ORDINANCE NO. 1931
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING ARTICLE 307 OF THE PORTERVILLE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
REGARDING NONCONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES, AND LOTS
WHEREAS: On April 21, 2026 the City Council at its regularly scheduled meeting held a public hearing to consider amendment to the Porterville Development Ordinance; and WHEREAS: The purpose of the proposed amendment is to relax the regulatory provisions for classification and modification of nonconforming uses, structures, and lots; and WHEREAS: The proposed ordinance is an implementation measure of the policies, goals, and objectives of the Porterville General 2030 Plan. The Environmental Coordinator made a determination on the basis of substantial evidence that, since the amendment consists solely of changes to regulations and would not authorize any particular use or activity, it can be shown with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed text amendment could have a significant effect on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Porterville as follows:
SECTION 1: Adoption of the proposed ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
SECTION 2: Article 307 of the Porterville Development Ordinance is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:
307.01: PURPOSE:
The specific purpose of this chapter is to permit continuation of uses and continued occupancy and maintenance of structures that were legally established but do not comply with all of the standards and requirements of this Ordinance in a manner that does not impair public health, safety, and general welfare. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019)
307.02: APPLICABILITY:
These provisions apply to structures, land and uses that have become nonconforming by operation of this Ordinance and that remain in a Ordinance No. 1931
nonconforming status by application of this chapter, as well as structures, land, and uses that hereafter become nonconforming due to annexation to the City or amendments to the zoning map or development Ordinance text. (Ord. 1866, 11- 19-2019)
307.03: ESTABLISHMENT OF LEGAL NONCONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES:
A. Nonconformity. A non-conformity may result from any inconsistency with the requirements of this Ordinance, including but not limited to location, density, height, yard, usable open space, buffering, or performance standards or the lack of a Conditional Use Permit, variance, or other required authorization. A use or structure shall not be deemed nonconforming solely because it does not conform with the parking dimension standards, loading, planting area, or screening regulations of the district in which it is located or does not conform to the standards for the following building features: garage door location; garage door width; chimney height; cornices, eaves, and other ornamental features that exceed maximum projections into required yards; or bay windows and balconies above the first floor that exceed maximum projections into required yards.
B. Nonconforming Uses and Structures-Right to Continue. Any use or structure that was legally established prior to the effective date of this Ordinance or of any subsequent rezoning or amendment shall be deemed to be in compliance with this Ordinance and may be continued and maintained indefinitely if it has remained in continuous existence. The right to continue a nonconforming use or structure shall run with the land. However, no substitution, expansion, or other change in use and no alteration or other change in structures is permitted, except as otherwise provided in this chapter. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019) 307.04: CONTINUATION AND MAINTENANCE OF NONCONFORMING
STRUCTURES:
Ordinance No. 1931
Legal nonconforming structures may be continued and maintained in compliance with the requirements of this chapter unless deemed to be a public nuisance because of health or safety conditions.
A. Maintenance and Nonstructural Repairs. Maintenance, non-structural repairs and non-structural interior alterations are permitted to a nonconforming structure or to a structure occupied by a nonconforming use, so long as the changes and improvements do not enlarge or extend the structure.
B. Structural Repairs. Structural repairs that do not enlarge or extend the structure, including modification or repair of bearing walls, columns, beams or girders, may be undertaken only when the Building Official determines that such modification or repair is immediately necessary to protect public health and safety, occupants of the nonconforming structure, or occupants of adjacent property and when the cost of such work does not exceed fifty (50) percent of the higher of the assessed value of the nonconforming structure as determined by the Tulare County Assessor or an appraisal performed by a certified appraiser for the applicant. If an applicant chooses not to submit an appraisal, the Tulare County Assessor’s determination shall be used. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019) 307.05: ALTERATIONS AND ENLARGEMENTS TO NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES:
Nonconforming structures may be enlarged, extended, structurally altered or repaired subject to the following provisions:
A. Nonconforming Structures. A Structure that is nonconforming with respect to one (1) or more required setbacks may be enlarged or altered, subject to the following standards:
1. Interior Side and Rear Setbacks. Additions or enlargements that maintain a nonconforming interior side or rear yard setback are permitted as long as the addition does not:
a. Further reduce any nonconforming side or rear setback; b. Create any new encroachment into any other required setback; Ordinance No. 1931
c. Increase the existing height of the portion of the structure that is within the required setback;
d. Result in a violation of applicable standards for building coverage, parking, or useable open space; or
e. Result in a violation of any standard of the Building Code.
2. Front Setbacks. Additions or enlargements that vertically or horizontally extend a nonconforming front yard setback may be approved based on a finding that the proposed addition will maintain the average setback of development on the same block front within two hundred (200) feet of the lot.
3. Height. Additions or enlargements that horizontally extend a nonconforming side or rear setback of any portion of a structure that is nonconforming with respect to height may be approved based on findings that the proposed alteration will not:
a. Substantially interfere with solar access available to surrounding properties;
b. Reduce the privacy of surrounding properties; or
c. Create a structure that is incompatible with the character of surrounding development due to its bulk or form.
B. Nonconforming Parking:
1. Nonresidential Structures. A nonresidential structure that is nonconforming because it does not satisfy the parking requirements of this Ordinance may be expanded subject to a determination by the Zoning Administrator based on evidence in the record that the amount of existing parking is sufficient to accommodate the proposed use.
2. Residential Structures. A residential structure that is nonconforming because two (2) spaces have not been previously required by this Ordinance may be altered or expanded with only one (1) covered space.
Ordinance No. 1931
C. Nonconforming Lot Coverage. A structure that is nonconforming because it exceeds the maximum allowable lot coverage may be expanded in floor area only if the expansion does not increase the lot coverage. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019) 307.06: CLASSIFICATION OF NONCONFORMING USES:
Reserved.
307.07: CHANGES AND SUBSTITUTIONS OF NONCONFORMING USES:
No legal nonconforming use shall be expanded or changed in operation without the approval of the Zoning Administrator as provided for in this chapter. This requirement shall not apply to a change of ownership, tenancy, or management where the new use is in the same classification as the previous use, as defined in Chapter 701: Use Classifications, and the use is not expanded.
A. Change from Nonconforming to Permitted Use. Any nonconforming use may be changed to a use that is allowed by right in the zoning district in which it is located and complies with all applicable standards for such use.
B. Conditional Use Permit to Legalize Use. Any use that is nonconforming solely by reason of the absence of a Conditional Use Permit may be changed to a conforming use by obtaining the required permit.
C. Change from Nonconforming Use to Other Nonconforming Use. The Zoning Administrator may allow the expansion of a nonconforming use subject to a determination made pursuant to Article 602 and the requirements of this chapter.
1. Within a Structure That Conforms to the Development Ordinance. A nonconforming use in a structure that conforms to this Ordinance and to the requirements of the Building Code may expand the floor area that it occupies, subject to Zoning Administrator approval provided that no structural alteration is proposed or made for the purpose of the expansion.
a. A nonconforming use may not be expanded to occupy another lot that it did not occupy on the effective date of this Ordinance.
Ordinance No. 1931
b. The expansion of the nonconforming use shall not exceed fifty (50) percent of the area that the nonconforming use legally occupies at the time of application.
2. Within a Structure That Does Not Conform to the Development Ordinance.
A nonconforming use in a structure that does not conform to the requirements of this Ordinance may expand its occupancy and building floor area subject to the requirements of paragraph one (1) above.
3. Within a Structure That Does Not Conform to the Building Code. Any nonconforming use in a structure that does not conform to the Building Code may not expand the area it occupies. A nonconforming use may expand the area it occupies subject to Zoning Administrator approval after the structure is brought into conformance with all applicable Building Code requirements.
4. Zoning Administrator Review. The Zoning Administrator, in approving a change or substitution pursuant to this section, shall find that:
a. The proposed new use will be more compatible with the purposes of the district and surrounding uses than the nonconforming use it replaces; b. The proposed new use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort or general welfare of persons residing or working in the surrounding area or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements of adjacent properties, the surrounding area, or the neighborhood because of noise, traffic generation, odors, dust, glare, vibrations, or other effects; and c. The proposed new use will comply with all applicable standards or there are special circumstances peculiar to the property and its relation to surrounding uses or to the district itself that would justify modification to applicable standards.
5. Standards for Zoning Administrator Determination. In making its findings and conclusions pursuant to paragraph four (4) above, the Zoning Administrator shall consider the following factors:
a. Noise;
b. Traffic generation;
Ordinance No. 1931
c. Hours of operation;
d. Noxious or annoying emissions of odor, smoke, waste water or other matters;
e. Proximity of the use to conforming uses;
f. Extent and severity of nonconformity;
g. Effect of the nonconforming use on surrounding conforming uses; h. Character of the surrounding neighborhood, including the number and proportion of nonconforming uses;
i. Access to the nonconforming use;
j. Maintenance of the nonconforming use; and
k. Any other factors the Zoning Administrator deems relevant given the purposes of this chapter.
6. Conditions. When making its decision on an application for a change or substitution of use, the Zoning Administrator may establish conditions that are necessary to accomplish the purposes of this chapter, including, but not limited to:
a. Required improvement of, or modifications to existing improvements on, the property;
b. Limitations on hours of operations;
c. Limitations on the nature of operations; and
d. A specified term of years for which the continued nonconforming use shall be allowed.
7. Revocation of Approved Changes of Nonconforming Use. The City Council may initiate a review of a changed or substituted nonconforming uses upon its own motion, or following a recommendation from the Zoning Administrator, in accordance with Section 601.10, Revocation of Approvals, and the following standards and procedures.
a. Initiation of Revocation Procedure. Initiation of City Council review of a nonconforming use approved pursuant to this section shall first require a report Ordinance No. 1931
from the Zoning Administrator based upon the Zoning Administrator’s independent investigation and determination, recommending action by the Council.
b. City Council Review and Decision. The City Council shall hold a public hearing, pursuant to the procedures established in Chapter 601, Common Procedures. Upon the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council shall determine whether the nonconforming status shall be revoked and the use discontinued or allowed to continue subject to conditions. In making its determination the Council shall base its decision on the same considerations it used when approving the Conditional Use Permit to allow a change or substitution of a nonconforming use and the standards in paragraph five (5) above. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019)
307.08: RESTORATION OF DAMAGED NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES:
A. Restoration When Damage is Less than Seventy-Five (75) Percent of Value. If a nonconforming structure or a structure containing a nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other calamity, to the extent of seventy-five (75) percent or less of the replacement cost, as determined by the Building Official, the structure may be restored and the nonconforming use may be resumed, provided that a building permit for restoration is issued within six (6) months and restoration work is diligently pursued to completion.
B. Restoration When Damage Exceeds Seventy-Five (75) Percent of Value. If any nonconforming structure or a structure containing a nonconforming use is destroyed by fire, explosion or other casualty or act of God to an extent of seventyfive (75) percent or greater of the replacement cost, as determined by the Building Official, then the structure may be restored and used only in compliance with the applicable regulations for the district where it is located, except as provided below.
1. Exceptions for Residential Structures.
Ordinance No. 1931
a. Any nonconforming residential use may be reconstructed, restored, or rebuilt up to the size and number of dwelling units prior to the damage and the nonconforming use, if any, may be resumed unless the City finds that:
(1) The reconstruction, restoration, or rebuilding will be detrimental or injurious to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or will be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood.
(2) The existing nonconforming use of the building or structure can be more appropriately moved to a zoning district in which the use is permitted, or that there no longer exists a district in which the existing nonconforming use is permitted.
2. Any reconstruction, restoration, or rebuilding undertaken pursuant to this section shall conform to all applicable Building Code requirements.
3. A building permit shall be obtained within two (2) years after the date of the damage or destruction. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019)
307.09: CORRECTION OF NONCONFORMING SITE FEATURES:
Prior to occupancy of a site or structure that is nonconforming due to lack of one (1) of the following: screening of mechanical equipment; required walls or fences to screen parking; required paving for driveways; or required landscaping; a schedule for elimination or substantial reduction of these nonconformities over a period not exceeding five (5) years shall be submitted. Priority may be given to elimination of nonconformities that have a significant adverse impact on surrounding properties, and shall not require a commitment to remove nonconformities that have a minor impact and would be costly to eliminate due to the configuration of the site and the location of existing structures. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019)
307.10: ABANDONMENT OF NONCONFORMING USES:
Ordinance No. 1931
No nonconforming use may be resumed, reestablished, reopened or replaced by any other nonconforming use after it has been abandoned or vacated for a period of six (6) months, except as provided for in this section. The nonconforming use of a legally established structure may be reestablished if the Zoning Administrator makes the following findings. As a condition of approving the resumption of such nonconforming use, the Zoning Administrator may impose a time limit on its duration if necessary in order to make the required findings.
A. The structure cannot be used for any conforming use because of its original design or because of legal structural changes made for a previous nonconforming use;
B. The structure can be reasonably expected to remain in active use for a period of twenty (20) years without requiring repairs or maintenance in excess of fifty (50) percent of the replacement cost of the structure, as defined in this chapter, within any five (5) year period; and
C. The continuation of the use or structure will not be incompatible with or detrimental to surrounding conforming uses. (Ord. 1866, 11-19-2019 This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after its publication and passage.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 5th day of May, 2026. ____________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:
Richard Tree, City Clerk
By: _________________________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Item No. 20.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – MAY 5, 2026
SUBJECT: Second Reading - Ordinance 1932 - Amending Article VII of Chapter 7 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville, Setting Forth Procedures for Expediting Permitting Processing for Electric Vehicle Charging Systems SOURCE: Administrative Services
COMMENT:
Ordinance No. 1932, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Porterville, amending Article VII of Chapter 7 of the Municipal Code of the City of Porterville, Setting Forth Procedures for Expediting Permitting Processing for Electric Vehicle Charging Systems
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council give Second Reading to Ordinance No. 1932, waive further reading, and adopt said Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance No. 1932
Appropriated/Funded: N/A
Review By:
Department Director:
Yuliana Andrade, Administrative Services Director
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 1932
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE AMENDING ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 7 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY
OF PORTERVILLE SETTING FORTH PROCEDURES FOR EXPEDITING
PERMITTING PROCESSING FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SYSTEMS WHEREAS: The State of California and the City of Porterville has consistently promoted and encouraged the use of fuel-efficient electric vehicles; and WHEREAS: The State of California recently adopted Assembly Bill 1236, which requires local agencies to adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited and streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging systems; and WHEREAS: Creation of an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations would facilitate convenient charging of electric vehicles and help reduce the City’s reliance on environmentally damaging fossil fuels.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORTERVILLE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:
Article VII of Chapter 7 of the Porterville Municipal Code shall be entitled “Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permit Expediting” and shall include section 7-52, 7-53, 7-54, 7-55, 7-56, 7-57, 7-58 (including 7-58.1 through 7-58.4), 7-59, and 7-60 as follows:
CHAPTER 7-52
Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permit Expediting
7-52: Definitions
7-53: Purpose
7-54: Applicability
7-55 Expedited Review Process
7-56 Electronic Submittals
7-57 Association Approval
7-58 Permit Application Process
7-58.1 Electric Vehicle Charging System Requirements
7-58.2 Duties of City in Reviewing EVCS Applications
7-58.3 Permit Review and Inspection Requirements
7-58.4 Technical Review
7-59 Conflicts
7-60 Severability
Ordinance No. 1932
7-52: DEFINITIONS
ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SYSTEM (EVCS): Any level of electric vehicle supply equipment that is designed and built in compliance with the California Electrical Code, delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into one or more electric vehicles, and meets all applicable safety standards.
ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL: The utilization of one or more of the following approved methods:
A. E-mail;
B. Internet;
C. Other electronic methods approved by the City.
SPECIFIC, ADVERSE IMPACT: A significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified, and written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions.
7-53: PURPOSE
The purpose of this article is to adopt an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging systems pursuant to Government Code Section 65850.7. This article is intended to encourage the use of electric vehicle charging systems by removing unreasonable barriers, minimizing costs to property owners and the City, and ensuring installations are safe and compliant with applicable codes. The terms, phrases, and words used in this process shall be construed in compliance with California Government Code Section 65850.7.
7-54: APPLICABILITY
This article applies to the permitting of all electric vehicle charging systems within the City.
Existing systems legally installed prior to the effective date of this article shall not be subject to these requirements unless modifications are made that require a new permit or until such time as State law mandates such.
7-55: EXPEDITED REVIEW PROCESS
Consistent with Government Code Section 65850.7, the Building Official shall implement an expedited administrative permit review process for electric vehicle charging stations, and adopt a checklist of all requirements with which electric vehicle charging stations shall comply with in order to be eligible for expedited review. The expedited administrative permit review process and checklist may refer to the recommendations in the checklist prescribed by the most current version of the “Plug-In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Permitting Checklist” of the “Zero-Emission Vehicles in the California: Community Readiness Guidebook” published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.
The City’s checklist shall be published on the City’s website.
Ordinance No. 1932
7-56: ELECTRONIC SUBMITTALS
Consistent with Government Code Section 65850.7, the Building Official shall allow for electronic submittal of permit applications covered by this process and associated supporting documentations. In accepting such permit applications, the Building Official shall also accept electronic signatures on all forms, applications, and other documentation in lieu of a we signature by any applicant.
7-57 ASSOCIATION APPROVAL
Consistent with Government Code Section 65850.7, the Building Official shall not condition the approval for any electric vehicle charging station permit on the approval of such a system by an association, as defined by Civil Code Section 4080. 7-58: PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESS
A permit application that satisfies the information requirements in the City’s checklist shall be deemed complete and be promptly processed. Upon confirmation by the Building Official that the permit application and supporting documents meet the requirements of th City checklist, and is consistent with all applicable laws the Building Official shall, consistent with Government Cde Section 65850.7, approve the application and issue all necessary permits. Such approval does not authorize an applicant to energize or utilize the electric vehicle charging station until approval is granted by the City via required inspections. If the Building Official determines that the permit application is incomplete, they shall issue a written correction notice to the applicant, detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.
7-58.1: ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
A. All electric vehicle charging systems shall meet applicable health and safety standards and requirements imposed by the State of California and the City of Porterville.
B. Electric vehicle charging systems shall comply with all applicable building codes.
C. Electric vehicle charging systems shall be installed in accordance with manufacturer specifications and applicable industry standards. 7-58.2: DUTIES OF CITY IN REVIEWING EVCS APPLICATIONS
A. All required documents for EVCS permit applications shall be made available on the City’s publicly accessible website.
B. Electronic submittal of permit applications shall be accepted.
C. The Building Official shall adopt a standard plan and checklist of all requirements for EVCS installations eligible for expedited review.
D. The permit process, standard plans, and checklists shall conform to current state law and applicable codes.
Ordinance No. 1932
E. Fees for EVCS permits shall comply with applicable state law. 7-58.3: PERMIT REVIEW AND INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS
A. The Building Official shall implement an administrative, nondiscretionary review process for EVCS applications.
B. The Building Official shall approve applications that meet all checklist requirements and applicable laws.
C. Review of the application shall be limited to compliance with health and safety requirements and building code.
D. The Building Official may require a use permit if there is substantial evidence that the installation would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety.
E. Any conditions imposed shall mitigate the impact at the lowest possible cost.
F. If an application is incomplete, a written correction notice shall be provided.
G. Only one inspection shall be required where feasible. Additional inspections may be required if deficiencies are identified or warranted due to contingent and/or related work by code.
H. Inspections shall be scheduled in a timely manner consistent with the expedited process.
7-58.4: TECHNICAL REVIEW
It is the intent of this policy to encourage the installation of electric vehicle charging stations by removing obstacles to permitting for charging stations so long as the action does not supersede the Building Official’s authority to address higher priority life-safety situations. If the Building Official makes a finding based on substantial evidence that the electric vehicle charging station could have a specific adverse impact upon the public health or safety as defined in Government Code 65850.7, the City may require the applicant to apply for a use permit. 7-59: CONFLICTS
Any provision of the City or appendices thereto, inconsistent with these provisions, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect these provisions.
7-60: SEVERABILITY
If any section of this article is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions.
SECTION 2:
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption.
Ordinance No. 1932
SECTION 3:
The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published in accordance with law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 5th day of May, 2026. ___________________________
Greg Meister, Mayor
ATTEST:
Richard Tree, City Clerk
By: __________________________
Fernando Gabriel-Moraga,
Chief Deputy City Clerk
Item No. 21.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA – MAY 5, 2026
SUBJECT: Award of Contract for the Main Street Parking Lot Project SOURCE: Engineering and Project Management
COMMENT: On April 3, 2026, staff received nine (9) bids for the Main Street Parking Lot Project, which is planned for the former JCPenney site that was damaged by fire and subsequently cleared. This project will convert the former JCPenney site into a public parking facility to support downtown businesses, improve ADA access, and address stormwater needs.
The bids received are as follows:
Contractor Bid Amount
MAC General Engineering $1,674,950.95
Cal Valley Construction, Inc $1,876,493.80
Dawson-Mauldin, LLC $1,877,393.00
Walsh Montgomery Construction, Inc $2,262,160.00
Granite Construction $2,361,167.00
Alpha1 Engineering $2,360,900.00
American Paving $2,516,525.90
BDM, Inc Non-Responsive
Synergy Construction & Development Non-Responsive
Two (2) of the nine (9) bids received were deemed non-responsive as they did not utilize the required bid sheet issued by the addendum.
The Engineer’s estimate of probable construction cost was $1,000,000. The Item No. 21.
lowest responsive bid submitted by MAC General Engineering is $1,674,950.95, which exceeds the estimate by approximately 67%.
Despite exceeding the Engineer’s Estimate, the staff recommends proceeding with the award based on the competitive nature of the bidding process. The City received nine (9) bids, which demonstrates strong market participation and provides confidence that the bid pricing reflects current market conditions. Readvertising the project is not expected to result in lower bids and may delay project delivery without reducing costs.
The higher-than-anticipated construction costs are also attributed to sitespecific conditions, including work near a waterway, site preparation requirements, and ADA improvements, which increase construction complexity and cost.
The total project cost is estimated at $2,009,940.95, which includes construction, contingency, and support services.
Funding for this project is provided by Measure I funds in the amount of $1,200,000 as approved in the Fiscal Year 2025–2026 budget. Additional Measure I funds are available to fully fund the project, including savings realized from the Fire Station #72 Remodel Project.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council:
1. Award the Main Street Parking Lot Project to MAC General Engineering in the amount of $1,674,950.95;
2. Authorize a 10% construction contingency and an additional 10% for construction management, surveying, inspection, and quality control services; and
3. Authorize an appropriation of $809,940.95 in Measure I Funds to fully fund the project;
OR
4. Reject all bids and direct staff to re-advertise the project.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Locator Map
Appropriated/Funded:
Review By:
Department Director:
Clayton Dignam, Interim Engineering and Project Management Director/Fire Marshal
Item No. 21.
Final Approver: Fernando Gabriel-Moraga, Chief Deputy City Clerk © 2025 Microsoft Corporation © 2025 Maxar ©CNES (2025) Distribution Airbus DS D
EIR
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E IR
T FD
E
SITE MAP
NOT TO SCALE
SHEET C2
MAIN STREET
N HOCKETT STREET SITE MAP OLIVE AVENUE
N HOCKETT STREET
N DIVISION STREET E GARDEN AVENUE
N D STREET
N 2ND STREET
PORTER SLOUGH
PORTER SLOUGH
N 3RD STREET
N 4TH STREET