.

In case the Contractor refuses to suspend operations on verbal order, the inspector giving such verbal order will then issue the order in writing. After placing the order in the hands of the person in charge of the work for the Contractor, the inspector will immediately leave the job. Work done during the absence of the inspector will not be accepted or compensated.

The Contractor shall prosecute work only in the presence of an authorized inspector or authorized representative of the Engineer, and any work done without such inspection shall be at the Contractor’s risk and be subject to rejection.

The Contractor shall furnish the Engineer with every reasonable facility for ascertaining whether or not the work, as performed, is in accordance with the requirements and intent of the specifications and contract. The Contractor shall at all times and for any purpose permit the Engineer and any of his representatives and representatives of the City to have access to the work and the premises used by the Contractor.

11. Defective Materials
Any materials condemned or rejected by the Engineer as not meeting the requirements of these specifications may be branded or otherwise marked by the Engineer and shall, on demand, be at once removed by the Contractor to a satisfactory distance from the work.

If the Contractor does not remove such material within a reasonable time, fixed by written notice, the City may remove and store the materials at the expense of the Contractor. If the Contractor does not pay the expense of such removal and storage within ten days thereafter, the City may, upon ten days’ written notice, sell such materials at auction or at private sale. The City will account for the net proceeds thereof after deducting all the costs and expenses that should have been borne by the Contractor.

No partial payment, inspection, taking possession of, or other act made or done by the Engineer or the City with respect to the work prior to the final completion and acceptance thereof shall relieve Contractor from performing the Work in accordance with this contract, and shall not affect or prejudice the right of the Engineer or the City to reject any defective work or material or to require the Contractor complete fulfillment of all the provisions of the contract.

If the Engineer deems it expedient and not in the best interests of the City to correct work injured or done not in accordance with the contract, the defective work may be accepted subject to an equitable deduction from the contract price which may be made therefor by the City upon certificate from the Engineer.

12. Temporary Suspension of Work and Extension of Time for Performance When conditions at the site of the proposed work are unsatisfactory for the prosecution of a part or all of the work as adjudged by the Contractor and he is forced to suspend such work until reasonable conditions for its prosecution exist, he may request, in writing, that the Engineer authorize such suspension of work. Without the Engineer’s approval, any suspensions violate this specification.

3.a
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 19 Unsatisfactory conditions may include, but not limited to: inclement weather, excessively high surf and/or tides, strikes, excessive high or low ambient temperature and inability of delivery of materials by suppliers for good reason.

When, in the opinion of the Engineer, suspensions of work are beyond the control of both the Contractor and the City (including, without limitation, adverse weather, conditions, earthquakes, force majeure events), the time of performance as set forth in the Agreement will be extended by the Engineer, in writing, by a period of time equal to that lost due to the delay occasioned by the allowed suspension, all at no additional cost to the City and without waiver of remedies for nonproliferation of the work. Such allowed suspension of work shall not relieve the Contractor of his contractual responsibilities.

13. Laws and Regulations
The Contractor shall comply with all local, regional, State and Federal laws and regulations at all times. In addition, the Contractor shall meet the standards set by the Air Quality Act for Noise and Pollution. If there is any conflict between these specifications and provisions and any laws or regulations, the matter shall be brought to the attention of the Engineer immediately.

14. Sound Control Requirements
The Contractor shall comply with all local sound control and noise level rules, regulations and ordinances which apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract.

Each internal combustion engine, used for any purposes on the job or related to the job, shall be equipped with a muffler of a type recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine shall be operated on the project without said muffler.

15. Air Pollution Control
The Contractor shall comply with all air pollution control rules, regulations, ordinances and statutes which apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract, involving any air pollution control rules, regulations, ordinances and statutes specified in Section 11017 of the Government Code.

16. Water Pollution
General:

Contractor shall take all measures necessary to prevent debris or contamination from entering the ocean. Best Management Practice (BMP) shall be enforced at all times.

Correction of Inadequate Pollution and Erosion Control Measures:

If the measures being taken by the Contractor are inadequate to control water pollution effectively, the City Engineer may direct the Contractor to revise operations. The directions will be in writing and will specify the items of work for which the Contractor’s water pollution control measures are inadequate. No further work shall be performed on those items until the water pollution control measures are made adequate.

Abatement of Other Water Pollution:

3.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 20 The cleanup of water pollution by chemicals, petroleum products, cement or by the escape of any other material that is harmful or potentially harmful, from the work site as a result of the Contractor’s operations, into drainage systems or the ocean shall be the financial responsibility of the Contractor. The means of cleanup and the party or parties to be engaged to perform the cleanup work shall be determined by the Engineer in consultation with appropriate hazardous materials, pollution control, safety, health and wildlife authorities and officials. The Contractor shall immediately carry out cleanup orders issued to him through or by the Engineer and shall make the work site accessible to personnel and equipment from outside pollution control resources called in by the Engineer. The cost of cleanup action called for by the Engineer and performed by outside resources shall be deducted from any monies due or become due the Contractor.

Compensation:

Full compensation for conforming to the requirements of this section shall be considered as included in the Contract Sum paid for the various items of work and no additional compensation will be allowed therefor.

17. Environmental Protection Requirements
Source Reduction and Recycling
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) mandates that 25 percent of the waste stream in the City of Pacifica be diverted from landfill by 1995 and that this diversion increase to 50 percent by 2000. AB 939 also required the City of Pacifica to prepare and adopt a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) outlining recommended programs to meet the above noted diversion goals. One of the approved SRRE programs is to require the utilization of recycled construction materials for City projects. All work performed under this contract and all contractors and their associates and/or employees shall utilize recycled materials and recycle construction materials where feasible. Construction/Demolition Recycling Resources Lists are available from the Pacifica Planning Department and the California Integrated Waste Management Board.

Contractor shall reuse or recycle any useful construction materials generated during the project.

Disposal
At the end of each working day, the Contractor shall collect all scrap, debris and waste material and dispose of such materials properly.

Hazardous Material/Waste Management
A. Storage
The Contractor shall label and store all hazardous materials, such as pesticides, paints, thinners, solvents, and fuels; and all hazardous wastes, such as waste oil and antifreeze; in accordance with the City of Pacifica Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance and all applicable State and Federal regulations.

The Contractor shall store all hazardous materials and all hazardous wastes in accordance with secondary containment regulations, and it is recommended that these materials and

3.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 21 wastes be covered, as needed, to avoid potential management of collected rain water as a hazardous waste.

The Contractor shall keep an accurate, up-to-date inventory, including Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs), of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes stored on-site, to assist emergency response personnel in the event of a hazardous materials incident.

B. Disposal
The Contractor shall use secondary containment, such as a drip pan, to catch leaks or spills any time that vehicle or equipment fluids are dispensed, changed or poured.

The Contractor shall keep a stockpile of spill cleanup materials, such as rags or absorbents, readily accessible on site.

The Contractor shall clean up leaks and spills of vehicle or equipment fluids immediately and dispose of the waste and cleanup materials as hazardous waste, as described in the section above.

The Contractor shall not wash any spilled material into streets, gutters, storm drains or creeks and shall not bury spilled hazardous materials.

The Contractor shall report any hazardous materials spill to the City of Pacifica Building Division at (650) 738-7344.

The Contractor shall inspect vehicles and equipment arriving on site for leaking fluids and shall promptly repair leaking vehicles and equipment. Drip pans shall be used to catch leaks until repairs are made.

C. Activity-Specific Requirements
The following requirements shall be met on all projects within the City of Pacifica that include the listed activities.

Concrete, Grout and Mortar Waste Management
Material Management:

The Contractor shall store concrete, grout, and mortar away from drainage areas and ensure that these materials do not enter the storm drain system or the ocean waters.

Concrete Truck/Equipment Wash Out:

The Contractor shall not wash out concrete trucks or equipment into streets or gutters.

The Contractor shall perform washout of concrete trucks or equipment off-site or in a designated area on-site where the water will flow onto dirt or into a temporary pit in a dirt area. The Contractor shall let the water percolate into the soil and

3.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing FY 2022-23 RESURFACING PROJECT DRYCO CONSTRUCTION, INC. Part I – Page 22 dispose of the hardened concrete in a trash container. If a suitable dirt area is not available, then the Contractor shall collect the wash water and remove it off-site.

18. Layout of Work
Layout of work shall be done by the Contractor. Contractor shall mark the work area limits and facilities to be removed and replaced. All layout shall be approved by the City.

19. Substitutions
Substitutions in material or methods of construction, when necessary because of material shortages or in order to avoid serious delay may be made only after they are approved by the City Engineer in writing.

20. Traffic Control and Public Access
The Contractor shall be responsible for proper traffic control to assure public safety and convenience. Continuous safe public access shall be maintained to residential structures at all times.

21. Material and Workmanship
All materials and workmanship are to be the best of their respective kinds. The terms “or equal,” “approved,” “selected” and so forth shall mean as approved, etc. by the City Engineer. All materials and equipment used should be in accordance with the manufacturer’s printed directions.

Use adequate numbers of skilled workmen who are thoroughly trained and experienced in necessary crafts and who are completely familiar with the specified requirements and methods needed for proper performance of work specified. Use equipment adequate in terms of size, capacity and numbers to accomplish work in a timely manner.

22. Drug-Free Workplace
The Contractor is required to comply with the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. The requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Policy are described in City of Pacifica Administrative Policy Number

46. 23. Harassment and Discrimination
The Contractor is required to comply with City of Pacifica Administrative Policy Number 33, Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace.

24. Payroll Records
Contractor and each Sub-Contractor shall keep an accurate payroll record, showing the name, address, social security number, work week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by him in connection with the public work. All payroll records shall be certified and maintained by the Contractor and be made available to auditors and managers from the City upon request.

3.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Attachment "A" - Construction Services Agreement with DRYCO Construction, Inc. (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing OAK #4818-2196-0582 v1

MASTER AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES
This Master Agreement for Consultant Services (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this 28th day of March, 2022, by and between THE CITY OF PACIFICA, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "CITY") and GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES [a sole proprietorship, partnership, limited liability partnership, corporation, limited liability corporation] (hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT"). CITY and CONSULTANT may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.”

RECITALS
WHEREAS, CITY requires Construction Management, Inspections and Material Testing services in connection with the FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT is qualified to perform such services; and WHEREAS, CONSULTANT has agreed to provide CITY with such services on the terms and conditions set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, for the considerations hereinafter set forth, CONSULTANT and CITY agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 - SCOPE OF SERVICES

1.1. Scope of Services. CONSULTANT agrees to furnish services pursuant to a Task Order in the form set forth in Exhibit A, Task Order, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Services").

1.2. Compliance with Law. The Services shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders.

1.3. Time is of the Essence. CONSULTANT agrees to diligently prosecute the Services. In the performance of this Agreement, time is of the essence.

1.4. Professional Competence. CONSULTANT represents that it has the professional skills necessary to perform the Services and that it will perform the Services in a skillful and professional manner. CONSULTANT represents that it has all the necessary licenses to perform the Services and shall maintain them throughout the term of this Agreement.

CONSULTANT agrees that the Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which CONSULTANT is engaged, in the same or similar geographical area in which CONSULTANT practices its profession, and will prepare all work products required by this Agreement in accordance with such standards. CITY and CONSULTANT agree that CONSULTANT is in responsible charge of the Services. Acceptance by CITY of the Services does not operate as a release of CONSULTANT from professional responsibility for the Services performed.

ATTACHMENT B 3.b
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23

1.5. Independent Contractor. CONSULTANT is an independent contractor and not an employee of CITY. CONSULTANT expressly warrants that it will not represent that it is an employee of CITY. Persons employed or utilized by CONSULTANT in the performance of the Services will not be employees or agents of CITY. CONSULTANT is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

1.6. Confidentiality. CONSULTANT agrees to maintain in confidence and not disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation, without CITY's prior written consent, any trade secret or confidential information, knowledge or data relating to the products, process, or operation of CITY. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain in confidence and not to disclose to any person, firm, governmental entity, or corporation any data, information, technology, or material developed or obtained by CONSULTANT during the performance of the Services. The covenants contained in this Section 1.6 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause.

1.7. Ownership of Material. Any reports and other material prepared by or on behalf of CONSULTANT under this Agreement (collectively, the "Documents") shall be and remain the property of CITY. All Documents not already provided to CITY shall be delivered to CITY on the date of termination of this Agreement for any reason. The Documents may be used by CITY and its agents, employees, representatives, and assigns, in whole or in part, or in modified form, for all purposes CITY may deem appropriate without further employment of or payment of any compensation to CONSULTANT.

1.8. Documentation. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain full and complete documentation and accounting records, employee time sheets, and correspondence pertaining to the performance of the Services, and CONSULTANT shall make such documents available for review and/or audit by CITY and CITY's representatives at all reasonable times for at least four years after the termination of this Agreement or completion of the Services.

1.9. Testimony. CONSULTANT agrees to testify at CITY's request if litigation is brought against CITY in connection with the Services. Unless the action is brought by CONSULTANT or is based upon CONSULTANT's negligence, CITY will compensate CONSULTANT for the preparation and the testimony at CONSULTANT's standard hourly rates.

ARTICLE 2 - COMPENSATION

2.1. Compensation. Compensation for the Services shall be in accordance with the rate and schedules specified in a Task Order. However, in no event shall the amount the CITY pays to CONSULTANT for work done under a Task Order exceed the total compensation specified in the Task Order (“Cost Ceiling”).

2.2. Invoices. CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices in a form satisfactory to CITY on or before the tenth day of each month for Services provided during the preceding month. CONSULTANT shall submit time and cost records as necessary to substantiate

3.b
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 performance of the Services. Within 35 days after receipt of each such invoice, CITY shall verify the accuracy of the invoice, correct the charges where appropriate and as discussed and mutually agreed with CONSULTANT, and make payment to CONSULTANT in an amount equal to the amount of such invoice, as verified or corrected by CITY. No payment hereunder shall be construed as evidence of acceptance of any of CONSULTANT's work. CITY reserves the right to withhold payment from CONSULTANT on account of Services not performed satisfactorily, delays in CONSULTANT's performance of Services, or other defaults hereunder. CONSULTANT shall not stop or delay performance of the Services under this Agreement on account of payment disputes with CITY.

2.3. Status Reports. Together with each monthly invoice, CONSULTANT shall submit a status report detailing the amount expended on the Services to that date and the remaining amount to be expended before the Cost Ceiling is reached. CONSULTANT shall notify CITY in writing when payments have reached 90 percent of the Cost Ceiling.

2.4. Withholding. In lieu of holding retention, CITY shall withhold CONSULTANT's final payment under a Task Order until the Services provided under that Task Order are complete and CITY has received all Documents. CONSULTANT shall diligently continue and complete performance of the Services if the Services are not complete at the time CONSULTANT has performed services up to the Cost Ceiling.

ARTICLE 3 - TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon execution of the second signature and shall remain in full force and effect until December 31, 2022 (the "Term").

Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement may be extended for successive one-year term(s) upon mutual, written approval by the City Manager or his/her designee and CONSULTANT. Work authorized by a Task Order shall be performed in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Task Order.

3.2. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by CITY upon written notice to CONSULTANT.

3.3. Final Payment. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to compensation for Services performed up to the time of such termination, it being understood that any payments are full compensation for the Services rendered under this Agreement.

3.4. Other Remedies. Nothing in this Article 3 shall be deemed to limit the respective rights of the parties to terminate this Agreement for cause or otherwise to exercise any rights or pursue any remedies which may accrue to them.

ARTICLE 4 - DESIGNATED CONTACTS

4.1. CITY Contact. CITY designates Sam Bautista, its Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, as its contact who shall be responsible for administering and interpreting the terms and conditions of this Agreement, for matters relating to CONSULTANT's performance under this Agreement, and for liaison and coordination between CITY and

3.b
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 CONSULTANT. In the event CITY wishes to make a change in CITY 's representative, CITY will notify CONSULTANT of the change in writing.

4.2. CONSULTANT Contact. CONSULTANT designates Charles Krueger, Division Director as its contact, who shall have immediate responsibility for the performance of the Services and for all matters relating to performance under this Agreement. Any change in CONSULTANT's designated contact shall be subject to written approval by CITY.

ARTICLE 5 - INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE

5.1. Indemnification. CONSULTANT shall, to the fullest extent allowed by law, with respect to claims, liability, loss, damage, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's and expert witness fees, awards, fines, penalties, or judgments, arising out of or relating to the Services (collectively "Claims") that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless CITY, its Officials, officers, employees and agents (the "CITY Parties"), except to the extent the Claims are attributable to CITY Parties' gross negligence or willful misconduct. CONSULTANT shall defend the CITY Parties as required by California Civil Code Section 2778, and with counsel reasonably acceptable to those parties. CONSULTANT shall have no right to seek reimbursement from the CITY Parties for the costs of defense.

If CONSULTANT is a “design professional,” as defined in California Civil Code Section 2782.8(c), CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Indemnitees harmless against Liability only to the extent such Liability arises out of, pertains to, or relates to CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct. In such an event, the cost to defend charged to CONSULTANT shall not exceed CONSULTANT’s proportionate percentage of fault.

The obligations contained in this Section 5.1 shall survive the termination of this Agreement for whatever cause for the full period of time allowed by law and shall not in any way be limited by the insurance requirements of this Agreement.

5.2. Health and Safety. CONSULTANT may perform part of the Services at sites which contain unknown working conditions and contaminated materials. CONSULTANT shall be solely responsible for the health and safety of CONSULTANT's employees during the performance of the Services.

5.3. Insurance. CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency shall procure, provide and maintain at all times during the performance of this Agreement, and for such additional periods as described herein, the insurance listed below with insurers licensed to do business in the State of California and with a Best's rating of no less than A:VII.

A. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance providing bodily injury liability and property damage, to protect against

3.b
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 all liability arising out of the use of any owned, leased, passenger or commercial automobile at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit and $2,000,000 aggregate. Coverage shall apply to hired and non-owned autos.

B. Commercial General Liability Insurance. Commercial General Liability Insurance, with limits providing a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage for each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate and $2,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate. The insurance shall cover all operations including but not limited to the following: (1) premises, operations and mobile equipment liability; (2) completed operations and products liability; (3) contractual liability insuring the obligations assumed by CONSULTANT in this Agreement; (4) broad form property damage liability; (5) personal injury liability endorsement, including death; and (6) automobile bodily injury and property damage insurance, including all owned, hired and non-owned equipment.

C. Professional Liability Insurance. Professional Liability Insurance protecting against liabilities arising out of or in connection with negligent acts, errors, or omissions of CONSULTANT and all of CONSULTANTS employees, subcontractors, consultants and other agency in connection with this Agreement, at a minimum amount of $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage and $1,000,000 aggregate, on a "claims made basis" with a continuation of coverage extension for liabilities for two years from the date the Services are substantially complete. Such professional liability policies shall include coverage for liability assumed by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement.

D. Workers Compensation Insurance. Workers Compensation insurance, occupational disease insurance and employer’s liability insurance shall be required with minimum limits as required by law, covering all workplaces involved in this Agreement.

E. Policy Terms. Concurrently with execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with Certificates of Insurance evidencing that CONSULTANT has obtained or maintains the insurance required by this Section

5.3. The Certificates shall be on forms acceptable to CITY. CONSULTANT shall also furnish CITY with original endorsements with the following documentation:
 Precluding cancellation or reduction in coverage before the expiration of thirty (30) days after CITY shall have received written notification thereof from CONSULTANT by United States mail;
 Providing that CONSULTANT's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, and include a “separation of insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability (cross-liability endorsement);
 Excepting CONSULTANT’S professional liability insurance, naming CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents as additional insureds (“Additional Insureds”); and

3.b
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23  Providing that for any claims relating to CONSULTANT's services hereunder, CONSULTANT's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to CITY, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents, and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by CITY for itself, its City Council, boards, commissions, committees, officers, employees and agents shall be in excess of CONSULTANT's insurance and shall not be contributory with it.
 It shall be a requirement under this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverages requirements and/or limits shall be available to the Additional Insured, including but not limited to any umbrella or excess insurance.

Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be the greater of:
(a) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (b) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured.

F. Material Breach. If CONSULTANT fails to maintain insurance coverage or provided insurance documentation which is required pursuant to this Agreement, it shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement. CITY, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement and obtain damages from CONSULTANT resulting from said breach. Alternatively, CITY may purchase the required insurance coverage, and without further notice to CONSULTANT, may deduct from sums due to CONSULTANT any premium costs advanced by CITY for such insurance. These remedies shall be in addition to any other remedies available to CITY.

ARTICLE 6 - NOTICES
All notices or other communications required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing, and shall be personally delivered or sent by facsimile or reputable overnight courier and shall be deemed received upon the earlier of: (1) if personally delivered, the date of delivery to the address of the person to receive such notice; (2) if delivered by Federal Express or other overnight courier for next business day delivery, the next business day; (3) if sent by facsimile, with the original sent on the same day by overnight courier, the date on which the facsimile is received, provided it is before 5:00 P.M. Pacific Time; or (4) if sent electronically, the date of delivery on the confirmed read receipt. Notice of change of address shall be given by written notice in the manner described in this Article 6. Rejection or other refusal to accept or the inability to deliver because of a change in address of which no notice was given shall be deemed to constitute receipt of the notice or communication sent. Unless changed in accordance herewith, the addresses for notices given pursuant to this Agreement shall be as follows:

If to CITY: City Manager
540 Crespi Drive
Pacifica, CA 94404
Phone: (650) 738-7409
Facsimile: (650) 359-6038
Email: [email protected]

3.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 If to CONSULTANT: Charles Krueger, Division Director
GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES, Inc.
2055 Gateway Place Ste 470
San Jose, CA 95110
Tel: (408) 435-5503
Fax: (408) 435-5505
Email: [email protected]
ARTICLE 7 - MISCELLANEOUS

7.1. Conflict of Interest Prohibition. CITY and CONSULTANT will comply with the requirements of the CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code adopted pursuant to California Government Code §87300 et seq., the Political Reform Act (California Government Code §81000 et seq.), the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission (Title 2, §18110 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations), California Government Code §1090 et seq., and any other ethics laws applicable to the performance of the Services and/or this Agreement. CONSULTANT may be required to file with the CITY Clerk a completed Form 700 before commencing performance of the Services unless the CITY Clerk determines that completion of a Form 700 is not required, pursuant to CITY’s Conflict of Interest Code. Form 700 forms are available from the CITY Clerk.

CONSULTANT may not perform Services for any other person or entity that, pursuant to any applicable law or regulation, would result in a conflict of interest or would otherwise be prohibited with respect to CONSULTANT’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with CITY and to provide any necessary and appropriate information requested by CITY or any authorized representative concerning potential conflicts of interest or prohibitions concerning CONSULTANT’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement.

CONSULTANT may not employ any CITY official, officer or employee in the performance of the Services, nor may any official, officer or employee of CITY have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code §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 CITY. If CONSULTANT was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of 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 §1090 et seq., the entire Agreement is void and CONSULTANT will not be entitled to any compensation for CONSULTANT’s performance of the Services, including reimbursement of expenses, and CONSULTANT will be required to reimburse CITY for any sums paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement. CONSULTANT understands that, in addition to the foregoing, penalties for violating Government Code §1090 may include criminal prosecution and disqualification from holding public office in the State of California.

Any violation by CONSULTANT of the requirements of this provision will constitute a

3.b
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 material breach of this Agreement, and the CITY reserves all its rights and remedies at law and equity concerning any such violations.

7.2. Subcontracting. CONSULTANT may subcontract portions of the Services upon the prior written approval of CITY. CONSULTANT will be solely responsible for payment of such subcontract Services. No contractual relationship will exist between any such subcontractors of CONSULTANT and CITY. CONSULTANT’s subcontractors agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under the Agreement. CONSULTANT’s subcontractors further agree to include the same requirements and provisions of this Agreement, including the indemnity and insurance requirements, with any subsubcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the sub-subcontractor’s work. A copy of the CITY indemnity and insurance provisions will be furnished to CONSULTANT’s subcontractors upon request.

7.3. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of CITY and CONSULTANT as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters covered hereunder. This Agreement may only be modified by an amendment in writing signed by each party.

7.4. No Assignment. The Services are deemed unique and neither party shall assign, transfer, subcontract or otherwise substitute its interest in this Agreement or any of its obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party. As limited by this Section

7.2, this Agreement is to be binding on the successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

7.5. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is determined to be unconstitutional, invalid or beyond the authority of either party, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, which shall continue in full force and effect, provided that the remainder of this Agreement can be interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the parties.

7.6. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and, when fully signed, such counterparts shall have the same effect as if signed in one document.

7.7. Choice of Law. This Agreement and all matters relating to it shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without reference to its choice of laws principles and venue shall be in the appropriate court in San Mateo County, California.

7.8. Waiver. No failure on the part of either Party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder. A waiver by either CITY or CONSULTANT of any breach of this Agreement shall not be binding upon the waiving party unless such waiver is in writing. In the event of a written waiver, such a waiver shall not affect the waiving party's rights with respect to any other further breach.

7.9. Mediation. In the event the parties are unable to resolve a dispute arising under this Agreement through good faith negotiations, the parties agree to submit the matter to

3.b
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 mediation with a mutually agreeable mediator. Prior to the mediation, the parties shall exchange any documents reasonably necessary to resolve the matter to be mediated.

7.10. Attorney’s Fees. If any action at law or in equity, including an action for declaratory relief, is brought to enforce or interpret the provisions of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, which may be set by the court in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose, in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled.

7.11. Interpretation. In the event this Agreement is ever construed in any dispute between the parties, it and each of its provisions shall be construed without regard to the party or parties responsible for its preparation and shall be deemed to have been prepared jointly by the parties. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement.

7.12. Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement on behalf of one of the parties represents that he or she is duly authorized to sign and deliver the Agreement on behalf of such party and that this Agreement is binding on such party in accordance with its terms.

7.13. Third Parties. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with, or cause of action in favor of, a third party against either the CITY or CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT’s Services hereunder are being performed solely for the benefit of CITY. CITY shall be an express third-party beneficiary of all contracts between CONSULTANT and any subcontractors or subconsultants in connection with any services performed in connection with, or in furtherance of, this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager

CONSULTANT
By: Date
Attest:

By: ___________________________
Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

3.b
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23

EXHIBIT A

TASK ORDER

3.b
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23

EXAMPLE OF
TASK ORDER NO. ________

CITY OF PACIFICA
AND
__________________________
SECTION 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct _______________ to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica (“CITY”) and _______________ (“CONSULTANT”) hereto dated ________________ (“MASTER AGREEMENT”)
SECTION 2 – SCOPE OF WORK
The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment “A” – Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3 – COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be as set forth in Attachment “B” – Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed ____________________ ($____________) (“Cost Ceiling”).

SECTION 4 – TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed by _________________ or as extended in writing by the City Manager.

SECTION 5 – ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.

Approved this _______ day of _____, _______.
[Signatures on Next Page]

3.b
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Approved As To Form
By:

Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

CONSULTANT
_______________________________
By: Date
By: Date

3.b
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 ATTACHMENT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES

3.b
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 ATTACHMENT “B”

COMPENSATION

3.b
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 TASK ORDER NO. 1

CITY OF PACIFICA AND

GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES
SECTION 1 – PURPOSE
The purpose of this Task Order is to authorize and direct GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES to proceed with the work specified in SECTION 2 below, in accordance with the provisions of the Master Agreement for Consultant Services between the City of Pacifica (“CITY”) and GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES, (“CONSULTANT”) hereto dated March 28, 2022 (“MASTER AGREEMENT”) SECTION 2 – SCOPE OF WORK
The items authorized by this Task Order are presented in Attachment “A” – Scope of Services, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference.

SECTION 3 – COMPENSATION AND PAYMENT
Compensation shall be as provided in the MASTER AGREEMENT. Compensation for services as set forth in SECTION 2 shall be as set forth in Attachment “B” – Compensation, which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. Total compensation for all services provided under this Task Order shall not exceed One Hundred Sixteen thousand six hundred eighty-four and zero /100 ($116,684.00) (“Cost Ceiling”).

SECTION 4 – TIME OF PERFORMANCE
The services described in SECTION 2 of this Task Order shall be completed within 60 working days or as extended in writing by the City Engineer.

SECTION 5 – ITEMS AND CONDITIONS
All terms and conditions contained in the MASTER AGREEMENT are incorporated by reference and remain in full force and effect.

Approved this 28th day of March 2022

CITY OF PACIFICA
By: Date: __________________
Kevin Woodhouse, City Manager
Approved As To Form:

By: Date: __________________
Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney
CONSULTANT: GHIRARDELLI ASSOCIATES
By: Date: __________________
Charles Krueger, Division Director

3.b
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 ATTACHMENT “A”

SCOPE OF SERVICES

3.b
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Construction Management for the City of Pacifica, FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project www.ghirardelliassoc.com
File No. 21104.004
March 2, 2022
City of Pacifica
ATTN: Raymund Donguines, PE, Senior Civil Engineer
City of Pacifica
151 Milagra Drive
Pacifica, CA 94044
[email protected]
RE: Construction Management for City of Pacifica FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Dear Mr. Donguines,
Ghirardelli Associates, Inc. (Ghirardelli) is pleased to submit this proposal to provide Construction Management, Inspection and Material Testing services to the City of Pacifica (City) for their FY 2022-23 Resurfacing Project. The Ghirardelli team has proven construction management experience; intimate knowledge of the Pacifica community, work environment, and site conditions; and qualified personnel to deliver this project. Ghirardelli is a proven Bay Area leader in effectively/successfully delivering local agency projects.

Our proposed team will be led by Project Manager Charlie Krueger, PE, QSD. Mr. Krueger is a professional engineer with 30 years of experience in project management, with a proven record of delivering multiple projects on schedule and within budget. His experience includes public works and local transportation agencies, as well as working with the State of California and private developers. He is personally committed to support the City in the successful delivery of this project. Our Construction Manager/Resident Engineer, Mr. Jaime Heredia, PE and our Construction Inspector, Cesar Lara, will provide the quality Construction Management and Inspection services demonstrated during Pacifica’s 2021 Curb Ramp project. Additionally, Ghirardelli will use the resources of our materials testing subconsultant, Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder). All key members of our team have a history of successfully working together that will bring added value to the effective and successful construction and closeout of the FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project. Resumes are included at the end of this proposal.

The team has the leadership, available resources, proven record, and strong commitment to undertake construction management,inspection and testing services for this City project. The following proposal outlines how the team will assist the City during construction and deliver on our commitment to meet the project delivery goals and objectives.

Ghirardelli understands that we will be bound by the City’s As-Needed Services Master Services Agreement when selected for this project.

As a principal of the firm, I have the authority to bind the firm/team. Our Project Manager/Resident Engineer, Mr.

Krueger, can be contacted directly during the evaluation via email at [email protected] or via cell at 510- 867-4452
Sincerely,
Ghirardelli Associates, Inc.

Raewyn Lelo-Butcher
Executive Vice President
M| 510.708.7442 E| [email protected]

3.b
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Construction Management for the City of Pacifica, FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project www.ghirardelliassoc.com

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The City is seeking an experienced consultant from the on-call list to provide Construction Management, Inspection and Testing services for the City of Pacifica FY 2022-23 Resurfacing project. Construction activities will include asphalt overlay, cape seal, rubber cape seal, slurry seal, double slurry seal, microsurfacing, base repair, pavement striping and marking and related work. The project is anticipated to start in April 2022 with a total of 60 construction working days.

Quality Construction of Road Repairs and surfacing
The quality and tolerances are critical to a good, long lasting finished project. Good workmanship is critical when matching and conforming to existing infrastructure in order to prevent drivability and drainage issues. Adherence to specified materials and temperatures are important to having a long lasting pavement overlay and surfacing project. Ghirardelli will implement a strict quality control regimen to confirm that the contractor understands the intent of the design. Our team, particularly our inspector Cesar Lara, has significant experience as a consultant for and working with street surfacing materials and contractors. He has worked with designers,owners and the contractors to ensure that the surfacing is done correctly.

Control of Measured Bid Quantities
Measured bid quantities will need to be tracked closely in the field to avoid any overruns. Certain operations such as areas repaired and linear feet of striping can easily exceed contract quantities and overrun the contract budget. Ghirardelli will verify that the field quantities match the quantities shown on the plans prior to starting operations. Any deviations from the planned quantities will be verified with the City Representative and the designer. All unit cost bid items will be measured in the field and verieifed for use as the basis of payment.

Ghirardelli understands that we will be working closely with the rest of the project team which includes the Design Engineers, the City’s Project Manager, and the City Inspector.

SCOPE OF WORK
Ghirardelli is proud to bring its experience with similar resurfacing projects. Our approach for this type of project is built around the qualifications and experience of our staff and lessons learned from previous projects. Our team realizes that the success of any construction management project depends on the ability of the project team to proactively identify and anticipate problems before they become major issues and to resolve issues promptly before they impact the project budget and schedule.

Ghirardelli will provide Resident Engineering, Construction Inspection, and Materials Testing services on the project, including, but not limited to the following:
• Review and accept contractor submittals for compliance with contract requirements. • Respond to Contractor Requests for Information (RFIs), coordinating with City staff as necessary. • Inspect and observe Construction Contractor’s work daily for compliance with the contract documents, environmental documents, state laws, regulations, etc.
• Provide Construction Contractor with notifications of acceptability or deficiencies in work and required actions for contract compliance.
• Maintain daily inspection reports of work, including photos, descriptions of daily activities, any corrective actions to be taken by Construction Contractor, persons and equipment onsite, and work to be completed the following day(s).
• Review of materials and equipment delivered to site for compliance with submittals and contract documents. • Coordinate and provide material testing and specialty inspections as required. • Review of Construction Contractor’s compliance with all permits, stormwater regulations and permits (SWPPP), and environmental documents.
• Review of Construction Contractor’s compliance with health and safety standards and regulations and reporting of non-compliance.
• Monitor record documents to ensure proper maintenance and completion by Contractor.

3.b
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Construction Management for the City of Pacifica, FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project www.ghirardelliassoc.com
• Develop punch list and perform other project closeout activities, as needed.

Daily Inspection Reports
Ghirardelli’s inspector (Cesar Lara) will prepare a daily report for each construction day. The inspector’s daily reports (including the reports from material testers) will be provided to the Resident Engineer. This information will be used for the preparation and evaluation of the monthly progress estimates, non-compliance issues, construction delays, compliance tests, CPM schedule review, liquidated damages, and claims. The daily reports will be reviewed for the following factual information:
• Date, project identification, contractor’s name, subcontractor’s name(s), and time of inspections. • Conditions (weather, moisture, soil, etc.); any inclement weather conditions that hampered or delayed the contractor’s operations.
• Activities detail. Scheduled activities including starting and completion dates. Bid item numbers of all activities should be listed in the daily report.
• Difficulties encountered by the contractor.
• Controversial matters (disputes, questionable items, etc.). • Deficiencies and violations (including construction work, safety, labor, etc.). • Anticipated project problems
• Major material and equipment deliveries to the site (type, quantity, means of delivery, and condition of materials). • Record of manpower, construction equipment, and materials testing locations and results.

Materials Testing
Ghirardelli’s inspector (Cesar Lara) will coordinate material testing with our subconsultant materials testing lab, Kleinfelder.

All material testing will be performed at the frequency established by the Contract documents including the City’s Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and the Caltrans Construction Manual. Our inspector will review the test reports for compliance and maintain the required documentation, including a non-conformance log to confirm that all failed tests are retested until meeting compliance.

Project Management
Mr. Krueger, as the Project Manager will manage our staff and oversee preparation of Ghirardelli’s monthly invoices.

FEE PROPOSAL
On the following page is the estimated fee for Construction Management, Inspection and Testing services associated with the FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project. It is based on our review and understanding of the plans and specifications along with our correspondence with the City.

Ghirardelli estimates that our fee will be $116,683.60. The fee includes part time hours for out Resident Engineer (Jaime Heredia, PE), and full time hours for our Construction Inspector (Cesar Lara).

3.b
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Construction Management for the City of Pacifica, FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project www.ghirardelliassoc.com
Associate Role Rates
ST March April May June
Total Hours
Jaime Heredia
Construction
Manager / Resident
Engineer
$222.32 20 30 30 15 95
Cesar Lara Construction
Inspector $165.80 80 172 172 80 504
Jaime Heredia
Construction
Manager / Resident
Engineer
$21,120.40
Cesar Lara Construction
Inspector $83,563.20
Special Inspection and Material Testing $12,000.00
$116,683.60
$116,683.60
Fee Assumptions:

1. Construction work will be 60 workdays. We have allowed 8 hrs. of Inspector time for both preconstruction and Close out.

2. Project Manager will process the Ghirardelli invoice and manage project paperwork.

3. Resident Engineer will work part time throughout the project.

4. Inspector will be full time during construction.

5. Rates and fees are valid for the duration of the project.

6. Rates include the cost of Inspector's normal equipment and PPE, vehicles, computers, phones, and office equipment.

3.b
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Charlie Krueger, PE, QSD
Project Manager
Mr. Krueger, PE, QSD, has extensive experience in the planning, development, design and construction of public works, transportation and infrastructure improvement projects. His skillset includes construction management and contract administration, coordination with owners, contractors, engineers, architects, outside agencies, utilities, public relations, partnering, and dispute resolution boards. Charlie has overseen the construction management of various public works, transportation, modernization, and rehabilitation projects. His expertise includes roadway, utilities, and transit facilities.

In addition to successful structural projects, he has also overseen light-rail construction including at-grade and elevated light rail and at-grade bus rapid transit stations. His management and dedication to successful project completion has helped many public agencies achieve their goals of transportation modernization and community improvement initiatives.

Project Experience
Fair Oaks Bridge
City of Sunnyvale; Sunnyvale, CA
Project Manager | Located between Kifer Road and Evelyn Avenue, the Fair Oaks Bridge crosses over the Caltrain tracks and Hendy Avenue. The bridge was built in 1967, retrofitted in 1981 and 1993, and will undergo several improvements to address: Severe deck cracking/spalling, Inadequate bike lane width, No sidewalk on bridge, Structural deficiencies with Sufficiency Rating of 47., Existing pedestrian overcrossing non-compliance with Construction activities will encompass: Bridge widening along the east side, New sidewalk on east side of the bridge and widen bike lanes, Removal of existing pedestrian overcrossing, Hendy Avenue realignment and improvement, Realignment of roadway along Fair Oaks connecting Hendy and Kifer, Intersection improvement, Water and sewer main replacements, Landscaping/guardrails/streetlights installation.

The City’s goal is to maintain one travel lane and one bike lane in each direction during this time. However, some short-term lane closures may be required. In addition, the Hendy Avenue underpass area will be closed during early construction phases (approximately 8-10 months) to help expedite the overall construction schedule. Pedestrian access over the Caltrain corridor will be maintained until bridge construction is complete.

Kato Road Grade Separation (C222)
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority; Fremont and Milpitas, CA Structures Representative | This was a grade separation project for the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) extension to Silicon Valley, and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). Site work involved the construction of a two-span structural steel UPRR bridge, a cast-in-place two-span UPRR access bridge, and a cast-in-place post-tensioned two-span BART bridge, over Kato Road. Deep soil-mix retaining walls were constructed to lower the road profile. The project included a shoofly for UPRR and constructed a box culvert adjacent to a new housing development, within a few feet of an existing home. The project also included a pump station, bio-swale, tree-well filters, irrigation and landscaping.

Utilities requiring protection included Kinder Morgan and Chevron pipelines. Mr. Krueger managed the field inspection staff for the civil and structures work, resolved technical issues and interpreted specifications. He also assisted with public relations with the adjacent businesses and homeowners association.

Lower Berryesa Creek Project, Phase I & II
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Project Manager | Phase 1 includes work on Lower Berryessa Creek from Penitencia Creek to Abel Street, which is EXPERIENCE 30+ Years
TENURE W/GA 15 Years

EDUCATION
B.S. Civil Engineering, San Jose
State University, 1987

REGISTRATIONS
CA Professional Civil Engineer,
#47496

CERTIFICATIONS
• Quality Storm Water Developer/
Practitioner (QSD/P), #20677

3.b
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23

CHARLIE KRUEGER, PE, QSD

PROJECT MANAGER
divided into two reaches (A and B) for a total length of 2,400 feet. Phase 1 – Lower Berryessa Creek (Penitencia Creek to Abel Street): Raises the existing levee on the southwest bank, replaces the existing levee on the northeast bank with concrete floodwalls, constructs new headwalls, and raises and reconstructs a pedestrian bridge.

Phase 2 will consist of improvements to Berryessa Creek from Abel Street to Calaveras Boulevard, which is divided in five reaches (C, D, E, F, and G) for a total of 6,000 feet. Phase 2 also includes improvements on the lower reaches of Calera Creek and Tularcitos Creek for a total of 3,000 feet. Lower Berryessa Creek (Abel Street to Calaveras Boulevard) raises levees, constructs floodwalls including spread footing and cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) piles foundation on both sides of the creek, reconstructs pedestrian bridge (Town Center), constructs transitions structures and headwalls, constructs access roads and on-ramp and off ramps from access roads, including Armorflex paving, removes vegetation and re-vegetation, utility relocation, and outfall repairs.

Lower Calera Creek reconfigures and widens the channel, and constructs new floodwalls and headwalls. Tularcitos Creek constructs a new stormwater pump station with masonry building and diesel pumps, short floodwalls, and new headwalls, and reconstructs two pedestrian bridges.

Alum Rock Bus Rapid Transit
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority; San Jose, CA Resident Engineer | This project constructed 16 new station platforms with custom stainless-steel shelters incorporating integral electrical and communications cabinets, LED lighting, CCTV, real-time information signage, lighted ad panels and attractive art enhancements along Santa Clara Street in Downtown San Jose, Alum Rock Avenue and Capitol Expressway. The project constructed a busway in the median by widening Alum Rock Avenue, which required new sidewalk and handicap ramps at multiple intersections. The project reconstructed portions of the roadway on Alum Rock Avenue between U.S. 101 and Capitol Avenue and included construction of 12 new signalized intersections to accommodate the median busway. Mr. Krueger was the main point of contact between the VTA and the contractor and was responsible for preparing letters and other correspondence to the contractor. He coordinated construction activities with regulatory and local agencies including the City of San Jose and the County of Santa Clara, as well as with Caltrans. He also worked with VTA’s utility coordinator to manage utility relocations and new services by PG&E, AT&T, and San Jose Water Company. Additionally, He supervised a project engineer, a scheduler, four civil/structural inspectors, an electrical inspector, project controls staff, and an engineering aide.

Jerrold Avenue Bridge Replacement
Caltrain/Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB); San Francisco, CA Resident Engineer | This Joint Powers Board project replaced the existing intermediate three (3)-spans with a single span, steel-fabricated bridge, and included the installation of two (2) jump-spans to conform to the present bridge layout. Also involved was the reconstruction of the tracks that were impacted by the new structures, travel way and sidewalks. Mr. Krueger provided contract administration, reviewed submittals, managed inspections and testing, and monitored the schedule. He also reviewed, recommended, and negotiated change orders, as well as coordinated with the stakeholders.

The bridge replacement took place over a 12-hour period on a Friday night after the last scheduled train crossed the old bridge. This required extensive coordination with JPB and Caltrain staff over a 6-month period in order to develop a site specific work plan that covered every aspect of the process, including construction of 9’ diameter CIDH pile foundations while the old bridge was still in service, bridge demolition and replacement, trackwork and contingency plans.

3.b
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Jaime Heredia, PE
Resident Engineer
Mr. Heredia has over 21 years of experience in administering the design, construction and project management of teams completing major capital improvement projects that include slide restoration, emergency roadway repair, paving, and streetscapes.

Project Experience
On-Call Construction Management Services
Alameda County Public Works; Alameda County, CA
Resident Engineer/Inspector | Mr. Heredia completed and/or assisted the County on the following projects: Castro Valley Resurfacing; Safety Improvements on Fairmont Drive; Palomares and Redwood Road Safety Improvements; The Miller Sweeney Bridge Fender System Repair; East 14th Street/162nd Avenue Sidewalk; and Caltrans new Federal projects.

The work included AC Milling and AC overlay, tree planting, and installing guardrail and, streetlights. Mr. Heredia’s duties included daily reports using Virtual Project Manager software, weekly meetings, coordination of submittal review, inspection, coordination of field testing, field measurements, review of extra work cost proposals, preparation of progress payments and change orders, and coordination with various stakeholders and utility providers. He also assisted County staff in preparing award packages for federally funded projects and compiling documentation for Caltrans audits.

Many of the projects were on residential streets requiring thoughtful coordination with residents to maintain safe access to driveways and adequate notices for parking restrictions.

Snake Road Slide Repair
City of Oakland; Oakland, CA
Resident Engineer | As part of the City of Oakland’s Civil Capital Improvement projects which included slide repairs, streetscapes, street widenings, and emergency roadway repair projects, Mr. Heredia served as the Resident Engineer for the Snake Road slide repair project. The project involved repair along 120 linear feet of roadway and involved 20 soldier piles with 30’ high timber lagging and two tiers of tiebacks that held back engineered backfill beneath the new road construction.

Design and Construction Services Division
City of Oakland; Oakland, CA
Supervising Civil Engineer | Mr. Heredia was responsible for administration, project management, and design of the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) consisting of transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian improvement projects, including streetscapes, bridge maintenance & rehabilitation, bridge seismic retrofit, bridge replacement, street resurfacing, sidewalk repair, stair & path repair, slide restoration, and emergency roadway repair. He was responsible for managing and administering CIP budget of $100 million and staffing of 9 FTE’s. Mr. Heredia was responsible for managing and administering 37 multi-tiered as-needed professional services contracts for civil, structural and geotechnical engineering services totaling $11.7 million. He was also responsible for managing and administering “design/build” contracts for major redevelopment funded CIP projects.

Infrastructure Maintenance Division
City of Oakland; Oakland, CA
Acting Operations Manager/Supervising Civil Engineer | Mr. Heredia acted as operations manager for the Infrastructure Maintenance Division, consisting of streets and sidewalks, sewer and storm drainage, and tree maintenance. He was responsible for managing and administering an annual operating budget of $15.8 million and staffing of approximately 156 employees. He assisted in Fiscal Year 2005-07 budget development for Public Works Agency, Infrastructure Maintenance Division.

EXPERIENCE 21 Years
TENURE W/GA 1 Years

EDUCATION
M.S., Civil Engineering, University
of California, Berkeley
B.S., Civil Engineering, University
of California, Berkeley

REGISTRATIONS
Professional Civil Engineer, CA,
No. 42244

3.b
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Cesar Lara
Construction Inspector/Pavement
Preservation Specialist
Mr. Lara has over 20 years of experience in the pavement industry. He has introduced and helped author specifications for bonded wearing course, TruPave, GlasPave Paving Mat, Evotherm WMA, Scrub Seal, Micro Surfacing and other products in Western US. He was responsible for the development and implementation of specifications in California, Oregon, Washington and Nevada for Telfer and Telfer Pavements for various maintenance processes, emulsions and specialty product lines. His experience includes consulting on multiple value engineering projects as the pavement preservation expert for the City of Santa Clara, City of Stockton, City of San Ramon, City of Danville, Mendocino County, Marin County, Amador County and Placer County. Mr.

Lara’s experience includes providing street assessments and recommendation to cities, counties, and state agencies.

Project Experience
FY 2015 Measure M Surface Seals
City of Berkeley; Berkeley, CA
Pavement Preservation Specialist | This was the City’s first Asphalt Rubber Cape Seal (AR chip seal covered by a Type II Slurry) project that Mr. Lara presented to the City on Pavement Preservation. He assisted the City in choosing specific street locations that would benefit from this treatment. This treatment was eventually placed at various locations throughout the City.

FY 2020-21/2021-22/2022-23 StreetSaver Pavement Preservation Streets County of Marin; Marin County, CA
Pavement Preservation Specialist | Mr. Lara provides value engineering services by reviewing all streets/recommendations from the County’s StreetSaver report. He chose specific locations for their pavement preservation program and marked all dig out locations.

Cold Plane AC Pavement and Overlay RMHA-G (BWC)
Caltrans District 4: Solano County, CA
Construction Quality Control | This project was on Highway 505 between Vacaville and Winters from Post mile 0.0 – 10.6 North and South bound lanes (approx. 40 lane miles). Mr. Lara provided quality control on materials during the placement of 39,700 tons of RMHA-G BWC.

Bonded Wearing Course Highway 37
Caltrans District 4; Vallejo, CA
Construction Quality Control | This project involved the placement of 2,100 tons of patch paving and 5,800 tons of rubberized BWC on 14 miles of Highway 37. The highway was closed during night paving and opened early on both nights safely to traffic. Mr. Lara provided quality control of materials during the placement of patch paving and rubberized BWC.

EXPERIENCE 20 Years
TENURE W/GA 2 Years

CERTIFICATIONS/TRAINING
SWPPP
Caltrans: 8 Hour Safety Training
APWA: Inspector Training

TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE
• Roadway Resurfacing and
Reconstruction
• Pavement Preservation

ORGANIZATIONS
• Western Regional Association
of Pavement Preservation –
Current President
• Maintenance Superintendent
Association – Annual
Presenter
• American Public Works
Association, Northern
California Chapter –
Education Committee,
Secretary

3.b
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23

CESAR LARA

CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR/PAVEMENT PRESERVATION SPECIALIST 2013 Road Sealant Projects
County of Marin; Marin County, CA
Construction Quality Control | The project covered 291,000 square yards of Chip Seal and 208,200 square yards of Micro Surfacing on various locations throughout the County. Mr. Lara provided quality control services for the emulsion and placement of Chip Seal and Micro Surfacing activities.

Various Pavement Preservation Projects
Various Clients; Bay Area Region, CA
Pavement Preservation Specialist | Mr. Lara has provided his pavement and preservation expertise to multiple city and county agencies throughout California. He regularly conducts street assessments and provides agencies recommendations to help preserve the life of their roads. As part of this effort he is currently developing a 5-year Preservation Plan for Marin County by evaluating current road conditions, marking dig-outs and inspecting current county projects.

Various Pavement Preservation Projects
Telfer Pavement Technologies; Martinez, CA
Pavement Preservation Specialist | As a pavement preservation specialist who understands the details of asphalt products, Mr. Lara’s industry knowledge with pavement distresses and emulsion products/processes is an asset to any project. Telfer Pavement Technologies specialized in the manufacture, distribution, transportation and application of asphalt products. Their services included asphalt rubber production and placement, emulsion chip sealing, slurry and microsurfacing, bonded wearing course, dust control, fabric, mat and grid installation, sand sealing/scrub sealing, fog sealing, tack coat, prime coat, CTB cure and many others. For nearly a decade Mr. Lara provided critical expertise and recommendations to city, county, and state agencies on the best products and materials that were most suited to their needs and budgets.

3.b
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 ATTACHMENT “B”

COMPENSATION

3.b
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and Ghirardelli Associates (4931 : FY 2022-23 Construction Management for the City of Pacifica, FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project www.ghirardelliassoc.com
Associate Role Rates
ST March April May June
Total Hours
Jaime Heredia
Construction
Manager / Resident
Engineer
$222.32 20 30 30 15 95
Cesar Lara Construction
Inspector $165.80 80 172 172 80 504
Jaime Heredia
Construction
Manager / Resident
Engineer
$21,120.40
Cesar Lara Construction
Inspector $83,563.20
Special Inspection and Material Testing $12,000.00
$116,683.60
$116,683.60
Fee Assumptions:

1. Construction work will be 60 workdays. We have allowed 8 hrs. of Inspector time for both preconstruction and Close out.

2. Project Manager will process the Ghirardelli invoice and manage project paperwork.

3. Resident Engineer will work part time throughout the project.

4. Inspector will be full time during construction.

5. Rates and fees are valid for the duration of the project.

6. Rates include the cost of Inspector's normal equipment and PPE, vehicles, computers, phones, and office equipment.

3.b
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment "B" - Master Agreement and Task Order No. 1 between City of Pacifica and 280
82 101
1 92
82 380
1 INVERNESS DRIVE

HICKEY BOULEVARD

CATALINA AVENUE

BEACHVIEW AVENUE CRESTMOOR CIRCLE

FOOTHILL DRIVE

HEATHCLIFF DRIVE

MANOR DRIVE

GLASGOW DRIVE GLENCOURT WAY

LORRY LANE

MONTEREY ROAD

BROOKHAVEN COURT HAMILTON COURT MELROSE COURT

RUTLAND
DRIVE

HORIZON WAY

IDLEWILD COURT

FOREST LAKE DRIVE

MONTEREY ROAD
DRIVE

LOCKHAVEN
8 2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898
1 G1

TITLE SHEET
DATE:

ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS

BIDDING
02/23/22

CITY OF PACIFICA
2022/23 PAVEMENT RESURFACING PROJECT
DRAWING C1
-BEACHVIEW AVENUE
-BROOKHAVEN COURT
-CATALINA AVENUE
-CRESTMOOR CIRCLE
-HAMILTON COURT
-HICKEY BOULEVARD:

FROM INVERNESS DRIVE

TO FIRECREST AVENUE
-INVERNESS DRIVE:

FROM HICKEY BOULEVARD

TO HEATHCLIFF DRIVE
-MELROSE COURT
-RUTLAND DRIVE
DRAWING C3
-HEATHCLIFF DRIVE:

FROM INVERNESS DRIVE

TO MANOR DRIVE
-INVERNESS DRIVE:

FROM HEATHCLIFF DRIVE

TO MANOR DRIVE
-MANOR DRIVE

PROJECT AREA

LOCATION MAP
NTS

VICINITY MAP
NTS
DRAWING C2
-FOOTHILL DRIVE
-FOREST LAKE DRIVE
-HEATHCLIFF DRIVE:

FROM INVERNESS DRIVE TO

KAVANAUGH WAY
-HICKEY BOULEVARD:

FROM INVERNESS DRIVE TO

FIRECREST AVENUE
-HORIZON WAY
-IDLEWILD COURT
-MONTEREY ROAD

ENGINEER
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Richmond, Ca. 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
Tel. (650) 738-3767 | Fax. (650) 738-3003

CITY OF PACIFICA
OWNER

ATTACHMENT C

3.c
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project) 8 2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898
2 G2

NOTES, LEGEND,

ABBREVIATIONS, AND

CORE SUMMARY
DATE:

ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS

BIDDING
02/23/22

3.c
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project)

INVERNESS DRIVE

HICKEY BOULEVARD

CATALINA AVENUE

BEACHVIEW AVENUE

CRESTMOOR CIRCLE

FOOTHILL DRIVE

FOREST LAKE DRIVE

HEATHCLIFF DRIVE

BROOKHAVEN COURT

HAMILTON COURT

MELROSE COURT

RUTLAND DRIVE

DRIVE CORAL RIDGE

FIRECREST AVENUE

HORIZON WAY

IDLEWILD COURT

HICKEY BOULEVARD

FARALLON AVENUE

MONTEREY ROAD

BEACHVIEW AVENUE
8 2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898
3 C1
VICINITY MAP 1
DATE:

ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS

BIDDING
02/23/22

3.c
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project)

INVERNESS DRIVE

FOOTHILL DRIVE FOREST LAKE DRIVE

HEATHCLIFF DRIVE

MANOR DRIVE

GLASGOW DRIVE

GLENCOURT WAY

LORRY LANE

MELROSE COURT

HORIZON WAY IDLEWILD COURT

HICKEY BOULEVARD FARALLON AVENUE MONTEREY ROAD BEACHVIEW AVENUE

KAVANAUGH WAY
INVERNESS DRIVE LOMOND DRIVE MONTEREY ROAD 8
2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898 4
C2
VICINITY MAP 2
DATE: ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS BIDDING 02/23/22

3.c
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project)

HEATHCLIFF DRIVE

MANOR DRIVE

GLASGOW DRIVE

GLENCOURT WAY

LORRY LANE

KAVANAUGH WAY
INVERNESS DRIVE LOMOND DRIVE MONTEREY ROAD 8
2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898 5
C3
VICINITY MAP 3
DATE: ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS BIDDING 02/23/22

3.c
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project) 8 2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898
6 D1
CIVIL DETAILS 1
DATE:

ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS

BIDDING
02/23/22

3.c
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project) 8 2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898
7 D2
CIVIL DETAILS 2
DATE:

ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS

BIDDING
02/23/22

3.c
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project)

BOULEVARD HICKEY
BOULEVARD CATALINA 8
2022/23 PAVEMENT

RESURFACING PROJECT
151 MILAGRA DRIVE
PACIFICA, CA 94044
501 Canal Blvd., Suite I
Pt. Richmond, CA 94804
(510) 215-3620 * Fax (510) 215-2898 8
D3

STRIPING DETAILS
DATE: ISSUED FOR FINAL PLANS BIDDING 02/23/22 ℄

3.c
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment "C" - FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project Plans (4931 : FY 2022-23 Pavement Resurfacing Project)

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3/28/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” to Repeal and Replace Section 2-9.02 “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to Adopt the “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” by Repealing and Replacing Section 2-9.02, “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data; and finding ordinance exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

STAFF CONTACT:

Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION:

On December 17, 2018, the City Council of the City of Pacifica adopted Ordinance No. 839- C.S., establishing a district-based system for the election of members of the City Council by five districts, establishing the boundaries and identification number of each district and establishing the election order of each district. This ordinance added Chapter 9 “District Elections” to Title 2 of the Pacifica Municipal Code. By this action, the City of Pacifica changed from an at-large election system to a by district election system for the election of City Council members, established five voting districts to elect Councilmembers, adopted Map 505b defining City Council district boundaries and establishing the sequence of elections for each district with Districts 1 and 4 to be elected in November 2020 and Districts 2, 3 and 5 to be elected in November 2022.

Every ten years, after the federal census is complete, district lines must be reviewed and, if necessary, adjusted to keep the boundaries as nearly equal in population as possible, allowing for certain variances due to geography, topography, communities of interest, etc., as required by federal and California law. This process of reviewing the census data and adjusting the district boundary lines is called redistricting. The City of Pacifica has engaged National Demographics Corporation (NDC) to provide demographer services to assist in the process of redistricting. The redistricting process for the City of Pacifica must be completed by April 17, 2022.

In California, the process for redistricting is established by the Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and Political Subdivisions Act (“Act”). Under the Act, cities and counties must conduct certain outreach, maintain websites with publicly available information about draft maps and hold at least four public hearings on the issue.
4 Packet Pg. 115
Pacifica City Council 2
March 28, 2022
Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 21607.1, public hearings were held on the following dates to conduct the redistricting process:
• January 10, 2022 at a regular meeting of the City Council - first public hearing held prior to the consideration of any draft maps.
• February 14, 2022 at a regular meeting of the City Council - second public hearing in the redistricting process, at which input from the community was received on what factors should be taken into consideration while evaluating district boundaries and the first hearing to consider any draft maps that were prepared or submitted. • February 28, 2022 at a regular meeting of the City Council - third public hearing in the redistricting process and second hearing at which draft maps were considered. • March 14, 2022 at a regular meeting of the City Council - fourth public hearing in the redistricting process, selection of the final district map and introduction of the proposed ordinance that is now in order for adoption. The Council selected the final district map and election sequencing with the intent of re-adopting the current Council District Map 505b and retaining the existing election sequencing for the existing districts.

The staff report from the March 14, 2022 public hearing is attached as Attachment A and provides additional detail in the background and discussion of the City's redistricting process and considerations.

The proposed ordinance amends Pacifica Municipal Code section 2-9.02 to repeal and replace the existing code provisions. The sequencing of the elections is found in Pacifica Municipal Code Section 2-9.04 and will remain unchanged. This provision provides for Districts 2, 3 and 5 to be elected in November 2022 and Districts 1 and 4 to be elected in November 2024.

This ordinance was introduced at the regular meeting of the City Council held on March 14, 2022
Next Steps
If the proposed Ordinance is adopted at tonight’s meeting, the City will transmit a copy of the fully executed Ordinance and the GIS shape files corresponding to the adopted final district map to the County of San Mateo Registrar of Voters / Elections Division by the April 17, 2022 deadline.

CEQA:

Introduction of this ordinance is exempt from environmental review as the adoption of this Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3) since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the Ordinance would cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

The process of evaluating City Council districts with respect to updated 2020 census data and consideration of redistricting is consistent with the following Council adopted Goals:
“A Connected Community” includes taking actions to restore trust in City government, expanding communication and building community.
4 Packet Pg. 116
Pacifica City Council 3
March 28, 2022
FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact of engaging NDC as the consulting demographer ranges from $3,500 to a notto-exceed amount of $45,000 per the agreement between the City and NDC, with the low-range cost being associated with concluding the redistricting process with a finding that the current districts are “still balanced.” Actual costs will reflect the "still balanced" option, NDC consultant's per-meeting participation for attendance at virtual meetings where public hearings for the redistricting process were held and the public map toolkit provided by NDC for the City of Pacifica.

Additional costs for the redistricting process that are not reflected in the agreement not-toexceed cost include city attorney legal expenses, publication expenses related to notices of public hearings associated with the redistricting process, printing and publication expenses for additional informational community outreach and advertising, and translation costs for meetings or printed materials, if necessary. The primary expense related to redistricting would be the engagement of the demographer per the attached agreement. Expenses for redistricting would be budgeted under the general fund City Manager - Election Expenses fund

01.200210.52331.0000.000.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A: March 14, 2022 Staff Report (PDF)
4 Packet Pg. 117
Pacifica City Council 4
March 28, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. (ID # 4936)
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, “DISTRICT ELECTIONS” BY REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 2-9.02, “CITY COUNCIL DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED” OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES BASED ON 2020 CENSUS DATA
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 839-C.S. on December 17, 2018, to provide for the election of members of the City Council of the City of Pacifica bydistrict in five single-member districts and establish district boundaries for five City Council districts as defined in the voting district map 505b and set forth the election sequence of the five districts; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code 21601, following each federal decennial census for a city whose council is already elected using district-based elections, the council shall, by ordinance or resolution, adopt boundaries for all of the council districts of the city so that the council districts shall be substantially equal in population as required by the United States Constitution; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 21600 et seq., requires, among other things, that following each decennial federal census, and using that census as a basis, the city council by ordinance or resolution, adopt boundaries for any or all of the council districts of the city so that the council districts shall be substantially equal in population as required by the United States Constitution (“redistricting”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to California Elections Code 21607.1(a), at a regular meeting held on January 10, 2022, the City Council held a public hearing where the public was invited to provide input regarding the composition of the City’s voting districts before any draft maps were drawn; and
WHEREAS, thereafter, at regular meetings held on February 14, 2022 and February 28, 2022, the City Council held public hearings pursuant to California Elections Code 21607, where the public was invited to provide input regarding the content of the draft maps that had been released at least seven (7) days before each meeting, and the City Council considered and discussed the same; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on February 28, 2022, the City Council discussed the draft maps and selected the final voting district map; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on March 14, 2022, the City Council affirmed the final voting district map and set forth the introduction of this Ordinance for a first reading; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with Elections Code section 21607.1(b)(c) and (d), all of the public hearings were commenced at a fixed time after 5:30 p.m., on a weekday, and were accessible to persons with disabilities; and
4 Packet Pg. 118
Pacifica City Council 5
March 28, 2022
WHEREAS, in compliance with Elections Code section 21608(a), the Council took steps to encourage residents, including those in underrepresented communities and nonEnglish speaking communities, to participate in the redistricting public review process.

These steps include, but are not limited to the following:
• Public Hearing Notice for the January 10, 2022 public hearing was posted at City Hall on January 4, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on January 5, 2022.
• Following the January 10, 2022 public hearing, public mapping kits in English and Spanish were posted to the City website and available at City Hall. • Public Hearing Notice for the February 14, 2022 Public Hearing #2 was posted at City Hall on January 21, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on January 26, 2022 and February 2, 2022.
• Public Hearing Notice for the February 28, 2022 Public Hearing #3 was posted at City Hall on February 11, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on February 16, 2022 and February 23, 2022, published in Spanish in El Reportero on February 25, 2022 and published in Chinese in the World Journal on February 24, 2022.
• Information on redistricting and soliciting public input and submission of draft maps for the redistricting process were published in the City of Pacifica’s “Connect With Pacifica” weekly e-newsletter and distributed by email on January 21, 2022, January 28, 2022 and February 4, 2022. • Information on redistricting and soliciting public input and submission of draft maps in reference to the February 14, 2022 Public Hearing was also published to the City’s NextDoor and Facebook social media feeds on February 2, 2022.
• Draft maps for consideration at the February 28, 2022 Public Hearing were published on the City’s Redistricting webpage
(www.cityofpacifica.org/Redistricting) on February 20, 2022.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608(c), the City established a redistricting website which provided a schedule with the date, time, and location for any public hearing relating to redistricting on the internet at least five days before the hearing and also provided access to redistricting data and for the purposes of drawing draft maps and paper mapping tools; and
WHEREAS, a fourth public hearing is scheduled to be held at a regular meeting of the City Council on March 14, 2022, to review and consider additional public input related to the selection of final district map and the introduction of this proposed ordinance with adoption of the ordinance anticipated to take place at a regular meeting on March 28, 2022; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608(d)(1), all draft maps considered by the Council were published on the City’s redistricting website at least seven days before being considered for adoption as a final map by the Council. 4 Packet Pg. 119
Pacifica City Council 6
March 28, 2022

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

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council hereby finds that the foregoing recitals are a true and accurate and are incorporated herein by reference.

Section 2. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Determination.

Adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from environmental review as the adoption of this Ordinance does not qualify as a “project” pursuant to Public Resource Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3) since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that adoption of the Ordinance would cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

Section 3. Code Amendment. Title 2, “Administration”, Chapter 9,“District Elections” is amended by repealing Section 2-9.02, “City Council Districts” in its entirety and replacing it to read as follows:
“2-9.02. - City Council Districts.

Five City Council districts are hereby adopted in the City of Pacifica. The boundaries and identifying number of each district for the City Council elections shall be as described on the Council District Map 505b included and incorporated below:
4 Packet Pg. 120
Pacifica City Council 7
March 28, 2022
Section 4. Authorization for Technical Adjustments. The City’s demographer, National Demographics Corporation (NDC), is hereby authorized to make non-substantive technical adjustments to Map 505b to finalize the Map as necessary and to prepare a GIS shapefile which identifies the Council district boundaries consistent with Map 505b as well as census 4 Packet Pg. 121
Pacifica City Council 8
March 28, 2022
blocks and tracts, as may be necessary, in a form approved by the City Clerk and City Attorney.

Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Ordinance shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. The Council of the City of Pacifica hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of this Ordinance be declared invalid or unenforceable.

Section 6. Effective Date.

This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption as provided by Government Code section 36937.

Section 7. Publication; Certification.

The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the same to be published in accordance with State law. The City Clerk is also authorized and directed to file this Ordinance, Map 505b, the census blocks and tracts, the GIS shapefile, and any other documents, as may be necessary, to effectuate the adoption of Map 505b with the San Mateo County Clerk-Recorder-Assessor-Registrar of Voters. In the case of any parcels that are split across Council district boundaries, the County Clerk-Recorder-Assessor-Registrar of Voters shall apply a uniform methodology to adjust the boundary line to a border of the parcel without materially affecting the population within each affected district.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____day of March 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT
__________________________
Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ___________________________ Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Kenyon, City Attorney 4 Packet Pg. 122
Pacifica City Council 9
March 28, 2022
* * * * *
(ID # 4936) at 3/28/2022 7:00 PM City Council Regular Meeting 4 Packet Pg. 123

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3/14/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Redistricting - Public Hearing #4 to Receive Input Regarding Proposed Draft District Maps, Composition of Council District Boundaries; Affirm Selection of Map 505b and Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica Amending Title 2, Chapter 9, “District Elections” to Repeal and Replace Section 2-9.02 “City Council Districts Established” of the City of Pacifica Municipal Code to Adopt City Council District Boundaries Based on 2020 Census Data
RECOMMENDED ACTION:

1. Conduct the Public Hearing to Receive Input Regarding Composition of Council District Boundaries and Affirm Selection of Map 505b; and

STAFF CONTACT:

Sarah Coffey, City Clerk
650-738-7307
[email protected]
BACKGROUND:

4.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Attachment A: March 14, 2022 Staff Report (4936 : Redistricting Based on 2020 Census - Ordinance Adoption with Final District Pacifica City Council 2
March 14, 2022
In California, the process for redistricting is established by the Fair and Inclusive Redistricting for Municipalities and Political Subdivisions Act (“Act”). Under the Act, cities and counties must conduct certain outreach, maintain websites with publicly available information about draft maps and hold at least four public hearings on the issue.

Under the Act, the council shall draw and adopt boundaries using the following criteria in the listed order of priority (Elections Code 21601(c) for general law cities):

1. Comply with the federal requirements of equal population and the federal Voting Rights Act

2. Geographically contiguous

3. Undivided neighborhoods and “communities of interest” (socio-economic geographic areas that should be kept together)

4. Easily identifiable boundaries

5. Compact (do not bypass one group of people to get to a more distant group of people)

6. Shall not favor or discriminate against a political party Once the above prioritized criteria are met, other traditional districting principles may be considered, such as:

1. Minimizing the number of voters delayed from voting due to a change of their district;

2. Respecting voters’ choices / continuity in office

3. Future population growth
By law, the City must hold at least four public hearings that enable community members to provide input on the redistricting process. The process involves the following requirements:
● At least one hearing must occur before the City draws draft maps ● At least two hearings must happen after the drawing of draft maps ● The fourth hearing can happen either before or after the drawing of draft maps ● City staff or consultants may hold a public workshop instead of one of the required public redistricting hearings
Previously, the first public hearing in the redistricting process was held on January 10, 2022. At the January 10, 2022 Public Hearing, the Council received a presentation from NDC providing a general overview of the redistricting process, information regarding the federal and state requirements regarding the criteria in order of priority to be used to establish district boundaries, review of the existing district boundary map 505b with 2020 census data and received public input on what factors should be taken into consideration while creating district boundaries.

The January 10, 2022 public hearing was held prior to the consideration of any draft maps.

The second public hearing to consider redistricting was held on February 14, 2022. The purpose of the second public hearing was to receive input from the community on what factors should be taken into consideration while evaluating district boundaries such as input on neighborhoods and communities of interest, and to consider any draft maps that have been submitted or prepared. At that public hearing, the existing map 505b and a draft map submitted by a member of the public, identified as map 506, was considered. The Council directed staff to bring further analysis of map 506 with additional information about demographics and street level detail and to consider an additional draft map based on map 506 with adjustments made to boundaries to move an identified population block from District 3 to District 4.

The third public hearing to consider redistricting and the second at which draft maps were

4.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Attachment A: March 14, 2022 Staff Report (4936 : Redistricting Based on 2020 Census - Ordinance Adoption with Final District Pacifica City Council 3
March 14, 2022
considered was held on February 28, 2022. At the public hearing on February 28, 2022, Council received input from the community regarding the draft maps, district boundaries, and election sequencing.

The City has a webpage dedicated to the redistricting process which can be found here:
www.cityofpacifica.org/Redistricting <http://www.cityofpacifica.org/Redistricting> City staff has also made efforts to conduct outreach to the public to provide information on the City’s redistricting process including the following:
• Public Hearing Notice for the January 10, 2022 public hearing was posted at City Hall on January 4, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on January 5, 2022. • Following the January 10, 2022 public hearing, public mapping kits in English and Spanish were posted to the City website and available at City Hall. • Public Hearing Notice for the February 14, 2022 Public Hearing #2 was posted at City Hall on January 21, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on January 26, 2022 and February 2, 2022.
• Public Hearing Notice for the February 28, 2022 Public Hearing #3 was posted at City Hall on February 11, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on February 16, 2022 and February 23, 2022, published in Spanish in El Reportero on February 25, 2022 and published in Chinese in the World Journal on February 24, 2022. • Information on redistricting and soliciting public input and submission of draft maps for the redistricting process were published in the City of Pacifica’s “Connect With Pacifica” weekly e-newsletter and distributed by email on January 21, 2022, January 28, 2022 and February 4, 2022.
• Information on redistricting and soliciting public input and submission of draft maps in reference to the February 14, 2022 Public Hearing was also published to the City’s NextDoor and Facebook social media feeds on February 2, 2022. • Draft maps for consideration at the February 28, 2022 Public Hearing were published on the City’s Redistricting webpage (www.cityofpacifica.org/Redistricting <http://www.cityofpacifica.org/Redistricting>) on February 20, 2022. • Public Hearing Notice for the March 14, 2022 Public Hearing #4 was posted at City Hall on March 4, 2022 and published in the Pacifica Tribune on March 9, 2022.

Public comments and input regarding redistricting can be sent to the City via email to [email protected]; please indicate “Redistricting” in the subject line.

DISCUSSION:

Tonight’s March 14, 2022 meeting is the fourth public hearing to consider redistricting. At the previous public hearing on February 28, 2022, Council received information regarding three draft maps under consideration - Map 505b, Draft Map 506 and Draft Map 506b - including demographer consultant NDC’s analysis of each of the maps with respect to the 2020 census data; Council received input from the community regarding the draft maps, district boundaries, and election sequencing; and Council approved an introduction of a proposed ordinance with the final selected district map and election sequencing with the intent of re-adopting the current Council District Map 505b and retaining the existing election sequencing for the existing districts.

4.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Attachment A: March 14, 2022 Staff Report (4936 : Redistricting Based on 2020 Census - Ordinance Adoption with Final District Pacifica City Council 4
March 14, 2022
Following introduction of the ordinance, it was discovered that there was a discrepancy in the depiction of the map included in the proposed ordinance. Map 505b referenced in the proposed ordinance introduced at the February 28, 2022 meeting depicted NDC’s version of Map 505b, which was based on the 2020 Census blocks. These Census blocks did deviate slightly from the original district boundaries adopted by the Council in 2018.

To honor the City Council’s and community’s intent to preserve the existing precise official District lines of Map 505b as adopted in 2018, Staff is recommending that the Council conduct another first reading of the ordinance using the current District Map 505b as adopted in 2018.

NDC’s analysis of the current District Map 505b as adopted in 2018, concludes that the overall population balance of the map is still well below the 10% “presumed constitutional” limit to meet the federal requirements of equal population under the federal Voting Rights Act, even considering where approximations must be made to consider where official district lines may split census blocks.

Ordinance
Staff has prepared the proposed ordinance which amends Pacifica Municipal Code section 2-

9.02 to repeal and replace the existing code provisions. The sequencing of the elections is found in Pacifica Municipal Code Section 2-9.04 and will remain unchanged. This provision provides for Districts 2, 3 and 5 to be elected in November 2022 and Districts 1 and 4 to be elected in November 2024.

It is recommended that Council introduce and waive the first reading and read by title only, the ordinance proposed as attached.

Next Steps
If the proposed Ordinance is introduced at tonight’s meeting, the Ordinance will be in order for adoption at the March 28, 2022 regular City Council meeting.

The revised timeline to complete the redistricting and map adoption process is summarized as follows:
• Public Hearing #1 January 10, 2022 - review process and laws, review 2020 census data, receive input on composition of districts
• Public Hearing #2 February 14, 2022 - review draft maps • Public Hearing #3 February 28, 2022 - selection of final map • Public Hearing #4 March 14, 2022 - Introduction of ordinance with selection of final map • March 28, 2022 - Adoption of ordinance
• April 17, 2022 - Deadline for City to transmit Ordinance and GIS shape files corresponding to adopted final district map to the County of San Mateo Registrar of Voters / Elections Division.

CEQA:

4.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Attachment A: March 14, 2022 Staff Report (4936 : Redistricting Based on 2020 Census - Ordinance Adoption with Final District Pacifica City Council 5
March 14, 2022
environment.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact of engaging NDC as the consulting demographer ranges from $3,500 to a notto-exceed amount of $45,000 per the attached agreement, with the low-range cost being associated with concluding the redistricting process with a finding that the current districts are “still balanced.”
Additional costs for the redistricting process that are not reflected in the agreement not-toexceed cost include city attorney legal expenses, publication expenses related to notices of public hearings associated with the redistricting process, printing and publication expenses for additional informational community outreach and advertising, and translation costs for meetings or printed materials, if necessary. The primary expense related to redistricting would be the engagement of the demographer per the attached agreement. Expenses for redistricting would be budgeted under the general fund City Manager - Election Expenses fund

01.200210.52331.0000.000.

ORIGINATED BY:

City Clerk
ATTACHMENT LIST:

4.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Attachment A: March 14, 2022 Staff Report (4936 : Redistricting Based on 2020 Census - Ordinance Adoption with Final District

CITY OF PACIFICA

COUNCIL AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
3/28/2022
1 SUBJECT:

Adoption of a Resolution to approve General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21 to change the General Plan land use designation from Low Density Residential to Very Low Density Residential, and introduction of an Ordinance to approve Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-18 to rezone from the R-1/B-4/HPD zoning district to the P-D/HPD zoning district and to authorize a single-family residential use, filed by Matthew and Margaret Murphy, at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110) in Pacifica (File No. 2018-057). Recommended California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) status: Class 3 Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Resolution and Ordinance, and approved Specific Plan SP-169- 18, Variance PV-526-18, and Parking Exception PE-191-21 for construction of a 2,406-square foot (sf) single-family residence with a two-car garage on the 24,149-sf undeveloped parcel, by a vote of 7-0 on January 18, 2022.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Move to adopt a Resolution to approve General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21 and to introduce, waive the first reading, and read by title only, an Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Pacifica approving Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-18 to establish a Planned Development (P-D) zoning district with development plan at TBD Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110).”
STAFF CONTACT:

Christian Murdock, AICP, Deputy Director of Planning
(650) 738-7341
[email protected]

SUMMARY
Planning Department staff initially provided public notice of a public hearing on this item for March 14, 2022. However, the City Council did not conduct the public hearing on that date and continued the public hearing to the present meeting.

Staff is requesting City Council consideration of a resolution that would approve a General Plan amendment to change the land use designation applicable to the subject site, and introduction of an ordinance that would approve a rezoning and development plan, to enable development of a single-family residence on an undeveloped site at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue. The following discussion summarizes the City’s proceedings on this application at the Planning Commission prior to consideration by the City Council.

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

1. Overview
The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on the proposed project on August 2, 2021, and January 18, 2022. At the January 18, 2022, public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to approve Specific Plan SP-169-18, Variance PV-526-18, and Parking Exception PE-191-21 (“Development Permits”), and to recommend City Council approval of 5 Packet Pg. 129
Pacifica City Council 2
March 28, 2022
General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21, Rezoning RZ-201-18, and Development Plan DP-79-18 (“Legislative Approvals”) by adopting Resolution No. 2022-001 (Attachment C). The Planning Commission agenda packet from January 18, 2022, is included as Attachment D (also includes agenda materials from August 2, 2021)1. The minutes from the Planning Commission hearings on August 2, 2021, and January 18, 2022, are included as Attachment E and Attachment F, respectively.

2. Project Description
As more fully detailed in the Planning Commission reference materials, the proposed project consists of construction of one single-family residence with 2,406 square feet (sf) of floor area on a 24,149-sf undeveloped parcel. The proposed project required Planning Commission approval of a specific plan and now requires City Council approval of a rezoning and development plan pursuant to the City’s Hillside Preservation District (HPD) zoning standards in Pacifica Municipal Code (PMC) Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 22.5. The project additionally required Planning Commission approval of a variance from HPD coverage standards because the site’s slope yielded no allowable coverage under the formula provided in PMC section 9-4.2257, and also required approval of a parking exception and variance because it would not provide the guest parking space required by the HPD off-street parking regulations in PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Articles 22.5 and 28.

The project requires City Council approval of a General Plan amendment because the existing Low Density Residential (LDR) land use designation, which allows three to nine dwelling units per acre, would require construction of at least two dwelling units based on the project site’s size (approximately 0.554 acres).2 Because the project applicant only has interest in constructing one dwelling unit on the project site, the General Plan amendment is required to enable development of the proposed housing unit.

3. Existing General Plan, Zoning, and Surrounding Uses
A. Surrounding Uses
The project site is located at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue as shown in Figure 1. The approximately 470-foot length of Talbot Avenue immediately west of the project site is a private street with access rights provided by easement to the project site. The City of Pacifica previously vacated this segment of Talbot Avenue.
1 The project plans are included as Attachment E of Attachment D to this staff report. Except, however, that the Planning Commission approval excluded the guest parking space shown in the front yard of the project plans.
2 0.554 acres X 3 DU per acre = 1.662 DU = 2 DU minimum. Pursuant to PMC section 9-4.2312, fraction numbers derived from density calculations shall be rounded up to the next whole number for fractions from 0.5 through 0.9.
5 Packet Pg. 130
Pacifica City Council 3
March 28, 2022
Figure 1 – Project Vicinity, Looking East
Lands immediately to the north and east of the site are undeveloped. A single-family residence is located to the south of the site. Additional single-family residential development exists to the west of the project site along the south side of Talbot Avenue.

The general vicinity of the project site is characterized by one- to two-story single-family residential development toward the west along Talbot Avenue and on lower ground toward the northwest along Canyon Drive. Milagra Ridge Trail is located to the northeast of the project site on Golden Gate National Recreation Area property.

B. General Plan
The General Plan designation for the site is Low Density Residential (LDR) as shown in Figure

2. The LDR land use designation permits residential development at an average density of three to nine units per acre (an average lot area of 4,840-14,520 square feet per unit). The proposed single-family residence on a 24,149 square foot (sq. ft.) parcel is consistent with the use type but not the density of allowable development within the LDR land use designation.

Therefore, a General Plan Amendment is needed to change the land use designation to the Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) land use designation. The VLDR land use designation permits residential development at an average density of 0.2 to 2.0 units per acre (an average lot area of one-half to five acres per dwelling unit).
5 Packet Pg. 131
Pacifica City Council 4
March 28, 2022
Figure 2 – Existing General Plan Land Use Designations in Project Vicinity C. Zoning
The project site is currently located within the R-1/B-4/HPD (Single-Family Residential/B-Lot Size Overlay/Hillside Preservation District) zoning districts (Figure 3). In accordance with PMC section 9-4.2256, which addresses development procedures and standards in the HPD overlay district, the development proposal would require a zoning reclassification to a P-D (Planned Development) district and simultaneous approval of a Development Plan, which sets forth permitted uses within the P-D zoned area. The rezoning would not change the HPD zoning of the site and the resulting zoning classification would be P-D/HPD. 5 Packet Pg. 132
Pacifica City Council 5
March 28, 2022
In accordance with PMC section 9-4.2204(b), the regulations for area, coverage, density, yards, parking, height, and open ground area within the P-D zoning district shall be guided by the regulations of the residential, commercial, or industrial zoning district most similar in nature and function to the proposed project type. In this case, the existing R-1/B-4 lot size overlay zoning reflects the residential zoning district most similar in nature and function to the proposed singlefamily residence, primarily based on the project’s proposal for a single-family residential use consistent with the R-1 zoning, and the project site’s 24,149-sf lot size which is consistent with the 20,000 sf minimum lot size within the B-4 lot size overlay development standards in PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 20.

4. City Council’s Role
The Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the Development Permits required for construction of the proposed project. Because no appeal was filed to challenge the Planning Commission’s action, approval of the Development Permits is final. The Development Permits will take effect and allow construction of the proposed project only if the City Council approves the Legislative Approvals, which include a proposed General Plan amendment, rezoning, and development plan pursuant to the P-D zoning provisions in PMC Title 9, Chapter 4, Article 22.

The Planning Commission has recommended approval of the Legislative Approvals.

The City Council in its capacity as the legislative body of the City and in the exercise of its police power under the California Constitution is required to approve legislative actions on behalf of the City. The City Council is not bound by specific findings when approving legislative items, and may consider all information relevant to the public health, safety, and welfare of persons within the City.

Prior to adopting any legislative item, the City Council must comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Compliance with CEQA requires the identification of potential significant impacts on the environment and identification of measures to mitigate any such effects. Discussion of CEQA compliance for the proposed Legislative Approvals is contained in the following section of this report.

5. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Status
Figure 3 – Existing Zoning Classifications in Project Vicinity 5 Packet Pg. 133
Pacifica City Council 6
March 28, 2022
If the City Council approves the requested Legislative Approvals, they would enable the development of one single-family residence on the project site. A project to construct one single-family residence is exempt from CEQA pursuant to a Class 3 categorical exemption as provided in CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a). Section 15303 states in pertinent part:

Class 3 consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another where only minor modifications are made in the exterior of the structure. The numbers of structures described in this section are the maximum allowable on any legal parcel. Examples of this exemption include but are not limited to:
(a) One single-family residence, or a second dwelling unit in a residential zone. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be constructed or converted under this exemption.

The subject proposal to construct one single-family residence fits within the scope of a Class 3 categorical exemption. Specifically, the project (1) includes one single-family residence; and (2) is located in an area where the PMC and General Plan authorize single-family residential uses.

Additionally, none of the exceptions to application of an exemption contained in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply to the project, as described below:
• Sec. 15300.2(a): There is no evidence in the record that the project will impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern in an area designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, State, or local agencies. • Sec. 15300.2(b): There is no evidence in the record that successive projects of the same type in the area would have a significant environmental impact. • Sec. 15300.2(c): There is no evidence in the record of any possibility that the project would have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. • Sec. 15300.2(d) through (f): The project is not proposed near a scenic highway, does not involve a current or former hazardous waste site, and, does not affect any historical resources.

Because the project is consistent with the requirements for a Class 3 exemption and none of the exceptions to applying an exemption in Section 15300.2 apply; therefore, there is substantial evidence in the record to support a finding that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA.

6. Public Comments
Written public comments received during the Planning Commission’s review process are included as Attachment G. Verbal public comments from the public hearings conducted by the Planning Commission are summarized in Attachments E and F. The City also received one written public comment during consideration of continuance of the public hearing on March 14, 2022, included as Attachment H.

7. Staff Analysis and Recommendation
Approval of the Legislative Approvals would enable the construction of one single-family residence on an existing undeveloped lot. The Planning Commission, over the course of two public hearings, thoroughly considered issues relevant to the project including but not limited to 5 Packet Pg. 134
Pacifica City Council 7
March 28, 2022
aesthetics, views from adjacent public lands, HPD coverage, and the requested variances and parking exception. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the Development Permits and to recommend City Council approval of the Legislative Approvals. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council act in the manner recommended by the Planning Commission and approve General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21, Rezoning RZ-201-18, and Development Plan DP-79-18.

ALTERNATIVE ACTION:

The Council may deny the requested Legislative Approvals, which would have the effect of denying the overall project including the Development Permits approved by the Planning Commission.

RELATION TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND WORK PLAN:

Review of the proposed resolution and ordinance is not directly associated with a City Council goal or an item on the City Council’s Work Plan. Serving in a legislative capacity is a routine function of the City Council as part of its normal governance process as established in the Pacifica Municipal Code and in State Law.

FISCAL IMPACT:

No direct fiscal impact. Processing costs for this item are paid by the applicant.

ORIGINATED BY:

Planning Department
ATTACHMENT LIST:

Attachment A - Draft Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment (DOCX) Attachment B - Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning and Development Plan (DOCX) Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (PDF) Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - January 18, 2022 (omitting Attachments A and C) (PDF)
Attachment E - Planning Commission Minutes - August 2, 2021 (PDF) Attachment F - Planning Commission Minutes - January 18, 2022 (PDF) Attachment G - Public comments through Planning Commission phase (PDF) Attachment H - Public Comment Received at City Council Meeting - March 14, 2022 (PDF) 5 Packet Pg. 135
RESOLUTION NO. ______________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA-100-21 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION

IN THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN FROM LOW DENSITY

RESIDENTIAL TO VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AT TBD TALBOT AVENUE (APN 016-270-110)
WHEREAS, an application has been submitted for construction of a 2,406-square foot (sf) singlefamily residence with attached 425-sf two-car garage on an undeveloped 24,149-sf parcel at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110), including an application to amend the Land Use Element of the General Plan to indicate the Very Low Density Residential land use designation for the project site to enable a finding of General Plan consistency for development of one dwelling unit on the project site (File NO. 2018-057); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and adopted Resolution No. 2022-001 recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21, Rezoning RZ-201-18, and Development Plan DP-079-18 on January 18, 2022; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2022, the City Council of the City of Pacifica continued the public hearing to March 28, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica held a duly noticed public hearing on March 28, 2022.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica as follows:

1. The above recitals are true and correct and material to this Resolution.

2. In making its findings, the City Council relied upon and hereby incorporates by reference all correspondence, staff reports, and other related materials.

BE IT FUTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Pacifica as follows:

Section 1. Findings. Specific findings of fact for approval of the General Plan Amendment are contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-11 adopted on January 18, 2022, including without limitation findings related to the consistency of the project with the General Plan, and the City Council concurs with said findings and incorporates the findings herein by reference.

Section 2. Amendment. The East Sharp Park Land Use Map of the General Plan of the City of Pacifica, as described in the Land Use Element: Description by Neighborhood of the Pacifica General Plan, is hereby amended as depicted in Exhibit 1 to this Resolution. The specific area affected by this amendment is more particularly described in the legal description included as Exhibit 2 to this Resolution.

Section 3. Effective Date. The effective date of the General Plan amendment described in this Resolution shall be the effective date of an ordinance to approve Rezoning RZ-201-18 and Development Plan DP-79-

18. Section 4. Compliance with CEQA. The City Council hereby finds in the exercise of its independent judgment that the Project qualifies for a Class 3 exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, and that none of the exceptions to application of an exemption contained in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply to this action.

Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution is for any

5.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:
reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the Resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional. * * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

5.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

General Plan Amendment GPA
-100-21
File No. 2018-057: TBD Talbot Avenue(APN 016-270-110)
March 28, 2022
EXHIBIT1

5.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21
File No. 2018-057: TBD Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110)
March 28, 2022
EXHIBIT 2

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of Pacifica, County of San Mateo, State of California, described as follows:

PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 19.62 ACRE TRACT OF LAND DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM SALADA IMPROVEMENT COMPANY TO OCEAN SHORE LAND COMPANY, DATED APRIL 26, 1911 AND RECORDED AUGUST 18, 1911 IN BOOK 200 OF DEEDS AT PAGE 151 (FILE NO. 4862), SAID PORTION BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED IN THE DEED FROM RAY T. HIGGINS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION TO WILLIAM J. SCHADE AND FRIEDA K. SCHADE, HIS WIFE, AS JOINT TENANTS, DATED MARCH 29, 1960 AND RECORDED MARCH 30, 1960 IN BOOK 3771 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 605 (FILE NO. 42019-S),

RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF

BEGINNING WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LANDS, A DISTANCE OF 181.63 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE 19.62 ACRE TRACT OF LAND FIRST ABOVE REFERRED TO: THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE LAST MENTIONED LINE TO

THE NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LAST MENTIONED LANDS, SAID NORTHWESTERLY CORNER BEING MARKED BY A STAKE MARKED NO. 8; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID 19.62 ACRE TRACT TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 2 IN THE DEED FROM

OCEAN SHORE LAND COMPANY, A CORPORATION TO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DATED JANUARY 18, 1943 AND RECORDED JANUARY 22, 1943 IN BOOK 1049, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AT PAGE 206 (FILE NO. 73385-E), RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE LAST MENTIONED LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

APN: 016-270-110

5.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Attachment A - Draft Resolution Approving General Plan Amendment (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PACIFICA APPROVING REZONING RZ-201-18 AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN DP-79-18 TO ESTABLISH A PLANNED

DEVELOPMENT (P-D) ZONING DISTRICT WITH DEVELOPMENT PLAN AT TBD TALBOT AVENUE (APN 016-270-110)
WHEREAS, an application has been submitted for construction of a 2,406-square foot (sf) singlefamily residence with attached 425-sf two-car garage on an undeveloped 24,149-sf parcel at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110) (File No. 2018-057); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and adopted Resolution No. 2022-001 recommending City Council approval of General Plan Amendment GPA-100-21, Rezoning RZ-201-18, and Development Plan DP-079-18 on January 18, 2022; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2022, the City Council of the City of Pacifica continued the public hearing to March 28, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Pacifica held a duly noticed public hearing on March 28, 2022, and introduced Ordinance No _______.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Pacifica does ordain as follows:

Section 1. Recitals. The City Council of the City of Pacifica does hereby find that the above referenced recitals are true and correct and material to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Section 2. Findings. Specific findings of fact for approval of the Rezoning and Development Plan are contained in the Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 adopted on January 18, 2022, including without limitation findings related to the consistency of the residential development with the General Plan, and the City Council concurs with said findings and incorporates the findings herein by reference.

Section 3. Development Plan. The approved Development Plan DP-79-18 for the project site, which shall be implemented through the development more particularly set forth in a specific plan approved in accordance with Article 22 of Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Pacifica Municipal Code, shall be as set forth in the following Table 1:

5.b
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Attachment B - Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning and Development Plan (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

TABLE 1
Standards Approved
Use • One Single-Family Residence
• Accessory Dwelling Unit(s) and Junior
Accessory Dwelling Unit(s) as allowed
by the Pacifica Municipal Code,
provided they do not increase the
amount of coverage under the Hillside
Preservation District (HPD).

Lot Size 20,000 to 43,559.99 square feet
Lot Width (min.) 100 feet
Lot Coverage (max.) Impervious Surface: 40%
Structure: 30%
Hillside Preservation
District (HPD) Coverage
(max.)

27.22% (6,573.13 square feet)
Landscaping (Planting
area+Undisturbed Natural
Vegetation) (min.)
20%
Setbacks
Front 45’-0”
Side 50’-0” (south) / 80’-0” (north)
Rear 26’-0”
Height 35’-0”
Off-street Parking 2 covered (garage) and 2 uncovered spaces (Variance and Parking Exception granted to
deviate from the HPD guest parking
requirement)
Usable Recreational Open
Space
536 square feet
Section 4. Reclassification. Section Map 8 of the Zoning Map of the City of Pacifica, as described in Section 9-4.302 of the Pacifica Municipal Code, is hereby amended as depicted in Exhibit 1 to this Ordinance. The specific area affected by this reclassification is more particularly described in the legal description included as Exhibit 2 to this Ordinance. The reclassification does not alter the existing Hillside Preservation District (HPD) zoning applicable to the site, which shall remain in full force and effect.

5.b
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Attachment B - Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning and Development Plan (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

Section 5. Compliance with CEQA. The City Council hereby finds in the exercise of its independent judgment that the Project qualifies for a Class 3 exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, and that none of the exceptions to application of an exemption contained in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines apply to this action.

Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional.

Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to certify to the passage of this Ordinance by the City Council of the City of Pacifica, California, and cause the same to be published once in The Pacifica Tribune, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Pacifica, California.
* * * * *
PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Mary Bier, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Sarah Coffey, City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney

5.b
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Attachment B - Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning and Development Plan (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

EXHIBIT
1 P-D (DP-079-18)

5.b
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Attachment B - Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning and Development Plan (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

Construction of a New Single-Family Dwelling
File No. 2018-057: TBD Talbot Avenue (APN 016-270-110)
March 28, 2022
Page | 2
EXHIBIT 2

LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Real property in the City of Pacifica, County of San Mateo, State of California, described as follows:

RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, THENCE FROM SAID POINT OF

APN: 016-270-110

5.b
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Attachment B - Draft Ordinance Approving Rezoning and Development Plan (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project:

5.c
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 148
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 149
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 150
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 151
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 152
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 153
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 154
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 155
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

5.c
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment: Attachment C - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-001 (4914 : TBD Talbot Single-Family Residential Project: General Plan

PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
Scenic Pacifica
Incorporated Nov. 22, 1957
DATE: January 18, 2022 FILE: GPA-100-21
RZ-201-18
DP-79-18
SP-169-18
PV-526-18
PE-191-21
ITEM: 1
PUBLIC NOTICE: Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Pacifica Tribune on January 5, 2022, and mailed to 53 surrounding property owners and occupants.

APPLICANT: Javier Chavarria
848 Burns Ct.

Pacifica, CA 94044
OWNER: Matthew & Margaret Murphy
570 Talbot Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94044
PROJECT LOCATION: TBD Talbot Avenue, at the eastern terminus of Talbot Avenue. (APN 016-270-110) – East Sharp Park
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: File No. 2018-057 – Construction of a 2,406-square foot (sf) single-family residence with attached 425-sf two-car garage on an undeveloped 24,149-sf parcel.

SITE DESIGNATIONS: Current General Plan: Low Density Residential (LDR) Current Zoning: R-1/B-4/HPD (Single-Family Residential/B-Lot Size Overlay/Hillside Preservation District)
Proposed General Plan: Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) Proposed Zoning: P-D/HPD (Planned Development/Hillside Preservation District)
RECOMMENDED CEQA STATUS: Exempt under Class 3 Categorical Exemption, CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.

ADDITIONAL REQUIRED APPROVALS: City Council Approval of General Plan Amendment, Rezoning, and Development Plan.
1 Packet Pg. 15

5.d
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Attachment D - Planning Commission Agenda Packet - January 18, 2022 (omitting Attachments A and C) (4914 : TBD Talbot PC Staff Report
New single-family residence at TBD Talbot (APN 016-270-110) January 18, 2022

Page 2 ends

Pacifica City CouncilMarch 28, 2022

Pacifica City Council
March 28, 2022