Seaside City Council
June 24, 2025

AMENDED A G E N D A

CITY OF SEASIDE SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL/SUCCESSOR 440 HARCOURT AVE (COUNCIL CHAMBER) AGENCY TO THE Tuesday, June 24, 2025
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 5:00 PM
__________________________________________________________________________________ NOTICE: The City Council will hold its public meetings in person, with a virtual option for public participation based on availability. The City of Seaside utilizes Zoom tele-conferencing technology for virtual public participation; however, we make no representation or warranty of any kind, regarding the adequacy, reliability, or availability of the use of this platform in this manner. Participation by members of public through this means is at their own risk. ___________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________

1. To view this meeting: Please click on the following link to the City of Seaside YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofSeasideCalifornia

2. To view or participate this meeting: Using the Zoom application on your smart phone, laptop, tablet or desktop and click on this link: https://ci-seaside-ca-us.zoom.us/j/81936832059 WEBINAR ID: 819 3683 2059

3. To listen or participate by phone: Please call (669) 900-9128 Enter the WEBINAR ID: 819 3683 2059 when prompted. There is no participate code – press the pound sign # after the recording prompts you.

4. To make public comment, the following options are available:

Before the Meeting via Email: Written comments can be emailed to [email protected] Include the following subject line: “Public Comment Item #___” (insert the agenda item number relevant to your comment). Written comments must be received by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting.

During the Meeting: When the Chair calls for public comment, members of the public participating in person and wishing to address the City Council may approach the podium when the Chair calls for public comment.

When the Chair calls for public comment, members of the public participating on Zoom and wishing to address the City Council can queue to speak with the “Raise Hand” feature. On the Zoom application, click the “Raise Hand” button. On the phone, press *9 to “Raise Hand”; press *6 to unmute.

5. In accordance with the City’s Remote Meeting Participation Policy for Public Comment: The City of Seaside reserves the right to refuse, limit, and/or revoke use of video conferencing technology and the option for virtual public participation. Granting use of the virtual participation in no way constitutes an endorsement of any person or group to display hateful conduct, including sending or posting hateful images, making violent threats, or targeting others with hateful or abusive speech. The City may remove any participate that violates its agreement or applicable policy with proper notice as outlined in the conditions of use/meeting access.

Packet Page 1
City Council SPECIAL Meeting June 24, 2025 5:00 PM Agenda Page 2

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL – ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Ian N. Oglesby
David R. Pacheco
Alexis Garcia-Arrazola
Rita Burks
Alex Miller
Mayor/Chair
Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair
Council/Agency Member
Council/Agency Member
Council/Agency Member
Remote location for
Council/Agency Member
Alex Miller:
611A Livingstone Tower
Acqua Residences
Bgy Hulo, Mandaluyong City
Metro Manila, Philippines

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. REVIEW OF AGENDA
If there are any items that arose after the 72-hour posting deadline, this is the point in the meeting where a vote may be taken to add the item to the agenda. (A 2/3- majority vote is required).

5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public wishing to address the City Council on matters within the jurisdiction of the City of Seaside, but not on this agenda, may do so during the Public Comment period for up to three (3) minutes. Public Comments for "Presentations" on this agenda are also taken at this time; comments on specific agenda items are heard under that item. For the public record, please state your name.

6. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMUNICATIONS
This is a time specifically set aside for representatives of public agencies to make brief comments of general interest to the City Council and the community.

A. SEASIDE CITY NEWS BROADCAST OF UPCOMING CITYWIDE EVENTS

AND COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS

7. PRESENTATIONS
A. APRIL AND MAY 2025 HOUSE OF THE MONTH AWARDS
(NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION)
B. RECEIVE A PRESENTATION REGARDING CHARTWELL SCHOOL
(DANIELLE PATTERSON, HEAD OF SCHOOL - OUTREACH & FAMILY

ENGAGEMENT)
Packet Page 2
City Council SPECIAL Meeting June 24, 2025 5:00 PM Agenda Page 3

8. CONSENT AGENDA
A. APPROVE MINUTES FROM JUNE 10 AND 12, 2025, SPECIAL MEETINGS RECOMMENDATION: Approve minutes as presented in the agenda packet.

B. APPROVE A MAYOR'S YOUTH FUND CONTRIBUTION REQUEST OF $3,000.00 FROM THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF MONTEREY COUNTY TO

ASSIST WITH THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR EIGHT-WEEK

YOUTH SUMMER CAMP PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the request.

C. APPROVE A FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM PALENKE ARTS

ORGANIZATION TO USE LAGUNA GRANDE HALL AND KITCHEN TO HOLD THEIR ANNUAL "DIA DE LOS MUERTOS" EVENT ON NOVEMBER 1, 2025, IN THE AMOUNT OF $604.50
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the fee waiver request from Palenke Arts.

D. APPROVE A FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM MONTEREY COUNTY POPS!

FOR THEIR LABOR DAY CONCERT AT SEASIDE CITY HALL LAWN ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2025, IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,686.00
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the fee waiver request from Monterey County POPS!.

E. ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR CITY PARKS

AND FACILITIES WITH HOPE SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $154,375.00
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution authorizing a one-year maintenance service agreement for City parks and facilities with HOPE Services.

F. ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ALLOCATION OF 0.081 ACREFEET OF WATER PER YEAR FROM THE CITY RESERVE TO 1721 DEL

MONTE BOULEVARD TO SUPPORT AN EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING

LEXUS AUTO DEALERSHIP
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the allocation of 0.06 AFY to 1721 Del Monte Avenue.

G. ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE HOUSING

COLLABORATIVE TO AUTHORIZE THE COLLABORATIVE TO PURSUE THE

DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON TWO CITY-OWNED
PARCELS LOCATED ON THE 1200 BLOCK OF DARWIN STREET AND THE 1200 BLOCK OF LUZERN STREET
Packet Page 3
City Council SPECIAL Meeting June 24, 2025 5:00 PM Agenda Page 4 RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution to enter into a Cooperative Agreement with the Seaside Housing Collaborative.

H. ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES TO COMPLETE THE

COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE FEE STUDY FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $29,995.00
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution authorizing a professional services agreement with Willdan Financial Services to complete the preparation of a Comprehensive Citywide User Fee Study.

I. ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO AUTHORIZE SIDE LETTER AMENDMENTS TO

LABOR AGREEMENTS AND NON-REPRESENTATIVE GROUPS
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolutions and side-letter agreements to the existing labor agreements and plans of the Seaside Public Safety Managers' Association, Seaside City Employees' Association, Seaside Firefighters' Association, Seaside Police Officers' Association, Seaside Supervisory and Management Association, and benefit plan listings for non-represented groups of Seaside for the Confidential Exempt and Non-Exempt Employees', Unclassified Exempt and NonExempt Employees, and the Department Director Compensation Plan.

J. ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KRAEMER ENGINEERING INC. FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$699,978.94 FOR THE SAN PABLO AVENUE TRAFFIC CALMING

IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the plans and specifications for the San Pablo Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements Project; awarding a construction contract to Kraemer Engineering Inc. for an amount not to exceed $699,978.94; establishing a 30% construction contingency for a total project construction amount not to exceed $910,000.00; authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and approve any amendments, extensions, and change orders until completion of the project in accordance with the plans and specifications up to the total project construction amount.

K. ADOPT A RESOLUTION CANCELING THE JULY 3, 2025, REGULAR CITY

COUNCIL MEETING
RECOMMENDATION: Cancel the July 3, 2025, regular meeting.

9. PUBLIC HEARING
A. ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FY 2025–2029 CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND FY 2025–2026 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a resolution approving the 2025–2029 Consolidated Packet Page 4
City Council SPECIAL Meeting June 24, 2025 5:00 PM Agenda Page 5 Plan and the Fiscal Year 2025–2026 Annual Action Plan for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, and authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to:

1. Submit the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan and all required certifications and documentation to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and

2. Make any conforming or non-substantive modifications necessary to carry out the intent of the Plan and to remain in compliance with HUD requirements; and

3. Execute all implementing documents required by HUD for the receipt and use of CDBG funds; and

4. Enter into agreements and amendments with eligible subrecipients, contractors, and consultants for the implementation of approved CDBGfunded activities consistent with the adopted Plans.

B. AB 2561 PRESENTATION REPORT ON CURRENT JOB VACANCIES,

RECRUITMENT, AND RETENTION EFFORTS
RECOMMENDATION: Accept and file report on the status of job vacancies, recruitment, and retention efforts as required by Government Code section 3502.3 (Assembly Bill 2561).

10. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026

OPERATING BUDGET, INVESTMENT POLICY, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT

PROGRAM, FEE SCHEDULE, POSITION CONTROL LIST, SALARY

SCHEDULE, STRATEGIC PLAN, AND RESERVE AMOUNTS AND PROVIDE

DIRECTION TO STAFF AS TO ANY CHANGES TO BE MADE PRIOR TO

ADOPTION
RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation of the fiscal year 2025-26 draft budget and provide direction to staff as to any changes to be made prior to adoption.

11. COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS
A. NEW COUNCIL MEMBER REQUESTS
B. FOLLOW UP ON PREVIOUS REQUESTS

12. CITY ATTORNEY, CITY MANAGER, CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR

COMMENTS AND REPORTS ON COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
This is a time specifically set aside for members of the City Council, the City Manager and City Attorney to make brief comments of general interest to the community and report on committee assignments.

Packet Page 5
City Council SPECIAL Meeting June 24, 2025 5:00 PM Agenda Page 6

13. CLOSED SESSION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 et seq., the City Council and Successor Agency to Redevelopment Agency may adjourn to a Closed Session to consider specific matters dealing with litigation, certain personnel matters, property negotiations or to confer with the City Attorney. Public comments on these items are taken after being read by the City Attorney. For the public record, please state your name.

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 54956.8
Property: The Property Commonly Referred to As Campus Town (Property bounded by Highway 1/1st Avenue, 7th Avenue, Lightfighter/Colonel Durham Street, and Gigling)
Agency Negotiators: City Manager, et. al
Negotiating Parties: KBB Seaside Venture, et. al. and City of Seaside Under Negotiation: Price, terms of payment or both
B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 54956.8
Property: Golf Course Hotel parcel located at 1 McClure Way, Seaside, CA 93955 Agency Negotiators: City Manager and City Attorney
Negotiating Parties: City of Seaside and KDG
Under Negotiation: Price, Terms of Payment, or both
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 - EXISTING LITIGATION
Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 24CV002483
Case Name: Landwatch and Center for Biological Diversity v. City of Seaside, et al.

D. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 - EXISTING LITIGATION
Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 24 CV002872
Case Name: Seaside Highlands Homeowners Association v. City of Seaside, et al.

E. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 - EXISTING LITIGATION
Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 25CV001036
Case Name: City of Seaside v. Seaside Highlands Homeowners Association, et al.

F. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE 54956.9 (D)(2)
Packet Page 6
City Council SPECIAL Meeting June 24, 2025 5:00 PM Agenda Page 7

14. ADJOURNMENT
Next Regularly Scheduled Meeting:

July 3, 2025
5:00 p.m.

The City of Seaside is committed to providing accessible facilities and accommodating people with disabilities in all of its services programs and activities. If special considerations are needed by any person to fully participate in this meeting, contact the City Clerk at 899-6707 no fewer than two business days prior to the meeting to allow reasonable arrangements. Agendas are posted at:
http://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/129/City-Council-Committee-Agendas Agenda-related writings or documents provided during public meetings are available for public inspection during the meeting or from the office of the City Clerk. This agenda is posted in compliance with California Governor Newsom's Executive Orders N-29-20 and N-33-20.

Packet Page 7

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY OF SEASIDE SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR 440 HARCOURT AVE
AGENCY TO THE Tuesday, June 10, 2025
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 5:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chair Oglesby called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL – ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
PRESENT: Burks, Garcia-Arrazola, Miller, Oglesby, Pacheco ABSENT: None

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge was led by City Manager Greg McDanel.

4. PUBLIC COMMENT
Lynda Cunningham, Peter Kaiser

5. CONSENT AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENT: Peter Kaiser
On motion by Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Pacheco and second by Council/Agency Member Burks and carried by the following vote, the City Council/Successor Agency moved to approve the consent agenda as presented.

RESULT: 5-0-0-0
AYES: Burks, Garcia-Arrazola, Miller, Oglesby, Pacheco
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
A. ADOPT A RESOLUTION CANCELING JUNE 19, 2025, REGULAR CITY

COUNCIL MEETING
ACTION: ADOPTED RESO #25-85
B. ADOPT A RESOLUTION EXTENDING 180.6 ACRE FEET ALLOCATION OF WATER AND 45.83 ACRE FEET OF RECYCLED WATER PER YEAR FOR THE

KB BAKEWELL SEASIDE VENTURE II RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL

DEVELOPMENT LOCATED WITHIN THE CAMPUS TOWN SPECIFIC

PLANNING AREA
ACTION: ADOPTED RESO #25-86

6. BUDGET STUDY SESSION
Packet Page 8
Tuesday, June 10, 2025 City Council SPECIAL Meeting Page 2 A. RECEIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026

OPERATING BUDGET, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FEE

SCHEDULE, POSITION CONTROL LIST, SALARY SCHEDULE, AND

RESERVE AMOUNTS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF AS TO ANY

CHANGES TO BE MADE PRIOR TO ADOPTION
The City Manager and Finance Director provided an overview budget, and the following departments reviewed their budget requests: City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney, Human Resources, Finance, Police, Fire, Building (division of the Community Development Department) and Recreation.

The city council also reviewed the recommendations from the Neighborhood Improvement Programs and confirmed to proceed with the following projects:

1. Annual Tree Giveaway Program ($5000).

2. 6 Benches at parks around existing playground equipment-Highland Otis, Lincoln Cunningham, Pacchetti, Capra ($27,000).

3. Add 2 Wheel chair accessibility ramps to the benches on General Jim Moore ($4000).

4. 5 wraps on electric boxes ($8,500).

5. 1 Mural ($15,000).

6. 3 bikes racks at Lincoln Cunningham Park Basketball court and Havana Soliz Park BBQ area ($3,900).

7. Laguna Grande Park 10 Benches Replacement and Additions ($50,000).

8. Install 2 Grandstand/Gazebos at Laguna Grande Park Lakeside BBQ area ($40,000).

9. Canyon Del Rey Median Landscaping (intersection of Del Monte to CDR) ($25,000).

7. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business the meeting adjourned at 10:21 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
_________________________ _________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
Packet Page 9

DRAFT MINUTES

CITY OF SEASIDE SPECIAL MEETING
CITY COUNCIL/ SUCCESSOR 440 HARCOURT AVE
AGENCY TO THE Thursday, June 12, 2025
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 5:00 PM

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chair Oglesby called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL – ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
PRESENT: Burks, Garcia-Arrazola, Miller, Oglesby, Pacheco ABSENT: None

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge was led by Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Pacheco.

4. PUBLIC COMMENT
Peter Kaiser, Robert Daniels, Jr.

5. BUDGET STUDY SESSION
A. RECEIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE DRAFT FISCAL YEAR 2025-2026

OPERATING BUDGET, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, FEE

SCHEDULE, POSITION CONTROL LIST, SALARY SCHEDULE, AND

RESERVE AMOUNTS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF AS TO ANY

CHANGES TO BE MADE PRIOR TO ADOPTION
PUBLIC COMMENT #1: Lynda Cunningham, Lisa Sears, Lora James, Juan Sanchez, Peter Kaiser
The following departments provided presentations on their budget requests:

Economic Development, Community Development, Public Works. The Finance Director also presented the fee schedule.

PUBLIC COMMENT #2: Lora James, Lynda Cunningham, Robert Daniels, Jr.

On motion by Council/Agency Member Garcia-Arrazola and second by Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair Pacheco and carried by the following vote, the City Council/Successor Agency moved to authorize reductions by deferring the Hilby Storm Drain Project (saves $200,000), deferring the Fab Lab Trailer Project (saves $370,000), and reducing street transfers (saves $1.5 million).

RESULT: 4-0-0-1
AYES: Garcia-Arrazola, Miller, Oglesby, Pacheco
Packet Page 10
Thursday, June 12, 2025 City Council SPECIAL Meeting Page 2 NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Burks

6. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:21 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
_________________________ _________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
Packet Page 11

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.B.

TO: City Council
BY: Dan Meewis, Assistant City Manager
Kee Hyon Higgins, Recreation Supervisor
DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: APPROVE A MAYOR'S YOUTH FUND CONTRIBUTION REQUEST OF $3,000.00 FROM THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF MONTEREY

COUNTY TO ASSIST WITH THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH

THEIR EIGHT-WEEK YOUTH SUMMER CAMP PROGRAM

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the request.

BACKGROUND
The Boys & Girls Clubs of Monterey County is requesting a donation of $3,000.00 from the Mayor's Youth Fund to cover the costs associated with expenses related to their eight-week youth Summer Camp Program, including the purchase of art & craft supplies, sewing machines, and a variety of resources for STEAM-based learning. Their Summer Camp Program provides robust learning and hands-on projects for youth ages 6-18. It is designed to support local youth in continuing their academic, social, and emotional development during the school break. Their overall goal is to serve 122 youth for the eight-week summer program.

The Boys & Girls Club Summer Camp Program engages in environmental sustainability through its EV fleet conversion. At least one field trip a week will be scheduled, ensuring the newest method of transportation will be utilized. Three meals a day will be provided for the youth and the remaining scraps and materials will be recycled.

Based on the information provided in the application, the request meets the criteria for the Mayor’s Youth Fund Policy. They received their last donation at the June 20, 2024, Packet Page 12

Item No. 8.B. Page 2 of 2
City Council meeting. They submitted their 2024 Mayor's Youth Fund Closing Report within the 60-day time frame.

FISCAL IMPACT
This request would be funded by a donation from the Green Waste Recovery's donation to the Mayor's Youth Fund. The current balance of the Mayor's Youth Fund account (601-2106) is $7,364.61. If the City Council approves this request, the balance will decrease to $4,364.61. This is for fiscal year 2024/25.

In the event that all the funds in the Mayor's Youth Fund become exhausted, staff will keep a file of all applications. Once Green Waste issues the next round of funding, all applications on file will be processed at the next available City Council meeting.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Mayor's Youth Fund Request Boys & Girls Clubs of Monterey County 2025

2. Boys & Girls Clubs of Monterey County 501(c)(3)

3. Mayor's Youth Fund Closing Report - Boys & Girls Clubs of Monterey County 2024

Packet Page 13
Packet Page 14
Packet Page 15
Packet Page 16
Packet Page 17
Packet Page 18
Packet Page 19
Packet Page 20
Packet Page 21
Packet Page 22
Mayor's Youth Fund Closing Report
Date Mayor's Youth Fund was approved by council: June 20, 2024 and check received June 28,2024 Name of Organization: Boys & Girls Clubs ofMonterey County Contact: Kassandra Pasillas
Address: 1332 La Salle Ave Seaside, CA 93955Email/Phone: grantsadministration©,bgcmc.org (831) 394-5171 Amount of Donation Received: $3,000
What Items were purchased with Mayor's Youth Fund Donation:

Items that BGCMC purchased with the Mayor's Youth Fund consisted of: mason jars, craft rolls,cornstarch, baking soda, salt, white vinegar, hydrogen peroxide, food coloring, dish soap, instant yeast, oil, yarn, glue, chart paper, and other supplies for projects. The entire grant funding of $3,000 was utilized to purchase supplies.

Please describe the activities and the date the group/individual participated in related to reduce,reuse and recycle? Please provide written description, brief City Council presentation, and/orphotos.The 2024 Summer Academy at the Seaside Clubhouse provided robust learning and hands-on projects foryouth ages 6-18. Program services operate from 8:00a-6:00p. Overall the grant supported 163 youth whoreside in Seaside. Youth formed groups ofK-2nd, 3rd-5th and 6th-8th graders. The program culminated in our STEAM Fair on Friday, July 26 and showcased the member's work throughout the summer. Some of the grade level projects offered included:Bits of Science (K-3rd) Youth K through 3rd did weekly projects to learn about the different branches of science; chemistry,engineering, animals, food science, etc. Each week they would do small projects and experiments to learnthese concepts behind the branches of science.

Wonder of Animation (4th-5th)
The Wonder of Animation program taught 4th and 5th grade members Claymation, an animation technique using movable clay characters and stop motion recording. Members worked in groups to create their own claymation films by creating storylines, characters, sets from recycled materials and theircharacters from clay.

Nutrition (6th -8th Grade)The 6th tlirough 8th grade cohort worked on understanding the food that we eat, how it affects your bodies and making healthy choices based on that knowledge. To further demonstrate commitment tosustainability, BGCMC has taken significant steps to reduce, reuse, and recycle. We have incorporatedelectric buses for all transportation needs, including numerous field trips. During the summer, members were provided with three meals a day, with all leftover scraps and materials being recycled. Additionally,the facility is equipped with solar panels, ensuring that our environmental efforts are consistently upheld.

Packet Page 23
f::f®i
'.'.,'" ::^fK'Ksi
!'-..''i';..^''st
Adrian (1st grade), mixed a
healthy firuit salad togetherduring Bits of Science.

Vivian (3rd grade), during the
STEAM project illustrates
fireworks in a jar by adding food
coloring to oil.

Levi (3rd grade) carefully pours
solution into bottle while Leonel(3rd grade) provides assistance maintaining bottle's stability.

Angel (4th grade) took a field trip with his group to theMuseum of Natural Histoiy.

Signature:

D»e: ^ /tl\ l^aA
Packet Page 24

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.C.

TO: City Council
BY: Dan Meewis, Assistant City Manager
Kee Hyon Higgins, Recreation Supervisor
DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: APPROVE A FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM PALENKE ARTS

ORGANIZATION TO USE LAGUNA GRANDE HALL AND KITCHEN
TO HOLD THEIR ANNUAL "DIA DE LOS MUERTOS" EVENT ON
NOVEMBER 1, 2025, IN THE AMOUNT OF $604.50

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the fee waiver request from Palenke Arts.

BACKGROUND
Palenke Arts is a non-profit organization, and they are requesting a fee waiver to help cover the costs associated with their annual event "Dia de los Muertos" (Day of the Dead) celebration on Saturday, November 1, 2025, from 12:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. in the Laguna Grande Hall and kitchen at the Oldemeyer Center. This is the fifth year that Palenke Arts has requested a fee waiver for this event, with the last request being in 2024.

This event will feature a variety of demonstrations and presentations from the different programs offered by Palenke Arts, as well as a large "Ofrenda" which will honor those in our community who have passed away.

Staff recommends that the fees be waived for the rental cost of the facility and deposit and that the organization provide liability coverage.

Palenke Atrs has received a fee waiver for their "Dia de los Muertos Celebration (Day of the Dead)" annually since 2021.

Packet Page 25

Item No. 8.C. Page 2 of 2

FISCAL IMPACT
The approximate fees which are applicable to this request are:

Laguna Grande Hall & Kitchen Fee 9 Hours @ $56.25 per hour $506.25 Non-Refundable Portion Deposit $ 98.25
TOTAL $604.50
Should the City Council approve the request with the staff recommendation to waive all rental fees and deposit, the fiscal impact is $604.50 out of account 100.3672.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Palenke Arts Fee Waiver Request Dia de los Muentos Celebration (Day of the Dead) 2025

2. 501(c)(3) - Palenke Arts

Packet Page 26
Packet Page 27
Packet Page 28
Packet Page 29
Packet Page 30
Packet Page 31
Packet Page 32
Packet Page 33
Packet Page 34

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.D.

TO: City Council
BY: Dan Meewis, Assistant City Manager
Kee Hyon Higgins, Recreation Supervisor
DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: APPROVE A FEE WAIVER REQUEST FROM MONTEREY COUNTY POPS! FOR THEIR LABOR DAY CONCERT AT SEASIDE CITY
HALL LAWN ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2025, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$5,686.00

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the fee waiver request from Monterey County POPS!.

BACKGROUND
Monterey County POPS! is requesting co-sponsorship to waive all fees and staff costs related to their Labor Day Concert on the City Hall Lawn on September 01, 2025, from 12:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. A Special Event application was submitted and reviewed by staff and the Special Event Committee.

Monterey County POPS! is an orchestra dedicated to bringing pop and patriotic music performed by professional musicians free-of-charge to the families and visitors of Monterey County while identifying, engaging, and educating the under-served youth of Monterey County. The concert on the City Hall lawn would include pop and patriotic music, along with a selection of hispanic favorites. Rehearsal would start at 9:00 a.m. with opening events at noon and the concert from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. Folks can bring their chairs and have a picnic and enjoy the music on the lawn.

They are anticipating an ongoing partnership with the city providing logistics support, including any food vendors or other activities, chairs and tents for the orchestra, toilets, advertising, amplified sound/music, trash collection, installation of their banner, loading Packet Page 35

Item No. 8.D. Page 2 of 2
zone and six reserved parking spaces on Harcourt Avenue next to the lawn.

The City Council has approved this request on an annual basis since 2024.

FISCAL IMPACT
Should the City Council approve the request for co-sponsorship of the Monterey County POPS! Labor Day Concert, the approximate fiscal impact is as follows:

Special Event Application Fee $ 110.00
City Hall Lawn Rental Fee $ 121.00
City Hall Lawn Deposit $ 183.00
Amplified Sound/Music System $3,500.00
Tent Permit Fee $ 218.00
Public Works Staff Time $ 404.00
Portable Potties & Hand Wash Station Quote $1,150.00
TOTAL $5,686.00

ATTACHMENTS

1. Monterey County POPS! Special Event Application 2025

2. Montery County POPS! - Fee Waiver 2025

3. Montery County POPS! - 501(c)(3)

Packet Page 36
Packet Page 37
Packet Page 38
Packet Page 39
Packet Page 40
Packet Page 41
Packet Page 42
Packet Page 43
Packet Page 44
Packet Page 45
Packet Page 46
Packet Page 47
Packet Page 48
Packet Page 49
Packet Page 50
Packet Page 51
Packet Page 52
Packet Page 53
Packet Page 54
Packet Page 55

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.E.

TO: City Council
FROM: Greg McDanel, City Manager
BY: Thomas Korman, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Monty Miller
DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT

FOR CITY PARKS AND FACILITIES WITH HOPE SERVICES IN
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $154,375.00

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing a one-year maintenance service agreement for City parks and facilities with HOPE Services.

BACKGROUND
HOPE Services (HOPE) is a local non-profit organization engaged in the training of persons with disabilities to enter the mainstream workforce. Since 2001, Hope Services has provided the City with public works maintenance assistance and has proven to be an invaluable asset. In return, the City has provided work experience and opportunities for persons with disabilities. HOPE maintains the City parks by removing trash from cans, picking up litter, replacing dog waste bags and maintaining the dog waste stations; and provides additional litter control on Coe Avenue, General Jim Moore Blvd., Monterey Road, southwest corner of the intersection of Canyon Del Rey and Fremont Boulevard, and designated alleyways throughout the City. They also pick up litter and empty cans outside at City Hall and County Library, Oldemeyer Center, Pattullo Swim, and Youth Education Center.

There are twenty-four (24) parks and other public areas in the City that have benefited from the successful partnership with HOPE. It has allowed the City Parks staff to concentrate on beautification projects and maintenance and repair of irrigation systems, and has reduced City staff overtime.

Packet Page 56

Item No. 8.E. Page 2 of 2
The attached contract provides for four (4) workers and one (1) supervisor by HOPE to perform maintenance and cleanup tasks in and around public facilities. The HOPE crew is scheduled to work six and a half hours (6.5 hrs) per day from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. with a half hour lunch break, Monday through Friday. The work performed by HOPE is under the direction of the City Maintenance and Utilities Superintendent. The core objective required to be performed by the HOPE crew is the cleaning of litter at each park at least once a week. Also, HOPE’s supervisor is responsible for tracking the amount of litter removed by the clean-up of parks as part of the required documentation for the city’s Storm Water Management Program. There was no increase in the billing rate per hour from Fiscal Year 2024/25 to Fiscal Year 2025/26, and therefore there is no increase in the overall contract amount.

Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a one-year Maintenance Services Agreement with HOPE Services for an amount not to exceed $154,375.00.

FISCAL IMPACT
The HOPE fees are distributed from the following fund sources: Stormwater Fund (271) and Parks (100). Based on the time spent for each aspect of the work provided, each of these funds will be charged accordingly for a total agreement amount not to exceed $154,375.00.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY
Not Applicable

ATTACHMENTS

1. Agreement

2. Resolution
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

____________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 57

City of Seaside

RESTATED AND AMENDED MAINTENANCE SERVICE AGREEMENT
OPTION YEAR EXTENSION 2025-2026
This Maintenance Services Agreement (“Agreement”) made the date last written below, is by and between the City of Seaside, a municipal corporation (“City”) and HOPE Services, a corporation (“HOPE”).

RECITALS
A. HOPE is engaged in the training of persons with disabilities to enter the mainstream workforce.

B. HOPE has offered to provide certain maintenance services to the City for a fee and the City desires to engage HOPE to provide such services to the City, all on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Provisions of Services. HOPE agrees to perform certain maintenance tasks for the City that will generally consist of, but not limited to, trash and litter removal, cleaning and light maintenance of landscaping, streets, parks and other public areas.

2. Amount of Services. HOPE shall provide a work crew consisting of four maintenance workers and one supervisor to accomplish the assigned tasks referred to in paragraph 1, during the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Monday through Friday with .5 hour daily lunch break each week during the term of this Agreement (6.5 hour work day).

3. Holiday Schedule. The following holiday schedule in which HOPE Services and the City observe shall not be obligated to perform any services:

Independence Day Friday July 4, 2025
Labor Day Monday September 1, 2025
Thanksgiving Day Thursday November 27, 2025
Day after Thanksgiving Friday November 28, 2025
Christmas Eve Wednesday December 24, 2025
Christmas Holiday Thursday December 25, 2025
New Year’s Day Thursday January 1, 2026
Martin Luther King Day Monday January 19, 2026
President’s Day Monday February 16, 2026
Memorial Day Monday May 25, 2026
Juneteenth Friday June 19, 2026
Docusign Envelope ID: CB549AC6-BE5F-498A-A4BD-97894362CE38 Packet Page 58

4. Payment to HOPE. The City shall pay consultant on a time and materials basis an amount not to exceed ONE HUNDRED FIFTY FOUR THOUSAND AND THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY FIVE dollars ($154,375.00) for the services described in paragraph 2. Any additional services provided by HOPE at the request of the City shall be billed by HOPE to the City on an hourly basis at $95.00 (July 1, 2025-June 30, 2026).

HOPE will bill the customer monthly; invoices are due and payable upon receipt. HOPE will prepare and submit a list to the Public Works Division of the necessary supplies, equipment, etc. needed for the work assignments specified by the City. City will provide transportation during the workday. After review and approval of the proposed supplies, etc. the City will purchase or reimburse HOPE for those approved supplies, equipment, etc.

5. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence on July 1, 2025 and terminate June 30, 2026; provided however, that either party may terminate this Agreement at any time on thirty day written notice to the other party.

6. Supervision of Work. HOPE shall accomplish the maintenance tasks assigned to it by the City in a safe, skillful, workmanlike and lawful manner. All members of the work crew shall dress appropriately for the task at hand at all times while working in the City. The supervisor of the work crew referred to in paragraph 2 will supervise the work crew at all times while the work crew is performing maintenance tasks in the City. City shall have no right or obligation to direct the specific methods used by HOPE or its employees to accomplish a particular maintenance task.

7. Indemnification. HOPE shall indemnify, defend, and hold City harmless from and against any and all losses, claims, demands, damages, expenses or judgements arising from any willful or negligent act, error or omission of HOPE or its employees except for any loss, claim, demand, damage, expense or judgement arising from the sole negligence or intentional act of City or its employee.

8. Insurance. Without limiting HOPE’s duty to indemnify, HOPE shall maintain in effect throughout the term of this Agreement a policy or policies of insurance covering all of its operations (including public liability coverage, property damage coverage and professional malpractice) with the following minimum limits of liability:

A. COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY INSURANCE:

Commercial General Liability, including but not limited to, premises, personal injuries, products and completed operations, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 property damage; and

1. Bodily injury $1,000,000.00 per occurrence and $1,000,000.00 and aggregate and $1,000,000.00 property damage; and

2. A combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence.

Docusign Envelope ID: CB549AC6-BE5F-498A-A4BD-97894362CE38 Packet Page 59

B. AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY INSURANCE:

Comprehensive automotive liability covering all motor vehicles including owned, leased, non-owned, and hired vehicles, used in providing services under this agreement, with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence.

1. Bodily injury $1,000,000.00 per occurrence and $1,000,000.00 and aggregate and $1,000,000.00 property damage; and

2. A combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00 per occurrence.

C. WORKER’S COMPENSATION INSURANCE:

Workers’ compensation insurance in accordance with California Labor Code section 3700 and with a minimum of $100,000,00 per occurrence for employer’s liability.

9. Relationship of Parties. Nothing in this Agreement or otherwise shall create any partnership or joint venture between HOPE and the City. The parties to this agreement are independent contractors and shall maintain that relationship throughout the term of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement or the performance of this Agreement shall create an employer/employee relationship between any individual and the City.

10. Notices. All notices and demands shall be given in writing either by personal services or by registered or certified mail return receipt requested, postage and fees prepaid when delivered by the United States Post Office, or by facsimile transmission with a confirmation copy delivered by mail as aforesaid. Notice shall be considered given on the date received by personal service or transmitted by facsimile, or the date appearing on the return receipt, but if the receipt is not returned, within three (3) days after being mailed. Notice shall be addressed as shown below for each party, expect that, if any party gives notice of a change of name or address, notices to that party shall thereafter be given as shown in that notice.
“HOPE” “CITY”
Community Employment Manager City Manager
HOPE Services City of Seaside
546 Brunken Avenue 440 Harcourt Avenue
Salinas, Ca 93901 Seaside, Ca. 93955
Tel: (831) 758-0973 Tel: (831) 899-6700
Fax: (831) 758-0252 Fax: (831) 899-6207

11. Time. Time is of the essence of this Agreement.

Docusign Envelope ID: CB549AC6-BE5F-498A-A4BD-97894362CE38 Packet Page 60

12. Amendment of Contract. This Agreement may be amended or modified at any time with respect to any provision by a written instrument executed by City and HOPE.

13. Captions. The captions heading the various paragraphs of this Agreement are for convenience and shall not be considered to limit, expand, or define the contents of the respective paragraphs.

Date:_______________ HOPE SERVICE
________________________________
Vinay Behl, CFO
Date:_________________ CITY OF SEASIDE
_________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Docusign Envelope ID: CB549AC6-BE5F-498A-A4BD-97894362CE38 6/10/2025
Packet Page 61
Meeting Date: 6/24/25
Item #: 8.F.

RESOLUTION NO. 25-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A ONE-YEAR MAINTENANCE

SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR CITY PARKS WITH HOPE SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $154,375.00
WHEREAS, HOPE Services is a local non-profit organization engaged in the training of persons with disabilities to enter the mainstream workforce; and WHEREAS, the City of Seaside has maintained a successful partnership with HOPE Services for over twenty years; and
WHEREAS, HOPE Services would perform maintenance and clean-up tasks at each park location and designated public areas on at least a weekly basis by maintaining the City parks by removing trash from cans, picking up litter, replacing dog waste bags and maintaining the dog waste stations; and providing litter control on Coe Avenue, General Jim Moore Blvd., Monterey Road, southwest corner of the intersection of Canyon Del Rey and Freemont Boulevard, and designated alleyways throughout the City They also pick up litter and empty cans outside at City Hall and County Library, Oldemeyer Center, Pattullo Swim, and Youth Education Center.; and WHEREAS, the services performed by HOPE Services have reduced staff overtime and have allowed city staff to concentrate on beautification projects, and maintenance and repair of the irrigation systems; and
WHEREAS, HOPE Services and the City have agreed to a one-year contract.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby the City Manager to execute a maintenance service agreement with HOPE Services to perform park and public maintenance services for an amount not to exceed $154,375.00.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 24th day of June, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
APPROVED:

Packet Page 62
-2
_______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APROVED TO FORM:
______________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 63

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.F.

TO: City Council
FROM: Greg McDanel, City Manager
BY: Andrew Myrick, Economic Development & Community Planning Manager DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ALLOCATION OF 0.081

ACRE-FEET OF WATER PER YEAR FROM THE CITY RESERVE TO
1721 DEL MONTE BOULEVARD TO SUPPORT AN EXPANSION OF

THE EXISTING LEXUS AUTO DEALERSHIP

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the allocation of 0.06 AFY to 1721 Del Monte Avenue.

BACKGROUND
On June 4, 2025, the City of Seaside Community Development Department approved Architectural Review AR-2024-007 to allow for an existing Lexus dealership located at 1721 Del Monte Boulevard to construct a 1,163-square-foot addition to their showroom (see attached AR-2024-007 for plans and conditions of approval). As the proposed expansion would increase the floor area of the existing building, an additional 0.081 acre-feet per year (AFY) would need to be allocated to the project from the City reserve in order for the project to proceed.

The City Council has previously allocated 3.602 AFY for uses related to the development of Auto Center Properties. If this project utilizes 0.081 AFY, there will be 3.521 AFY remaining under this allocation.

Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the allocation of 0.081 AFY for the project. If the project does not proceed to completion, the City will be able to recover the water.

FISCAL IMPACT
Packet Page 64

Item No. 8.F. Page 2 of 2
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY
Vibrant Local Economy, Enhanced Physical Infrastructure & Abundant Water Supply

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution - 1721 Del Monte Water Allocation

2. AR-2024-007 Approval Documents
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

____________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 65
Meeting Date: x/xx/xx
Item #: X.X.

RESOLUTION NO. 25-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE APPROVING AN ALLOCATION OF 0.081 ACRE-FEET PER YEAR FROM THE CITY RESERVE TO 1721 DEL MONTE BOULEVARD TO SUPPORT AN EXPANSION OF THE

EXISTING LEXUS AUTO DEALERSHIP
WHEREAS, the City of Seaside desires to see local businesses expand and thrive within the City of Seaside; and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2025, the City of Seaside Community Development Department approved Architectural Review AR-2024-007 to allow an existing Lexus Dealership located at 1721 Del Monte Avenue to expand its floor area by 1,163 square feet; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the rules of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District, the business must obtain 0.081 acre-feet per year (AFY) of water from another source in order to proceed with the project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Seaside has previously set aside 3.602 AFY of water for use by properties within the Auto Center; and
WHEREAS, the City of Seaside desires to allocate 0.081 AFY from its reserves in order to facilitate the expansion of the existing business.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby allocate 0.081 AFY of water from the City’s Auto Center Properties category within its reserves to allow for the expansion of the existing building as authorized by AR-2024-007.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this allocation is made contingent upon the applicant diligently pursuing the project to completion, and that the City may recall this allocation if the applicant allows AR-2024-007 to expire prior to completion of the project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Special meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 24th day of June, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
APPROVED:

Packet Page 66
-2
_______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
______________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 67
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT | Planning Division
440 Harcourt Avenue [email protected]
Seaside, CA 93955 https://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/

SENT VIA EMAIL

MEMORANDUM
DATE: JUNE 4, 2025
TO: HUNTER HAUSINGER
FROM: ANDREW MYRICK, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITY

PLANNING MANAGER
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF: AR-2024-007 FOR ADDITIONS AND FAÇADE CHANGES TO AN EXISTING AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP.

On May 2, 2024, Cappo Real Estate Holdings, LLC, property owner, and Hunter Hausinger, project applicant, submitted Architectural Review application AR2024-007 for a 668 square foot (SF) showroom addition, a 495 SF vehicle delivery enclosure addition, 440 SF of landscaping, and a new façade, parapet, sign blade, and vehicle display pad for the existing automobile dealership located at 1721 Del Monte Blvd (APN: 011-541-004) in the Automotive Regional Commercial (CA) zoning district.

The project was resubmitted on July 8, 2024, September 17, 2024, and November 1, 2024. On November 27, 2024, the project was deemed complete save for the staking and flagging requirement. On May 13, 2025 the staking and flagging requirement was satisfied by a sign that was posted on the road frontage abutting Del Monte Boulevard in accordance with Seaside Municipal Code (SMC) 17.62.030.D.2. The sign showed architectural renderings of the proposed project and the time, place, and method of requesting a hearing thereon. On May 16, 2025, the City mailed a Notice of Intent to Approve to property owners and property occupants within a 300-foot radius of the proposed project. No requests for a public hearing were received by the City within the ten-day period that expired on May 27, 2025.

The existing 11,213 SF automobile dealership building sits on a 41,649 SF lot.

The project proposes expanding the primary building to 12,376 SF. The 668 SF showroom addition will have the beneficial effect of moving the windows closer towards Del Monte Boulevard. This will reduce the shadow created by the overhang and create a more pleasant and open appearance. The aluminum Packet Page 68
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT | Planning Division
440 Harcourt Avenue [email protected]
Seaside, CA 93955 https://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/

metal composite (ACM) panels will modernize the exterior and bring it more in line with other nearby automobile dealerships.

The proposed parapet rises 2’ more than the existing parapet: from 28’ to 30’ on the service parapet and from 32’ to 34’ on the showroom parapet. This is within the allowed 36’ in height per the Seaside General Plan 2040 for auto-oriented uses.

The proposed sign blade rises to 42’ 9” in height. This is greater than the 36’ allowed by Seaside General Plan 2040, however it is considered a projection under SMC 17.30.030.D.1. Therefore, the 42’ 9” blade is compliant with the General Plan and the Municipal Code.

Some landscaping, 440 SF of it, is proposed to be added near the bottom of the new sign blade. This will soften an appearance on what was previously pavement.

Signs are not part of this proposed project.

Findings

1. Architectural Review is not an activity subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA guidelines.

Evidence: Discretionary design review of an otherwise permitted use does not give the City the authority to mitigate environmental impacts and thus the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

2. The proposed structure will not adversely impact the character of the neighborhood.

Evidence: The proposed structure will enhance the character of the neighborhood. It renovates an older style overhanging façade into a sleek modern design that emphasizes windows and sunlight by bringing the windows closer to the street and styling the upper façade with aluminum metal composite (AMC) panels.

3. The proposed structure will be compatible with the scale, bulk, height, and location of existing structures located on the neighboring block face.

Evidence: Surrounding uses largely consist of similar large-scale automobile uses on similarly large parcels. The single non-auto-oriented Packet Page 69
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT | Planning Division
440 Harcourt Avenue [email protected]
Seaside, CA 93955 https://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/

use consists of an even larger structure for a concrete and building supply company.

4. A Notice of Intent to Approve has been mailed to all real property owners within 300 feet of the property and no protest has been received.

Evidence: The notice of intent to approve was mailed on May 16, 2025 to all property owners and all property occupants within 300’ of the project parcel, including parcels located in Sand City. No requests for a public hearing were received by the City within the ten-day period that expired on May 27, 2025.

5. The application has complied with the requirements of Section

17.62.030.D.

Evidence: The total project height of 34’ for the showroom parapet and 42’ 9” for the sign blade renders traditional staking and flagging infeasible.

In accordance with SMC 17.62.030.D.2, a conspicuous sign was posted on the road frontage abutting Del Monte Boulevard on May 13, 2025. The project site has only one frontage and that is on Del Monte Boulevard.

The sign contained an architectural rendering of the proposed project and instructions on how to request a public hearing and the deadline for doing so.

Permit expiration conditions are set forth in Condition of Approval #17 in Exhibit A.

The Architectural Review application AR-2024-007 is hereby approved as set forth in the attached exhibits.

Please acknowledge your acceptance of this approval and the conditions of approval by signing the enclosed copy of this memorandum and returning it to our office. If we can be of further assistance, please contact your project planner Eric Azriel at (831) 899-6778 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Andrew Myrick
Economic Development and Community Planning Manager
[email protected]
Packet Page 70
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT | Planning Division
440 Harcourt Avenue [email protected]
Seaside, CA 93955 https://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/

Attachments:

Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Exhibit B: Project Plans
Packet Page 71

ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION No. AR-2024-007
This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the applicant and property owner(s).

The undersigned hereby acknowledge the approved terms and conditions and agree to fully conform to, and comply with, said terms and conditions within the time frames approved by the review authority.
_______________ __________________________________
Dated Hunter Hausinger, Applicant
_______________ __________________________________
Dated Cappo Real Estate Holdings, LLC, Property Owner
Packet Page 72

Exhibit A: Conditions of Approval
Planning:

1. Landscaped areas, including trees and other plantings, as well as paving, walls, and fences, shall be regularly maintained.

2. The 440 SF of new landscaped area shall be allowed to be planted with a native species that does not require irrigation after establishment, subject to approval by the Planning department.

3. Area lighting shall be designed to minimize the negative effects of lighting the night sky and employ control features so as to avoid light being directed off-site. The light source for externally-illuminated signs must be positioned so that light does not shine directly on adjoining properties or cause glare or shine in the eyes of motorists of pedestrians. All outdoor lighting shall be downlit and fully shielded. No outdoor lights shall be permitted that blink, flash, or change intensity.

4. Compliance with SMC 17.30.070 Outdoor Lighting is to be illustrated in the lighting plans of the building permit plan set.

5. The Zoning Administrator has the authority to approve minor changes to the landscaping, lighting, and architectural finishes of this project, given changes are kept in a similar design style, the colors and materials are within the same design family (metal, wood, composite siding), and the juxtaposition of the materials and colors achieves a similar design balance and aesthetic.

6. This approval does not include approval of any signs.

7. A Water Allocation to account for the new floor area shall be obtained prior to commencement of construction.

Building:

8. Construction must comply with all requirements of the California Building Code, as amended by the City of Seaside and in effect at the time of Building Permit submittal.

Packet Page 73

Fire Department:

9. Construction must comply with all requirements of the California Fire Code, as amended by the City of Seaside and in effect at the time of Building Permit submittal.

Engineering and Public Works:

10.The project must implement storm water best management practices (BMPs) during construction. (SMC 8.46)
a. Complete and submit the Storm Water Compliance Tracking Form, with signature with building permit application.
b. A project specific Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) is required of the applicant as part of building permit application.

11.Post-development peak storm water runoff rates shall not exceed predevelopment rate. A pro rata share of the cost of offsite erosion sediment, and flood control improvements and/or for maintenance to the principal drainage way may be required by the City Engineer to handle the increase peak runoff and/or sediment generated by the project. (SMC 15.32.170)
a. As part of Building Permit application, develop civil grading and drainage plans to clearly show direction of storm water drainage from new or redeveloped impervious surfaces.
b. Drainage shall not be directed to adjacent properties.

12.Prior to final inspection, any curb, gutter and sidewalk damaged during construction shall be replaced by a licensed concrete contractor in conformance with the most current applicable engineering standards, and upon the prior issuance of an Encroachment Permit from the Public Work Department.

Standard:

13.Except as modified by the conditions of approval, plans submitted for Building Permits must be in compliance with Exhibit B: Project Plans.

14.The applicant agrees as a condition and in consideration of the approval of this permit that it will defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Seaside or its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or its agents, officers or employees to attack, Packet Page 74

set aside, void or annul this approval. The applicant will reimburse the City for any court costs and attorney’s fees, which the City may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. City may, at its sole discretion, participate in the defense of such action; but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and the City shall cooperate fully in the defense thereof.

15.The project shall comply with the requirements and the applicable ordinances of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD).

16.The permit shall have no force or effect unless and until accepted, and the terms thereof agreed to, in writing, by the applicant and property owner prior to issuance of any Building Permit or establishment of any use authorized by the permit.

17.This approval shall become null and void unless a Building Permit application is submitted or authorized use is established within twelve (12) months of June 4, 2025 in accordance with Seaside Municipal Code Section 17.64.080.A. Time extensions may be granted by the original review authority if a written request and associated fee are received by the Community Development Department at least 30 days prior to the expiration in accordance with Seaside Municipal Code Section 17.64.080.B.

This approval shall also become null and void if the implementing Building Permit application expires.

18.For purposes of assuring compliance, the applicant, agents, representatives or their assignees agree not to deny or impede access to the subject property by City employees in the performance of their duties.

Packet Page 75

Exhibit B: Project Plans (19 sheets)
Packet Page 76
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A000
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP
COVER

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

LEXUS MONTEREY PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD., SEASIDE, CA 93955

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 77
X
AXXX
SIM
A100
1 SIM
SIM
X
AXXX

ENLARGED CALLOUT

BUILDING SECTION TAG

WALL SECTION TAG

DETAIL SECTION TAG
AXXX
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
X
AXXX
1 1i
IG-104A
A1

REVISION NUMBER
X
AXXX
SIM
X
AXXX
SIM

CURTAINWALL OR STOREFRONT TYPE

INTERIOR ALUMINUM FRAMING AND

GLAZING TYPE
(REFER TO WINDOW SCHEDULE)

WALL PARTITION TYPE

FIRE EXTINGUISHER AND SEMI-RECESSED

WALL CABINET

FIRE EXTINGUISHER AND WALL BRACKET
333 B DOOR DESIGNATION
(REFER TO DOOR SCHEDULE)

INTERIOR ELEVATION

BUILDING ELEVATION TAG

ROOM NAME AND NUMBER

SET BACK

MILLWORK ELEVATION X/AXXX

ROOM NAME
101
XXX
XXX

PROPERTY LINE
LEXUS

MONTEREY

PENINSULA

DEL MONTE BLVD
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A001
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

GENERAL

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

1. CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY DIMENSIONS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO STARTING WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.

2. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE AND PAY FOR BUILDING PERMITS,

APPLICATIONS FEES, SERVICE FEES, GOVERNMENTAL FEES, LICENSES AND

INSPECTIONS NECESSARY FOR THE EXECUTION AND COMPLETION OF THE WORK WHICH ARE LEGALLY REQUIRED.

3. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF APPLICABLE BUILDING

CODES AND AGENCIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE VARIOUS PHASES OF THE WORK.

4. REFER TO DRAWING A002, A003, AND A004 FOR ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. THE

WORK SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

5. DIMENSIONS ARE INDICATED TO THE CENTERLINE OF STRUCTURAL GRID, FACE OF

CONCRETE WALL, NOMINAL FACE OF CMU WALL, OR FACE OF PARTITION AS SCHEDULED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

6. REFER TO SOILS REPORT FOR GEOLOGICAL INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SLAB AND FOUNDATION SPECIFICATIONS.

7. REFER TO CIVIL ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS FOR FINISH PAD ELEVATION, FINISH GRADES, SIDEWALKS, UTILITIES, AND DRAINAGE.

8. REFER TO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS FOR STRUCTURAL RELATED

INFORMATION INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SLAB, FOUNDATION, FRAMING, SHEAR WALL, MASONRY, ETC...

9. REFER TO MECHANICAL ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS FOR MECHANICAL RELATED

INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO HEATING, AIR CONDITIONING, DUCTING, VENTILATION, REGISTER SIZES, ENERGY CALCULATIONS, ETC...

10. REFER TO PLUMBING ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS FOR PLUMBING RELATED INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: ROOF DRAINS AND OVERFLOWS, PLUMBING FIXTURES, DRAINS, CONDENSATES, WATER HEATER, AND HOSE BIBS.

11. REFER TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEER'S DRAWINGS FOR ELECTRICAL RELATED

INFORMATION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO POWER / SERVICE PANEL REQUIREMENTS, WIRING, CONDUITS, OUTLETS, LIGHTING, SWITCHES, ETC...

12. FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM TO BE TIED INTO AN ALARM SYSTEM PER 903 I.B.C.

13. AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM SERVING MORE THAN 100 SPRINKLERS SHALL BE

SUPERVISED BY AN APPROVED CENTRAL, PROPRIETARY OR REMOTE STATION

SERVICE OR A LOCAL ALARM WHICH WILL GIVE AN AUDIBLE SIGNAL AT CONSTANTLY ATTENDED LOCATION.

14. PROVIDE AND INSTALL R-13 BATT INSULATION AT INTERIOR METAL STUD WALLS ADJOINING AIR CONDITIONED AREAS WITH NON-AIR CONDITIONED AREAS.

15. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE REQUIRED OPENINGS THROUGH WALLS, FLOOR SLABS AND/ OR ROOF FRAMING w/ MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING SUB-CONTRACTORS.

16. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE SEPARATION BARRIER BETWEEN DISSIMILAR METALS.

17. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT AND MAINTAIN DUST PROOF PARTITIONS AS

REQUIRED TO PREVENT SPREAD OF DUST, FUMES, AND SMOKE TO OTHER PARTS OF BUILDING. UPON COMPLETION, REMOVE PARTITIONS AND REPAIR DAMAGED SURFACES TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES.

18. PROVIDE UNISTRUT STRUCTURAL SUPPORT PLATFORM FOR AIR HANDLING UNITS ABOVE CEILING.

19. PROVIDE FULL HEIGHT 5/8" MOISTURE RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD AT DRINKING FOUNTAIN PLUMBING WALLS AND WALLS TO RECEIVE TILE.

ARCHITECTURAL / INTERIOR ABBREVIATIONS DRAWING ANNOTATIONS A.B. - ANCHOR BOLT
A.C.T. - ACOUSTICAL CEILING TILE
A.D. - AREA DRAIN
A.F.F. - ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
A.P.C. - ACOUSTICAL PANEL CEILING
A.V. - AUDIO VISUAL

A/C - AIR CONDITIONING
ACC. - ACCESSIBLE
ACOUS. - ACOUSTICAL

ACS - ACRYLIC SHEET
ADD. - ADDITIONAL
ADJ. - ADJUSTABLE
AGGR. - AGGREGATE
ALT. - ALTERNATE
ALUM. - ALUMINUM
ANCH. - ANCHOR
ANNO. - ANODIZED
APPD. - APPROVED
APPROX. - APPROXIMATE
ARCH. - ARCHITECTURAL
AUTO. - AUTOMATIC
B.U.R. - BUILT-UP ROOFING
BD. - BOARD
BLDG. - BUILDING
BLK. - BLOCK
BM. - BEAM
BOT. - BOTTOM
BRK. - BRICK
BSMT. - BASEMENT
BT. - BOLT
BYND. - BEYOND
C. - GYPSUM BOARD CEILING
C.B. - CATCH BASIN
C.B.U. - CEMENTITIOUS BACKER UNIT
C.BD. - CHALK BOARD
C.G. - CORNER GUARD
C.I. - CAST IRON
C.I.P. - CAST-IN PLACE
C.J. - CONTROL JOIST /

CONSTRUCTION JOINT
C.L. - CENTER LINE
C.M.U. - CONCRETE MASONRY UNITS
C.O. - CLEANOUT
C.T. - CERAMIC TILE
C.T.B. - CERAMIC TILE BASE
C.W. - COLD WATER (PIPING)
CAB. - CABINET
CAT. - CATEGORY
CEM. - CEMENT
CER. - CERAMIC
CH. - CHILLER
CHAN. - CHANNEL
CLG. - CEILING
CLR. - CLEAR
CNTR. - COUNTER
COL. - COLUMN
COMPART. - COMPARTMENT
CONC. - CONCRETE
COND. - CONDITION
CONN. - CONNECTION
CONT. - CONTINUOUS
CONTR. - CONTRACTOR
COORD. - COORDINATE
CORR. - CORRIDOR
CPT. - CARPET
CTR. - CENTER
D. - DEEP, DEPTH
D.F. - DRINKING FOUNTAIN
D.O. - DOOR OPENING
D.P. - DEMOUNTABLE PARTITION
D.PNT. - DIMENSION POINT
D.W. - DISHWASHER
DA. - DISABLED
DBL. - DOUBLE
DEG. - DEGREE
DEMO. - DEMOLITION
DEPT. - DEPARTMENT
DET. - DETAIL
DIA. - DIAMETER
DIFF. - DIFFUSER
DIM. - DIMENSION
DISP. - DISPENSER
DMPF. - DAMPPROOFING
DMT. - DEMOUNTABLE
DN. - DOWN
DR. - DOOR
DRN. - DRAIN
DS. - DOWNSPOUT
DWG. - DRAWING
DWR. - DRAWER
E. - EAST
E.B. - EXPANSION BOLT
E.D.F. - ELECTRIC DRINKING FOUNTAIN
E.F.S. - EXTERIOR FINISH SYSTEM
E.I.F.S. - EXTERIOR INSULATION & FINISH
SYSTEM
E.J. - EXPANSION JOINT
E.P. - ELECTRICAL PANELBOARD
E.W.C. - ELECTRICAL WATER COOLER
EA. - EACH
EL. - ELEVATION
ELEC. - ELECTRICAL
ELEV. - ELEVATOR
EMERG. - EMERGENCY
ENCL. - ENCLOSURE
EQ. - EQUAL
EQUIP. - EQUIPMENT
ESCAL. - ESCALATOR
EX. - EXPOSED
EXH. - EXHAUST
EXIST. - EXISTING
EXP. - EXPANSION
EXT. - EXTERIOR
F.A. - FIRE ALARM
F.B. - FACE BRICK
F.D. - FLOOR DRAIN
F.D.C. - FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION
F.E. - FIRE EXTINGUISHER
F.E.B. - FIRE EXTINGUISHER BRACKET
F.E.C. - FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET
F.F.&E. - FURNITURE, FIXTURE &

EQUIPMENT
F.F.EL. - FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION
F.H.C. - FIRE HOSE CABINET
F.O. - FACE OF
F.O.I.C. - FURNITURE BY OWNER

INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR
F.P. - FIRE PROTECTION
F.R.T. - FIRE RETARDANT TREATED
F.R.T.W. - FIRE RETARDANT TREATED
WOOD
F.V. - FIELD-VERIFY
F.W.C. - FABRIC WALLCOVERING
F.W.P. - FABRIC WRAPPED PANEL
FC. - FACE
FDN. - FOUNDATION
FIN. - FINISH
FIXT. - FIXTURE
FL. - FLOOR
FLASH. - FLASHING
FLUOR. - FLUORESCENT
FPG. - FIREPROOFING
FR. - FRAME
FT. - FOOT / FEET
FTG. - FOOTING
FURN. - FURNITURE
G. - GROUND / GLASS
G.B. - GRAB BAR
G.C. - GENERAL CONTRACT(OR)
G.R.C. - GLASS FIBER REINFORCED

CONCRETE
G.R.G. - GLASS FIBER REINFORCED
GYPSUM
GA. - GAUGE / GAGE

DRAWING INDEX

VICINITY MAP

20. PROVIDE AND INSTALL SOUND ATTENUATING BATT INSULATION AT INTERIOR METAL STUD PARTITION WALLS OF RESTROOMS AND MECHANICAL ROOMS. EXTEND PARTITION WALLS TO UNDERSIDE OF DECK.

21. REFER TO FLOOR PLANS AND WALL SECTIONS FOR FIRE-RATED WALLS. PROVIDE SOLID BACKING FOR FIRE-RATED WINDOW SHUTTERS IN WALL CAVITY.

22. PAINT EXPOSED CONDUIT, PIPING, METAL BUILDING COMPONENTS AND

ACCESSORIES DUCTWORK AND PIPING RACEWAYS ACCESSORIES AT ROOMS NOTED AS "PAINTED EXPOSED STRUCTURE."

23. AT PLUMBING WALLS, INSTALL PAIRS OF 3 5/8" METAL STUDS WITH SOUND BATTS.

FRAMING SHALL EXTEND TO DECK AND SHALL BE BRACED TO STRUCTURE ABOVE.

INSTALL 5/8" MOISTURE RESISTANT GYP. BOARD FROM FLOOR TO 6" ABOVE LAY-IN CEILING. FINISHES SHALL BE AS SCHEDULED. INSTALL SOUND BATT INSULATION IN PLUMBING WALLS AND OTHER RESTROOM WALLS.

24. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE BACKING PLATES AND SUPPORTS FOR ITEMS SUCH AS,

BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TOILET ACCESSORIES, TOILET PARTITIONS, MIRRORS, CASEWORK, HANDRAILS, ETC...

25. REFER TO FINISH FLOOR PLAN FOR FLOOR FINISH TRANSITION STRIP TYPES AND LOCATIONS.

26. INSTALL 6" SOUND ATTENUATING BATT INSULATION ABOVE RESTROOMS CEILINGS.

27. INSTALL 6" SOUND ATTENUATING BATT INSULATION ABOVE DEALER OFFICE CEILING, WHEN PROJECT-APPLICABLE.

28. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER HOOK UP OF OWNER

SUPPLIED EQUIPMENT AND SHALL COORDINATE WITH OWNER'S VENDORS FOR ITEMS REQUIRING HOOK-UPS.

29. EXTERIOR BUILDING SIGNAGE UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT.

30. CONNECT ROOF DRAINS DIRECTLY TO STORM DRAINS UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN OR NOTED. REFER TO CIVIL AND PLUMBING DRAWINGS.

31. EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR EXPOSED STRUCTURE SHALL BE PAINTED. REFER TO FINISH SCHEDULE.

32. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE SOLID BLOCKING AT PARTITION WALLS WHERE REQUIRED FOR TOILET ACCESSORIES SUPPORT.

33. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE (3) 4'-0"X8'-0"X3/4" THICK A-C-GRADE PAINTED PLYWOOD PANEL BOARDS AT EACH COMMUNICATION AND DATA EQUIPMENT ROOM.

LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY ARCHITECT.

34. WALL LOUVERS SHALL BE PAINTED AND PROVIDED W/BIRD SCREENS.

GENERAL NOTES
GALV. - GALVANIZED
GL. - GLASS
GR. - GRADE
GRD. - GROUND
GYP. BD. - GYPSUM WALLBOARD
H. - HIGH / HEIGHT
H.B. - HOSE BIBB
H.C. - HOLLOW CORE
H.M. - HOLLOW METAL (STEEL FRAME)
H.O. - HOLD-OPEN
H.P. - HIGH POINT
H.R.C. - HOSE REEL CABINET
H.S. - HEAT STRENGTHENED (GLASS)
H.V.A.C. - HEATING, VENTILATING, AIR

CONDITIONING
H.W. - HOT WATER
HCP. - HANDICAP
HD.WD. - HARD WOOD
HDW. - HARDWARE
HNDRL. - HANDRAIL
HORIZ. - HORIZONTAL
HR. . HOUR
HT. - HEIGHT
HYDR. - HYDRAULIC
I.D. - INSIDE DIAMETER
I.P.S. - INTERNATIONAL PIPE STANDARD
I.R.M.A. - INVERTED ROOF MEMBRANE

ASSEMBLY
IN. - INCH
INCAND. - INCANDESCENT
INCL. - INCLUDED / INCLUDING
INFO. - INFORMATION
INSUL. - INSULATION
INT. - INTERIOR
INTERM. - INTERMEDIATE
INV. - INVERT
J.C. - JANITOR'S CLOSET
JAN. - JANITOR
JST. - JOIST
JT. - JOINT
K. - KIP (1000 LBF)
K.O. - KNOCKOUT
K.PL. - KICK PLATE
KG. - KILOGRAM
KIT. - KITCHEN
L. - LONG
L.F. - LINEAR FOOT
L.L.H. - LONG LEG HORIZONTAL
L.L.V. - LONG LEG VERTICAL
L.PT. - LOW POINT
L.S. - LANDSCAPE
L.V.T. - LUXURY VINYL TILE
LAB. - LABORATORY
LAM. - LAMINATED / LAMINATION
LAV. - LAVATORY
LB. - POUND
LDG. - LANDING
LKR. - LOCKER
LN. - LINE
LT. - LIGHT
M.B. - MACHINE BOLT
M.C. - MEDIUM DENSITY CEILING
M.D.F. - MEDIUM DENSITY FIBERBOARD
M.D.O. - MEDIUM DENSITY OVERLAY

PLYWOOD
M.E.P. - MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL,

PLUMING
M.H. - MANHOLE
M.O. - MASONRY OPENING
M.S. - MACHINE SCREW
MACH. - MACHINE
MAINT. - MAINTENANCE
MAS. - MASONRY
MATL. - MATERIAL
MAX. - MAXIMUM
MBL. - MARBLE
MECH. - MECHANICAL
MEMB. - MEMBRANE
MEZZ. - MEZZANINE
MFR. - MANUFACTURER
MIN. - MINIMUM
MISC. - MISCELLANEOUS
MK.B. - MARKER BOARD
MM. - MILLIMETER
MTD. - MOUNTED
MTG. - MOUNTING
MTL. - METAL
MULL. - MULLION
N. - NORTH
N.C. - NOISE CRITERIA
N.I.C. - NOT IN CONTRACT
N.T.S. - NOT TO SCALE

N/A - NOT APPLICABLE
NO. - NUMBER
NOM. - NOMINAL
O.A. - OUTSIDE AIR
O.C. - ON CENTER
O.C.E.W. - ON CENTER EACH WAY
O.D. - OUTSIDE DIAMETER/DIMENSION
O.F. - OVERFLOW
O.F.C.I. - OWNER FURNISHED, CONTR

INSTALLED
O.F.O.I. - OWNER FURNISHED, OWNER

INSTALLED
O.H. - OVER HEAD
O.R.D. - OVERFLOW ROOF DRAIN
OFF. - OFFICE
OPNG. - OPENING
OPP. - OPPOSITE
OPP. HD. - OPPOSITE HAND
OUTS. - OUTSIDE
P. - PAINT
P.BD. - PARTICLEBOARD
P.C. - PRECAST CONCRETE
P.D.F. - POWER-DRIVEN FASTENER
P.F. - POINT OF FROG
P.I. - POINT OF INTERSECTION
P.L.F. - POUNDS PER LINEAR FOOT
P.LAM. - PLASTIC LAMINATE
P.S.F. - POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
P.T.R. - PAPER TOWEL RECEPTACLE
PA.T.D. - PAPER TOWEL DISPENSER
PARTN. - PARTITION
PERF. - PERFORATED
PERIM. - PERIMETER
PERP. - PERPENDICULAR
PL. - PLATE
PLAS. - PLASTER
PLUMP. - PLUMBING
PLYWD. - PLYWOOD
PNL. - PANEL
POL. - POLISHED
PR. - PAIR
PREFAB. - PREFABRICATED
PROJ. - PROJECT
PT. - POINT
PTD. - PAINTED
PVG. - PAVING
QTY. - QUANTITY
R. - RADIUS OR RISER (PIPING)
R.A. - RETURN AIR
R.B. - RESILIENT BASE
R.C.P. - REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
R.D. - ROOF DRAIN
R.O. - ROUGH OPENING
R.W.L. - RAIN WATER LEADER
RAD. - RADIUS
REC. - RECESSED
RECOM. - RECOMMENDED
RECPT. - RECEPTACLE
REF. - REFERENCE
REFL. - REFLECTED / REFLECTIVE /

REFLECT
REFR. - REFRIGERATOR
REG. - REGISTER
REINF. - REINFORCED / REINFORCING
REL. - RELOCATE, RELOCATED
REM. - REMOVABLE
REQ. - REQUIRE / REQUIRED
RESIL. - RESILIENT
REV. - REVISION / REVISED
RM. - ROOM
RTD. - RATED
RTG. - RATING
S. - SOUTH
S.A. - SUPPLY AIR
S.C. - SOLID CORE
S.D. - SOAP DISPENSER
S.F. - SQUARE FEET/FOOT
S.H. - SPRINKLER HEAD
S.M. - SHEET METAL
S.N.D. - SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSER
S.P. - STANDPIPE
S.S. - STAINLESS STEEL
S.S.E. - STRUCTURE SLAB ELEVATION
S.SK. - SERVICE SINK
S.SNG. - SOLID SURFACING
SAN. - SANITARY
SCHED. - SCHEDULE
SECT. - SECTION
SHR. - SHOWER
SHT. - SHEET
SIM. - SIMILAR
SPEC. - SPECIFICATION
SPKR. - SPEAKER
SPR. - SPRINKLER
SQ. - SQUARE
ST. - STONE
STA. - STATION
STD. - STANDARD
STL. - STEEL
STL.JST. - STEEL JOIST
STN. - STAIN
STO. - STORAGE
STRG. - STRINGER
STRUCT. - STRUCTURAL
SUBCAT. - SUBCATEGORY
SUSP. - SUSPENDED
SYMM. - SYMMETRICAL
SYS. - SYSTEM
T. - TREAD / THERMOSTAT
T. & G. - TONGUE AND GROOVE
T.B. - TOWEL BAR
T.C. - TOP OF CURB
T.CONC. - TOP OF CONCRETE
T.O. - TOP OF (SEE OTHER WORD)
T.O.S. - TOP OF SLAB, TOP OF

STRUCTURE
T.O.STL. - TOP OF STEEL
T.P. - TOP OF PAVEMENT
T.P.D. - TOILET PAPER DISPENSER
T.W. - TOP OF WALL
TEL. - TELEPHONE OR TELECOM
TEMP. - TEMPERATURE
TER. - TERRAZZO
TG.B. - TOGGLE BOLT
THK. - THICKNESS
THRES. - THRESHOLD
THRU. - THROUGH
TK.BD. - TACKBOARD
TMPD. - TEMPERED
TRACT. - TRACTION
TV. - TELEVISION
TYP. - TYPICAL
U.N.O. - UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE

UNFIN - UNFINISHED
UR. - URINAL
V.A.C. - VENTILATION AND AIR

CONDITIONING
V.C.T. - VINYL COMPOSITION TILE
V.I.F. - VERIFY IN FIELD
V.R. - VAPOR RETARDER
V.T. - VINYL TILE
V.W.C. - VINYL WALL COVERING
VERT. - VERTICAL
VEST. - VESTIBULE
W. - WIDE/WITH, WEST
W.B. - WOOD BASE
W.C. - WATER CLOSET
W.P. - WATERPROOFING
W.P.M. - WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE
W.PT. - WORK POINT
W.R. - WATER RESISTANT/REPELLENT
W.W. - WALL TO WALL

W/ - WITH

W/O - WITHOUT
WD. - WOOD
WD.S. - WOOD SCREW
WDW. - WINDOW
WS. - WEATHERSTRIPPING
WSCT. - WAINSCOT
WT. - WEIGHT

DRAWING INDEX
PLANNING ISSUE - 04/26/2430% SET - 05/10/24PLANNING ISSUE - 07/05/24 Sheet
Number Sheet Name

GENERAL
X X X A000 COVER
X X X A001 GENERAL
A007 CALGREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE
A008 CALGREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE
X X X A010 ACCESSIBILITY PLANS

ARCHITECTURAL DEMO
X X X AD100 DEMO SITE PLANS
X X X AD110 DEMO FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1
X X X AD111 DEMO FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2
AD180 DEMO REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - FIRST FLOOR
X X X AD190 DEMO ROOF PLAN
X X X AD200 DEMO BUILDING ELEVATIONS

ARCHITECTURAL
X X X A101 DIMENSIONED SITE PLAN
X X X A102 NOTED SITE PLAN
X A120 DIMENSION PLAN - FIRST FLOOR
X X X A130 NOTED PLAN - FIRST FLOOR
X A180 REFLECTED CEILING PLAN - FIRST FLOOR
X X X A190 ROOF PLAN
X X X A200 BUILDING ELEVATIONS
X X X A202 MATERIAL BOARD
X A210 BUILDING SECTIONS
X X X A310 GLAZING TYPES & ELEVATIONS
X A430 ENLARGED MILLWORK

NOT USED
A605 SITE SIGN

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

DEFERRED SUBMITTAL

1. BUILDING SINAGE PERMIT TO BE SUBMITTED

SEPARATELY
Packet Page 78
J J

BUILDING CODE ANALYSIS
PROJECT:

LEXUS MONTEREY PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD., SEASIDE, CA 93955
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

NEW VEHICLE DELIVERY ADDITION, SHOWROOM ADDITION, INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR RENOVATION OF EXISTING AUTO DEALERSHIP APPLICABLE CODES:
• 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC)
• 2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE (CFC)
• 2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE (CPC)
• 2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE (CMC)
• 2022 INTERNATIONAL ENERGY CONSERVATION CODE (IECC)
• 2022 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE (NEC)
• 2022 INTERNATIONAL FUEL & GAS CODE
• 2022 ADA STANDARDS FOR ACCESSIBILE DESIGN
ICC 2022 CODE SUMMARY

1. CONSTRUCTION TYPE:

CBC SECTION 601
CBC TABLE 601
TYPE V-B; SPRINKLERED

2. USE AND OCCUPANCY
CLASSIFICATION:

CBC SECTIONS 301
THROUGH 314

TWO-STORY, MIXED USE, SEPARATED OCCUPANCY, SPRINKLERED
• OCCUPANCY B, BUSINESS
• OCCUPANCY S-2, STORAGE

ALLOWABLE AREA (SPRINKLERED)
BUSINESS GROUP (B): 3 STORIES (60'); 54,000 SF PER FLOOR STORAGE GROUP (S-2): 3 STORIES (60'); 63,000 SF PER FLOOR

3. BUILDING HEIGHTS
AND AREAS:

CBC TABLE 504.3
CBC TABLE 504.4
CBC SECTION 506.1
CBC SECTION 507.5 ACTUAL BUILDING AREA

OCCUPANCY TYPE AREA
FIRST FLOOR:

BUSINESS (B) 4,994 SF
STORAGE (S-2) 3,355 SF
STORAGE (S-1) 171 SF
SECOND FLOOR:

BUSINESS (B) 3,856 SF
TOTAL BUILDING AREA = 12,376 SF

4. OCCUPANT LOAD:

CBC TABLE 1004.5

5. EGRESS CAPACITY:

CBC SECTION 1005.1
MEANS OF EGRESS SIZING: (SPRINKLERED)
OTHER EGRESS COMPONENTS: 0.2" PER OCCUPANT (MINIMUM 32" EXIT WIDTH) STAIRWAYS: 0.3" PER OCCUPANT
(IBC SECTION XXXX)
WIDTH & CAPACITY:

MINIMUM CORRIDOR WIDTH: 36" (LESS THAN 50 OCCUPANTS)
(ICC SECTION 1020.3)
MINIMUM STAIRWAYS WIDTH: 36" (LESS THAN 50 OCCUPANTS)
(ICC SECTION 1011.2)
AREA OF REFUGE: 30" X 52" WHEELCHAIR SPACE FOR EACH 200 OCCUPANTS (ICC SECTION 1009.6.3)
REQUIRED EGRESS WIDTHS PER OCCUPANCY TOTALS: (SPRINKLERED) FIRST FLOOR:

BUSINESS GROUP (B) 53 OCCUPANTS X 0.2" = 10.6"
STORAGE GROUP (S-2) 11 OCCUPANTS X 0.2" = 2.2"
STORAGE GROUP (S-1) 1 OCCUPANTS X 0.2" = 0.2"
SECOND FLOOR:

BUSINESS GROUP (B) 66 OCCUPANTS X 0.2" = 13.2"

ACTUAL EGRESS WIDTH PROVIDED
**SEE FLOOR PLAN FOR INDIVIDUAL DOOR SIZES

7. EGRESS TRAVEL
DISTANCE:

CBC TABLE 1017.2
CBC TABLE 1006.2.1
CBC SECTION 1020.4
EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE: (SPRINKLERED)

OCCUPANCY W/OUT SPRINKLERS W/ SPRINKLERS
BUSINESS GROUP B: 200 FEET MAXIMUM 300 FEET MAXIMUM
STORAGE GROUP S-2: 300 FEET MAXIMUM 400 FEET MAXIMUM
STORAGE GROUP S-1: 200 FEET MAXIMUM 250 FEET MAXIMUM
SPACES WITH ONE EXIT OR EXIT ACCESS DOORWAY: (SPRINKLERED) MAXIMUM COMMON PATH OF EGRESS TRAVEL DISTANCE:

FIRST FLOOR:

BUSINESS GROUP (B): 53 OCCUPANTS > 30 = 75 FEET
STORAGE GROUP (S-2): 11 OCCUPANTS < 30 = 100 FEET
STORAGE GROUP (S-1): 1 OCCUPANTS < 30 = 100 FEET
SECOND FLOOR:

BUSINESS GROUP (B): 66 OCCUPANTS > 30 = 75 FEET
DEAD-END CORRIDOR: (SPRINKLERED)
BUSINESS GROUP B: 50 FEET MAXIMUM
STORAGE GROUP S-2: 50 FEET MAXIMUM

6. NUMBER OF EXITS:

CBC TABLE 1006.2.1
CBC TABLE 1006.3.3
SPACES WITH ONE EXIT OR EXIT ACCESS DOORWAY: (SPRINKLERED) BUSINESS GROUP B: 49 OCCUPANTS (MAXIMUM)
STORAGE GROUP S-2: 29 OCCUPANTS (MAXIMUM)
MINIMUM NUMBER OF EXITS OR ACCESS TO EXITS PER STORY:
1 - 500 OCCUPANTS = 2 EXITS
501 - 1,000 OCCUPANTS = 3 EXITS
GREATER THAN 1,000 OCCUPANTS = 4 EXITS

1. PLUMBING FIXTURE

REQUIREMENTS
(CBC 2022 TABLE 2902.1)
(CPC 2022 TABLE 422.1)

PLUMBING CODE ANALYSIS
* URINALS SHALL NOT BE SUBSTITUTED FOR MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE REQUIRED WATER CLOSETS.
** SUBSTITUTE @ 2/3 PER (1) WATER CLOSET REQUIRED

PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS

BASIC MINIMUM EXTINGUISHER RATING
BUSINESS GROUP (B) AND STORAGE GROUP (S-2) = 2-A
FEC FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET. SEMI-RECESSED
FEB FIRE EXTINGUISHER. BRACKET MOUNTED

8. FLOOR AREA RATIO
(FAR):

SMC 17.98
• 2021 SEASIDE MUNICIPAL CODE (SMC)

ACTUAL BUILDING AREA
TOTAL BUILDING AREA = 12,335 SF
LOT SIZE = 41,649 SF
FAR = 12,335 / 41,649 = 0.30

MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCE PER OCCUPANT
ACCESSORY STORAGE & MECHANICAL 1 PERSON / 300 SF (GROSS AREA) ASSEMBLY (UNCONCENTRATED TALBE & CHAIRS) 1 PERSON / 15 SF (GROSS AREA) BUSINESS AREA 1 PERSON / 150 SF (GROSS AREA)
STORAGE, STOCK, SHIPPING AREAS 1 PERSON / 300 SF (GROSS AREA)

GROSS FLOOR AREA AND OCCUPANT LOAD

BUSINESS GROUP (B)
FIRST FLOOR:

ASSEMBLY (UNCONCENTRATED TABLE & CHAIRS) 367 SF / 15 = 25 OCCUPANTS BUSINESS AREA 4,023 SF / 150 = 27 OCCUPANTS
STORAGE, STOCK, SHIPPING AREAS 45 SF / 300 = 1 OCCUPANTS SECOND FLOOR:

ACCESSORY STORAGE & MECHANICAL 978 SF / 300 = 4 OCCUPANTS ASSEMBLY (UNCONCENTRATED TALBE & CHAIRS) 747 SF / 15 = 50 OCCUPANTS BUSINESS AREA 1,761 SF / 150 = 12 OCCUPANTS
STORAGE GROUP (S-2)
ACCESSORY STORAGE & MECHANICAL 3,255 SF / 300 = 11 OCCUPANTS STORAGE GROUP (S-1)
ACCESSORY STORAGE & MECHANICAL 146 SF / 300 = 1 OCCUPANTS TOTAL OCCUPANTS = 131 OCCUPANTS

GROSS FLOOR AREA

OCCUPANCY TYPE AREA
FIRST FLOOR:

BUSINESS (B) 4,813 SF
STORAGE (S-2) 3,255 SF
STORAGE (S-1) 146 SF
SECOND FLOOR:

BUSINESS (B) 3,694 SF

PROPOSED NEW

SHOWROOM ENTRANCE
150 SF

RECEPTION/MANAGER
495 SF
NVD

DUMPSTER
110 SF
MECH
OIL/

COMPRESSOR
274 SF
PARTS

STORAGE
115 SF

WOMEN'S RR
113 SF

MEN'S RR
25 SF
JAN.
117 SF

F&I OFFICE
122 SF

F&I OFFICE
76 SF

STAIR B
16 SF
73 SF STOR.

CORRIDOR
109 SF

STAIR A
96 SF

RETAIL PARTS/

CASHIER
59 SF

SERVICE

MANAGER
SERVICE DRIVE 528 SF

SERVICE

ADVISORS
1457 SF

SHOWROOM
3,355 SF
GROUP 'S-2'
4,994 SF

GROUP 'B'
171 SF
GROUP 'S-1'
FDC
75' - 0"
75' - 0"
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT
EXIT

SHOWROOM

ADDITION
8'-11"
5'-0"
10'-0"
4'-6"
24'-4"
15'-3"
55'-0"
16'-10"
11'-4"
TOTAL: 83'-2"
2937 SF

SERVICE SHOP
180 0.2
36"
180 0.2
36"
360

0.2 72"
180

0.2 36"

PROPOSED NEW VEHICLE
DELIVERY (474 SF),

ENCLOSURE WITH NEW ROOF

SHOWROOM

ADDITION
17'-6"
25'-0"
7'-9"
44'-6"
4'-0"
COMMON PATH OF TRAVEL = 96'-0"
TOTAL EGRESS TRAVEL = 121'-0"
FDC
11'-9"
8'-9"

BUILDING DIAGONAL
124' - 6"
24'-4"
5'-8"

COMMON PATH OF
TRAVEL = 36'-0"

TOTAL EGRESS
TRAVEL = 61'-0"
COMMON PATH OF TRAVEL = 67'-0"
TOTAL EGRESS TRAVEL = 92'-0"

END OF COMMON PATH

OF EGRESS TRAVEL
10'-0"
40'-2"
16'-10"

END OF COMMON PATH

OF EGRESS TRAVEL

COMMON PATH OF
TRAVEL = 11'-9"

TOTAL EGRESS
TRAVEL = 20'-6"

END OF COMMON PATH

OF EGRESS TRAVEL

COMMON PATH OF
TRAVEL = 24'-4"

TOTAL EGRESS
TRAVEL = 39'-7"
EXIT

DIAGONAL
(1/3
MIN
OF
BLD

DIAGONAL)
39' - 6"

SHOWROOM ADDITION
668 SF
LEGEND
OCCUPANCY TYPE:

GROUP 'B'
NOTE
EXIT SIGN TO BE EDGE LIT. EMERGENCY LIGHTS TO BE RECESSED OR INCORPORATED INTO A LIGHT FIXTURE. NO "BUG EYE"
EMERGENCY LIGHTS IN CUSTOMER AREAS.

ALL FIRE EXTINGUISHERS TO BE RECESSED IN TRIM-LESS CABINETS IN CUSTOMER AREAS.

SYMBOLS:
4 600
150
250 0.2
50"
T.E.S. 1 - EXIT
- EXIT STAIR DOWN
- EXIT ROUTE

SEE SIGNAGE ACCESSIBILITY
STANDARDS A0002
T.E.S. 2
T.E.S. 3

OCCUPANT
LOAD

FACTOR FROM TABLE

REQUIRED WIDTH
OCC.

LOAD

SQUARE FOOTAGE
FACTOR FROM TABLE 1004.1.2
EGRESS WIDTH:

OCCUPANT LOAD:

TACTILE SIGNS:

EXAMPLE:

DESCRIPTION:

EXAMPLE:

DESCRIPTION:

GROUP 'S-2'
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A009
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

CODE ANALYSIS

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
SERVICE SINK 1 -
DRINKING FOUNTAINS 1 -
FEMALE LAVATORIES 1 -
FEMALE WATER CLOSETS 1 -
MALE LAVATORIES 1 -
MALE URINALS (PER IPC SECTION 419.2)** - -
MALE WATER CLOSETS 1 -

REQUIRED PROVIDED
STORAGE GROUP (S-2): 11 OCCUPANTS / 2 = 6 OCCUPANTS
SERVICE SINK 1 0
DRINKING FOUNTAINS 1 1
FEMALE LAVATORIES 1 3
FEMALE WATER CLOSETS 2 3
MALE LAVATORIES 1 2
MALE URINALS (PER IPC SECTION 419.2)** - 2
MALE WATER CLOSETS 1 2

REQUIRED PROVIDED
BUSINESS GROUP (B): 53 OCCUPANTS / 2 = 27 OCCUPANTS
*** FINAL EXTINGUISHER LOCATION(S) TO BE DETERMINED BY FIRE MARSHAL / CODE OFFICIAL STORAGE GROUP (S-2) 3,335 SF 1 UNKNOWN FEB
50 FEET MAXIMUM TRAVEL DISTANCE

TO EXTINGUISHER
BUSINESS GROUP (B) 4,994 SF 1 2 FEB
75 FEET MAXIMUM TRAVEL DISTANCE

TO EXTINGUISHER
LOCATION AREA (SF) REQUIRED PROVIDED***
QUANTITY: (1 PER 11,250 SF)

TYPE INTERVAL
TABLE 906.3(1), 906.3(2), AND NFPA 10
1 3/16" = 1'-0"
LEVEL 1 - CODE ANALYSIS
N N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 79
4" WIDE PAINTED BLUE
PARKING STRIPPING @ 2'-0"
O.C. W/4" WIDE PAINTED
BORDER
12" TALL WITH 2" STROKE

CAPITAL LETTERS, CENTERED

WITH EACH ACCESSIBILE AISLE

ADJACENT TO THE PARKING
SPACE

TRUNCATED DOMES
ADA COMPLIANT RAMP.

REF: ACCESSIBILITY SHEETS
4' - 0"
8'
- 0"
9'
- 0"
8'
- 0"
9'
- 0"
NOTES

1. THE BOTTOM OF THE SIGN SHALL BE 80" MINIMUM ABOVE FINISH GRADE.

2. SIGNS SHALL BE PROPERLY CENTERED WITHIN THE PARKING SPACE.

3. THE SIGN FACE SHOULD BE LOCATED NO FARTHER THAN 6 FEET FROM THE FRONT OF EACH PARKING SPACE.

4. ALL LETTERING SERIES 'C' GREEN COLOR.

5. INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY ON PARKING SIGN SHOWN WHITE ON 6'x6" BLUE FIELD WITH 1 2" RADIUS CORNERS.

6. THE INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY PARKING SPACE MARKINGS

SHALL BE PLACED IN EACH PARKING SPACE DESIGNATED FOR USE BY PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES. A BLUE BACKGROUND WITH WHITE BORDER MAY SUPPLEMENT THE WHEELCHAIR SYMBOL.

NOTES

1. THE BOTTOM OF THE VAN ACCESSIBLE SIGN
SHALL BE 80" MINIMUM ABOVE FINISH GRADE.

2. THE VAN ACCESSIBLE SIGN SHALL BE

CENTERED UNDER THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING
SIGN AS SHOWN.

3. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON RESERVED

PARKING SIGN SEE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN
DETAIL LEFT.

4. ALL LETTERING SERIES 'C' GREEN COLOR.

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACES SHALL BE YELLOW
AND APPROXIMATE FS33538 OF FEDERAL STANDARD 595C
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A010
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

ACCESSIBILITY PLANS

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

ENLARGED SITE ACCESSIBILITY PLANS
? 12" = 1'-0"

ACCESIBLE PARKING SIGN
? 12" = 1'-0"

VAN PARKING SIGN
? 12" = 1'-0"

ACCESSIBLE SYMBOL
? 12" = 1'-0"

DETECTABLE WARNINGS
32 06 05

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 80
001
003
007
005
006
004
005
003
005
006
006
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED.

1. CONTRACTOR IS TO SECURE ALL PERMITS AND EXPEDITE SAME INCLUDING ALL EXPRESS FEES.

2. PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE TIME ESTIMATE FOR THE WORK WITH INITIAL PROPOSAL ESTIMATE.

3. ON A WEEKLY BASIS CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A

WEEKLY SCHEDULE CLEARLY OUTLINING WORK TO BE DONE IN THAT WEEK,

AND ADVISE OWNER OF WORK GOALS COMPLETED AND/OR NOT COMPLETED IN THE PRIOR WEEK.

4. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE DEMOLITION WORK WITH THE OWNER'S

APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE, AND PREPARE FOR REVIEW A DETAILED "DEMOLITION SCHEDULE" WITH OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AT LEAST TWO WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF ANY DEMOLITION WORK TO BE DONE.

5. DEMOLISH IN AN ORDERLY AND CAREFUL MANNER AS REQUIRED TO

ACCOMMODATE NEW WORK INCLUDING THAT REQUIRED FOR CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING. PROTECT EXISTING FOUNDATIONS, WINDOWS AND SUPPORTING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.

6. PERFORM DEMOLITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER WORK.

7. PROVIDE DEMOLITION IN EXCESS OF THAT REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION,

AT EXISTING TO REMAIN CONDITIONS, TERMINATE EXTENTS OF DEMOLITION AT

A SIGNIFICANT JOINT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EDGE OF FOUNDATION, STRUCTURE, ROOF OR WALL.

8. BURNING OF MATERIALS ON SITE IS NOT PERMITTED.

9. REMOVE FROM SITE, CONTAMINATED, VERMIN INFESTED OR DANGEROUS

MATERIALS ENCOUNTERED AND DISPOSE OF BY SAFE MEANS SO AS NOT TO ENDANGER HEALTH OF WORKERS AND PUBLIC.

10. REMOVE DEMOLISHED MATERIALS, TOOLS, AND EQUIPMENT FROM SITE UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. LEAVE SITE IN A CONDITION ACCEPTABLE TO THE ARCHITECT AND THE OWNER.

11. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UTILITY CAPACITIES AND SHALL INCREASE CAPACITY AS REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION:

INCLUDING ELECTRICAL SWITCH GEAR, PRIMARY ELECTRICAL SERVICE, HVAC SYSTEMS AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS.

12. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE OWNERS USE OF EXISTING

BUILDINGS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WORK AND SHALL MAINTAIN FREE AND SAFE PASSAGE TO AND FROM.

13. CONTRACTOR SHALL PREVENT MOVEMENT OR SETTLEMENT OF EXISTING STRUCTURES. PROVIDE AND PLACE BRACING OR SHORING AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SAFETY AND SUPPORT OF EXISTING STRUCTURE. ASSUME LIABILITY FOR SUCH MOVEMENT, SETTLEMENT, DAMAGE, OR INJURY.

14. CONTRACTOR SHALL CEASE OPERATIONS AND NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY, IF SAFETY OF STRUCTURE APPEARS TO BE ENDANGERED.

CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS TO PROPERLY SUPPORT STRUCTURE. DO NOT RESUME OPERATIONS UNTIL SAFETY IS RESTORED.

15. CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE AND PAY FOR DISCONNECTING FEES,

INCLUDING REMOVING AND CAPPING UTILITY SERVICES WITHIN AREAS OF DEMOLITION. DISCONNECT AND STUB OFF. NOTIFY THE AFFECTED UTILITY

COMPANY IN ADVANCE AND OBTAIN OWNER APPROVAL BEFORE STARTING THIS WORK.

16. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE MARKERS TO INDICATE LOCATION OF DISCONNECTED SERVICES. IDENTIFY SERVICE LINES AND CAPPING LOCATIONS ON PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS.

17. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT WEATHERPROOF CLOSURES FOR EXTERIOR OPENINGS.

18. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT AND MAINTAIN DUST PROOF PARTITIONS AS

REQUIRED TO PREVENT SPREAD OF DUST, FUMES, AND SMOKE TO OTHER PARTS OF THE BUILDING. ON COMPETITION , REMOVE PARTITIONS AND REPAIR DAMAGED SURFACES TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES.

19. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY, IDENTIFY AND MARK LOCATION OF ALL

EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY DEMOLITION WORK.

DEMOLITION GENERAL NOTES:
24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
AD100
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

DEMO SITE PLANS

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

DEMOLITION SITE PLAN

DEMOLITION SITE PLAN KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING PAVING TO BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED. PREPARE SURFACES FOR NEW ADA ACCESSIBLE RAMP. REF. CIVIL DRAWINGS 003 EXISTING AISLE STRIPING TO BE REMOVED AND REPAINTED 004 EXISTING STRIPING TO BE REMOVED
005 EXISTING CURB TO BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED
006 EXISTING LANDSCAPE TO BE REMOVED. PREPARE SURFACES FOR NEW CURB AND PAVEMENT.REPLACE LANDSCAPING WITH PAVING.

REF. CIVIL DRAWINGS
007 EXISTING ADA PARKING SIGNAGE AND MARKING TO BE REMOVED N

PROJECT NORTH
N

TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 81
001
001
003
003
001

NOT IN SCOPE
004
004
005
006
004
007
008
006
004
004
007
006
11223344556677
99 AA
BB
CC
DD
FF
88 E
E

3.1 3.1
A.1 A.1
A.3 A.3 G G
009
010
011
009
009
002 002 002
002
009 009
009
009
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED.

1. CONTRACTOR IS TO SECURE ALL PERMITS AND EXPEDITE SAME INCLUDING ALL EXPRESS FEES.

2. PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE TIME ESTIMATE FOR THE WORK WITH INITIAL PROPOSAL ESTIMATE.

3. ON A WEEKLY BASIS CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A

WEEKLY SCHEDULE CLEARLY OUTLINING WORK TO BE DONE IN THAT WEEK,

AND ADVISE OWNER OF WORK GOALS COMPLETED AND/OR NOT COMPLETED IN THE PRIOR WEEK.

4. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE DEMOLITION WORK WITH THE OWNER'S

APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE, AND PREPARE FOR REVIEW A DETAILED "DEMOLITION SCHEDULE" WITH OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AT LEAST TWO WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF ANY DEMOLITION WORK TO BE DONE.

5. DEMOLISH IN AN ORDERLY AND CAREFUL MANNER AS REQUIRED TO

ACCOMMODATE NEW WORK INCLUDING THAT REQUIRED FOR CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING. PROTECT EXISTING FOUNDATIONS, WINDOWS AND SUPPORTING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.

6. PERFORM DEMOLITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER WORK.

7. PROVIDE DEMOLITION IN EXCESS OF THAT REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION,

AT EXISTING TO REMAIN CONDITIONS, TERMINATE EXTENTS OF DEMOLITION AT

A SIGNIFICANT JOINT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EDGE OF FOUNDATION, STRUCTURE, ROOF OR WALL.

8. BURNING OF MATERIALS ON SITE IS NOT PERMITTED.

9. REMOVE FROM SITE, CONTAMINATED, VERMIN INFESTED OR DANGEROUS

MATERIALS ENCOUNTERED AND DISPOSE OF BY SAFE MEANS SO AS NOT TO ENDANGER HEALTH OF WORKERS AND PUBLIC.

10. REMOVE DEMOLISHED MATERIALS, TOOLS, AND EQUIPMENT FROM SITE UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. LEAVE SITE IN A CONDITION ACCEPTABLE TO THE ARCHITECT AND THE OWNER.

11. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UTILITY CAPACITIES AND SHALL INCREASE CAPACITY AS REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION:

INCLUDING ELECTRICAL SWITCH GEAR, PRIMARY ELECTRICAL SERVICE, HVAC SYSTEMS AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS.

12. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE OWNERS USE OF EXISTING

BUILDINGS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WORK AND SHALL MAINTAIN FREE AND SAFE PASSAGE TO AND FROM.

13. CONTRACTOR SHALL PREVENT MOVEMENT OR SETTLEMENT OF EXISTING STRUCTURES. PROVIDE AND PLACE BRACING OR SHORING AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SAFETY AND SUPPORT OF EXISTING STRUCTURE. ASSUME LIABILITY FOR SUCH MOVEMENT, SETTLEMENT, DAMAGE, OR INJURY.

14. CONTRACTOR SHALL CEASE OPERATIONS AND NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY, IF SAFETY OF STRUCTURE APPEARS TO BE ENDANGERED.

CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS TO PROPERLY SUPPORT STRUCTURE. DO NOT RESUME OPERATIONS UNTIL SAFETY IS RESTORED.

15. CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE AND PAY FOR DISCONNECTING FEES,

INCLUDING REMOVING AND CAPPING UTILITY SERVICES WITHIN AREAS OF DEMOLITION. DISCONNECT AND STUB OFF. NOTIFY THE AFFECTED UTILITY

COMPANY IN ADVANCE AND OBTAIN OWNER APPROVAL BEFORE STARTING THIS WORK.

16. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE MARKERS TO INDICATE LOCATION OF DISCONNECTED SERVICES. IDENTIFY SERVICE LINES AND CAPPING LOCATIONS ON PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS.

17. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT WEATHERPROOF CLOSURES FOR EXTERIOR OPENINGS.

18. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT AND MAINTAIN DUST PROOF PARTITIONS AS

REQUIRED TO PREVENT SPREAD OF DUST, FUMES, AND SMOKE TO OTHER PARTS OF THE BUILDING. ON COMPETITION , REMOVE PARTITIONS AND REPAIR DAMAGED SURFACES TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES.

19. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY, IDENTIFY AND MARK LOCATION OF ALL

EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY DEMOLITION WORK.

DEMOLITION GENERAL NOTES:
24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
AD110
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP
DEMO FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 3/16" = 1'-0"
DEMO BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 1

DEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING INTERIOR WALL/PARTITION TO BE DEMOLISHED 002 EXISTING GLAZING TO BE DEMOLISHED 003 DEMO EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME. PREPARE WALL FOR NEW
DOOR AND FRAME.
004 EXISTING PAVING TO BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED. PREPARE
SURFACES FOR NEW ADA ACCESSIBLE RAMP. REF. CIVIL DRAWINGS 005 EXISTING ADA PARKING SIGNAGE AND MARKING TO BE REMOVED 006 EXISTING CURB TO BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED
007 EXISTING LANDSCAPE TO BE REMOVED. PREPARE SURFACES FOR NEW CURB AND PAVEMENT.REPLACE LANDSCAPING WITH EQUAL
PLANTING. REF. CIVIL DRAWINGS
008 EXISTING STRIPING TO BE REMOVED
009 EXISTING COLUMN TO REMIAN
010 EXISTING GLAZING TO REMAIN
011 EXISTING EV CHARGER TO BE RELOCATED
N

PROJECT NORTH
N

TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 82
UP
002

NOT IN SCOPE
004
004 001
003
005
002
002
11223344556677
99 AA
BB
CC
DD
FF
88 EE

3.1 3.1
A.1 A.1
A.3 A.3 G G
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED.

1. CONTRACTOR IS TO SECURE ALL PERMITS AND EXPEDITE SAME INCLUDING ALL EXPRESS FEES.

2. PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE TIME ESTIMATE FOR THE WORK WITH INITIAL PROPOSAL ESTIMATE.

3. ON A WEEKLY BASIS CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A

WEEKLY SCHEDULE CLEARLY OUTLINING WORK TO BE DONE IN THAT WEEK,

AND ADVISE OWNER OF WORK GOALS COMPLETED AND/OR NOT COMPLETED IN THE PRIOR WEEK.

4. CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE DEMOLITION WORK WITH THE OWNER'S

APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE, AND PREPARE FOR REVIEW A DETAILED "DEMOLITION SCHEDULE" WITH OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AT LEAST TWO WEEKS IN ADVANCE OF ANY DEMOLITION WORK TO BE DONE.

5. DEMOLISH IN AN ORDERLY AND CAREFUL MANNER AS REQUIRED TO

ACCOMMODATE NEW WORK INCLUDING THAT REQUIRED FOR CONNECTION TO THE EXISTING BUILDING. PROTECT EXISTING FOUNDATIONS, WINDOWS AND SUPPORTING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.

6. PERFORM DEMOLITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER WORK.

7. PROVIDE DEMOLITION IN EXCESS OF THAT REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION,

AT EXISTING TO REMAIN CONDITIONS, TERMINATE EXTENTS OF DEMOLITION AT

A SIGNIFICANT JOINT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO EDGE OF FOUNDATION, STRUCTURE, ROOF OR WALL.

8. BURNING OF MATERIALS ON SITE IS NOT PERMITTED.

9. REMOVE FROM SITE, CONTAMINATED, VERMIN INFESTED OR DANGEROUS

MATERIALS ENCOUNTERED AND DISPOSE OF BY SAFE MEANS SO AS NOT TO ENDANGER HEALTH OF WORKERS AND PUBLIC.

10. REMOVE DEMOLISHED MATERIALS, TOOLS, AND EQUIPMENT FROM SITE UPON COMPLETION OF WORK. LEAVE SITE IN A CONDITION ACCEPTABLE TO THE ARCHITECT AND THE OWNER.

11. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING UTILITY CAPACITIES AND SHALL INCREASE CAPACITY AS REQUIRED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION:

INCLUDING ELECTRICAL SWITCH GEAR, PRIMARY ELECTRICAL SERVICE, HVAC SYSTEMS AND PLUMBING SYSTEMS.

12. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE OWNERS USE OF EXISTING

BUILDINGS IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE WORK AND SHALL MAINTAIN FREE AND SAFE PASSAGE TO AND FROM.

13. CONTRACTOR SHALL PREVENT MOVEMENT OR SETTLEMENT OF EXISTING STRUCTURES. PROVIDE AND PLACE BRACING OR SHORING AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SAFETY AND SUPPORT OF EXISTING STRUCTURE. ASSUME LIABILITY FOR SUCH MOVEMENT, SETTLEMENT, DAMAGE, OR INJURY.

14. CONTRACTOR SHALL CEASE OPERATIONS AND NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY, IF SAFETY OF STRUCTURE APPEARS TO BE ENDANGERED.

CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS TO PROPERLY SUPPORT STRUCTURE. DO NOT RESUME OPERATIONS UNTIL SAFETY IS RESTORED.

15. CONTRACTOR SHALL ARRANGE AND PAY FOR DISCONNECTING FEES,

INCLUDING REMOVING AND CAPPING UTILITY SERVICES WITHIN AREAS OF DEMOLITION. DISCONNECT AND STUB OFF. NOTIFY THE AFFECTED UTILITY

COMPANY IN ADVANCE AND OBTAIN OWNER APPROVAL BEFORE STARTING THIS WORK.

16. CONTRACTOR SHALL PLACE MARKERS TO INDICATE LOCATION OF DISCONNECTED SERVICES. IDENTIFY SERVICE LINES AND CAPPING LOCATIONS ON PROJECT RECORD DOCUMENTS.

17. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT WEATHERPROOF CLOSURES FOR EXTERIOR OPENINGS.

18. CONTRACTOR SHALL ERECT AND MAINTAIN DUST PROOF PARTITIONS AS

REQUIRED TO PREVENT SPREAD OF DUST, FUMES, AND SMOKE TO OTHER PARTS OF THE BUILDING. ON COMPETITION , REMOVE PARTITIONS AND REPAIR DAMAGED SURFACES TO MATCH ADJACENT SURFACES.

19. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY, IDENTIFY AND MARK LOCATION OF ALL

EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY DEMOLITION WORK.

DEMOLITION GENERAL NOTES:
24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
AD111
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP
DEMO FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 3/16" = 1'-0"
DEMO BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 2
DEMO FLOOR PLAN 2 KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING CONCRETE BEAM TO BE DEMOLISHED 002 EXISTING PARAPET TO BE DEMOLISHED 003 EXISTING INTERIOR WALL/PARTITION TO BE DEMOLISHED
004 EXISTING SIGNAGE TO BE REMOVED
005 EXTERIOR GLAZING TO BE DEMOLISHED

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 83
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"

NVD PARPET
19' - 0"
005 005 005
14' - 6" 9' - 0" 4' - 6"
28' - 0"
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
987654 3.1321
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"

NVD PARPET
19' - 0"
003
002
005 001 004
006
005 005
008 009 006
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"
3' - 1"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
A A.1B A.3CDEFG
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"

NVD PARPET
19' - 0"
001
007
004 005
006
004 005 005 004
009 008 002 006
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
123 3.1456789
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"

NVD PARPET
19' - 0"
007
004 005
009 010 003
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"

TOP OF WALL
42' - 0"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
GFEDC A.3B A.1A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
AD200
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

DEMO BUILDING ELEVATIONS

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
3 1/8" = 1'-0"

DEMO NORTH ELEVATION
2 1/8" = 1'-0"

DEMO WEST ELEVATION
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
DEMO SOUTH ELEVATION 4 1/8" = 1'-0"

DEMO EAST ELEVATION

DEMOLITION ELEVATION KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING CONCRETE BEAM TO BE DEMOLISHED 002 EXISTING GLAZING DOOR TO BE REMOVED 003 EXTERIOR GLAZING TO BE DEMOLISHED
004 EXISTING SIGNAGE TO BE REMOVED
005 EXISTING PARAPET PROFILE TO BE DEMOLISHED
006 REMOVE EXISTING WALL FINISH AND PREP FOR NEW EIFS OR ACM PANEL, REF: ELEVATIONS
007 EXISTING EV CHARGERS TO BE REMOVED AND RELOCATED TO NEW

LOCATION
008 EXISTING ADA STALL TO BE DEMOLISHED
009 EXISTING PAVING TO BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED
010 EXISTING CURB TO BE SAWCUT AND REMOVED

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 84
UP
UP

DEL MONTE BLVD

LEXUS SIGN
116' - 3"
24' - 7 1/2"
9' - 5"
13' - 5 1/8" 8' - 1"

DISTANCE FROM STRUCTURE TO PROPERTY LINE
3' - 4 3/4"

DISTANCE FROM STRUCTURE TO PROPERTY LINE
47' - 6"
7"

DISTANCE FROM STRUCTURE TO PROPERTY LINE
238' - 6"

DISTANCE FROM STRUCTURE TO PROPERTY LINE
6' - 5"
6' - 0"
6' - 0"
19' - 5" 34' - 0" 18' - 11"
19' - 9"
38' - 3"
20' - 3"
2 6
'
-
4 "
9'
- 0"
9'
- 0"
20' - 0"
9' -
0"
20' - 0"
2 0
'
-
0 "
9' - 0"
9'
- 0"
4' - 0"

60.00°

60.00°

45.00°

60.00°
21' - 9 9/16"
20' - 0"
4' - 0"
6' - 0"
9' - 0"
20' - 0"
4 8
5 3
52 CUSTOMER ONLY

CUSTOMER / EMPLOYEE PARKING
I
N
V
E
N
TO
RY
D
I
S
P
LAY
O
N
LY

CUSTOMER /

EMPLOYEE

PARKING

SERVICE

PARKING
15 C
U
S
TO
M
E
R
/
E
M
P
L
OY
E
E
PA
R
K
I
N
G
3 CUSTOMER ONLY
3 CUSTOMER / EMPLOYEE PARKING
2 SERVICE ONLY

SERVICE ONLY
22' - 2"
15' - 0"
15' - 0"
NVD

EXPANSION

SHOWROOM

EXPANSION
15' - 0"
15' - 0"
3 2
'
-
3 "
12' - 0"
15' - 10"
4 7
'
-
3 "
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED.

1. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND SCOPE OF WORK REQUIREMENTS.

2. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS OF CURBS, PAVING AND PLANTERS ADJACENT TO BUILDINGS.

3. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXECUTE THE WORK IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THESE

DRAWINGS, LOCAL GOVERNING BUILDING, FIRE, MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING

CODES, THE CURRENT ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS AND ALL OTHER AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT CONFLICTING REQUIREMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT FOR INTERPRETATION.

4. DEALER SITE SIGNS AND THEIR REQUIRED FOUNDATIONS ARE NOT IN CONTRACT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE /

COORDINATE POWER REQUIREMENTS CONDUITS, AND PROVIDE HOOK-UPS FOR POWER.

5. PARKING AND CURB DIMENSIONS ARE TAKEN FROM FACE OF CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

6. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE ACCESSIBILITY CODES. PROVIDE SIGNS SHOWING SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY AT EACH SPACE.

PROVIDE "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SIGN AT VAN SPACE. REFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY SHEETS FOR MOUNTING DETAILS.

7. POST SITE ADDRESS DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER THE BUILDING IS OCCUPIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FIRE MARSHALL REQUIREMENTS.

8. REFER TO CIVIL FOR FIRE AND SITE YARD HYDRANTS INFORMATION.

9. REFER TO LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION PLANS FOR APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES.

10. REFER TO ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR POWER
SITE WORK GENERAL NOTES:
24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A101
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

DIMENSIONED SITE PLAN

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

DIMENSIONED SITE PLAN
N
N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 85

LEXUS SIGN
001
002
004
005
007
007

EXISTING SERVICE DRIVE
4 8
5 3
52 A010 1

CUSTOMER ONLY

CUSTOMER / EMPLOYEE PARKING
I
N
V
E
N
TO
RY
D
I
S
P
LAY
O
N
LY

CUSTOMER / EMPLOYEE PARKING
006
006
006

SERVICE

PARKING
FH
DN

INVENTORY
DISPLAY ONLY 22
006
006
15 C
U
S
TO
M
E
R
/
E
M
P
L
OY
E
E
PA
R
K
I
N
G
009
010
011
012
001 013
3 CUSTOMER ONLY
3 CUSTOMER / EMPLOYEE PARKING
2 SERVICE ONLY

SERVICE ONLY
DN DN
NVD

EXPANSION

SHOWROOM

EXPANSION
DN
014
013
001

SITE PLAN LEGEND
EXISTING PARKING: NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS
NEW PARKING: NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS
11 PARKING CALCULATIONS

REQUIRED PROVIDED
23 SPACES

PARKING DESIGNATION
SEASIDE REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING, SEC. 17.34.030

AUTOMOBILE SALES AND

SERVICE BUILDING
1 SPACE PER 400 SF OF FLOOR

AREA FOR SHOWROOM AND
OFFICE
1 SPACE PER 2,000 SF OF OUT

DOOR DISPLAY AREA
4 SPACE PER EACH SERVICE OR

WASH BAY

PARKING REQUIREMENTS
23 SPACES
4,776 + 3,694 / 400 SF = 21
3,258 / 2,000 SF = 2
3 SERVICE BAY X 4 = 12

EMPLOYEE / CUSTOMER EMPLOYEE / CUSTOMER

ACCESSIBLE PARKING TABULATION

REQUIRED PROVIDED
1 SPACES
RATIO
PER SEC. 17.34.030. PER 11B-208 AND TABLE 11B-208.2 OF THE 2022 CBC

ACCESSIBLE SPACES
VAN
TYPE
1 SPACES FOR 0 TO 25 TOTAL 1 SPACES

PARKING SPACES
1 SPACE FOR EVERY 6 (OR FRACTION
OF 6) ADA SPACES

DESIGNATED EV PARKING TABULATION

BICYCLE PARKING TABULATION
1 SPACES 1 SPACES

REQUIRED PROVIDED
4 SPACES
RATIO
PER TABLE 5.106.5.3.1 AND SECTION 5.1.106.3.2.1 OF THE 2022 CGBSC

EV CAPABLE SPACES

EV CHARGING STATION (EVCS)
TYPE
4 SPACES FOR 10 TO 25 TOTAL 4 SPACES

PARKING SPACES
0 SPACE FOR 10 TO 25 TOTAL

PARKING SPACES
0 SPACES 1 SPACES

REQUIRED PROVIDED
2 SPACES
RATIO
PER SEASIDE MUNICIPLE CODE 17.34.060. PER TABLE 5.106.4.1.1 AND SECTION 5.1.106.4.1.2 OF THE 2022 CGBSC

BICYCLE PARKING
(SHORT-TERM)

BICYCLE PARKING
(LONG-TERM)

TOTAL BICYCLE PARKING
TYPE
5% OF REQUIRED PARKING 2 SPACES
5% OF REQUIRED PARKING 2 SPACES 2 SPACES
4 SPACES 4 SPACES
12 SPACES 12 SPACES

LANDSCAPE TABULATION SERVICE SERVICE
RATIO
PER SEASIDE MUNICIPLE CODE 17.16.060.D.1.b

LANDSCAPE AREA

TOTAL SITE AREA

TOTAL BICYCLE PARKING
TYPE
5% OF REQUIRED PARKING
2,900 SF
2,449 / 41,649 = 0.07 = 7 %
AREA
41,649 SF
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED.

1. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND SCOPE OF WORK REQUIREMENTS.

2. REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS OF CURBS, PAVING AND PLANTERS ADJACENT TO BUILDINGS.

3. CONTRACTOR SHALL EXECUTE THE WORK IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH THESE

DRAWINGS, LOCAL GOVERNING BUILDING, FIRE, MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING

CODES, THE CURRENT ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS AND ALL OTHER AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT CONFLICTING REQUIREMENTS TO THE ARCHITECT FOR INTERPRETATION.

4. DEALER SITE SIGNS AND THEIR REQUIRED FOUNDATIONS ARE NOT IN CONTRACT UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE /

COORDINATE POWER REQUIREMENTS CONDUITS, AND PROVIDE HOOK-UPS FOR POWER.

5. PARKING AND CURB DIMENSIONS ARE TAKEN FROM FACE OF CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

6. ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE ACCESSIBILITY CODES. PROVIDE SIGNS SHOWING SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY AT EACH SPACE.

PROVIDE "VAN ACCESSIBLE" SIGN AT VAN SPACE. REFERENCE ACCESSIBILITY SHEETS FOR MOUNTING DETAILS.

7. POST SITE ADDRESS DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER THE BUILDING IS OCCUPIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH FIRE MARSHALL REQUIREMENTS.

8. REFER TO CIVIL FOR FIRE AND SITE YARD HYDRANTS INFORMATION.

9. REFER TO LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION PLANS FOR APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS AND QUANTITIES.

10. REFER TO ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR POWER
SITE WORK GENERAL NOTES:
24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A102
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

NOTED SITE PLAN

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

SITE PLAN KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING LANDSCAPING TO REMAIN 002 EXTERIOR DISPLAY AREA CONCRETE TO BE PREPPED, STAINED, AND SEALED. REF: FINISH SCHEDULE
004 NEW ACCESSIBLE RAMP. REF: CIVIL DRAWINGS
005 EXISTING FIRE HYDRANT TO REMAIN
006 NEW STRIPING PAINTED HIGH CONTRAST WHITE PAINT.
007 NEW CURB. REF: CIVIL DRAWINGS
009 EXISTING TRASH ENCLOSURE. CMU WITH STUCCO WALL.
010 NEW SHORT-TERM BICYCLE PARKING, BICYCLE RACK. USER TO PROVIDE U-LOCK OR CABLE LOCK.
011 NEW LONG-TERM BICYCLE PARKING. WALL MOUNT BICYCLE
RACK.USER TO PROVIDE U-LOCK OR CABLE LOCK.
012 EXISTING STORAGE AREA. LOCKED DURING NONE BUSINESS
HOURS
013 NEW LANDSCAPING TO BE ADDED. GROUNDCOVER SUCH AS
COSTAL STRAWBERRY (FRAGARIA CHILOENSIS).
014 NEW CONCRETE DISPLAY PAD 4'X4' MEDIUM GRAY TO MATCH ACM.

REF: CIVIL DRAWINGS
1 1/16" = 1'-0"

NOTED SITE PLAN
N
N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 86
UP
UP
UP

F&I OFFICE
114

F&I OFFICE
113
JAN.
112

MEN'S RR
111

WOMEN'S RR
110

CORRIDOR
117
STOR.
116

RETAIL PARTS/

CASHIER
119

SERVICE

ADVISORS
123

SERVICE

MANAGER
121

SHOWROOM
102

RECEPTION/MANAGER
103
NVD
104
MECH
106

DUMPSTER
105
OIL/

COMPRESSOR
107
PARTS

STORAGE
108
PARTS

STORAGE
108

SERVICE SHOP
109

SERVICE DRIVE
122

NOT IN SCOPE
116' - 3"
19' - 0" 42' - 0 1/2" 4' - 4 1/2" 6' - 0" 2" 1' - 3 1/2" 21' - 2 1/2" 3' - 2" 47' - 5" 4' - 0" 22' - 1 1/2" 16' - 7" 3' - 0" 5' - 0"
2' - 6" 16' - 0 1/2" 1' - 3 1/2" 16' - 11 1/2" 1' - 3 1/2" 16' - 11 1/2" 1' - 3 1/2" 16' - 1 1/2" 1' - 8 1/2" 3' - 7 1/2" 12' - 0"

PROPOSED SHOWROOM
EXPANSION 668 SF INCREASE IN

FLOOR AREA, ENCLOSURE UNDER

EXISTING ROOF

PROPOSED NEW VEHICLE
DELIVERY 458 SF INCREASE IN

FLOOR AREA,

ENCLOSURE WITH NEW ROOF
11223344556677
99 AA
BB
CC
DD
FF
19' - 0" 5' - 0" 24' - 0" 24' - 0" 23' - 0" 1' - 1"
96' - 1"
30' - 6" 17' - 3" 1' - 0" 17' - 3" 18' - 3" 18' - 3" 18' - 3" 13' - 3 1/2" 12' - 9" 88 146' - 9 1/2"
E
E

3.1 3.1

CUSTOMER
LOUNGE
101

USE CAR

DISPLAY
124
30' - 6" 17' - 3" 18' - 3" 18' - 3" 18' - 3" 18' - 3" 13' - 3 1/2" 12' - 9" A.1 A.1 19' - 0" 5' - 0" 21' - 0" 3' - 0" 24' - 0" 23' - 0" 1' - 1" 9 1/2" A.3 A.3
23' - 9 1/2"
G
G
96' - 10 1/2"
16' - 6 1/2"
5' - 8 1/2" 18' - 8"
24' - 7 1/2"
22' - 6"
1' - 3 1/2"
2' - 3 7/8"
2' - 3 7/8" 3' - 0 1/8"
5' - 6 3/8"
1' - 6 5/8"
10' - 7 5/8" 4' - 0 3/4"
6' - 4 1/8"
7' - 9 1/2"
16' - 2 5/8"
52' - 4 3/8" 5' - 8 5/8" 5' - 1 1/2"

SHOWROOM ADDITION
668 SF
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A120
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

DIMENSION PLAN - FIRST
FLOOR

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 3/16" = 1'-0"

DIMENSIONED PLAN - FIRST FLOOR
N
N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 87
UP
UP
UP
002

NOT IN SCOPE

RECEPTION/MANAGER
103
NVD
104
CW2
CW2
CW6

CUSTOMER
LOUNGE
101
001
003 004

F&I OFFICE
113

F&I OFFICE
114

SERVICE

MANAGER
121

SERVICE

ADVISORS
123

RETAIL PARTS/

CASHIER
119

MEN'S RR
111

WOMEN'S RR
110
JAN.
112
PARTS

STORAGE
108 OIL/

COMPRESSOR
107
MECH
106

SERVICE SHOP
109
A430 1
3 A210 3
A210
5 A210
5 A2101
A210
1 A210
2 A210 2
A210

TRASH ENCLOSURE

SHOWROOM
102

USE CAR

DISPLAY
124
4 A210 4
A210
6 A210
6 A210
CW1
CW3 CW4 CW4 CW5
104
C3
C3 C3
C3
C3
005
C3
C3
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED.

1. INTERIOR PARTITIONS TO BE TYPE 'A1'. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

2. THE WORK SHALL CONFORM TO REQUIREMENTS OF APPLICABLE LOCAL, STATE,

AND FEDERAL BUILDING CODES AND AGENCIES HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE VARIOUS PHASES OF THE WORK.

3. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO STARTING WORK AND SHALL NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.

4. PROVIDE FULL HEIGHT 5/8" CEMENT BACKER BOARD AT TOILET AND JANITOR ROOMS, AND AT WALLS TO RECEIVE TILE.

5. PROVIDE AND INSTALL SOUND DAMPENING INSULATION AT ALL PERIMETER METAL STUD WALLS OF RESTROOMS AND MECHANICAL ROOMS. EXTEND PARTITION WALLS TO UNDERSIDE OF DECK.

6. REFER TO NOTED FLOOR PLANS AND CODE ANALYSIS FOR FIRE-RATED WALLS.

PROVIDE SOLID BACKING FOR ALL FIRE-RATED SHUTTERS IN WALL CAVITIES.

7. PROVIDE AND INSTALL THERMAL BATT INSULATION AT INTERIOR METAL STUD

PARTITION WALLS ADJOINING AIR CONDITIONED AREAS WITH NON-AIR CONDITIONED AREAS.

8. REFER TO ACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS SHEETS FOR ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. THE WORK SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

9. ACCESSIBLE RESTROOMS SHALL CONFORM TO LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.

10. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE BLOCKING WHERE REQUIRED FOR TOILET ACCESSORIES.

11. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROPER CONNECTIONS OF THE EQUIPMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE W/ OWNER'S VENDORS FOR ITEMS REQUIRING HOOK-UPS.

12. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE (3) 4'-0" x 8'-0" x 3/4" THICK A-C GRADE PAINTED PLYWOOD PANEL BOARDS FOR COMMUNICATION AND DATA EQUIPMENT.

LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY ARCHITECT.

13. GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SECURE AND PAY FOR BUILDING PERMITS,

APPLICATIONS FEES, SERVICE FEES, GOVERNMENTAL FEES, LICENSES AND

INSPECTIONS NECESSARY FOR THE EXECUTION AND COMPLETION OF THE WORK.

14. PAINT EXPOSED CONDUIT, PIPING, METAL BUILDING COMPONENTS,

ACCESSORIES, DUCTWORK AND PIPING RACEWAY ACCESSORIES AT ROOMS NOTED AS "PAINT EXPOSED STRUCTURE."

15. PAINT VISIBLE CONDUIT, PIPING, BUILDING COMPONENTS, ACCESSORIES,

DUCTWORK AND PIPING RACEWAY ACCESSORIES ABOVE RETURN AIR GRILLS

WHEN RETURN AIR PLENUM IS DESIGNED

16. HOLLOW METAL DOORS AND FRAMES SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH ADJACENT WALL, BOTH SIDES, UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE .TYP.

17. PROVIDE CORNER GUARDS AT WALLS INDICATED AND SPECIFIED.

GENERAL PLAN NOTES:
24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A130
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

NOTED PLAN - FIRST FLOOR

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 3/16" = 1'-0"

NOTED PLAN - FIRST FLOOR

FLOOR PLAN KEYNOTES
001 DISPLAY CABINET WITH ACCESS FROM CASHIER SIDE 002 PROPOSED VEHICLE DELIEVERY EXPANSION 003 PROPOSED SHOWROOM EXPANSION
004 FURNITURE PROVIDED BY OWNER, G.C. TO PROVIDE DATA & POWER CONNECTIONS. TYPICAL REF: ELECTRICAL & POWER PLAN
005 FURROUT EXISTING COLUMN, TYP.

N
N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 88
UP
UP
UP

SHOWROOM
102
NVD
104

CUSTOMER
LOUNGE
101

F&I OFFICE
113

F&I OFFICE
114
JAN.
112

CORRIDOR
117

WOMEN'S RR
110

MEN'S RR
111

RETAIL PARTS/

CASHIER
119

SERVICE

MANAGER
121

SERVICE

ADVISORS
123

SERVICE SHOP
109
PARTS

STORAGE
108
OIL/

COMPRESSOR
107
MECH
106

SERVICE DRIVE
122
STOR.
116

NOT IN SCOPE
T-1
TB-1
P-1
CPT-1
RB-1
P-1
T-1
TB-1
P-1
P-1
CPT-1
RB-1
CPT-1
RB-1
P-1
6 / A580
6 / A580
6 / A580
6 / A580
6 / A580
P-1
T-1
TB-1
P-1
CPT-1
RB-1
P-1
T-1
TB-1
TR-1
7 / A580
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A150
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

FINISH PLAN - FIRST FLOOR

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 3/16" = 1'-0"

FINISH PLAN - FIRST FLOOR
N
N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 89
001
002
002
002
002
002
002
34' - 0"
34' - 0"
42' - 9"
34' - 0" 34' - 0"
34' - 0"
34' - 0"
30' - 0"
30' - 0"
32' - 6" 2" / 12"
5 5/8" / 12"
2 3/8" / 12"
9 1/8" / 12"
28' - 8 1/8"
003
8' - 2 1/8"
1/2" / 12"
19' - 0"
42' - 9"
004
1" / 12"
1" / 12"
1" / 12"
1" / 12"
1" / 12"
1" / 12"
1" / 12" 1" / 12"
1" / 12"
1" / 12"
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
006
006
006
006
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

1. GC TO COORDINATE WITH MECHANICAL SCREEN MANUFACTURER ON LOCATION OF MECHANICAL SCREEN POSTS. REFER TO STRUCTRUAL FOR BRACING

2. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING FOR OTHER ROOF EQUIPMENT.

3. PLACE ROOF WALK PAD AT PERIMETER OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, ROOF HATCHES AND TRAVEL ROUTES FROM ROOF LADDERS.

ROOF GENERAL NOTES:

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A190
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

ROOF PLAN

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

ROOF PLAN KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING ROOF ACCESS 002 EXISTING MECHANICAL UNIT TO REMAIN 003 NEW SIGN WALL
004 NEW ROOF DRAIN
005 NEW ROOF PARAPETS
006 NEW ROOF
1 3/16" = 1'-0"

ROOF PLAN
N
N

PROJECT NORTH TRUE NORTH

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 90
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"
ACM-1 ACM-2
ACM-1
ACM-2
EIFS-1
EP-1
GL-2 GL-1 EP
-1 ACM
-2
001
002
004
005
004
005

TOP OF WALL
42' - 0"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
006
1 23 3.145678
005 005 005 005
004
005
004
005
004
005
15' - 0"
21' - 0"
42' - 9"
12' - 0"
6' - 6" 14' - 6"
4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" 4' - 9" LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"
ACM-1 ACM-2 ACM-1
ACM-1
EIFS-1
EIFS-1
EP-1 EP-1 GL-2 GL
-1
001
001
004
005
004
005

TOP OF WALL
42' - 0"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
A A.1B A.3CDEF
005 005
G
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"

SERVICE PARPET
30' - 0"
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"
ACM-2
ACM-1
ACM-1
EIFS-1
EP-1
EIFS-1
EP-1
001
001
EIFS-1

TOP OF WALL
42' - 0"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
1 2
976543
8 3.1
LEVEL 1
0' - 0"
LEVEL 2.5
13' - 5"
LEVEL 2
10' - 11"
ACM-2
ACM-1
ACM-2
EP-1
001
001
004
002
ACM-1

TOP OF WALL
42' - 0"
8' - 9" 15' - 0" 19' - 6"
42' - 9"

SHOWROOM PARPET
34' - 0"
GFEDC A.3B A.1A
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A200
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

BUILDING ELEVATIONS

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
1 1/8" = 1'-0"

SOUTH ELEVATION
2 1/8" = 1'-0"

WEST ELEVATION
3 1/8" = 1'-0"

NORTH ELEVATION
4 1/8" = 1'-0"

EAST ELEVATION

EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE

TAG MANUFACTURER MODEL / SERIES STYLE / COLOR NOTES / CONTACT ACMACM-2 ALPOLIC MICA COLOR: MZG MICA GREY
CONTACT: MARC ELLIS PHONE: 757-404-6645
EMAIL: [email protected]
FLOOR
CONC-1 CONCRETE
4' X 4' GRID. MEDIUM GRAY TO MATCH
ACM
GLASS
GL-1 VISION GLASS
GL-2 SPANDREL GLASS
PAINT
EP-1 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COLOR: SW 7657 TINSMITH
WALL
EIFS-1

DRYVIT OR APPROVED
EQUAL

GC TO MATCH

EXISTING ADJACENT

EIFS TEXTURE
EIFS TO BE PAINTED P-5
EIFS- 2

DRYVIT OR APPROVED
EQUAL

GC TO MATCH

EXISTING ADJACENT

EIFS TEXTURE
EIFS TO BE PAINTED P-6

EXTERIOR ELEVATION KEYNOTES
001 EXISTING EIFS WALL TO REMAIN. TO BE PAINTED EP-1 002 EXISTING GLAZING TO REMAIN. 004 PROPOSED GLAZING TO MATCH EXISTING.
005 PROPOSED SPANDREL GLASS TO MATCH EXISTING.
006 BUILDING SIGNAGE TO BE PERMIT SEPARATELY, BY OTHERS.

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 91
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A202
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

MATERIAL BOARD

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022
SHERWIN-WILLIAMS EP-1
SW 7657 TINSMITH
ALPOLIC ACM-1

MZG GREY MICA
ALPOLIC ACM-2

MNC MICA ANODIC CLEAR

EXTERIOR FINISHES

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 92
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A601
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

FINISH SCHEDULE

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

INTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE

TAG MANUFACTURER STYLE / COLOR LOCATION NOTES / CONTACT CEILING CT-1 TBD TBD (CEILING TILE)

COUNTERTOP
SS-1
DALTILE STYLE: ONE QUARTZ,
COLOR: ROCKY MOUNTAIN OQ34
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
SS-2
DALTILE STYLE: EVERFORM SOLID SURFACE,
COLOR: DALMATA TERRAZZO MATRIX
(412)
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
SS-3
DALTILE STYLE: EVERFORM SOLID SURFACE,
COLOR: GRAFITE TERRAZZO MATRIX
(411)
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
FLOOR
CP-1
MOHAWK GROUP STYLE: DATA TIDE. BIOME TILE -
GT456, COLOR: WETLAND (549)
CONTACT: SUSAN LEATH: 972-467-5785,
[email protected]
CP-2
HOHAWK GROUP STYLE: OPTIC RESET - FIELD OF
VIEW DARK - GT449, COLOR:

UNDERTONE DARK (988)
CONTACT: SUSAN LEATH: 972-467-5785,
[email protected]
T-1
DALTILE STYLE: MARBLE ATTACHE, MA87,
MATTE 12X24,24X24, 24X48, COLOR:

CALACATTA MA87
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
T-2
DALTILE STYLE: EMERSON WOOD, 12X48,
6X48, 8X48, COLOR: HICKORY PECAN
EP05
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
T-3
DALTILE STYLE: UNIFORM WOOD, 8X48,
COLOR: BLACK UW16
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
PAINT
P-1
BENJAMIN MOORE COLOR: PALE OAK OC-20 CONTACT: MICHAEL ECKE - 201-783-7658 [email protected]
P-2
BENJAMIN MOORE COLOR: CHEATING HEART 1617 CONTACT: MICHAEL ECKE - 201-783-7658 [email protected]
P-3
BENJAMIN MOORE COLOR: GRAY WISP CC-670 CONTACT: MICHAEL ECKE - 201-783-7658 [email protected]
P-4
BENJAMIN MOORE COLOR: REVERE PEWTER HC-172 CONTACT: MICHAEL ECKE - 201-783-7658 [email protected]
P-5
BENJAMIN MOORE COLOR: CHANTILLY LACE OC-65 CONTACT: MICHAEL ECKE - 201-783-7658 [email protected]

PLASTIC LAMINATE
PL-1
ARBORITE STYLE: WOODGRAINS,
COLOR: MAHOGANY VISION 1541
CONTACT: SAMANTHA CURTIS - 214-616-7575,
[email protected]
PL-2
ARBORITE STYLE: PATTERNS AND ABSTRACTS,
COLOR: CHARCOAL CHAMOIS P331
CONTACT: SAMANTHA CURTIS - 214-616-7575,
[email protected]
PL-3 WILSONART BLACK 1595-12 SOFT GRAIN FURNITURE ACCENT MILLWORK

WALL BASES
CTB-1 TBD TILE BASE TBD
VB-1 TBD RUBBER BASE TBD
WALLS
T-4
DALTILE STYLE: PIETRA DIVINA,
COLOR: CALACATTA DOLOMITI M079
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY - 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
T-5
DALTILE STYLE: STRUCTURE,
COLOR: STEEL ST70
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY - 303-949-9638,
[email protected]
T-6
DALTILE STYLE: FAMED,
COLOR: DIAMOND FM10
CONTACT: BARB JOSEY - 303-949-9638,
[email protected]

ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE
NO. ROOM NAME
FLOOR
BASE

WALLS AND CEILINGS
NOTES

FLOOR ACCENT NORTH WALLS EAST WALLS SOUTH WALLS WEST WALLS CEILINGS DRYWALL

FIELD ACCENT FIELD ACCENT FIELD ACCENT FIELD ACCENT FIELD ACCENT GRADE 100 RESTROOM CA-1- TB-1 WT-1- WT-1- WT-1- WT-1 WT-2 T-1- GYP-1 1, 3 101 OFFICE T-11- TB-1 T-1- T-1- T-1 WT-2 T-1- T-1- GYP-2 2 101 CUSTOMER LOUNGE T-1 TB-1
102 STORAGE CN-1- TB-1 T-1- T-1- T-1- T-1- T-1- GYP-1 CEILING OPEN TO STRUCTURE ABOVE 102 SHOWROOM CPT-1 RB-1
103 RECEPTION/MANAGER T-1 TB-1
104 NVD T-1 TB-1 CPT-1 GYP-1
105 DUMPSTER
106 MECH
107 OIL/ COMPRESSOR
108 PARTS STORAGE
109 SERVICE SHOP
110 WOMEN'S RR
111 MEN'S RR
112 JAN.
113 F&I OFFICE CPT-1 RB-1 CT-1
114 F&I OFFICE CPT-1 RB-1 CT-1
115 STAIR B
116 STOR.
117 CORRIDOR
118 STAIR A
119 RETAIL PARTS/ CASHIER T-1 TB-1
120 CUSTOMER LOUNGE
121 SERVICE MANAGER CPT-1 RB-1
122 SERVICE DRIVE
123 SERVICE ADVISORS T-1 TB-1
124 USE CAR DISPLAY

TOILET ROOM ACCESSORIES SCHEDULE

TAG MANUFACTURER MODEL / SERIES STYLE / COLOR FINISH MATERIAL NOTES / CONTACT <varies> <varies>

EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE

TAG MANUFACTURER MODEL / SERIES STYLE / COLOR NOTES / CONTACT ACMACM-2 ALPOLIC MICA COLOR: MZG MICA GREY
CONTACT: MARC ELLIS PHONE: 757-404-6645
EMAIL: [email protected]
FLOOR
CONC-1 CONCRETE
4' X 4' GRID. MEDIUM GRAY TO MATCH
ACM
GLASS
GL-1 VISION GLASS
GL-2 SPANDREL GLASS
PAINT
EP-1 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COLOR: SW 7657 TINSMITH
WALL
EIFS-1

DRYVIT OR APPROVED
EQUAL

GC TO MATCH

EXISTING ADJACENT

EIFS TEXTURE
EIFS TO BE PAINTED P-5
EIFS- 2

DRYVIT OR APPROVED
EQUAL

GC TO MATCH

EXISTING ADJACENT

EIFS TEXTURE
EIFS TO BE PAINTED P-6

SITE MATERIAL SCHEDULE

TAG MANUFACTURER MODEL / SERIES STYLE / COLOR NOTES / CONTACT PAVING CN-2 TBD TBD TBD (CONCRETE)

ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE NOTES
# NOTES
1 ROOM FINISH NOTE, ROOM FINISH NOTE, ROOM FINISH NOT
E
2 ROOM FINISH NOTE, ROOM FINISH NOTE, ROOM FINISH NOTE
3 ROOM FINISH NOTE, ROOM FINISH NOTE, ROOM FINISH NOTE

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 93
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A602
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

LIGHTING SCHEDULE

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

INTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE

MARK MANUFACTURER MODEL TRIM FINISH / COLOR COMMENTS REMARK / CONTACT CREE

HET- AIR

RETURN LED
2X2 ARCHITECTURAL LED TROFFER
L3 Gipboard Ceiling

EXTERIOR LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE

MARK MANUFACTURER MODEL TRIM FINISH / COLOR COMMENTS REMARK / CONTACT

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 94
COPYRIGHTED DOCUMENT: THIS DRAWING AND THE BIM/CAD FILE FROM WHICH IT HAS BEEN GENERATED ARE PROVIDED AS AN INSTRUMENT OF SERVICE FOR THIS PROJECT. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. ANY USE OF THESE DOCUMENTS, DATA AND DESIGNS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED, WRITTEN PERMISSION OF GOREE WHITFIELD, INC. IS PROHIBITED. 24691 Del Prado Ave
Dana Point, CA 92629
949 -234 -1950
www.goree.com

PROJECT NAME

PROJECT ADDRESS

OWNER INFORMATION

ISSUE DATE

GOREE PROJECT NUMBER

SHEET NUMBER

SHEET NAME

KEY PLAN

STAMP / SIGNATURE

CONSULTANTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

LEXUS MONTEREY

PENINSULA
1721 DEL MONTE BLVD.,
SEASIDE, CA 93955
A603
07/05/2024
GW2311

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP

RENDERING

DMI ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS
41002 CHAMBORD DR.

LAKE ELSINORE, CA 91204
RPM ENGINEERS, INC.
102 DISCOVERY
IRVINE, CA 92618
P: 949-450-1229

GRIMM & CHEN
17500 REDHILL AVE, SUITE 240
IRVINE, CA 92614
949-250-3150
GC-SE.COM

ELECTRICAL ENGINEER

MECHANICAL & PLUMBING ENGINEERS

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
[INSERT PROJECT
DESCRIPTION]
© GOREE WHITFIELD 2022

ISSUE HISTORY
DATE: MARK: DESCRIPTION:

Packet Page 95

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.G.

TO: City Council
FROM: Greg McDanel, City Manager
BY: Andrew Myrick, Economic Development & Community Planning Manager DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COOPERATIVE

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE

SEASIDE HOUSING COLLABORATIVE TO AUTHORIZE THE

COLLABORATIVE TO PURSUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON TWO CITY-OWNED PARCELS
LOCATED ON THE 1200 BLOCK OF DARWIN STREET AND THE
1200 BLOCK OF LUZERN STREET

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution to enter into a Cooperative Agreement with the Seaside Housing Collaborative.

BACKGROUND
The Seaside Housing Collaborative (SHC) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation originally created by the Seaside City Council on October 7, 2021. The purpose of creating the SHC was to create an aligned partner to provide, develop, promote, fund, and/or assist in the provision of affordable housing for moderate, low and very low income households; households falling into specific demographics or groups where no adequate housing exists; and individuals and families in need of decent, safe and sanitary housing.

The SHC has conducted a review of City-owned parcels of land, and has identified two parcels of land which it believes represent the best candidates for the development of affordable housing:

Parcel 1: Monterey County Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 012-321-034-000, an approximately 0.1-acre lot located on the 1200 block of Darwin Avenue. This parcel Packet Page 96

Item No. 8.G. Page 2 of 3
appears to be a remainder parcel that was left over when a portion of the original parcel was taken in order to create space for a cul-de-sac bulb on Darwin Street.

Parcel 2: APN 012-323-042-000, an approximately 0.26-acre lot located in the 1200 blocks of Vallejo and Luzern Streets. This parcel runs between Vallejo and Luzern Streets, and at one point was designated as Encanto Park. However, the parcel has never been developed as a park (likely due to its steep topography). A portion of the parcel includes cul-de-sac bulbs from both Vallejo and Luzern Streets.

The proposed Cooperative Agreement would serve as a road map for the development of these two parcels. Under the Agreement, the SHC would be responsible for identifying a developer and performing due diligence on the properties (ie reviewing title reports, site investigations, etc). SHC would also be responsible for putting together a pro forma (financial analysis, including sources and uses of funds) for the project as well, and securing any necessary planning or building permits from the City.

Any units constructed would need to qualify to be counted towards the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) as defined in the City's Housing Element. Ultimately, if the SHC moves forward with the project, it would be responsible for managing the property on a long-term basis in a manner that preserves the affordability of the units.

The Agreement does not involve any financial commitments on the part of the City, and the City has the ability to terminate the Agreement in the event that the SHC does not fulfill its obligations.

Staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed Agreement.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this item.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY
Vibrant Local Economy, Diverse and Inclusive Community

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution SHC Cooperative Agreement 2025-06-24

2. Exhibit A - Draft Cooperative Agreement

3. Property Location Map
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

Packet Page 97

Item No. 8.G. Page 3 of 3
____________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 98
Meeting Date: x/xx/xx
Item #: X.X.

RESOLUTION NO. 25-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE APPROVING

A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE

SEASIDE HOUSING COLLABORATIVE TO AUTHORIZE THE COLLABORATIVE TO PURSUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON TWO CITYOWNED PARCELS LOCATED ON THE 1200 BLOCK OF DARWIN STREET AND THE 1200 BLOCK OF LUZERN STREET
WHEREAS, the City if the owner of certain real properties located on Darwin Street (APN 012-321-034-000) and Vallejo/Luzern Streets (APN 012-323-042-000) (hereafter referred to as the “Properties”); and
WHEREAS, the City desires to see affordable housing constructed on the Properties; and
WHEREAS, the Seaside Housing Collaborative is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation which was founded with the goal of facilitating and developing affordable housing within the City of Seaside; and
WHEREAS, the Seaside Housing Collaborative has approached the City with the desire to pursue the development of affordable housing project on the Properties; and WHEREAS, the City desires to allow the Seaside Housing Collaborative to construct affordable housing on the Properties.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby authorize and direct the City Manager to execute the Cooperative Agreement with the Seaside Housing Collaborative attached as Exhibit “A,” as finally reviewed and approved by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Special meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 24th day of June, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
APPROVED:
_______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
Packet Page 99
-2
ATTEST:
______________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
______________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Attachments:

Exhibit “A” – Cooperative Agreement
Packet Page 100

COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE

HOUSING
This Cooperative Agreement for the Development of Affordable Housing (“Agreement”), dated this ____ day of _______, 2025, is by and between the City of Seaside, a municipal corporation (“City”) and the Seaside Housing Collaborative, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation (“SHC”).

RECITALS

1. City is the owner of certain real properties located on Darwin Street (APN 012- 321-034-000) and Vallejo/Luzern Streets (APN 012-323-042-000) (each singularly a “Property” and collectively the “Properties”).

2. City desires to see affordable housing constructed on the Properties.

3. SHC is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation which was founded with the goal of facilitating and developing affordable housing within the city of Seaside.

4. SHC has approached the City with the desire to pursue the development of affordable housing projects on the Properties.

5. City desires to allow SHC to pursue the possibility of constructing housing on the site.

AGREEMENT

1. City hereby provides permission to SHC (or its representatives, contractors, or authorized designees) to access the Properties and perform such due diligence activities as may be deemed appropriate and necessary to confirm the feasibility of developing an affordable housing project on one or both Properties. Due diligence activities may include any activity which would not create any permanent detrimental situation on the Properties and may include, but are not limited to: title searches/reports, soils testing, and/or survey work.

2. If, upon completion of due diligence, SHC desires to proceed with the construction of affordable housing units on one or both Properties, the SHC shall provide City with the following:
a. Construction drawings showing proposed affordable housing units. City shall have the right to ensure that the proposed units are consistent with applicable Zoning, Building, and other Municipal Codes. b. A pro forma showing the estimated costs of construction for the proposed units as well as a sources and uses of funds document demonstrating how SHC will raise and spend the funds necessary to complete the units. c. An affordable housing plan demonstrating to the City how the units will remain affordable for a period of 55 years, and the entity which will be responsible for managing the properties.

Packet Page 101

3. Upon verification and acceptance by the City of the materials described above, SHC shall have the option to lease the property (the terms of which shall be established by mutual agreement) (the “Lease”) for the purposes of constructing and managing affordable housing. SHC shall be responsible for all costs associated with the construction of the affordable units, including any fees due to the City or other entities.

4. Upon execution of the lease, SHC (or its representative, contractor, or designee) shall obtain Building Permits, diligently pursue construction to completion, and shall obtain a Certificate of Occupancy from the City. In the event that SHC does not complete construction of the project, City shall have the ability to terminate the lease. City shall not be responsible for any costs incurred by SHC. A Deed Restriction shall be filed on the property to ensure continued affordability of the units.

5. City agrees to provide a sufficient water allocation to support the development of the Properties based on the approved projects. City further agrees to facilitate the establishment of water meters serving the Properties.

6. SHC shall manage the property as an affordable housing project. City shall have the right to terminate its lease with the SHC and assume management of the residential units if SHC fails to operate the Properties in accordance with these standards.

7. This Agreement shall commence on the date written above and shall continue to be in force for a period of one year unless terminated earlier pursuant to this Agreement. This Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement provided that SHC is not in default. City agrees that during the term of the Agreement that it will not negotiate with any person or entity other than SHC for the sale, lease, or development of the site.

8. For the purposes of this Agreement, an “affordable housing project” shall mean a residential project which consists solely of units which are eligible to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first written above.

FOR CITY: FOR SEASIDE HOUSING
COLLABORATIVE:

Greg McDanel, City Manager Ian Oglesby, Chair
City of Seaside Seaside Housing Collaborative
Packet Page 102
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Sheri Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 103
Property Location Map
APN 012-321-034-000 APN 012-323-042-000
Packet Page 104

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.H.

TO: City Council
FROM: Greg McDanel, City Manager
BY: Jessica Riley, Finance Director
DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES

TO COMPLETE THE COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE FEE STUDY
FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $29,995.00

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing a professional services agreement with Willdan Financial Services to complete the preparation of a Comprehensive Citywide User Fee Study.

BACKGROUND
The City of Seaside’s fee schedule has evolved over time and currently includes fees for services provided by the Administrative, Planning, Building, Public Works, Recreation, Fire, and Police Departments. The City’s user fee schedule was last comprehensively updated in 2013. Since then, the City has applied annual inflationary adjustments to maintain cost relevance. However, many fees no longer reflect the actual cost of providing services due to significant changes in staffing, technology, and operational practices.

In addition, the current format of the fee schedule presents several administrative and usability challenges. The structure is cumbersome and time-consuming to update, does not lend itself to efficient analysis or strategic planning, and lacks clarity in some areas.

For example, certain fees may be outdated or inaccurately estimated due to efficiencies gained from technology, while some descriptions—such as those referencing nonrefundable deposits—are unclear. These factors create confusion for both staff and the public and reduce overall transparency and ease of implementation.

To address these concerns, the City determined that a comprehensive fee study is Packet Page 105

Item No. 8.H. Page 2 of 3
necessary to evaluate and modernize the existing fee structure. The goal is to improve usability, enhance transparency, ensure legal defensibility, and align fees with the actual cost of service delivery.

A Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional consulting services to perform a Comprehensive Citywide User Fee Study was released on April 24, 2025. Proposals were due by May 23, 2025. The City received five (5) proposals in response. A review committee consisting of the Finance Director, Assistant Finance Director, and an outside consultant from the Building Department evaluated the proposals based on the qualifications of the project team, project understanding and approach, scope of services, project management plan, and references confirming a record of timely, highquality work on similar projects.

Based on the evaluation, Willdan Financial Services was selected as the most qualified firm. Their proposal demonstrated a deep understanding of the City’s needs, a practical and collaborative approach to fee development, extensive public sector experience, and strong familiarity with California legal and fiscal requirements. Willdan also brings recent experience working with the City of Seaside on a Water Rate and Capacity Fee Study.

The proposed agreement with Willdan is for an amount not to exceed $29,995.00, with an approximate 10% contingency of $2,999.50, for a total contract amount of $32,994.50.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with Willdan Financial Services in an amount not to exceed $29,995.00 to complete the Citywide Comprehensive Fee Study.

FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for the User Fee Study has been included in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget.

The total cost of the agreement with Willdan Financial Services will not exceed $32,994.50 inclusive of all services and deliverables.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY
Effective Accessible Governance

ATTACHMENTS

1. Professional Services Agreement

2. Resolution
Packet Page 106

Item No. 8.H. Page 3 of 3
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

____________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 107
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 1 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA

CITY OF SEASIDE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT FOR 2025

COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE FEE STUDY
This PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT (PSA) FOR NON-CONSTRUCTION PROJECT (“AGREEMENT”), is made and effective as of June 24, 2025 between the City of Seaside ("AGENCY"), a municipal corporation and Willdan Financial Services, a corporation ("CONSULTANT"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

I. TERM
This AGREEMENT shall commence on June 24, 2025 and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2026 unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this AGREEMENT.

II. SERVICES
CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.

CONSULTANT shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. To the extent that Exhibit A is a proposal from CONSULTANT, such proposal is incorporated only for the description of the scope of services and no other terms and conditions from any such proposal shall apply to this AGREEMENT unless specifically agreed to in writing.

III. PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his/her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. CONSULTANT shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of CONSULTANT hereunder in meeting its obligations under this AGREEMENT.

IV. AGENCY MANAGEMENT
Agency’s Finance Director shall represent AGENCY in all matters pertaining to the administration of this AGREEMENT, review and approval of all products submitted by CONSULTANT, but not including the authority to enlarge the Tasks to Be Performed or change the compensation due to CONSULTANT. Agency’s Manager shall be authorized to act on AGENCY's behalf and to execute all Packet Page 108
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 2 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
necessary documents which enlarge the Tasks to Be Performed or change CONSULTANT's compensation, subject to Section 5 hereof.

V. PAYMENT
A. The AGENCY agrees to pay CONSULTANT monthly, in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks.

This amount shall not TWENTY NINE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND NINETY FIVE dollars ($29,995.00) for the total term of the AGREEMENT unless additional payment is approved as provided in this AGREEMENT.

B. CONSULTANT shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this AGREEMENT which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the Agency Manager. CONSULTANT shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by Agency Manager and CONSULTANT at the time AGENCY's written authorization is given to CONSULTANT for the performance of said services.

C. CONSULTANT will submit invoices monthly for actual services performed.

Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, or as soon thereafter as practical, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the AGENCY disputes any of CONSULTANT's fees it shall give written notice to CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. Any final payment under this AGREEMENT shall be made within forty-five (45) days of receipt of an invoice therefore.

VI. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE A. The AGENCY may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this AGREEMENT, or any portion hereof, by serving upon the CONSULTANT at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the CONSULTANT shall immediately cease all work under this AGREEMENT, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the AGENCY suspends or terminates a portion of this AGREEMENT such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this AGREEMENT.

Packet Page 109
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 3 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
B. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated pursuant to this Section, the AGENCY shall pay to CONSULTANT the actual value of the work performed up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the AGENCY. Upon termination of the AGREEMENT pursuant to this Section, the CONSULTANT will submit an invoice to the AGENCY pursuant to Section 5.

VII. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT
A. The CONSULTANT's failure to comply with the provisions of this AGREEMENT shall constitute a default. In the event that CONSULTANT is in default for cause under the terms of this AGREEMENT, AGENCY shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating CONSULTANT for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this AGREEMENT immediately by written notice to the CONSULTANT. If such failure by the CONSULTANT to make progress in the performance of work hereunder arises out causes beyond the CONSULTANT's control, and without fault or negligence of the CONSULTANT, it shall not be considered a default.

B. If the Agency Manager or his/her designee determines that the CONSULTANT is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this AGREEMENT, he/she shall cause to be served upon the CONSULTANT a written notice of the default. The CONSULTANT shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the CONSULTANT fails to cure its default within such period of time or fails to present the AGENCY with a written plan for the cure of the default, the AGENCY shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this AGREEMENT, to terminate this AGREEMENT without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this AGREEMENT.

VIII. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
A. CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by AGENCY that relate to the performance of services under this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible.

CONSULTANT shall provide free access to the representatives of AGENCY or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give AGENCY the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall Packet Page 110
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 4 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
permit AGENCY to make transcripts or copies therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this AGREEMENT. Such records, together with supporting documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.

B. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, computer discs, and reports prepared by the Contractor under this Agreement shall become the sole property of City and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by City without the permission of Contractor. With respect to computer files, Contractor shall make available to City, at City's office and upon reasonable written request by City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files.

IX. INDEMNIFICATION AND DEFENSE
A. Indemnity
To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless AGENCY and any and all of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including legal counsel’s fees and costs, caused in whole or in part by the negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of CONSULTANT, its officers, agents, employees or subconsultants (or any agency or individual that CONSULTANT shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of services under this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT’s duty to indemnify and hold harmless AGENCY shall not extend to the AGENCY’s sole or active negligence.

B. Duty to defend
In the event the AGENCY, its officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from the performance of the services encompassed by this AGREEMENT, and upon demand by AGENCY, CONSULTANT shall defend the AGENCY at CONSULTANT’s cost or at AGENCY’s option, to reimburse AGENCY for its costs of defense, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the defense of such matters to the extent the matters arise from, relate to or are caused by CONSULTANT’s negligent acts, errors or omissions. Payment by AGENCY is not a condition precedent to enforcement of this indemnity. In the event of any dispute between CONSULTANT and AGENCY, as to whether liability arises from Packet Page 111
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 5 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
the sole or active negligence of the AGENCY or its officers, employees, or agents, CONSULTANT will be obligated to pay for AGENCY’s defense until such time as a final judgment has been entered adjudicating the AGENCY as solely or actively negligent. CONSULTANT will not be entitled in the absence of such a determination to any reimbursement of defense costs including but not limited to attorney’s fees, expert fees and costs of litigation.

X. INSURANCE
CONSULTANT shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this AGREEMENT insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit C attached to and part of this AGREEMENT.

XI. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
A. CONSULTANT is and shall at all times remain as to the AGENCY a wholly independent consultant and/or independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this AGREEMENT on behalf of CONSULTANT shall at all times be under CONSULTANT's exclusive direction and control. Neither AGENCY nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of CONSULTANT or any of CONSULTANT's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the AGENCY. CONSULTANT shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against AGENCY, or bind AGENCY in any manner.

B. No employee benefits shall be available to CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of this AGREEMENT. Except for the fees paid to CONSULTANT as provided in the AGREEMENT, AGENCY shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to CONSULTANT for performing services hereunder for AGENCY. AGENCY shall not be liable for compensation or indemnification to CONSULTANT for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.

XII. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The AGENCY, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the CONSULTANT to comply with this Section.

Packet Page 112
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 6 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
XIII. UNDUE INFLUENCE
CONSULTANT declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure was used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the AGENCY in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this AGREEMENT, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement. No officer or employee of the AGENCY has or will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from CONSULTANT, or from any officer, employee or agent of CONSULTANT, in connection with the award of this AGREEMENT or any work to be conducted as a result of this AGREEMENT.

Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this AGREEMENT entitling the AGENCY to any and all remedies at law or in equity.

XIV. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES
No member, officer, or employee of AGENCY, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the Project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the Project performed under this AGREEMENT.

XV. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
A. All information gained by CONSULTANT in performance of this AGREEMENT shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by CONSULTANT without AGENCY's prior written authorization.

CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants, shall not without written authorization from the Agency Manager or unless requested by the Agency Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this AGREEMENT or relating to any project or property located within the AGENCY. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided CONSULTANT gives AGENCY notice of such court order or subpoena.

B. CONSULTANT shall promptly notify AGENCY should CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions, or other discovery request (“Discovery”), court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this AGREEMENT and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the AGENCY, unless the AGENCY is a party to any lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding Packet Page 113
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 7 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
connected to such Discovery, or unless CONSULTANT is prohibited by law from informing the AGENCY of such Discovery. AGENCY retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent CONSULTANT and/or be present at any deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding as allowed by law. Unless AGENCY is a party to the lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding and is adverse to CONSULTANT in such proceeding, CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with AGENCY and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by CONSULTANT. However, AGENCY's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by AGENCY to control, direct, or rewrite said response.

C. CONSULTANT covenants that neither he/she nor any officer or principal of their firm have any interest in, or shall acquire any interest, directly or indirectly, which will conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of their services hereunder. CONSULTANT further covenants that in the performance of this AGREEMENT, no person having such interest shall be employed by them as an officer, employee, agent, or subconsultant. CONSULTANT further covenants that CONSULTANT has not contracted with nor is performing any services, directly or indirectly, with any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning property in the AGENCY or the study area and further covenants and agrees that CONSULTANT and/or its subconsultants shall provide no service or enter into any agreement or agreements with a/any developer(s) and/or property owner(s) and/or firm(s) and/or partnership(s) owning property in the AGENCY or the study area prior to the completion of the work under this AGREEMENT.

XVI. NOTICES
Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this AGREEMENT must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice:

To AGENCY: __City of Seaside _______
__440 Harcourt Avenue_______
Packet Page 114
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 8 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
_______Seaside, CA 93955________
_______Attention: City Clerk_______
To CONSULTANT: ____Willdan Financial Services_______
____27368 Via Industria, Suite 200___
____Temecula, CA 92590 ___
____Attention: Chris Fisher ___
XVII. ASSIGNMENT
The CONSULTANT shall not assign the performance of this AGREEMENT, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the AGENCY. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this AGREEMENT, only CONSULTANT shall perform the services described in this AGREEMENT. Chris Fisher may use assistants, under his/her direct supervision, to perform some of the services under this AGREEMENT.

CONSULTANT shall provide AGENCY fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of Chris Fisher from CONSULTANT's employ. Should he/she leave CONSULTANT's employ, the AGENCY shall have the option to immediately terminate this AGREEMENT, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, CONSULTANT's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the Governing Board and the CONSULTANT. Before retaining or contracting with any CONSULTANT for any services under this AGREEMENT, CONSULTANT shall provide AGENCY with the identity of the proposed CONSULTANT, a copy of the proposed written contract between CONSULTANT and such sub-consultant which shall include and indemnity provision similar to the one provided herein and identifying AGENCY as an indemnified party, or an incorporation of the indemnity provision provided herein, and proof that such proposed sub-consultant carries insurance at least equal to that required by this AGREEMENT or obtain a written waiver from AGENCY for such insurance.

XVIII. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this AGREEMENT, CONSULTANT shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this AGREEMENT.

XIX. GOVERNING LAW
The AGENCY and CONSULTANT understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this AGREEMENT and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement.

Packet Page 115
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 9 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
Any litigation concerning this AGREEMENT shall take place in the municipal, superior, or federal district court with jurisdiction over the AGENCY.

XX. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this AGREEMENT. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral or written and pertaining to the subject of this AGREEMENT or with respect to the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT, are merged into this AGREEMENT and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this AGREEMENT based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.

XXI. WORK SCHEDULED/TIME OF COMPLETION
Consultant shall complete the outlined scope of work in a timely manner within the time frame per “Section 1. Term” of this contract.

XXII. CONTENTS OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL AND PROPOSAL
CONSULTANT is bound by the contents of AGENCY's Request for Proposal, Exhibit "D" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and the contents of the proposal submitted by the CONSULTANT, Exhibit "E" hereto. In the event of conflict, the requirements of AGENCY's Request for Proposals and this AGREEMENT shall take precedence over those contained in the CONSULTANT's proposals. The incorporation of the CONSULTANT’s proposal shall be for the scope of services to be provided only, and any other terms and conditions included in such proposal shall have no force and effect on this AGREEMENT or the relationship between CONSULTANT and/or AGENCY, unless expressly agreed to in writing.

XXIII. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this AGREEMENT on behalf of CONSULTANT warrants and represents that he/she has the authority to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of the CONSULTANT and has the authority to bind CONSULTANT to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

Packet Page 116
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 10 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed the day and year first above written.

CONSULTANT
By:_________________ __ Date: _______________
Chris Fisher, Vice President/Director
______________________
Greg McDanel
City Manager
City of Seaside
Attachments: Exhibit A Tasks to Be Performed
Exhibit B Payment Schedule
Exhibit C Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D Request for Proposal
Exhibit E Consultant’s Proposal
Packet Page 117
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 11 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA

EXHIBIT A

TASKS TO BE PERFORMED
Packet Page 118
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 12 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA

EXHIBIT B

PAYMENT SCHEDULE
Packet Page 119
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 13 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting CONSULTANT’s indemnification of AGENCY, and prior to commencement of Work, CONSULTANT shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this AGREEMENT, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to AGENCY.

General liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this AGREEMENT, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this AGREEMENT, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this AGREEMENT and CONSULTANT agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the services required by this AGREEMENT.

Workers’ compensation insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

CONSULTANT shall submit to AGENCY, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of AGENCY, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

Packet Page 120
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 14 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
Umbrella or excess liability insurance. [Optional depending on limits required].

CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
 A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason;
 Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement;  Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies;  Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies; and  Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

Other provisions or requirements
Proof of insurance. CONSULTANT shall provide certificates of insurance to AGENCY as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by Agency’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with AGENCY at all times during the term of this contract. AGENCY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

Duration of coverage. CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.

Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by CONSULTANT shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by AGENCY shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of AGENCY before the AGENCY’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

Packet Page 121
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 15 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
Agency’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this AGREEMENT does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, AGENCY has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by AGENCY will be promptly reimbursed by CONSULTANT or AGENCY will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from CONSULTANT payments. In the alternative, AGENCY may cancel this AGREEMENT.

Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the Agency’s Risk Manager.

Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against AGENCY, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow CONSULTANT or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. CONSULTANT hereby waives its own right of recovery against AGENCY, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

Enforcement of contract provisions (non estoppel). CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the AGENCY to inform CONSULTANT of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the AGENCY nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the AGENCY requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the AGENCY.

Notice of cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to AGENCY with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.

Packet Page 122
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 16 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA
Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that AGENCY and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.

Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to AGENCY and approved of in writing.

Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.

Pass through clause. CONSULTANT agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by CONSULTANT, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. CONSULTANT agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to AGENCY for review.

Agency’s right to revise specifications. The AGENCY reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the CONSULTANT ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the CONSULTANT, the AGENCY and CONSULTANT may renegotiate CONSULTANT’s compensation.

Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by AGENCY. AGENCY reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by AGENCY.

Timely notice of claims. CONSULTANT shall give AGENCY prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from CONSULTANT’s performance under this AGREEMENT, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.

Additional insurance. CONSULTANT shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.

Packet Page 123
2025 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Rev. 2/19 Page 17 of 18 COS Non-Construction PSA

EXHIBIT D

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Packet Page 124
2023 WATER RATE AND CAPACITY FEE STUDIES EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A

CONSULTANT PROPOSAL
Packet Page 125
City of Seaside
Comprehensive Citywide Fee Study

EXHIBIT A
Packet Page 126
T 951.587.3500 ▪ 800.755.6864 | F 951.587.3510 ▪ 888.326.6864 | 27368 Via Industria, Suite 200, Temecula, CA 92590 | www.willdan.com i A. Transmittal Letter
May 21, 2025
Ms. Jessica Riley
Finance Director
City of Seaside
440 Harcourt Avenue
Seaside, CA 93955
Re: Proposal to Conduct a Comprehensive User Fee Study for the City of Seaside Dear Ms. Riley,
Municipalities throughout California are constantly challenged to do more with less. As cities are faced with limited financial resources to address competing priorities and objectives, they strive to maintain high standards of service and responsiveness to their communities. Processes and staffing often evolve as staff seek out more cost-effective and efficient service models, integrate technological improvements, or modify practices in response to events such as the recent pandemic.

Considering this, it is critical for the City of Seaside (“City”) to ensure that its fees for requested services, are developed and updated utilizing a legally defensible methodology and updated information and data to reflect current processes and staffing, account for the true cost of providing services, confirm a reasonable relationship between the cost of service and the fees, and ensure maximum appropriate cost recovery, so that the revenues generated by fees cover the cost of those services to the greatest extent possible. City staff, and ultimately the City Council, need a clear understanding of standards, service levels and the associated costs. Recognizing this, the City has responded by soliciting proposals for a Comprehensive User Fee Study.

Willdan Financial Services (“Willdan”) is uniquely qualified to assist the City of Seaside with this project, following are specific advantages that Willdan brings to the City for this study:

Direct Recent Experience with the City of Seaside. Since late 2023 Willdan has been proudly partnering with the City on their Water Rate and Capacity Fee Study, which is currently on hold as the City undergoes staffing changes and works through some financial issues related to water rights. Through this collaboration Willdan has gained an understanding of the City and it’s unique local dynamics and fostered relationships with key staff members.

Willdan is committed to bringing the same level of professionalism and expertise that has defined our work with the City. With our knowledge of the City, its structure, and the Seaside local community and surrounding area, we are able to integrate deep local insight into our analysis that sets us apart from other firms. Our understanding of the City reduces potential questions and will smooth workflow, enabling City staff to focus their time on City operations.

Extensive Local Experience with Similar Projects for Northern California Cities — Willdan is working with or has recently worked recently with numerous cities in and around Northern California on Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee projects with the same objectives and desired scope of services outlined in the City’s RFP. Our local experience provides an understanding of the region and its dynamics, enables us to bring valuable perspective and insight to other local cities’ approaches to developing fees and their policies on fee setting and subsidies and will assist us in conducting meaningful and efficient fee comparisons. Recent and ongoing studies include Monterey, Benicia, Fairfield, West Sacramento, Hayward, Foster City, Mountain View, Belmont, Salinas, Watsonville, Pittsburg, and Richmond.

Collaborative Approach, Proven Results and User-friendly Models and Reports — Willdan prides itself on working closely with City staff to develop an approach that is targeted toward your specific objectives and reality, and then working together with you to gather first-hand information regarding the processes and tasks required to provide services to those requesting them. This is a distinct advantage we will bring in our approach with the City of Seaside.

A collaborative approach ensures we clearly understand your goals and challenges, and just as importantly, you understand the process and the results.

Our Cost Allocation methodologies and
models have been reviewed and approved
by Cognizant Agencies such as the US Army
and recently, the US Department of
Housing and Urban Development,
providing evidence of our thorough and
defensible approach to the development of
Cost Allocation strategies.

Packet Page 127
Ms. Jessica Riley, Finance Director
City of Seaside
Proposal to Conduct a Comprehensive User Fee Study
May 21, 2025 | Page ii
We create user-friendly Excel-based models that the City can retain and conduct our analysis and develop the model collaboratively with City staff. Rather than using an inflexible proprietary software program, we construct our models from the ground up, mirroring the City’s budget format wherever possible.

Created directly from the models, our reports clearly and graphically illustrate full and recommended levels of cost recovery and projections of revenue for fee programs, break down the costs into direct and indirect overhead categories, and present the fee methodologies.

Our approach is geared toward delivering work on schedule and presenting results at public meetings and council workshops to stakeholders and elected officials who typically do not want or need to see the deep detailed analysis. The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non-finance-oriented individuals. We have coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service-based charges.

Unique Combination of Services and Expertise/Public Engagement — Established in 1988, Willdan is a team of over 80 professionals who provide essential financial consulting services throughout California, and the United States. Willdan has provided the requested services to municipal clients for over two decades; and is the only firm providing these types of consulting services that also has a long history of providing contract staff support to public agencies for the delivery of municipal services. This direct experience as “agency staff” provides us with firsthand understanding of City operations and is uniquely useful in determining the full effort associated with service delivery and in developing a fee schedule that is easy to communicate and implement.

Conflict of Interest — Willdan Financial Services is not aware of any actual or potential conflict of interest that would have an impact our ability to conduct the scope of services included within this proposal.

Proposal Validity — Willdan acknowledges herein its willingness to maintain all specified fees and services for a period of ninety (90) days from the closing date May 23, 2025.

We are excited about this opportunity to serve the City of Seaside. To discuss any aspect of our proposal, please contact me; my contact information is provided in the table below.

Willdan Financial Services
California Corporation
Chris Fisher
Vice President / Director
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200 | Temecula, CA 92590
Tel #: (951) 587-3500 | Fax #: (951) 587-3510
Email: [email protected] | www.willdan.com/financial
As a Vice President of Willdan Financial Services, I am authorized to bind the firm to the terms of this proposal, as well as the subsequent agreement.

Respectfully,

WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES
Chris Fisher
Vice President / Director
Packet Page 128
Comprehensive User Fee Study iii
City of Seaside, CA
B. Table of Contents
A. Transmittal Letter....................................................................................................................................................i B. Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................................. iii C. Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Firm Distinctiveness ......................................................................................................................... 1 Financial Stability.............................................................................................................................. 1 D. Company Information and Background.....................................................................................................2 Requested Information ..................................................................................................................... 2 Company Background ...................................................................................................................... 3 E. Relevant Experience ............................................................................................................................................4 Firm Experience ................................................................................................................................ 4 Similar Studies .................................................................................................................................. 4 Relevant Projects .............................................................................................................................. 9 F. Key Staffing, Development & Implementation Process.....................................................................11 Project Team.................................................................................................................................... 11 Resumes .......................................................................................................................................... 11 Chris Fisher....................................................................................................................................... 12 Tony Thrasher................................................................................................................................... 13 Priti Patel........................................................................................................................................... 14 Samantha Labitan ............................................................................................................................. 15 Robert Quaid..................................................................................................................................... 16 Project Approach ............................................................................................................................ 17 G. Proposed Scope of Services ...........................................................................................................................22 Comprehensive User Fee Study Work Plan .................................................................................. 22 Project Disclaimer........................................................................................................................... 26 Project Management and Quality Assurance/Control Approach ................................................. 27 H. & I. Training & Ongoing Support................................................................................................................29 J. References ..............................................................................................................................................................30 K. Cost Proposal..........................................................................................................................................................31 Comprehensive User Fee Study..................................................................................................... 31 Hourly Rates.................................................................................................................................... 31 L. Exceptions to Agreement................................................................................................................................32 Packet Page 129
Comprehensive User Fee Study 1
City of Seaside, CA
C. Executive Summary
Firm Distinctiveness
Established in 1988, Willdan is a team of over 80 professionals who provide essential financial consulting services throughout California, and the United States. Willdan has provided the requested services to municipal clients for over two decades; and is the only firm providing these types of consulting services that also has a long history of providing contract staff support to public agencies for the delivery of municipal services.

Willdan is the only firm providing these types of consulting services that also have a long history of providing contract staff support to public agencies for the delivery of municipal services. We are uniquely qualified to conduct the City of Seaside study.

Extensive Public Sector Experience
Willdan has delivered industry-leading financial, energy and engineering solutions that have transformed government and commerce for 60 years. Willdan Financial Services advises governments throughout the United States and abroad about financial and economic consulting. We serve all levels of government and collaborate with government staff, constituents, developers, officials, and other professional services firms.

Staff Continuity
Mr. Fisher has been assigned to serve as the City’s representative; he has been selected for this role due to his extensive experience, which includes the preparation and supervision of numerous fee studies, as well as his experience presenting to governing bodies, stakeholders, and industry groups.

Project Dedication
Willdan has assembled a project team of five (5) subject matter experts within the Financial Consulting Services group, to conduct the City of Seaside Fee Study engagement. This team has coordinated or participated in numerous public stakeholder and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of service-based charges. Willdan’s Financial Consulting Services group is composed of a team of over 30 senior-level professional consultants. While each member of the project team currently has work in progress with other clients, the workload is at a manageable level with sufficient capacity to meet the needs of the City specific to the schedule and budget for this engagement.

Community Investment
Much of our success in developing impactful programs and studies is due to our experiences in meeting with citizen / stakeholder groups and elected officials. Our ability to explain technical information in a concise, understandable manner is a fundamental reason for our high degree of success. Willdan staff takes the time to include and inform the Community.

Financial Stability
To establish our financial stability, we are providing the following information. Willdan Group, Inc. (WGI) has sustained a healthy financial performance record due to the outstanding performance of our operating divisions and a strong, dependable reputation in municipal consulting.

A snapshot of WGI’s financial statistics have been provided to the right demonstrating our financial position and stability. As a publicly traded company (WLDN), must provide public financial information as required by the SEC.

Additional detailed financial statements and annual reports are included on our webpage (http://ir.willdangroup.com/).

It is important to note that
Mr. Fisher has been with Willdan for 26
years, ensuring the City of Seaside of
continuity and dedication in staffing
during the completion of the project.

Financial Stability
▪ In business for over 60 years
▪ Approximately 1,770 employees
▪ Fiscal Year 2024 Consolidated
Contract Revenue of $566M
▪ Market capitalization of $571M
(April 2025)
▪ $50 million Line of Credit with the
ability to increase up to $60 million
Packet Page 130
Comprehensive User Fee Study 2
City of Seaside, CA
D. Company Information and Background
Requested Information
The requested information is noted in the table below.

Willdan Financial Services
Company Information
Legal Name
Willdan Financial Services
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200 | Temecula, California 92590 (951) 587-3500 | Fax (951) 587-3510
Type of Entity Willdan Financial Services is a “C” Corporation.

FEIN ID 33-030-2345
Business Entity Status Willdan is a corporation, incorporated in the State of California, of which, the parent company is Willdan Group Inc. (WGI).

Primary Contact
Mr. Chris Fisher, Vice President/Director
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200 | Temecula, California 92590 (951) 587-3528 | [email protected]
Company Headquarters The principal office for the City of Seaside engagement will be the Willdan Financial Services headquarters in Temecula, CA.

Hours of Operation Willdan Financial Services operates on standard business hours, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, closed on major holidays.

Satellite Offices
Aurora, CO
3190 S. Vaughn Way, Ste 550, Of 523
Aurora, CO 80014 | (303) 990-4616
Oakland, CA
66 Franklin Street, Ste 300
Oakland, CA 94607 | (510) 832-0899
Orlando, FL
200 South Orange Ave., Ste 1550
Orlando, FL 32801 | (407) 872-2467
Phoenix, AZ
1440 E. Missouri Ave., Ste C-170
Phoenix, AZ 85014 | (602) 870-7600
Plano, TX
5500 Democracy Lane, Suite 130
Plano, TX 75024 | (972) 378-6588
Washington, DC
1025 Connecticut Ave. NW, Ste 1000
Washington, DC 20036 | (202) 510-0511
Current Number of
Employees 82 professionals
Sub-consultants We will not require the assistance from another firm to complete the tasks included within the City’s RFP.

Business License Willdan Financial Services does not currently hold a business license in the City of Seaside, upon contract execution a business license will be acquired.

Years of Service
Willdan Financial Services has provided services to local government for 37 years. The Financial Consulting Services group has conducted User Fee Studies and Cost Allocation Plans for 27 years.

Litigation
Willdan Financial Services is not currently involved, nor in the previous seven years, in any condition (e.g., bankruptcy, pending litigation, planned office closures, impending merger, contract breach) that may impede our ability to complete this engagement.

Packet Page 131
Comprehensive User Fee Study 3
City of Seaside, CA
Company Background
Willdan Financial Services is an operating division
within Willdan Group, Inc. (WGI), which was founded
in 1964 as an engineering firm working with local
governments. Today, WGI is a publicly traded
company (WLDN). WGI, through its divisions,
provides professional technical and consulting
services that ensure the quality, value and security
of our nation’s infrastructure, systems, facilities, and environment. The firm has pursued two primary
service objectives since its inception—ensuring the
success of its clients and enhancing its surrounding
communities.

A financially stable company, Willdan has
approximately 1,770 employees working in more
than a dozen states across the U.S. Our employees
include a number of nationally recognized Subject
Matter Experts for all areas related to the broadest
definition of connected communities—five of whom
are committed to contribute their expertise
throughout the duration of the City of Seaside’s
Comprehensive User Fee Study engagement.

Willdan has solved economic, engineering and
energy challenges for local communities and
delivered industry-leading solutions that have transformed government and commerce. Today, we are leading our clients into a future accelerated by change in resources, infrastructure, technology, regulations, and industry trends.

Willdan Financial Services
Established on June 24, 1988, Willdan Financial Services, is a national firm and is one of the largest public sector economic and financial analysis consulting firms in the United States. Since that time, we have helped over 800 public agencies successfully address a broad range of infrastructure challenges.

Our staff of over 80 full-time employees support our clients by conducting year-round workshops and on-site training to assist them in keeping current with the latest developments in our areas of expertise.

Willdan assists local public agencies by providing the following services:

Willdan Financial Services
Services
▪ User fee studies;
▪ Cost allocation studies;
▪ Utility rate and cost of service studies;
▪ Real estate economic analysis;
▪ Feasibility studies;
▪ Municipal Advisory;
▪ Arbitrage and Continuing Disclosure Services;
▪ Economic development strategic plans;
▪ Development impact fee establishment and analysis;
▪ District Administration Services;
▪ Property tax audits;
▪ Tax increment finance district formation and
amendment;
▪ Housing development and implementation strategies;
▪ Debt issuance support; and
▪ Long-term financial plans and cash flow modeling.

Packet Page 132
Comprehensive User Fee Study 4
City of Seaside, CA
E. Relevant Experience
Firm Experience
Willdan has provided Development Impact Fee, User Fee,
and Cost Allocation Plan services to municipal clients for 27 years; and has prepared comprehensive impact fee studies, user fee studies, as well as cost allocation plans, and OMB compliant cost allocation plans for clients throughout
California, and the United States. Since 1998, we have
developed the expertise to successfully integrate this service into the Financial Consulting Services group’s primary
functions.

Willdan’s Financial Consulting Services staff has assisted well over 100 California government agencies with the
development and/or update of all fee types. Each project has required defensible documentation and thorough
coordination of fee program changes for different agency departments and stakeholders within the business
community. In some cases, Willdan has been required to
negotiate fees with stakeholders and, on occasion, defend them in meetings and public forums.

We are particularly strong in advising our clients on the advantages and disadvantages of different fee schedule
structures (Citywide versus multiple-fee districts/zones; more versus fewer land-use categories; etc.) and methods of fee calculation that are based on the City’s and stakeholder priorities and applicable regulations that comply with
Propositions 26 and 218.

Our record of success within the industry provides assurance of the professionalism and capability we will bring to this engagement. A team composed of project managers and analysts develop and/or update user fee studies, cost allocation plans and development impact fees. Willdan has extensive experience with the range of fees charged in the region and the state, and the typical pros, cons, and challenges of each, both in implementation and management. Willdan will bring its expertise to the City’s process of considering financial, practical and policy issues in deciding on its future fee program.

Similar Studies
Provided in the table below is a list of the public agencies in which similar services are currently in progress, or have been completed, in the previous five years.

Willdan Financial Services
Five Year Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Experience Client Project Description
City of Amarillo, TX Cost Allocation Plan
City of Arcadia, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Arroyo Grande, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study City of Arvin, CA Cost Allocation Plan
City of Atwater, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Aurora, CO Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Baldwin Park, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Barstow, CA Cost Allocation Plan
City of Bedford, TX Cost Allocation Plan
Packet Page 133
Comprehensive User Fee Study 5
City of Seaside, CA
Willdan Financial Services
Five Year Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Experience Client Project Description
City of Belmont, CA Development Services User Fee Study City of Bellflower, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Benicia, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Blythe, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Bradbury, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Brea, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Brighton, CO Cost Allocation Plan
City of Boulder, CO Cost Allocation Plan
City of Burbank, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Canyon Lake, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study & EMS User Fee Study City of Capitola, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Cave Creek, AZ Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Chico, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Indirect Cost Rate Plan City of Chino, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study, Cost Allocation Plan and Indirect Cost Rate Studies
City of Chino Hills, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Updates City of Claremont, CA Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study City of Clermont, FL Building & Safety Department User Fee Study City of Coachella, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Commerce City, CO Comprehensive User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Coppell, TX Full Cost Allocation Plan
City of Corona, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Coronado, CA Full Cost Allocation Plan and EMS User Fee Study City of Covina, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Cudahy, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of DeSoto, TX Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Diamond Bar, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Dinuba, CA Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study City of Duarte, CA Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study City of El Cerrito, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Community Development Department User Fee Study City of El Monte, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Updates, and Development Impact Fee Study
City of Eastvale, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Encinitas, CA Development Services User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan and Updates City of Fillmore, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Foster City, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Fountain Hills, AZ Comprehensive User Fee Study Packet Page 134
Comprehensive User Fee Study 6
City of Seaside, CA
Willdan Financial Services
Five Year Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Experience Client Project Description
City of Fountain Valley, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Fontana, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and User Fee Study City of Fullerton, CA Community Development Department User Fee Study and Fire Department User Fee Study
City of Georgetown, TX Cost Allocation Plan
City of Gilroy, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study & 2023 CPI Updates
City of Goleta, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and User Fee Study City of Hayward, CA Comprehensive Master User Fee Study, Full Cost Allocation Plan, and Updates City of Hesperia, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Hollister, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Planning User Fee Study City of Hughson, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Huntington Park, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Indian Wells, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study & Updates and Fire Services User Fee Study City of Irvine, CA Cost Allocation, Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Building & Safety Fee Update
City of Irwindale, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Kingsburg, CA Full & OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan City of La Puente, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of La Verne, CA Cost Allocation Plan
City of Lake Elsinore, CA User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan and Updates City of Lindsay, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and Impact Fee Analysis City of Lodi, CA Cost Allocation Plan & OMB Compliant Plan City of Lomita, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Analysis
City of Los Alamitos, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Los Altos, CA Cost Allocation Study, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Los Angeles, CA Building & Safety User Fee Study City of Los Banos, CA Full Cost Allocation Study, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Lynwood, CA User Fee Study Cost Allocation Plan, and Impact Fee Study City of McFarland, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Utility Rate Study City of Manhattan Beach, CA Full Cost Allocation Study, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Manteca, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Martinez, CA Cost Allocation Plan
City of Maywood, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Melissa, TX Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Mesquite, TX Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Compliant Plan, and Updates Packet Page 135
Comprehensive User Fee Study 7
City of Seaside, CA
Willdan Financial Services
Five Year Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Experience Client Project Description
City of Missouri City, TX Full Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study City of Montebello, CA Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study, and Updates City of Monterey Park, CA Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study City of Monterey, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Indirect Cost Rate City of Mountain View, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Murrieta, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study, Cost Allocation Plan, and Updates City of Napa, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study, Cost Allocation Plan, and OMB Compliant Plan City of National City, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, and ISF Allocation Study
City of Norco, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of North Port, FL User Fee Study
City of Ontario, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Oroville, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Updates
City of Oviedo, FL Cost Allocation Plan
City of Palm Desert, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Updates City of Palm Springs, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Patterson, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study, Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan City of Paramount, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Petaluma, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Admin Rate & Work Order Rate Analysis, Hourly Overhead Rates, and ISF Allocation Study, and Updates City of Pismo Beach, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and User Fee Study City of Pittsburg, CA User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan, and Updates City of Pleasant Hill, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and User Fee Study City of Pomona, CA Master Fee Schedule Update and Development Impact Fee Review City of Richmond, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study
City of Rosemead, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of St. Helena, CA Cost Allocation Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study, and Updates
City of San Anselmo, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of San Dimas, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of San Fernando, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study, and Updates
City of San Jacinto, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study
City of San Luis, AZ Cost Allocation Plan
City of San Pablo, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of San Marcos, CA Cost Allocation Plan, Indirect Cost Rate Studies and Comprehensive Citywide User Fee Study
City of Santa Cruz, CA Citywide Overhead Cost Allocation Plan, Santa Cruz Library Cost Allocation Plan, and Fleet and Facility Services Cost Allocation Plan, and Updates Packet Page 136
Comprehensive User Fee Study 8
City of Seaside, CA
Willdan Financial Services
Five Year Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study Experience Client Project Description
City of Santa Paula, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study
City of Sausalito, CA User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study City of Sierra Madre, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study and Full Cost Allocation Plan City of Solana Beach, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of South Pasadena, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study
City of Soledad, CA User Fee Study
City of Stanton, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan City of Tamarac, FL Building & Safety Department User Fee Study City of Temple, TX Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Tulare, CA Comprehensive User Fee and Rate Study and Full Cost Allocation Plan, City of Tustin, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Updates City of Twentynine Palms, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study and Full Cost Allocation Plan, City of Upland, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Vernon, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study City of Watsonville, CA Comprehensive User Fee and Rate Study, Cost Allocation Plan, and Updates City of West Hollywood, CA Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study, and Updates City of West Sacramento, CA Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study, and Updates
City of Yucaipa, CA Comprehensive User Fee and Rate Study, Full Cost Allocation Plan, and Updates Coachella Valley Cemetery, CA User Fee Study
County of Coconino, AZ Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study County of Mono, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
County of Placer, CA Land Development Fee Study
Housing Authority of the
City of Alameda, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Updates
Housing Authority of the County
of San Bernardino, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Updates
Navada Irrigation District , CA Cost Allocation Plan and Updates Placer County Water Agency, CA Cost Allocation Plan and Overhead Rate Study Town of Apple Valley, CA Cost Allocation Plan, Comprehensive User Fee Study and Development Impact Fee Study
Town of Paradise Valley, AZ Master User Fee Study
Town of Sunnyvale, TX Comprehensive User Fee Study
Town of Yucca Valley, CA Comprehensive User Fee Study
Packet Page 137
Comprehensive User Fee Study 9
City of Seaside, CA
Relevant Projects
Below are recent project descriptions, including client contact information, that are similar in nature to those requested by the City of Seaside engagement.

City of Petaluma, CA
Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular A-87 Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rates
Willdan provided an Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular A-87 Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rates to the City of Petaluma. After reviewing the City’s 2014 Master Fee Schedule, we developed an Overhead Cost Allocation Study, which is OMB A-87 compliant, and a User Fee Study that accurately accounted for the true cost of providing various services within and to each City operation, including capital projects. As part of this effort, we also developed fully burdened hourly rates for City employees that can be used for work orders, or to charge to specific activities. This included an analysis of administrative and overhead costs associated with activities that are delivered directly to the public, where hourly rates may be charged, to ensure appropriate recovery of costs. Willdan completed these studies concurrently, in a manner that fully identifies and takes into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and methods of service delivery.

Since the completion of the original study, Willdan has been selected to complete annual updates of the Cost Allocation Plan. We have also provided selected updates for the User Fees.

Client Contact: Jessie Gooch, Finance Director
Tel. #: (707) 778-4305 | Email: [email protected] Full Project Dates: August 2015 – Ongoing Recent CAP Update Project Budget: $4,900 City of Patterson, CA
Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Through a competitive process Willdan was engaged to provide a Cost Allocation Plan and a Comprehensive User Fee Study to the City of Patterson.

As part of this effort, we developed a full and an OMB compliant Cost Allocation Study and a User Fee Study that accurately accounted for the true cost of providing various services within and to each City operation, including capital projects. we also developed fully burdened hourly rates for City employees. This included an analysis of administrative and overhead costs associated with activities that are delivered directly to the public, where hourly rates may be charged, to ensure appropriate recovery of costs.

Willdan completed these studies concurrently, in a manner that fully identifies and takes into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and methods of service delivery.

Since the completion of the original study, Willdan was selected to conduct an annual update to the Cost Allocation Plan.

Client Contact: Sonia Delgado, Deputy Director of Regulatory Compliance & Administrative Services Tel #: (209) 895-8064 | Email: [email protected] Full Project Dates: January 2018 - June 2024 Total Project Budget: $44,300 Packet Page 138
Comprehensive User Fee Study 10
City of Seaside, CA
City of Hughson, CA
Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Through a competitive process Willdan was engaged to provide a Cost Allocation Plan and a Comprehensive User Fee Study to the City of Hughson.

As part of this effort, full and OMB compliant Cost Allocation Study models and reports were delivered. Comprehensive and updatable User Fee Study models will also be provided. User Fee modeling and analysis is being completed to accurately calculate the true cost of providing various services within and to each City operation, including capital projects; fully burdened hourly rates for City employees are also being developed. This analysis will include administrative and overhead costs associated with activities that are delivered directly to the public, where hourly rates may be charged, to ensure appropriate recovery of costs. Finally, Willdan is working with City Staff to develop and implement cost recovery policies for fee-setting.

This project is ongoing.

Client Contact: Kim Weimer, Director of Finance & Administrative Services Tel. #: 209-883-4054 | Email: [email protected]
Project Dates: May 2024 – Ongoing Project Budget: $36,830 City of Belmont, CA
Master Fee Study and Cost Allocation Refinement
Willdan completed a Master Fee Study and an analysis and review of the existing Cost Allocation Plan for the City of Belmont, and a Fee and Rate Study for the Belmont Fire Protection District.

Collectively, the Fee Studies will ensure that the City and FPD can accurately account for the cost of providing various services to the public and set updated fees appropriately; while the CAP review and refinement ensures that the Plan developed internally by the City is allocating the cost of its central (overhead) service organizations to operating groups and enterprise funds, in an equitable and defensible manner.

Willdan was re-selected to perform additional fee work for the Community Development department. The Willdan team built a comprehensive fee model, provided a technical memorandum, and ongoing consultant support.

Client Contact: Carlos de Melo, Community Development Director Tel. #: (650) 695-7440 | Email: [email protected]
Recent Project Dates: June 2022 – May 2023 Recent Project Budget: $15,000 City of Benicia, CA
Full Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Willdan was engaged to prepare a Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study for the City of Benicia.

Willdan developed a cost allocation plan and model that fully allocated central overhead costs to appropriate operating departments, funds, and/or programs. Our primary objective for the cost allocation study was to ensure that general government costs are fairly and equitably allocated to appropriate programs and funds, based on tailored and well thought out allocation factors.

Willdan reviewed and analyzed existing user fee programs, and based upon conversations with staff, made suggestions, as necessary for fees that may need to be added to the City’s fee schedule for which fees were not currently being charged. Utilizing the full CAP, the comprehensive user fee study phase was completed with full interviews with department staff, and a comprehensive fee model developed.

Willdan has recently been selected to conduct an Industrial Safety User Fee Study.

Client Contact: Jeff Tschudi, Finance Director
Tel. #: (707) 746-4225 | Email: [email protected] Project Dates: January 2022 – Ongoing Total Project Budget: $40,850 Packet Page 139
Comprehensive User Fee Study 11
City of Seaside, CA
F. Key Staffing, Development & Implementation Process
Project Team
Our management and supervision of the project team is very simple:
staff every position with experienced, capable personnel in sufficient numbers to deliver a superior product to the City, on time and on budget. With that philosophy in mind, we have selected experienced professionals for this engagement. We are confident that our team possesses the depth of experience that will successfully fulfill your desired work performance.

City of Seaside
Project Team
Key Team Member Project Role Responsibility to the Engagement Chris Fisher
Vice President/Director
Principal-in-Charge
▪ Ensure client satisfaction, flow of communication, and oversight of the project;
▪ Technical guidance;
▪ Project oversight;
▪ Quality assurance & control; and
▪ Meeting and presentation attendance.

Tony Thrasher
Principal Consultant
Project Manager
▪ Task oversight;
▪ Model development;
▪ Produce key elements of the analysis;
▪ Responsible for project deliverables;
▪ Report preparation and evaluation; and
▪ Meeting and presentation attendance.

Priti Patel
Senior Financial Analyst
Senior Analyst
▪ Collect, interpret, and disseminate key data;
▪ Assistance with model development;
▪ Peer review;
▪ Report preparation; and
▪ Meeting and presentation attendance.

Samantha Labitan
Senior Analyst
Analytical Support
▪ Collect, interpret, and disseminate key data;
▪ Assistance with model development;
▪ Peer review; and
▪ Report preparation.

Robert Quaid
Principal Consultant
Technical Advisor
▪ Third party reviewer; and
▪ Report evaluation.

Resumes
Resumes for Willdan’s project team are presented on the following pages.

The team presented within this proposal
has worked collectively on numerous
projects, such as the one requested by the
City of Seaside; an established work
practice between the team members has
been forged, this proven long-standing
system has benefited our clients.

Packet Page 140
Comprehensive User Fee Study 12
City of Seaside, CA
Education
San Francisco State
University, Bachelor of
Science, Finance
Areas of Expertise
Cost of Service
Analyses
Multi-disciplinary Team
Management
Special District
Formations
Client Presentations
Proposition 218
Affiliations
California Society of
Municipal Finance
Officers
Municipal Management
Association of
Northern California
California Municipal
Treasurers Association
26 Years’ Experience
Chris Fisher
Principal-in-Charge
Mr. Chris Fisher, Vice President / Director of Willdan’s Financial Consulting Services group, will serve as Principal-in-Charge for the City of Seaside project. He will also share his extensive knowledge related to cost-of-service principles with members of the project team.

Mr. Fisher joined Willdan in April of 1999, and during that time has managed an array of financial consulting projects for public agencies in California, Colorado, Texas, Arizona, and Florida, coordinating the activities of resources within Willdan, as well as those from other firms working on these projects. He is one of the firm’s leading experts for special district financing related to public infrastructure, maintenance, and services, including public safety.

Select Related Experience
City of Hayward, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served as the project manager for the City’s full overhead cost allocation plan and OMB A-87 cost allocation plan, along with a comprehensive master user fee study. He worked with the City and Willdan staff to gather the necessary data and is overseeing Willdan’s development of the cost allocation model. The City has a complicated and detailed budget, and the cost allocation plan that Willdan developed is tailored to their structure and includes provision for several Internal Service Funds.

City of San Bruno, CA — Comprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher oversaw the update of the City’s general overhead allocation plan and cost-ofservice user fees.

City of Petaluma, CA — Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rate Study: Mr. Fisher served as project manager for the project team and provided oversight for this thorough and intensive study for the City of Petaluma. The City has hired Willdan for multiple updates since we completed the original study.

City of West Hollywood, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan:

Mr. Fisher is the principal-in-charge for the City’s Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan engagement, managing the overall execution of the project, providing technical guidance and quality control.

City of Pomona, CA – Master Fee Schedule Update: Mr. Fisher was the principal-in-charge for the City’s master fee schedule update and update of the development impact fees. Mr. Fisher provided quality control and served as the primary contact with the City.

City of Burbank, CA — Comprehensive Citywide User Fees and Charges Study: Mr. Fisher oversaw the City’s recently completed Citywide User Fees and Charges Study.

City of West Covina, CA — Comprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher served in the role of project manager for the City’s engagement. The cost allocation plan developed will aid the City in the recovery of overhead costs related to central service activities.

City of Palm Desert, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:

Mr. Fisher was the principal-in-charge for the ongoing full cost allocation plan and user fee study.

Willdan’s work included the gathering of necessary data and information, interviews with City Staff to identify overhead support services and how they are used and interviews to gather information related to fee-based services. We also developed financial models to calculate overhead allocations and personnel rates and the full cost of services for which fees are charged. We worked with Staff to finalize cost recovery targets, prepare reports and present the results.

City of Laguna Hills, CA — Comprehensive Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Fisher oversaw the update of the City’s general overhead allocation plan and cost-ofservice user fees.

City of Irvine, CA — OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Willdan completed a cost allocation plan and user fee study for the City of Irvine. Mr. Fisher managed and provided quality assurance to this project, ensuring the accuracy of the models, as well as the final reports. He also presented the results to the City’s Finance Commission and to the City Council.

Packet Page 141
Comprehensive User Fee Study 13
City of Seaside, CA
Education
Bachelor of Science
in Economics;
California State
Polytechnic
University, Pomona
Areas of Expertise
Cost Allocation Plans
Fiscal Analysis for
User Fees and Rates
District Administration
Services
Utility Rate Studies
15 Years’ Experience
Tony Thrasher
Project Manager
Due to his cost allocation and user fee analyses experience, Mr. Tony Thrasher has been selected to serve as Project Manager for the City’s engagement. Mr. Thrasher is a Principal Consultant within the Financial Consulting Services group, whereby his responsibilities include managing projects and conducting fiscal analyses for cost allocation plans, user fees, and utility rate studies.

Mr. Thrasher’s prior employment was as a financial analyst working in bond, equity, and mortgagebacked security markets for Wells Fargo Bank, Bank of New York Mellon, and Deutsche Bank. His experience includes portfolio accounting, differential analysis, and forecasting.

Select Related Experience
City of Hayward, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: For this project, Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support and was largely responsible for the development of the models. Primary duties include gathering and verifying necessary data, finalizing model figures, and generating reports.

City of Petaluma, CA — Overhead Cost Allocation Plan and OMB Circular Plan, User Fee Study, CIP Rate Analysis, and Hourly Overhead Rate Study: Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support for this engagement. His primary duties were to work with City staff to gather data, provide assistance to the project manager, and produce reports.

City of Santa Cruz, CA – Cost Allocation Plan Update and Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Study:

Mr. Thrasher is serving as the project manager for the City of Santa Cruz’s engagement; this is an ongoing study.

City of Richmond, CA — Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher was the project manager for the City of Richmond’s fee study.

City of West Hollywood, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan:

As the project manager for City’s Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan engagement, Mr. Thrasher is overseeing the project analysts and is heavily involved in the analysis, development of models, preparation of reports and delivery of results.

City of Burbank, CA — Comprehensive Citywide User Fees and Charges Study: Mr. Thrasher was the project manager for the City’s recently completed study, He directed the preparation of the model and reports and was responsible for the delivery of results to the City.

City of Chino Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher is the project manager for the City’s Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study. He is working directly with the City contact throughout the engagement.

City of Pomona, CA – Master Fee Schedule Update: Mr. Thrasher served as the project manager for the master fee schedule update portion of the City of Pomona’s engagement, which also included an update of the development impact fees. Mr. Thrasher was responsible for the development of models and reports and coordinating analytical support.

City of Irvine, CA — OMB Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Serving as the project’s analyst, Mr. Thrasher provided analytical support; and designed micro-level allocation models to ensure full-cost recovery for public safety, public works, community development, community services, and administrative departments.

City of Indian Wells, CA — User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher served as the technical project manager for the City’s Administrative, Building, Planning and Public Works Departments. The study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs cost recovery levels.

City of San Marcos, CA — Cost Allocation Plan, Indirect Cost Rate Proposals and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Thrasher is the project manager for the City of San Marcos’ full and OMB compliant cost allocation plan, preparation of Indirect Cost Rate proposals, and Comprehensive User Fee Study engagement. He is the primary in developing the model, which contains all City personnel and expenditures broken down into the ICRP tables. The project is ongoing, and the User Fee Study is now underway.

Packet Page 142
Comprehensive User Fee Study 14
City of Seaside, CA
Education
Bachelor of Arts;
Business
Management,
Information Systems
and
International
Business,
University of
Cincinnati
Areas of Expertise
Cost Allocation Plans
User Fee Studies
Proposition 218
11 Years’ Experience
Priti Patel
Senior Analyst
Ms. Priti Patel is a Senior Analyst within the Financial Consulting Services group, whereby she supports project managers in conducting utility rate analyses, fee studies, cost allocation plans, monitoring Proposition 218 compliance, and forming special districts. Coordinating and conducting activities associated with Cost Allocation Plans and User Fee Studies, including database integration and manipulation, revenue and expenditure analyses, and documentation preparation are just some of Ms. Patel’s duties. With these duties, she interacts with clients on a regular basis.

Ms. Patel joined Willdan as an analyst with the District Administration Group, while with DAS she performed research and analysis needed for local government financial issues related to district administration, including document data entry and updating, database management, research and report preparation. She also provided general information on questions pertaining to Assessment Districts and special taxes (such as Mello-Roo’s Pools), as well as the status of property delinquencies.

Select Related Experience
City of San Bruno, CA — Comprehensive User Fees and Charges Study: Ms. Patel provided analytical support and gathered budget and allocation basis data for this engagement. She also assisted in the development of the financial model.

City of Richmond, CA — Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study: Ms. Patel was the financial analyst on the City of Richmond’s User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan. She assisted the project manager with gathering and validation of data, development of the models and related analysis, staff interviews and preparation of reports and presentations.

City of Pittsburg, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Ms. Patel was assigned to aid senior project team members on the Pittsburg Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study engagement.

She will be a technical lead for the gathering of data, creation of the models and preparation of study reports and presentations. The City hired Willdan for the original study, and for two subsequent updates.

City of Monterey, CA — Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Patel is serving as the financial analyst for the Monterey Cost Allocation Plan and updates. In this role she is responsible for obtaining updated information and data, reviewing overhead structure and functions, and preparing the updated model and report. The City originally hired Willdan for the creation of the first Cost Allocation Plan and has hired us for multiple updates since then.

City of West Hollywood, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan:

Ms. Patel is serving as the primary financial analyst for City of West Hollywood’s Fee Study engagement. Ms. Patel has been instrumental in collecting the necessary data and collaborating with the City and Willdan senior project team members in conducting the study, including development of the model, researching similar fees in comparable cities and preparation of reports.

City of Burbank, CA — Comprehensive Citywide User Fees and Charges Study: Ms. Patel provided analytical support and gathered budget and allocation basis data for this engagement. She also assisted in the development of the financial model.

City of San Fernando, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Patel provided support to senior team members in the preparation of the cost allocation plan, OMB compliant plan and comprehensive user fee study engagement.

City of Laguna Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Patel provided analytical support in the preparation of a full cost allocation plan and fee study for the development of a master list of fees.

City of Chino Hills, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Providing analytical support in the preparation of a cost allocation plan and comprehensive fee study, Ms. Patel worked to identify and take into account direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and service delivery methods. She is also assisting in the preparation of user-friendly Excelbased models that City staff can easily update in the future to determine the proper allocation of expenditures and ongoing full cost of City-provided services.

Packet Page 143
Comprehensive User Fee Study 15
City of Seaside, CA
Samantha Labitan
Analytical Support
Ms. Samantha Labitan is Senior Analyst within Willdan’s Financial Consulting and District Administration Services groups. Ms. Labitan provides analytical support under the guidance of the project team. Her primary function is to support project managers and senior analysts with cost allocation plans and user fee studies. She specializes in analysis for a variety of clients, including cities, water districts, public utilities, and school districts.

She regularly speaks with individuals representing title companies, real estate agencies, and appraisal firms, together with staff from cities and counties. Willdan’s proprietary computer system allows him to readily access the owner’s name, the Assessor’s Parcel Number, existing and future taxes or assessments, and more; thus, enabling expedient service. Community Facilities Districts, Local Improvement Districts, Landscape and Lighting Districts, and County Service Areas are some of the special districts she administers.

Select Relevant Experience
City of Richmond, CA — Cost Allocation Plan & User Fee Study: As analytical support, Ms. Labitan provided assistance to the project team. Primary duties included gathering and verifying necessary data, finalizing model figures and generating reports.

City of Gilroy, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Labitan worked on the team for the City’s fee study project, providing analytical support, gathering data, working with staff to make refinements, and developing cost allocation and fee models to ensure fullcost recovery for building and safety, planning, community development, and public works departments.

City of Goleta, CA — Cost Allocation Plan, OMB Compliant Plan, and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Labitan provided analytical support to the project team for the City’s comprehensive fee study, full and OMB compliant cost allocation plan.

City of Los Banos, CA — Full & OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Labitan provided analytical support to the project team for the City’s comprehensive fee study, full and OMB compliant cost allocation plan.

City of Pismo Beach, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study: Ms. Labitan served in the capacity of assistant analyst for the City’s comprehensive fee study.

City of West Hollywood, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study: For this project, Ms. Labitan provides analytical support. Primary duties include gathering and verifying necessary data, finalizing model figures and generating reports.

City of Lynwood, CA — Cost Allocation Plan & OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study: Ms. Labitan provided support to the project team specific to the preparation of a comprehensive fee study, full and OMB compliant cost allocation plan. Ms. Labitan worked in tandem with the project managers to identify and account for direct and indirect costs, along with changes in staffing, structure, and service delivery methods.

City of San Fernando, CA — Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study:

Ms. Labitan is currently providing support to senior team members in the preparation of a cost allocation plan, OMB compliant plan and comprehensive user fee study.

City of El Centro, CA — Full & OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study:

Ms. Labitan served as the analyst in the preparation of a full & OMB compliant Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study, for the City of El Centro engagement.

City of Blythe, CA — Full and OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan: Ms. Labitan served as the analyst in the preparation of a full and OMB compliant cost allocation plan, for the City of Blythe engagement.

City of Brighton, CO — Cost Allocation & OMB Compliant Plan: Ms. Labitan is providing analytical support for the City’s cost allocation plan.

Education
University of California,
Santa Barbara
Bachelor of Arts,
Mathematics
Areas of Expertise
Cost Allocation Plans
User Fee Studies
Benefit/Maintenance
Assessment Districts
Community Facilities
Districts
Local Improvement
Districts
8 Years’ Experience
Packet Page 144
Comprehensive User Fee Study 16
City of Seaside, CA
Education
Bachelor of Science,
University of
Southern California
Areas of Expertise
Fiscal Analysis for
User Fees and Rates
Cost Allocation Plans
Acquisition Audit
Services
Statutory Financial
Reporting
Fund Audits
Quality Review of
Community
Facilities, Lighting &
Landscaping, and
Assessment Districts
Affiliations
California Society
of Municipal
Finance Officers
California Society
of CPAs
40 Years’ Experience
Robert Quaid
Technical Advisor
With his 40 years of extensive experience in public financing, Mr. Robert Quaid has been selected to provide quality assurance/quality control in the role of technical advisor. In his position as a Principal Consultant at Willdan, Mr. Quaid provides project management, procedural support, technical support, and quality review for Willdan’s District Administration group, as well as the Financial Services Consulting group specific to cost allocation plans, user fee studies, and special financial analysis.

Prior to joining Willdan, Mr. Quaid worked in the private industry of real estate accounting and finance.

He began his career with the public accounting firm formerly known as Haskins & Sells (currently known as “Deloitte & Touche”). His experience includes financial statement analyses, asset administration, computer conversion, and reporting to the Securities and Exchange Commission for several public real estate partnerships. In 1979, Mr. Quaid became a licensed California CPA.

Select Related Experience
City of Thousand Oaks, CA — Cost Allocation Plan: Mr. Quaid served as project manager for the development of an OMB compliant cost allocation plan model using fiscal year actual costs as the basis for the allocations. He was responsible for the preparation of the Cost Allocation Plan report and provided cost allocation model training to City staff.

The objective of this project was to determine the appropriate allocation of indirect costs from City General Fund central service departments to the General Fund operating departments/programs and the non-General Fund departments/programs. The plan model included 16 allocation bases allocating costs to over 100 departments and divisions. Both full and OMB cost allocation models were delivered to the City. Willdan was awarded a four-year contract.

Cities of Fontana, Gardena and Hawthorne, CA — Cost Allocation Plan Projects: For each of these cities, Mr. Quaid served in the role of task manager for the development of an OMB compliant cost allocation plan model using Microsoft Excel. He was responsible for the preparation of the cost allocation plan report and trained City staff on how to use the cost allocation model.

City of Cathedral City, CA — Comprehensive User Fee Study: Mr. Quaid served as project manager for a user fee study that required updating fees for Planning, Engineering, Building, Police, Fire, City Clerk, and Finance.

Mr. Quaid has provided Quality Assurance and Quality Control to multiple clients throughout California.

Provided below are a few examples of clients for which services have been provided in the previous five years.
▪ City of Arcadia, CA
▪ City of Belmont, CA
▪ City of Burbank, CA
▪ City of Cerritos, CA
▪ City of Chino Hills, CA
▪ City of Claremont, CA
▪ City of Coalinga, CA
▪ City of Fillmore, CA
▪ City of Hayward, CA
▪ City of Irvine, CA
▪ City of Indian Wells, CA
▪ City of Lynwood, CA
▪ City of Monterey, CA
▪ City of Murrieta, CA
▪ City of Petaluma, CA
▪ City of Richmond, CA
▪ City of St. Helena, CA
▪ County of San Benito, CA
▪ City of San Bruno, CA
▪ City of Salinas, CA
▪ City of Upland, CA
▪ City of Watsonville, CA
▪ City of West Hollywood, CA
▪ City of Yucaipa, CA
Packet Page 145
Comprehensive User Fee Study 17
City of Seaside, CA
Project Approach
Project Understanding
Willdan Financial Services (“Willdan”) understands that the City of Seaside (“City”) is seeking an updated and welldocumented Comprehensive User Fee Study, based on a legally defensible methodology that is compliant with various statutes - primarily the Mitigation Fee Act and Prop 26.

The objectives of this study are to review and update existing fees and charges for user-requested services and recommend new fees where reasonable and appropriate. The study will result in fees that accurately account for the true cost of providing various City services, allow the City to recover actual costs incurred for providing feerelated services to the community, and reflect current practices, processes and staffing.

Given our extensive experience with User Fee Studies, our experience with the City of Seaside, and our review of the Request for Proposal, we have a clear understanding of the goals, issues and concerns for this project, and more importantly, how to address and overcome them and meet the City’s objectives.

We understand that the City has not comprehensively updated its fees since 2013. Since then, fees have been adjusted annually for inflation, but the current fee schedule is inefficient and sometimes cumbersome to administer. Fees don’t reflect changes in processes, staffing, and technology that have been implemented during the intervening years since 2013. A key goal of this engagement will be to produce a fee schedule that enhances transparency and understanding for the public, and allows for clarity, efficient analysis and strategic planning for City Staff who provide services and administer fee-based services.

Key City issues and objectives that are addressed within our scope of services include the following:
▪ Meeting with City Staff to review existing fee schedules, conduct interviews and gather information to understand the processes, operations, structure and staffing necessary for the City to provide services for which fees are charged; ▪ Conducting analysis that clearly identifies and establishes the full estimated cost of providing services for which fees are charged, ensuring there is a reasonable relationship between these costs, the services being provided, and the recipients of these services, demonstrating that fees do not exceed the reasonable estimated cost of providing the services, and that the fees bear a fair and reasonable relationship to the demand from the payer – all to support compliance with Prop 26 and Prop 218;
▪ Though this proposed engagement doesn’t include the preparation of a formal Cost Allocation Plan, we will incorporate provision for indirect overhead support services into our analysis to ensure the full cost of service that is calculated includes costs related to overhead support to operating functions and departments. We will develop and incorporate indirect overhead rates and fully burdened hourly rates into the analysis when calculating the full cost of providing services. Inclusion of overhead is a key element of any fee study, as it ensures that the full cost of service which we calculate, and upon which fee recommendations are based, includes costs of direct and indirect overhead, in addition to the direct cost of providing the services;
▪ Comparing costs of providing services with current cost recovery levels and evaluating and adjusting fees and charges to ensure they align with the cost of the services being provided by the City; ▪ Identifying and evaluating opportunities to develop and implement fees for services being provided for which fees don’t currently exist;
▪ Providing guidance related to best practices and strategies for cost recovery and working with City Staff to develop meaningful recommendations for fee setting and subsidies where charging fees that represent full cost recovery may not be reasonable for policy or political reasons;
▪ Providing meaningful ‘apples to apples’ comparisons of key fees charged by the City of Seaside to other similar and/or nearby cities chosen in discussions between Willdan and City Staff. These comparisons may involve applicable fees for sample representative projects which the City could anticipate encountering; ▪ Providing the City with a model that incorporates data and information used in developing updated fees, and allows for updates for CPI, new added personnel, updated time estimates and volumes, or other factors as necessary; and ▪ Preparing a report that clearly identifies services for which fees are charged, the cost of those services including direct, indirect and overhead costs, current and recommended cost recovery levels, recommended fee amounts with changes and revenue impacts, and presenting the results in a way that is readily understood by decision makers.

Packet Page 146
Comprehensive User Fee Study 18
City of Seaside, CA
The overall goal is to establish an updated schedule of fees that is objective, fair and equitable. We will deliver a straightforward model and report that clearly identifies the full cost of providing services, including overhead, direct and indirect costs; and provide recommendations for setting fees that maximize cost recovery in accordance with the City’s policies.

The end products will include user-friendly Excel-based models, which City staff will retain, and which can be easily updated to add or remove services and/or costs, update budgets in future years, determine the proper allocation of expenditures, and on-going full cost of services provided by the City. Most importantly, we will ensure that the results and recommendations are clear and understandable, defensible, and easily implementable.

For this fee study, we will meet directly with Department representatives at the City, to discuss the best-suited approach and process; and then in more detail to identify processes and levels of activity and effort involved in providing services for which fees are paid.

Through this process we will identify the full cost recovery amount for each fee related activity, compare this with the City’s current cost recovery levels, and then discuss with staff, policy and/or political concerns that need to be considered in developing recommended fees. Final recommended fees will be the result of these collaborative discussions, so that they reflect realities and considerations that are specific to the City of Seaside.

Willdan possesses the resources, practical experience, creative thinking, and collaborative consulting skills necessary to complete this important project. Key distinct advantages that Willdan brings to the City include the following:

On-site Data Gathering
Our experience has taught us that working together, via face-to-face discussions, is the most efficient and thorough way to ensure that results are accurate, and that studies are completed in a timely manner, which again, is critical in this proposed engagement. Consequently, through on-site interviews with your staff, Willdan will collect the majority of required data for the study. This method is better than the typical “time and motion surveys” that are provided to agency staff when studies like these are conducted. This process ensures that we gather the data we need in one coordinated step, rather than having to go through repeated follow-up and clarification. This approach and the dedication of our staff will help ensure we meet the City’s timeline and objectives and provide important information to City Staff and the City Council as soon as possible.

Public Engagement
Our models and project approach are geared toward delivering our work on schedule and presenting our analysis results at public meetings and Council workshops. While we understand that the City Council and local business community may be generally supportive of increasing fees where necessary, it will be important to present recommendations to them in a way that clearly demonstrates the rationale and supporting analysis.

The Willdan Team is experienced at communicating complex analytical results in a manner that is easy to understand by non-finance-oriented individuals and facilitates discussion. Our proposed principal-in-charge and project team for this engagement have coordinated or participated in numerous public and staff workshops regarding fees and cost of servicebased charges. As previously mentioned, our objective is to provide useful, detailed information to the City Council and City Staff, necessary to make important decisions. Our experience ensures that we can meet this objective.

User-friendly Models and Reports
Willdan prides itself on creating user-friendly Excel-based models that the City can retain and conducting our analysis and developing the models collaboratively with City Staff. With City Staff’s immediate input and collaboration, Willdan will design extremely flexible, intuitive Excel-based models. In the future, as the City assumes new responsibilities, modifies existing processes, and/or eliminates unnecessary services or programs, the models will be capable of adding or deleting funds, objects, departments, programs, staff positions, and activities.

Willdan understands that issues facing the City are unique; consequently, we design our models to match your immediate and desired needs to ensure that end-results exceed staff expectations.

This model is then the City’s to retain, after our services are completed, and allows for the creation of revenue projections, highlighting potential new revenues, and levels of subsidy.

Rather than costly and inflexible proprietary
software, which can require expensive
licensing fees, Willdan builds models
utilizing Excel, from the ground up,
employing the City’s budget as the gauge.

This model, which is then the City’s to
retain, gives City Staff the control to make
on-the-fly adjustments and updates.

The model will be developed to allow
the City to run “what-if” scenarios to
address potential changes in staffing
levels, working hours, etc.

Packet Page 147
Comprehensive User Fee Study 19
City of Seaside, CA
A key element of these studies is presenting results and recommendations in a straightforward manner, which allows the City Council and staff to confidently make fee setting policy decisions and understand the impacts of those decisions.

Rather than using an inflexible proprietary software program, we construct our models from the ground up, as previously discussed, mirroring the City’s budget format wherever possible.

As a result, the information contained in our models are easy for City Staff to interpret, and the familiar software ensures ease of navigation. As the models are being designed and constructed, we will work together with City Staff to determine the best and most effective features to include. After the project is completed, we will provide training, so that your staff can independently and efficiently evaluate the effects of changes in certain factors. Created directly from the models, our reports clearly and graphically illustrate bases for the full cost recovery level of fee programs, provide projections of revenue from fee programs, both at full cost recovery and at recommended levels, and present the fee methodologies.

Methodology
Comprehensive User Fee Study Methodology
The following describes our proposed methodology and approach to prepare a Comprehensive User Fee Study.

To comprehensively update fees, the City should develop a fee schedule that accurately accounts for the true cost of providing services. Once the study is complete, the fee study model must be flexible so that the City can add, delete, and revise fees in the future. To meet this goal, we will bring our expertise and unique perspectives to your fee study by approaching the project with these three principles:
1) Defensibility
Our user fee projects have not been legally challenged since the inception of this practice area in our firm. We have accomplished this by closely working with legal counsel familiar with user fee studies, our engineering division and with agency staff. In this way, we can tailor the correct approach to ensure full cost recovery combined with a sound and reasonable basis for each user fee you implement.

We employ principles from Proposition 218 to make certain that your user fee and rate schedule is developed with fairness, equity, and proportionate cost recovery principles in mind. With the addition of Proposition 26, Willdan will review each analyzed user fee for compliance and appropriateness to ensure continued defensibility. 2) Project and Staff Time
The City must have a sound and technically defensible fee schedule to ensure costs are appropriately recovered, as applicants approach the City for its services. Our standards and approaches serve to get to the issues of your fee study quickly. Starting with the project kick-off, we will make certain that your staff understands the purpose and scope of the study and its corresponding on-site departmental interview. As Willdan is able to communicate directly with the service providers, this face-to-face interaction provides valuable time estimates. 3) Responsiveness
We take great pride in providing responsive service to our clients. Frequent communication is critical to a successful user fee study experience. We will provide a list of data requirements in advance of the project kick-off. Due to this simple step, the introductory meeting can focus on the survey input process, answering questions, determining policy goals, and defining next steps in the project. We will follow up weekly with the City at each step in the fee study process to make sure that staff “buys in” to the fee study approach and results.

Approach
Our approach to preparing the user fee study and documentation for the City includes:
▪ Close coordination with your staff to devise a consensus approach. Different programs and/or different service delivery methods will necessitate different approaches. We will discuss specific pros and cons with City Staff as we determine which methods work best for various categories of fees; ▪ Strict adherence to key legal and policy issues with regard to user fees, including the percent of cost recovery that the City seeks to achieve. A user fee shall not be set higher than the reasonable cost of providing a fee-generating service.

Our approach provides you with a fee schedule that achieves maximum legal cost recovery while ensuring that each fee is supported by technically defensible documentation; and ▪ Technical analysis necessary for project participants to resolve policy issues.

Packet Page 148
Comprehensive User Fee Study 20
City of Seaside, CA
As described below, there are two basic approaches to calculating user fees:

Approach 1: Case Study Method
This is also sometimes referred to as a cost build-up approach. Using a time and materials approach, the “Case Study Method” examines the tasks, steps and City Staff involved in providing a particular ‘unit’ of service, such as a permit review, and then uses that information to develop estimates of the actual labor and material costs associated with providing a unit of service to a single user. It is often used when a service is provided on a regular basis, and staff and other costs associated with the service can be segregated from available budget data.

A typical case study fee model should comprise the following three general cost layers:
1) Central Services Overhead: This category may involve such costs as labor, services, and supplies that benefit more than one department, division, or project. The exact benefits to specific areas are impossible to ascribe to a single activity.

Examples are purchasing, human resources, and liability insurance. As part of the user fee study, these costs are calculated in the overhead cost review.
2) Department Overhead: This category may
include expenses related to such items as office
supplies, outside consultants, and membership
dues. It may include management, supervision,
and administrative support that are not provided to
a direct fee-generating service. Typically, these
items are charged, on an item-by-item basis,
directly to the department, division, or project.
3) Personnel Costs: This category refers to direct
salary and benefit costs of staff hours spent on
providing a fee-generating service (e.g., on-site
building inspector).

Approach 2: Average Cost Method
This is also sometimes referred to as a
programmatic approach, because it looks at costs
at a program level, and then allocates them to
participants on an occurrence basis. By taking
total service costs across a substantial sample
period (a year) and dividing by the total number of
service units delivered over that same period,
costs per unit of service is estimated.

This approach is useful when services or
programs are provided in a more aggregate
manner, where it might be difficult to identify a
specific sequence of steps associated with one
user or participant; or where it is not feasible to
cost-effectively segregate costs associated with
specific activities.

Central
Services
Overhead
Departmental
Overhead
Personnel
Costs
Fully -
Burdened
Hourly Rate
Packet Page 149
Comprehensive User Fee Study 21
City of Seaside, CA
Project Schedule
Willdan understands time is of the essence for the City of Seaside to begin this engagement. This schedule can only be met with the cooperation of City staff. Delays in responding to our requests for data and review will result in corresponding delays to the project schedule. If that is the case, we will notify the City immediately of the possible impact on the schedule.

City Staff Support
To complete our tasks, we will need the cooperation of City Staff. We suggest that the City of Seaside assign a key individual to represent the City as the project manager who can function as our primary contact. We anticipate that the City’s project manager will:
1) Coordinate responses to requests for information;
2) Coordinate review of work products; and
3) Help resolve policy matters. Willdan will endeavor to minimize the impact on City Staff in the completion of this project.

We will ask for responses to initial information requests in a timely manner. If there are delays on the part of the City, we will contact the City’s project manager to steer the project back on track. We will keep the City’s project manager informed of data or feedback we need to keep the project on schedule.

Scope of Services 7 # # # 4 # # # 1 8 # # # 6 # # # 3 # # # 1 8 # # # Task 1: Initial Document Request z1
Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees z2 Task 3: Kick-off / Refine Scope (web meeting/conference call) z3 Task 4: Develop User Fee Model/Incorporate Overhead Factors z4 Task 5: Staff Interviews and Information Gathering (web meetings) z5 Task 6: Data Analysis and Final User Fee Schedule (Web mtgs/conf calls) z6 Task 7: Common Fees Comparison z7
Task 8: Prepare and Present Draft Report (conference call) z8 Task 9: Revise Draft Report/Determine Cost Recovery Levels (conference call) z9 Task 10: Prepare and Present Final Report/Instruct Staff on Model (web meeting) z10 Deliverables:
z1: Information Request z6: Draft Fee and Rate Model Review z2: Draft List of Current Fees z7: Common Fee Comparison z3: Revised Project Scope and Schedule (if needed) z8: Draft Report z4: User-friendly Model in Microsoft Excel z9: Revised Draft Report/Final Report z5: Time Surveys and Draft Full Cost Recovery Fees z10: Final Report – Hard and Electronic Copies December
City of Seaside
Comprehensive User Fee Study
Project Schedule
July August September October November
Packet Page 150
Comprehensive User Fee Study 22
City of Seaside, CA
G. Proposed Scope of Services
Comprehensive User Fee Study Work Plan
Our proposed work plan, described in detail by task, is provided below. We explain how each task will be accomplished and identify associated meetings and deliverables. We want to ensure our scope provides quality and clarity and is responsive to the City’s needs and specific local circumstances. We will work in concert with the City to adjust the scope as needed during the course of the study.

Task 1: Initial Document Request
Objective: Initial due diligence; and obtain study-related data.

Description: Prior to the kick-off meeting, we will obtain and review relevant documentation to further enhance our understanding of the services, fees, and rates to be studied. A written request for data will be sent to the City. Please note that Time Survey data is not part of this request and will be gathered during the interviews described in Task 5.

We will request information, data sets, documentation on current fees and fee programs, activity levels, and budget and staffing information (to the extent not already available) related specifically to programs and activities which have associated fees, and for which the City has this level of detail.

As this proposed engagement does not include completion of a new or updated Cost Allocation Plan (CAP), we will incorporate analysis into the User Fee model that provides for overhead factors and costs to support updated fee recommendations.

Deliverables: Willdan: Submit information request to City.

City: Provide requested data to Willdan (prior to Task 3, Kick-off Meeting/Refine Scope). We will follow up with the City to confirm receipt of requested data and information and highlight data elements that are outstanding.

Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees/Review Existing Cost Allocation Method Objective: Willdan will identify the schedule of fees and develop the methodology for calculating the fees, incorporate overhead factors developed in consultation with the City, , and obtain updated staffing, salary, and benefit information.

Description: Based on the results of the initial document request and independent research, incorporate into our model the existing fees, provided by the City, to comprise the parameters of the fee study. We will review the existing fee schedule to ensure consistency and that it addresses areas where fees could be charged for services being provided and confer with Staff to identify potential new fees.

We will work with staff to incorporate reasonable indirect overhead factors from the City’s current Cost Allocation Plan, or develop new overhead factors to ensure the costs associated with central service overhead support are included in the full cost of providing services.

Reasonable indirect cost allocation percentages will be used in Task 4 to calculate departmental overhead rates and fully burdened hourly personnel rates. We will gather and review data and supporting analysis as necessary, related to the City’s cost allocation approach. This information will be used to verify or calculate the allocation of indirect service costs to operating departments, and then will be incorporated with staffing, and salary and benefit data to develop a comprehensive schedule of Fully Burdened Hourly Rates (FBHR). These rates will form a basis for the calculation of the costs of providing services to residents and customers, for which fees are charged.

Meetings: It is possible that a conference call with the City may be necessary to discuss new fees to implement or existing fees that may no longer be required.

Deliverables: Willdan: One (1) draft list of current fees based on initial data provided (to be discussed and finalized during the kick-off call).

City: Review completed fee schedules with comments/revisions to be discussed during the kick-off meeting.

Packet Page 151
Comprehensive User Fee Study 23
City of Seaside, CA
Task 3: Kick-off / Refine Project Requirements, Objectives and Scope Objective: Confirm goals and objectives for the Comprehensive User Fee Study. Identify and discuss policy matters typically raised, address gaps in data, and refine appropriate existing or new fee categories (based on Task 2).

Description: Verify our understanding of the City’s goals, the City’s cost-recovery policy for user fees, and fill gaps in data/information necessary for the project. It is important for the City and Willdan to identify and address any foreseeable problems and maintain open communication throughout the process.

During this discussion, we will ask that the City identify a project manager who will serve as the primary contact for the project. The project manager shall have responsibility for ensuring that all available data is provided in a timely manner, thereby maintaining adherence to the project’s schedule.

Meetings: One (1) project kick-off call/web meeting to initiate the project, discuss data needs, and address policy matters.

Deliverables: Willdan: 1) Revised project scope and schedule (if needed); and 2) brief summary of policy decisions (if needed).

City: 1) Provide further data needs; and 2) determine/introduce City’s project manager.

Task 4: Develop Comprehensive Fee Model/Incorporate Overhead/Develop Overhead Rates & FBHR Objective: Develop and test fee model and incorporate overhead factors.

Description: This task involves the development of the model ultimately used to calculate fees, based on data and information gathered in previous tasks and in the Time Survey Interviews described in Task 5. To ensure that City policies are met through the imposition of the calculated fees, the model will be formatted to include appropriate costs.

We will develop and determine the appropriate indirect cost factors and overhead rates to apply to personnel rates, to develop fully burdened hourly rates per the City’s employee structure. These rates will serve as a basis for calculating the full cost of providing services.

Key model inputs will include staff and allocated overhead costs per position, and relevant budget data on staffing, salaries and benefits. This information will be obtained directly from the City and incorporated directly into the user fee model. We will request clarification and/or additional data if necessary. We will also update, as appropriate, available fee volumes (occurrences) and revenue generation.

The model will provide an allocation of administrative and overhead costs to fee related activities, so that fees and billable rate schedules incorporate applicable costs. Furthermore, the fees and rates charged to customers will also reflect the cost of the services being provided, to the extent possible given policy and/or political considerations.

The model will be able to accommodate updates, additions, and revisions as costs, processes, staffing and the organization change from year to year.

The model will ultimately calculate the full cost of providing services for which fees are charged, based upon information and data provided by the City about the processes and staffing involved with direct service delivery in Task 5, supplemented by overhead percentages calculated in the CAP.

Deliverables: Willdan: One (1) user-friendly model in Microsoft Excel format, which, when finalized, City Staff can use to calculate fee changes annually, or as often as deemed appropriate by the City Council, and a schedule of Fully Burdened Hourly Rates.

Task 5: Time Survey Interviews and On-site or Virtual Information Gathering Objective: Meet with City Staff to complete Time Surveys and understand service delivery processes.

Description: In order to assist staff with the completion of the survey worksheets, we will schedule up to one (1) day of meetings with staff; however, the number of meetings needed may vary depending on the number of staff involved. The Willdan Team will conduct interviews with managers, as well as other staff, as deemed appropriate and/or necessary, to understand the processes and staffing involved in delivering fee-based City services and determine the average time required by City Staff to provide each of the services.

During this process we will identify instances of cross-departmental support and calculate associated costs.

Packet Page 152
Comprehensive User Fee Study 24
City of Seaside, CA
The fee model is designed so that full cost recovery fees are calculated immediately upon input of staff time. These full costs are also compared to current cost recovery levels.

This will allow Willdan and City Staff to conclude with a final meeting to review the draft full cost recovery fees and adjust any times as necessary once all information has been compiled and input into the fee model. We will schedule the interviews with City Staff to minimize any disruption to their normal workflow.

During these meetings, we will discuss potential new fees with City Staff that could be added to the City’s fee schedule(s) for applicable departments. Fee additions may be at the request of Staff during the initial process of creating an inventory of fees to be included in the study in Task 2, those recommended to address legislative and/or policy updates or recommended based on fees we’ve encountered in comparable cities that aren’t currently included on the City’s fee schedules. We will discuss potential fee additions with the City Council during a brief presentation.

Meetings: One (1) business day of meetings/staff interviews. Depending upon circumstances and availability, we may discuss the option with City Staff of conducting these meetings via WebEx or Zoom. These tools have proven to be highly effective and efficient, particularly for follow-up questions and/or discussions.

One (1) meeting with the City Council to review potential new fees.

Deliverables: Willdan and City: Time surveys and draft full cost recovery fees.

Task 6: Data Analysis, Calculate Full Cost of Providing Services, Final Fee Schedule Objective: Incorporate information obtained from surveys to fully develop model and calculate the cost of providing services.

Description: We will update the model, based on information received during the on-site surveys, to generate a comprehensive fee schedule. In addition, it is quite common that a supplemental data request may be necessary, based on new fees identified that the City is not currently collecting.

Where appropriate, we will suggest and discuss with staff alternate approaches to existing fee programs (i.e. deposit vs. straight fee, valuation, etc.) and suggest potential areas where fees could be collected, where they are not currently.

We will present the cost of service and full cost recovery level for fees, both current and projected under the new calculated fees, and revenue projections, given certain assumptions about the levels of subsidy for different fees.

We will begin the discussion of subsidies and fee-setting, and the implementation of policy and political objectives. We will provide guidance based upon our recent experience as to policy factors and approaches used by other similar cities.

Current levels of cost recovery will be compared to actual full costs calculated during the course of this study. Cost will be calculated at reasonable activity levels and include all appropriate direct and indirect costs and overhead. We will review fee programs for compliance with Propositions 218 and 26.

The fee data analysis and model development may take three (3) to five (5) weeks with frequent correspondence with City Staff to discuss current cost recovery amounts, necessary to recover full cost and frequency activity.

Meetings: Web meetings and/or conference calls, as necessary, to gather additional input, complete analysis and finalize fee schedule. Please see the note in Task 5 regarding in-person meetings.

Deliverables: Final user fee model for the City Council presentation and discussion.

Task 7: Common Fees Comparison
Objective: Examine up to five (5) comparable cities/agencies in Monterey County, or jurisdictions that are similar in either geography or profile to the City of Seaside.

Description: We will access and use our knowledge of other jurisdictions to benchmark all applicable fees for up to five projects as determined by City Staff and Willdan.

The purpose is to select sample projects (such as a 5-unit residential project or a 10,000 square foot commercial building) that the City may reasonably expect to encounter, and determine the total fee burden, as compared to the other selected cities.

Packet Page 153
Comprehensive User Fee Study 25
City of Seaside, CA
Fee schedules are rarely readily or directly comparable from agency to agency due to definitional and operational differences. For example, a grading permit in one jurisdiction may include the plan check service, while the same permit in another jurisdiction may not, resulting in similar sounding services with widely varying costs.

The survey will contain the following, a comparison of fees and charges used by the City and other jurisdictions for comparable sample projects; current and proposed fees and charges unique to the City of Seaside; fees and charges used by other public entities not currently used in the City; and if possible, identify characteristics and processes unique to the City that account for significant variances in fees and charges used by other jurisdictions.

Deliverables: Willdan: Recommendations provided in Task 8 will incorporate the data gathered during our examination.

Task 8: Prepare and Present Draft Results and Report, Conduct Presentations Objective: Prepare and present draft results and report.

Description: This task involves the preparation of the draft report that discusses the study’s background, the methodologies utilized in the study, and the results and presentation to various stakeholder groups. As noted below, meetings may occur during this or the next task as appropriate. The calculations used to generate the user fee study will be included textually, as well as in easy to understand tables. Individual fee summaries and a comprehensive fee schedule will be included as well. The draft report will include the following:
▪ Key results and findings;
▪ Current and recommended fees and charges, changes in fees; ▪ Basic descriptions of each service;
▪ The full cost calculations for each service;
▪ Current and recommended cost recovery levels;
▪ Comparison of the cost of providing services to current and proposed recovery levels and fees; ▪ Costs broken down into indirect, direct and overhead components; ▪ Fee recommendations, associated levels of cost recovery, subsidies, changes from current fees; ▪ Projections of potential fee revenue;
▪ Fee comparisons completed as part of Task 7;
▪ Assessment of reasonableness of each City’s costs; and ▪ Summary and recommendations.

The objective of the report is to communicate the recommendation of appropriate fees, which include the appropriate subsidy percentage for those fees where full cost recovery may be unrealistic.

Meetings: One (1) web meeting with City Staff and Management to present the report, recommended fee structure, methodology and draft results, address questions, and receive feedback.

Deliverables: Willdan: Draft report for City review and comment.

City: Review of draft report, with comments and edits.

Task 9: Discuss and Revise Draft Report/Determine Cost Recovery Levels for Recommended Adoption Objective: Review and discussion of draft results, fee structure, methodology, report, and fee model.

Description: The goal of this task is to conduct an in-depth review of the draft results, report and model, incorporate feedback and changes as a result of previous discussions and meetings, and arrive at an optimum fee structure. During this Task, we will finalize the actual fee levels, with consideration given to policy and current practices.

Often through the course of an engagement, City Staff will volunteer insightful likes and dislikes regarding the existing fee structure. We listen to this feedback carefully because your staff members know the community best. Comments usually revolve around issues of:
▪ Understandability;
▪ Fairness to applicants;
▪ Ease of calculation;
▪ Appropriate levels of cost recovery; and
▪ Full cost recovery hourly rates.

Packet Page 154
Comprehensive User Fee Study 26
City of Seaside, CA
When adjusting fee recovery levels, we believe it is important to address these concerns.

One (1) meeting with City Staff and Management to present the recommended fee structure, methodology and draft results, address questions, and receive feedback.

Following one (1) round of comments and feedback from the City on the methodology and draft report, we will prepare the final report for presentation to the City Council.

Meetings: Up to two (2) web meetings to review the model and report and finalize cost recovery levels.

Deliverables: Draft report, revised draft /final report.

Task 10: Prepare and Present Final Report/Instruct Staff on Model Objective: Prepare and present final report to the City Council. Instruct staff on the operation and use of the model for future modifications.

Description: This task is the culmination of the entire project. Based on staff comments received regarding the draft report, we will prepare the final report for presentation. We will provide Staff with guidance on how to update the model in future years, to incorporate cost increases and changes in staffing or processes.

Meetings: One (1) meeting to present recommended fee structure and methodology to the City Council to facilitate their understanding of the approach, analysis, results, recommendations and implications of the study.

We will also provide staff training on the operation and use of the model on the same day, during regular business hours. Follow-up offline discussions may occur as necessary with City Staff to review questions and/or requested clarifications from the City Council.

Deliverables: Provide one (1) electronic PDF file copy of the final report and models. Using Microsoft Word and Excel, an updateable electronic copy of the study and models, as well as related schedules, will also be provided.

Project Disclaimer
The City of Seaside further represents, acknowledges, and agrees that:
(i) The City uses, or may use, the services of one or more municipal advisors registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to advise it in connection with municipal financial products and the issuance of municipal securities;
(ii) The City is not looking to Willdan to provide, and City shall not otherwise request or require Willdan to provide, any advice or recommendations with respect to municipal financial products or the issuance of municipal securities (including any advice or recommendations with respect to the structure, timing, terms, and other similar matters concerning such financial products or issues);
(iii) The provisions of this proposal and the services to be provided hereunder as outlined in the scope of services are not intended (and shall not be construed) to constitute or include any municipal advisory services within the meaning of Section 15B of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the rules and regulations adopted thereunder;
(iv) For the avoidance of doubt and without limiting the foregoing, in connection with any revenue projections, cash-flow analyses, feasibility studies and/or other analyses Willdan may provide the City with respect to financial, economic or other matters relating to a prospective, new or existing issuance of municipal securities of the City, (A) any such projections, studies and analyses shall be based upon assumptions, opinions or views (including, without limitation, any assumptions related to revenue growth) established by the City, in conjunction with such of its municipal, financial, legal and other advisers as it deems appropriate; and (B) under no circumstances shall Willdan be asked to provide, nor shall it provide, any advice or recommendations or subjective assumptions, opinions or views with respect to the actual or proposed structure, terms, timing, pricing or other similar matters with respect to any municipal financial products or municipal securities issuances, including any revisions or amendments thereto; and (v) Notwithstanding all of the foregoing, the City recognizes that interpretive guidance regarding municipal advisory activities is currently quite limited and is likely to evolve and develop during the term of the potential engagement and, to that end, the City will work with Willdan throughout the term of the potential Agreement to ensure that the Agreement and the services to be provided by Willdan hereunder, is interpreted by the parties, and if necessary amended, in a manner intended to ensure that the City is not asking Willdan to provide, and Willdan is not in fact providing or required to provide, any municipal advisory services.

Packet Page 155
Comprehensive User Fee Study 27
City of Seaside, CA
Project Management and Quality Assurance/Control Approach Provided below is the firm’s project management approach to producing the required product in a timely fashion.

Project Management Approach
At Willdan, we utilize a Project Management Process/Approach that ensures projects are completed on time, within budget and most importantly yield results that match our clients’ expectations. We will document discussions leading to important policy decisions and/or the choice of critical assumptions used in constructing the analysis and model.

Following key stakeholder discussions, we will schedule a call to summarize findings and direction with City staff, to make certain that we are in agreement with stated objectives, and that feedback is incorporated as appropriate.

Project Management
Define the
Project Plan the Project Manage the Project
Review the
Project
Communicate
the Project
▪ Identify the project
scope, set
objectives, list
potential
constraints,
document
assumptions.
▪ Define a course of
action and develop
an effective
communication
plan.
▪ Provide a forum
for applying the
team’s collective
expertise to
solving difficult
analytical issues
that arise in
complex projects.
▪ Collaborate with
the project team
and client staff and
agree upon
timeline to meet the
estimated project
timeline.
▪ Assign workload
functions to
appropriately
qualified staff to
ensure milestones
are met, on time.
▪ Pre-schedule
quality control
meetings with
project team to
maintain the
progressive motion
of the project.
▪ Manage the
execution of the
project.
▪ Direct existing
and upcoming
project tasks.
▪ Control and
monitor work in
progress.
▪ Provide feedback
to client and
project team.
▪ Identify and
resolve deviances
from project
timeline.
▪ Review all work
product and
deliverables.
▪ Utilize structured
quality assurance
process involving
up to three levels
of review at the
peer level,
project manager
level.
▪ Procure
executive officer
level review.
▪ Communicate
with the client
regarding work
status and
progress.
▪ Ensure client is in
receipt of regular
status updates.
▪ Schedule regular
conference calls
to touch base.
▪ Inform client of
roadblocks, work
outside of
projected scope.

Through the process of providing
regular updates and conducting
status conference calls, potential
issues will be highlighted, discussed,
and resolved. Any deviances from
the project timeline will be identified
and plans will be developed for
course corrections.

Packet Page 156
Comprehensive User Fee Study 28
City of Seaside, CA
Quality Assurance / Quality Control Process
Our quality control program is incorporated as a required element of Willdan’s day-to-day activities. There are three levels of reviews incorporated for our deliverables:
1) Peer review;
2) Project Manager review; and
3) Final quality assurance manager
review.

Peer reviews involve one analyst
reviewing the work of another, while
project manager reviews are conducted
prior to delivery to the quality assurance
manager. The quality assurance manager
then performs a final review. This assures
that our final product has been thoroughly
evaluated for potential errors; thus,
providing quality client deliverables, and
high levels of integrity and outcomes.

The primary mission of our quality control plan is to provide staff with the technical and managerial expertise to plan, organize, implement, and control the overall quality effort, thereby ensuring the completion of a quality project within the time and budget established.

Quality Assurance Goals
Goal Lead Task
Quality Assurance /
Control Process Chris Fisher
▪ Establish a set of planned and systematic actions for maintaining a high level of quality in the professional services performed; ▪ Emphasize quality in every phase of work;
▪ Ensure efficient use of resources;
▪ Establish a consistent and uniform approach to the services performed; and
▪ Implement appropriate quality control measures for each work task of the project.

Quality Control Plan
Chris Fisher,
& Robert Quaid
▪ Contract deliverables;
▪ Specific quality control procedures;
▪ Special quality control emphasis;
▪ Budget and manpower requirements;
▪ Overall project schedule and budget; and
▪ Project documentation requirements;
Packet Page 157
Comprehensive User Fee Study 29
City of Seaside, CA
H. & I. Training & Ongoing Support
Provided within our scope of work is the education and instruction for Staff on the operation and use of the models for future modifications. We will also consult with the City as necessary to address questions related to the study, or to defend the study as the result of a challenge.

Willdan can offer additional hands-on training sessions to staff members responsible for using the model, as well as postproject phone consultations. The additional training can take place via a webinar, and provides staff members with an opportunity to learn the dynamic interactions of the rate model.

Ongoing support and communication with staff throughout the course of the engagement, and beyond, is key to a successful project. Willdan utilizes an effective combination of communication tools including in-person meetings, video collaboration software, and emails to in providing ongoing support to staff members. Frequent communication can ensure that there are no surprises and that all team members are in agreement with the recommendations to be presented to elected officials.

Taking a proactive role in communicating increases trust, improves the understanding of operations and services, and establishes a foundation for future positive relations within the community.

Packet Page 158
Comprehensive User Fee Study 30
City of Seaside, CA
J. References
Below are three additional project client/project references as requested in the RFP.

City of El Cerrito, CA
Community Development Department User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan Willdan was engaged in April 2017 to prepare a full cost allocation plan and Community Development Department User Fee Study for the City of El Cerrito; to determine the full costs incurred by the Community Development Department to support the various activities for which the City charges user fees, including the Building Division’s building permit issuance and inspection service, and to calculate Department fees that represent a reasonable estimate of the cost of providing services.

Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fee and program activities and to calculate fees accordingly. Utilizing the full CAP, the fee model was developed, after conducting full interviews and data gathering.

Willdan was re-selected, through competitive bid, in 2024 and is currently working on a Comprehensive User Fee Study and Cost Allocation Plan.

Client Contact: Claire Coleman, Budget / Financial Services Manager Tel. #: (510) 215-4365 | Email: [email protected] Project Dates: April 2017 – Ongoing Recent Project Budget: $38,275 City of Burbank, CA
Comprehensive User Fee Study
In Spring of 2023 Willdan completed a comprehensive master user fee study for the City of Burbank. Burbank is a large, diverse city with a full range of municipal services. We worked with City staff to gather the necessary data to incorporate appropriate central service overhead factors from the City’s current Cost Allocation Plan into this analysis. Following this, we analyzed the current fee schedule, developed a detailed cost-of-service analysis, and calculated the full cost of providing services for which fees are charged. We also evaluated opportunities to implement new fees and eliminate obsolete ones. Finally, we conducted fee comparisons with other local municipal agencies and worked with City Staff to develop fee-setting recommendations that incorporated policy guidelines and presented these to the City Council for adoption.

Willdan updated many of the fee programs and their structures. Final master fee recommendations were made to address the City’s goal to maximize the recovery of the costs of providing services, to the best extent possible, including overhead. The final steps of the process included a detailed presentation to the City Council, and delivery to the City of the fee model for their future use.

Client Contact: Justin Hess, City Manager
Tel #: (818) 238-5800 | Email: [email protected]
Project Dates: August 2022 – April 2023 Project Budget: $28,855 City of Pismo Beach, CA
Full & OMB Compliant Cost Allocation Plan and Comprehensive User Fee Study Willdan completed a comprehensive user fee study and full cost allocation plan for the City of Pismo Beach, which included an evaluation of user fees and comparison of fees with similar agencies. Willdan collected and validated data and information necessary to develop models for both the Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study.

We reviewed and analyzed existing user fee programs, developed a cost-of-service analysis and model that updated the cost of providing services associated with existing fees and incorporated new fees and used it to create an updated comprehensive fee schedule. We presented the results of both studies to City Staff, and to the City Council.

Willdan is currently working on a User Fee Study Update for the City.

Client Contact: Nadia Feeser, Administrative Services Director Tel #: (805) 773-7010 | Email: [email protected]
Project Dates: August 2022 – Ongoing Total Project Budget: $43,820 Packet Page 159

EXHIBIT B

FEE SCHEDULE
Packet Page 160
Comprehensive User Fee Study 31
City of Seaside, CA
K. Cost Proposal
Comprehensive User Fee Study
Willdan proposes a fixed fee of $29,995 to conduct the Comprehensive User Fee Study on the City’s behalf. The table below provides a breakdown of the fee to complete each study by task and project team member.

Notes
▪ Our fee includes all direct expenses associated with the project. ▪ We will invoice the City monthly based on percentage of project completed. ▪ If the City wishes for Willdan to attend additional in person meetings, the fee is $1,850 per meeting. ▪ City shall reimburse Willdan for any costs Willdan incurs, including without limitation, copying costs, digitizing costs, travel expenses, employee time and attorneys' fees, to respond to the legal process of any governmental agency relating to City or relating to the project. Reimbursement shall be at Willdan's rates in effect at the time of such response.
▪ The cost of preparing the user fee study can be included in the resulting new user fee schedule. Therefore, over time, the City can recover the initial outlay of funds that was required to complete the studies. ▪ Willdan will rely on the validity and accuracy of the City’s data and documentation to complete the analysis. Willdan will rely on the data as being accurate without performing an independent verification of accuracy and will not be responsible for any errors that result from inaccurate data provided by the client or a third party.

Hourly Rates
Additional services may be authorized in writing by the City and will be billed at our then current hourly consulting rates.

Our current hourly rates are identified in the table below.

Willdan Financial Services
Hourly Rate Schedule
Position Team Member Hourly Rate Position Team Member Hourly Rate Vice President / Director Chris Fisher $310 Managing Principal $300 Principal Consultant Tony Thrasher $270 Principal Consultant Bob Quaid $270 Senior Project Manager $250 Project Manager $210
Senior Project Analyst Priti Patel $150 Senior Analyst Samantha Labitan $135 Analyst II $120 Analyst I $110
C. Fisher
Principal-inCharge
T. Thrasher
Project
Manager
P. Patel
Senior
Analyst
S. Labitan
Analytical
Support
R. Quaid
QA/Tech
Advisor Total
$ 310 $ 270 $ 150 $ 135 $ 270 Hours Cost
Scope of Services
Task 1: Initial Document Request - - 1.0 - - 1.0 $ 150
Task 2: Compile Inventory of Current and Potential Fees - 0.5 1.0 1.0 - 2.5 420 Task 3: Kick-off /Refine Scope - 1.0 1.0 - - 2.0 420
Task 4: Develop User Fee Model/Incorporate Overhead Factors 0.5 4.0 6.0 16.0 1.0 27.5 4,565 Task 5: Staff Interviews and On-site Information Gathering - 4.0 8.0 3.0 - 15.0 2,685 Task 6: Data Analysis and Final Fee and Rate Schedule 0.5 5.0 32.0 40.0 1.0 78.5 11,975 Task 7: Common Fees Comparison 0.5 1.0 2.0 8.0 - 11.5 1,805 Task 8: Prepare and Present Draft Report 0.5 2.0 6.0 12.0 1.0 21.5 3,485 Task 9: Revise Draft/Determine Cost Recovery Levels 0.5 5.0 6.0 3.0 - 14.5 2,810 Task 10: Prepare and Present Final Report/Train Staff on Model - 4.0 4.0 - - 8.0 1,680 Total – Comprehensive User Fee Study 2.5 26.5 67.0 83.0 182.0 3.0 29,995 $ City of Seaside
Comprehensive User Fee Study
Fee Proposal

EXHIBIT B
Packet Page 161
Comprehensive User Fee Study 32
City of Seaside, CA
L. Exceptions to Agreement
Willdan has reviewed the agreement and has no exceptions at this time.

Packet Page 162
www.willdan.com
27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, CA 92590-4856
951.587.3500 | 800.755.6864 | Fax: 951.587.3510
Packet Page 163

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Packet Page 164

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting Consultant’s indemnification of Agency, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to Agency.

General liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the services required by this Agreement.

Workers’ compensation insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

Consultant shall submit to Agency, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of Agency, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.
2025 COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE USER FEE STUDY
Packet Page 165

EXHIBIT C
Umbrella or excess liability insurance. [Optional depending on limits required].

Consultant shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
• A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason;
• Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement; • Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies; • Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies; and • Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

Other provisions or requirements
Proof of insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to Agency as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by Agency’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance.

Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with Agency at all times during the term of this contract. Agency reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

Duration of coverage. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.

Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by Consultant shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by Agency shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of Agency before the Agency’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
2025 COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE USER FEE STUDY
Packet Page 166

EXHIBIT C
Agency’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, Agency has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by Agency will be promptly reimbursed by Consultant or Agency will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from Consultant payments.

In the alternative, Agency may cancel this Agreement.

Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the Agency’s Risk Manager.

Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against Agency, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against Agency, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

Enforcement of contract provisions (non estoppel). Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the Agency to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the Agency nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the Agency requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the Agency.

Notice of cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to Agency with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.
2025 COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE USER FEE STUDY
Packet Page 167
2025 COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE USER FEE STUDY EXHIBIT C
Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that Agency and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.

Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to Agency and approved of in writing.

Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.

Pass through clause. Consultant agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by Consultant, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of Consultant. Consultant agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to Agency for review.

Agency’s right to revise specifications. The Agency reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the Consultant ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the Consultant, the Agency and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant’s compensation.

Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by Agency. Agency reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by Agency.

Timely notice of claims. Consultant shall give Agency prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant’s performance under this AGREEMENT, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.

Additional insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work.

Packet Page 168

EXHIBIT D

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Packet Page 169
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Comprehensive Citywide Fee Study
excluding Water, Sewer and Stormwater Fees
City of Seaside
BID ISSUED DATE April 24, 2025
Title: Finance Director
Contact: Jessica Riley
Email: [email protected]
Phone Number: 831-899-6716

PROPOSAL DUE
Date: Friday, May 23, 2025, 5:00PM
Mail Address and Bid Opening Location: City Clerk
City of Seaside
440 Harcourt Avenue
Seaside, CA 93955
Sealed written responses must be received by the City Clerk no later than the date, time, and location indicated above for the Bid Opening and a digital copy emailed to the Finance Director at [email protected]. Late submission of responses shall not be considered. Submittal of response by fax is not acceptable.

BID CONTENTS

1. Introduction

2. Background

3. Objective

4. Project Schedule

5. Scope of Services

6. General

7. Proposal Format and Content

8. Criteria for Selection

9. Delivery of Proposals

10.Appendix A Consultant Agreement Sample
Note: This bid does not constitute an order for the goods or services specified

EXHIBIT D
Packet Page 170
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study

1. INTRODUCTION
The City of Seaside is located in Monterey County, California, on the Monterey Bay approximately 120 miles south of San Francisco. The City has a land area of 9.75 square miles and a population of 34,270. Seaside is the home of California State University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB) and the Monterey College of Law, which are located on the site of the former Fort Ord military base. It is also home to the Bayonet and Black Horse golf courses, also once part of the Fort Ord military base. These course are now open to the public and host to PGA Tour events. The City is a general-law City incorporated on October 13, 1954 and operates under a council-manager form of government.

The City provides a wide range of services to its residents. The major operating departments includes the City Manager, Administrative Services, Police and Fire protection, Community and Economic Development, Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, Recreation, Parks and Street Maintenance, and water service to part of the City and general City administration. Gas and electricity are provided by Pacific Gas & Electric; water services are provided by the City, California American Water, and Marina Coast Water District; sewer services are provided by Seaside County Sanitation District, Marina Coast Water District, and Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency.

The City is also financially accountable for a legally separate Successor Agency for the former Redevelopment Agency and a Housing Authority.

Past budgetary and financial information on the City can be found on the City’s web site at www.ci.seaside.ca.us.

2. BACKGROUND
The City of Seaside’s fee schedule has evolved over time and currently includes fees for services provided by the Administrative, Planning, Building, Public Works, Recreation, Fire, and Police Departments. A comprehensive fee study was last conducted in 2013. Since then, the City has adjusted its fees annually in accordance with City Ordinance No. 1013, which authorizes inflation-based adjustments to ensure the recovery of the full cost of service delivery.

However, the current fee schedule format presents several challenges. It is time-consuming and cumbersome to update, and its structure does not facilitate efficient analysis or strategic planning. Additionally, some fees may be outdated—either overestimated due to not accounting for efficiencies gained through technological advancements, or complicated by language that lacks clarity, particularly regarding non-refundable deposits. These issues create barriers to transparency and ease of understanding for the public and staff alike.

To address these concerns, the City seeks a qualified consultant to conduct a comprehensive fee study to evaluate and modernize its fee structure, enhance usability, and ensure alignment with current service delivery practices and legal requirements.

The City’s current fee schedule can be viewed online at: Municipal Fee Schedule 2024-2025 Packet Page 171
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study

3. OBJECTIVE
The objective of this Request for Proposals (RFP) is to solicit proposals for a Comprehensive User Fee Study. The study will involve reviewing and updating all existing fees and charges for services, as well as recommending additional fees where appropriate.

3.1 COMPREHENSIVE FEE STUDY
The City is seeking to evaluate the full cost of services it provides and assess whether a reasonable relationship exists between the cost of providing those services and the current service fees. This evaluation must ensure compliance with Proposition 26, Proposition 218, and other applicable statutory requirements. The City intends to undertake a comprehensive, citywide review and evaluation of user fee and rate charges, which will culminate in a costbased user fee study.

The Comprehensive User Fee Study will calculate the full, 100 percent cost of providing specific City services and will offer recommended fees to be charged for each applicable service. As part of this process, the Consultant will be expected to recommend cost recovery strategies and identify best practices in the establishment of user fees. These recommendations should take into account the unique complexities and demands of each department and program.

The selected Consultant will provide a thorough analysis and develop appropriate fee models, along with strategic recommendations. This includes identifying and recommending new fees and potential revenue sources. The City’s goal is to obtain a well-documented and legally defensible cost-of-service plan that identifies appropriate rates to recover billable service costs and establishes user fees in compliance with Proposition 26, Proposition 218, and other applicable laws. Additionally, a survey comparing rates and fees with those of similar cities will be required.

4. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The objective
The RFP schedule of events identifies the City’s best estimate of the schedule that will be followed.

Release of Request for Proposal April 24, 2025
Advisement May 1, 2025
Last Day for Submission of Questions May 14, 2025
City Response to Questions submitted May 19, 2025
Deadline for Receipt of Proposals May 23, 2025 at 5:00PM Evaluation June 4, 2025
Packet Page 172
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
Optional Interview if Required Week of June 11, 2025
Tentative Contract Award Date June 18, 2025
Implementation Summer 2025
*NOTE: The dates subsequent to receipt of proposal may be adjusted without further notice.

5. SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Consultant shall perform a Comprehensive User Fee Study for the City. Tasks shall include, but are not limited to, the following. If the Consultant believes additional or alternative tasks are necessary to achieve the goals of this project, such tasks must be clearly outlined and justified in the proposal. Consultants must be prepared to commence work immediately upon contract award. The City requires timely completion to allow for review, public presentation, and potential incorporation into the City’s budget planning cycle.

A. Project Initiation and Planning
Work and meet with City staff to refine the scope, purpose, objectives, and intended use of the study. Ensure alignment with City needs and strategic goals. Review the project schedule and clarify any questions that may impact the study’s timely and successful development.

B. Staff Engagement and Information Gathering
Conduct interviews with City department representatives to understand operations, identify services provided, and gather relevant financial and operational data. Review the City's existing fee structure and associated documents, including the current Master Fee Schedule.

C. Cost of Service Analysis
Identify the full cost of providing each City service at the appropriate activity level.

Include direct, indirect, and overhead costs in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations, including but not limited to Proposition 26 and Proposition 218.

D. Revenue and Cost Recovery Assessment
Compare calculated service costs to current fee levels to assess cost recovery. Identify services where fees are currently charged, as well as areas where new fees may be appropriate. Include considerations for subsidy policies, equity, legal defensibility, and services where full cost recovery may not be appropriate (e.g., senior or youth programs).

E. Benchmarking and Peer Comparison
Conduct a comparative analysis of the City’s fees with those of similar or neighboring jurisdictions within California. Highlight similarities and differences, identify regional standards, and provide context for any recommended changes.

Packet Page 173
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
F. Recommendations and Fee Setting Strategy
Recommend updated fees and charges, including new fees where applicable. Suggest appropriate subsidy levels based on policy direction, cost recovery goals, and community impacts. Address specific service categories such as: Pre- and postapplication meetings, Emergency services (e.g., post-fire inspections), Permit-based vs. percentage-based models, Fee deferral, waiver, or substitution options G. Reporting and Documentation
Prepare a comprehensive report that includes:
 Full cost calculations for each service
 Current and proposed fees
 Cost recovery levels
 Percentage and dollar amount changes
 Revenue impact estimates
 Fee comparisons with benchmark cities
 Additional findings or issues identified during the analysis H. Excel-Based Fee Model Development
Develop and deliver a flexible, user-friendly fee model in Microsoft Excel that allows City staff to:
 Adjust cost inputs and assumptions
 Perform "what-if" or scenario-based analysis
 Add or revise services and cost components
 Project future adjustments or service changes
I. Stakeholder Engagement and Presentations
Present findings to City management and staff. Incorporate feedback and adjustments as needed. Assist with presentations to the City Council and, if applicable, other public stakeholders or advisory bodies.

J. Training and Capacity Building
Provide on-site training to City staff to ensure they can maintain, update, and utilize the model and fee schedule annually or as needed.

K. Final Deliverables
Deliver a final report in both PDF and editable electronic format. Provide all supporting schedules, cost data, and models in Excel. Submit revisions to the Master Fee Schedule in a format that allows for ongoing editing and updates by City personnel.

L. Ongoing Support
Provide post-study consultation as needed to assist in defending the study’s methodology and recommendations in the event of legal or other challenges.

6. GENERAL
The Consultant may recommend other tasks that it deems appropriate to achieve the objectives set forth in this RFP.

The successful respondent shall be required to retain all working papers and relating supporting documents, including records of professional time spent, for a period of five years after delivery of the required reports, unless notified in writing by the City of the need to Packet Page 174
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
extend the retention period. The Consultant further agrees to allow City staff to review such documents upon written request at any time during the retention period.

6.1 QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RFP
Any questions, interpretations, or clarifications, either administrative or technical, about this RFP must be requested via email prior to the date in this section. All pertinent questions will be answered and conveyed to all Proposers. Oral statements concerning the meaning or intent of the contents of this RFP by any person is unauthorized and invalid. All questions either technical, commercial, or contractual in nature shall be directed to: Jessica Riley, Finance Director, [email protected].

6.2 ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
If a Proposer discovers any ambiguity, conflict, discrepancy, omission, or other error in the RFP or any of its attachments, he/she shall immediately notify the City of such error in writing and request modification or clarification of the document. Modifications will be made by addenda. Clarifications will be given by written notice to all parties who have been furnished or who have requested an RFP for proposing purposes, without divulging the source of the request for same.

If a Proposer fails to notify the City prior to the date fixed for submission of proposals of an error in the RFP known to him/her, or an error that reasonably should have been known to him/her, he/she shall bid at his/her own risk, and if he/she is awarded the contract, he/she shall not be entitled to additional compensation or time by reason of the error or its later correction.

6.3 ADDENDA
The City may modify this RFP, any of its key action dates, or any of its attachments, prior to the bid submittal date. Addenda will be numbered consecutively as a suffix to the RFP Reference Number. It is the Proposer’s responsibility to ensure they have incorporated all addenda. Failure to acknowledge and incorporate addenda will not relieve the Proposer of the responsibility to meet all terms and conditions of the RFP and any subsequent addenda.

6.4 PROPOSER’S COST
Costs for developing proposals are entirely the responsibility of the Proposer and shall not be chargeable to the City of Seaside.

6.5 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
The City requires a certificate of insurance prior to commencement of any work. An underwriter’s endorsement is also required with additional insured verbiage and must be an admitted surety in the State of California. Insurance requirements are outlined in the Contract Service Agreement (Appendix A).

6.6 CANCELLATION
This solicitation does not obligate the City to enter into an agreement. City of Seaside retains the right to cancel this RFP at any time, should the project be canceled, City of Seaside loses the required funding, or it is deemed in the best interest of the City. No obligation, either expressed or implied, exists on the part of the City to make an award or to pay any cost incurred in the preparation or submission of a proposal.

6.7 EXCEPTIONS
If a Bidder takes exception to any part of these specifications as written, or as amended by any addenda subsequently issued, or the Agreement, they must do so in writing. Said Packet Page 175
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
exceptions must be submitted with the proposal. Failure to do so will be construed as acceptance of all items of the specification and the Agreement.

6.8 PROPOSALS BECOME THE PROPERTY THE OF CITY OF SEASIDE Proposals become the property of the City and information contained therein shall become public property subject to disclosure laws after Notice of Intent to Award. The City reserves the right to make use of any information or ideas contained in the proposal.

6.9 CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL
Proposer must notify City in advance of any proprietary or confidential material contained in the proposal and provide justification for not making such material public. City shall have sole discretion to disclose or not disclose such material subject to any protective order which Proposer may obtain.

6.10 REJECTION OF PROPOSALS
City may reject any or all proposals and may waive any immaterial deviation in a proposal.

City of Seaside's waiver of an immaterial defect shall in no way modify the RFP documents or excuse the Proposer from full compliance with the specifications if he/she is awarded the contract. Proposals referring to terms and conditions other than City of Seaside’s terms and conditions may be rejected as being non-responsive.

6.11 DISPUTES/PROTESTS
The City encourages Proposers to resolve issues regarding the requirements or the procurement process through written correspondence and discussions during the period in which clarifying addenda may be issued. The City wishes to foster cooperative relationships and to reach a fair agreement in a timely manner.

6.12 AWARD OF CONTRACT
Award, if any, will be to the Proposer whose proposal best complies with all of the requirements of the RFP documents and any addenda. Evaluation methodology and basis for award are described in Section V – Evaluation and Award Criteria.

6.13 TERM OF CONTRACT
The agreement associate with the work described in this RFP shall be for a period of one (1) year and subject to include an extension option if additional time is required to complete work.

6.14 CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
In the event of a conflict between documents the following order of precedence shall apply:

1. City of Seaside Contract Services Agreement

2. City of Seaside Request for Proposal

3. Proposer's Proposal

6.15 EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT
Upon approval by the City Council, the contract shall be signed by the Proposer and returned, along with the required attachments to the City of Seaside within ten (10) working days. The period for execution may be changed by mutual agreement of the parties. Contracts are not effective until approved by the appropriate City of Seaside officials. Any work performed prior to receipt of a fully executed contract shall be at Proposer's own risk.

6.16 FAILURE TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT
Failure to execute the contract within the time frame identified above shall be sufficient cause for voiding the award. Failure to comply with other requirements within the set time shall constitute Packet Page 176
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
failure to execute the contract. If the successful Proposer refuses or fails to execute the contract, the City may award the contract to the next qualified highest ranked Proposer.

6.17 NON-ENDORSEMENT
If a proposal is accepted, the Proposer shall not issue any news releases or other statements pertaining to the award or servicing of the agreement which state or imply the City endorsement of Proposer’s services.

6.18 CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The City requires a Statement of Economic Interest (Form 700) to be filed by any proposer who is involved in the making, of the decisions which may have a foreseeable material effect on any City financial interest [reference Government Code § 82019].

7. PROPOSAL FORMAT AND CONTENT
The Consultant shall be responsible for preparing an effective, clear, and concise proposal. The City is requesting three (3) paper copies of the proposal and a digital copy emailed to the Finance Director at [email protected], which must contain at a minimum the following information:

A. Transmittal Letter
 Provide a standard business letter expressing interest in the project.  Include a statement regarding the consultant's availability, resources, and commitment to the project timeline.
 Confirm the proposal's validity for at least 90 days.  Declare no conflicts of interest (e.g., no employment by the City).

B. Table of Contents
 All pages should be numbered with a table of contents identifying each major section.

C. Executive Summary
 Provide a concise summary of the proposal, highlighting the consultant’s credentials and unique attributes that differentiate the proposal from others. Explain why the City should select your firm.

D. Company Information and Background
 Legal entity name, EIN, and business form (e.g., Corporation, LLC).  Identify whether the consultant is a subsidiary and the parent company if applicable.  Provide contact details for primary and ongoing support contacts.  List business license number for City of Seaside or a statement of intent to acquire one.
 Include information on any pending litigation, bankruptcy filings, or recent mergers/acquisitions.
 Provide an overview of the consultant’s history, nature of business, and years of service in fee studies.
 Mention years of experience in similar services, particularly for municipalities similar to the City of Seaside.

E. Relevant Experience
 Highlight the consultant’s relevant experience, particularly in conducting Comprehensive User Fee Studies.

Packet Page 177
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
 Provide a list of five (5) recent relevant projects, including client details, service provided, contract value, and project dates.

F. Key Staffing, Development, and Implementation Approach  Provide an organization chart and bios of key project staff, including the Project Manager.
 Describe the approach to completing the project, including methodologies, tools, and techniques to be used.
 Outline roles and responsibilities of both the consultant and City staff.  Provide a detailed project schedule with milestones, tasks, and estimated effort required from City staff.
 Indicate any lead time required to begin work.

G. Proposed Scope of Services
 Provide a proposed scope of services based on the RFP’s requirements. Discuss any ideas for modifying or improving the scope.
 Include a realistic schedule with key deliverables, milestones, and tasks.

H. Training
 Provide an overview of training for City staff to understand the methodology used in the fee studies.
 If applicable, include a training strategy for current and future staff to handle updates to the studies between formal review cycles.

I. Ongoing Support
 Outline any follow-up support the consultant will offer after project completion, especially related to the completed studies.

J. References
Provide at least three (3) references, which should be related to comprehensive fee studies.

For each reference, include:
 Entity name
 Customer contact details (name, title, phone, and email)  Scope of work performed, contract amount, and project dates K. Cost Proposal
 Total All-Inclusive Price: Include a total cost that covers all direct and indirect costs, including meetings, site visits, deliverables, and any anticipated reimbursable expenses.
 Component Costs: Provide separate pricing schedules for each task and deliverable, including hourly rates, estimated hours, and anticipated out-of-pocket expenses.  Rates for Additional Services: Indicate rates for any potential additional services not covered in the initial proposal.
 Manner of Payment: Specify payment terms, with interim billings based on completed work and out-of-pocket expenses.

L. Proposed Legal Agreement(s)
 Include the consultant’s proposed modifications to the City’s standard contract, or provide an alternative contract if applicable.
 Note that the City may choose to use its own contract for final agreement.

Packet Page 178
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
M. Additional Information
Optionally, provide details of complementary services or enhancements that the consultant can offer in the future.

8. CRITERIA FOR SELECTION
An evaluation committee of City staff will evaluate each respondent’s relevant experience and expertise. Proposals will be evaluated based on the information presented in the RFP. The evaluation committee of City staff will review proposals to ensure that the minimum requirements of the RFP are met and are evaluated for the following:
 Qualifications as they relate to this project (50%) in the order shown below:
o Thoroughness and understanding of the tasks to be completed. o Background and experience in organizational analysis evaluation. o Staff, including proposed key personnel, expertise, and qualifications.  Reputation for integrity and competence (15%)
o Positive reference checks.
 Proposed fees and charges for service (30%)
 A statement affirming the Consultant’s ability to provide the required services in a timely manner within the deadlines established in the RFP (5%) The City reserves the right to interview any or all responding proposers and/or to award a contract without conducting interviews. A recommendation for consultant selection will be made to the City Council based on the “best value” evaluation of the proposals/qualifications, which will take into account the consultant’s team’s qualifications, reference checks, comparable experience and cost, as well as the consultant’s availability to undertake the project, complete the tasks timely and deliver a high-quality work product, and ability to comply with the City’s standard professional service agreement.

All interested parties are encouraged to submit proposals to the RFP, as the award is not based solely on the lowest cost proposal submitted. Total cost will be taken into consideration, but the Consultant’s capabilities, competence, and capacity will be considered as well. The City reserves the right to choose the overall best proposer according to the City’s criteria. The City, and its designated representatives, shall be the sole judge of its own best interest, the proposal, and the resulting negotiated agreement. The City’s decisions will be final.

The above factors, along with other factors that the City may deem appropriate, will be used to identify the proposal that represents the best value, which will be the basis for the contract award. The decision of whether to award a contract and selection of a consultant will be in the sole discretion of the City Council.

9. DELIVERY OF PROPOSALS
Proposals submitted by mail should be postmarked sufficiently in advance of the bid opening to ensure delivery to the City Clerk, City of Seaside, prior to the specified opening time. The City assumes no responsibility for delay in delivery of the proposal by U.S. Mail or any other service. LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

Packet Page 179
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
Mail Proposals to: City Clerk
City of Seaside
440 Harcourt Avenue
Seaside, CA 93955
Please ensure “RFP Comprehensive Fee Study” is written in the lower left-hand corner of the envelope.

Three bound copies, plus one electronic file shall be submitted.

Sealed written responses must be received by the City Clerk no later than the date, time, and location indicated above for the Bid Opening and a digital copy emailed to the Finance Director at [email protected]. Late submission of responses shall not be considered. Submittal of response by fax is not acceptable.

Packet Page 180
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study

APPENDIX A

CITY OF SEASIDE

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

ENTER PROJECT NAME
This agreement is made by and between the City of Seaside (City), and <<CONSULTANT NAME>> (Consultant).

A. Engagement: The City agrees to engage the Consultant to provide as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and, hereinafter referred to as “the Project.”
B. Relationship: The Consultant is an independent contractor and is not to be considered an agent or employee of the City.

C. Compensation: The City shall pay consultant on a time and materials basis in accordance with the standard billing rates shown in Exhibit B, attached hereto, not to exceed <INSERT AMOUNT OF CONTRACT>
D. Expense Reimbursement: City will reimburse for professional services and expenses at cost upon submission of receipts.

E. Method of Payment: The City shall pay within 30 days in accordance with Consultant’s Fee Schedule, attached hereto, upon receipt of a written invoice from Consultant detailing services rendered.

F. Term: The term of this agreement shall commence on <INSERT START DATE> and terminate <INSERT END DATE>.

G. Termination: This agreement may be terminated; (a) by either party at any time for failure of the other party to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; (b) by either party upon 10 days prior written notice to the other party; or (c) upon mutual written agreement of both parties. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall stop work immediately and shall be entitled to compensation for professional fees and expense reimbursement to the date of termination and for any work necessitated by that termination.

H. Indemnity: To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless Agency and any and all of its officials, employees and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including legal counsel’s fees and costs, caused in whole Packet Page 181
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
or in part by the negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of Consultant, its officers, agents, employees or subconsultants (or any agency or individual that Consultant shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of services under this agreement. Consultant’s duty to indemnify and hold harmless Agency shall not extend to the Agency’s sole or active negligence.

I. Duty to Defend: In the event the Agency, its officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from the performance of the services encompassed by this agreement, and upon demand by Agency, Consultant shall defend the Agency at Consultant’s cost or at Agency’s option, to reimburse Agency for its costs of defense, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the defense of such matters to the extent the matters arise from, relate to or are caused by Consultant’s negligent acts, errors or omissions. Payment by Agency is not a condition precedent to enforcement of this provision. In the event of any dispute between Consultant and Agency, as to whether liability arises from the sole or active negligence of the Agency or its officers, employees, or agents, Consultant will be obligated to pay for Agency’s defense until such time as a final judgment has been entered adjudicating the Agency as solely or actively negligent. Consultant will not be entitled in the absence of such a determination to any reimbursement of defense costs including but not limited to attorney’s fees, expert fees and costs of litigation.

J. Insurance: Consultant shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this Agreement insurance coverage as follows; Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the services required by this agreement.

General liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile liability insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage Packet Page 182
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than 1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Workers’ compensation insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

Consultant shall submit to Agency, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of Agency, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.

K. Project Management. The (Contract Manager) will represent the City for all purposes under this Agreement. Melissa Savage, Assistant Engineer, is designated as the Project Manager for the City. The Project Manager will be Consultant’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The City may designate an alternate Project Manager from time to time.

L. Ownership of Work Product:
a. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this Agreement, all finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, computer discs, and reports prepared by the Contractor under this Agreement shall become the sole property of City and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by City without the permission of Contractor. With respect to computer files, Contractor shall make available to City, at City's office and upon reasonable written request by City, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, and printing computer files. b. The City agrees to hold Consultant harmless from all damages, claims, expenses, and losses arising out of any reuse of the plans, specifications, drawings, maps, models, computer files and other documents for purposes other than those described in this Agreement, unless written authorization of Consultant is first obtained.

M. Assignment
a. The Consultant shall not assign the performance of this Agreement, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the City. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement, ___________ shall perform the services described in this Agreement.
b. ____________ may use assistants under his/her supervision to perform services under this Agreement. Consultant shall provide City fourteen (14) days' notice prior to the departure of ____________ from Consultant's employ. Should he/she leave Consultant's employ, the City shall have the option to immediately terminate this Agreement, within three (3) days of the close of said notice period. Upon termination of this Agreement, Packet Page 183
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
Consultant's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the date of termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between the City Engineer and the Consultant.

N. Conflict of Interest
a. Consultant shall at all times avoid conflicts of interest, or the appearance of conflicts of interest, in the performance of this Contract. b. If City determines Consultant comes within the definition of Consultant under the Political Reform Act (Government Code §87100 et seq.) Consultant shall complete and file and shall require any other person doing work under this Agreement to complete and file a "Statement of Economic Interest" with City disclosing Consultant’s and/or such other person’s financial interests.

O. Miscellaneous:
a. The entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereunder is contained in this agreement.
b. Neither this agreement nor any rights or obligations hereunder shall be assigned or delegated by the Consultant without the prior written consent of the City.
c. This agreement shall be modified only by written agreement duly executed by the City and the Consultant.
d. Should any of the provisions hereunder be found to be invalid, void or voidable by a court, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
e. This agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
f. All notices required or permitted under this agreement shall be deemed to have been given if and when deposited in the United States mail, properly stamped and addressed to the party for whom intended at such party’s address listed below, or when delivered personally to such party. A party may change its address for notice hereunder by giving written notice to the other party.

Packet Page 184
City of Seaside
RFP Fee Study
Wherefore, the parties have entered into this agreement as of the later of the dates stated below.

Approved:

Dated: ____________________ CONSULTANT

___________________________________
By: ________________________________
Title: ______________________________
Address: ____________________________

____________________________________
Dated: _____________, 2022 City of Seaside:
_______________________
By: Jaime M. Fontes
Title: City Manager
Attachments: Exhibit A Scope of Work
Exhibit B Consultant’s Proposal
Packet Page 185
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

AUTHORIZING A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN

FINANCIAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT THE COMPREHENSIVE CITYWIDE USER FEE STUDY FOR AN AMOUT NOT TO EXCEED $29,995.00
WHEREAS, the Citywide Comprehensive User Fee Study (Project) is included in the adopted Fiscal Year 2024/2025 Budget; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services was released on April 24, 2025, and proposals were due on May 23, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City received five (5) proposals from the following firms: Willdan Financial Services, Government Consulting Partners, Inc. (GCP), Clear Source Financial Consulting, Matrix Consulting Group, and MGT; and
WHEREAS, a comprehensive review and rating of the proposals was conducted by a panel comprised of the Finance Director, Assistant Finance Director, and an outside consultant from the Building Department; and
WHEREAS, Willdan Financial Services was found to be the most qualified to perform the work based on their project approach, qualifications, and relevant experience; and WHEREAS, the proposal from Willdan Financial Services was in the amount of $29,995.00; and
WHEREAS, a 10% contingency in the amount of $2,999.50 is recommended to cover any unforeseen services or adjustments during the course of the study; and WHEREAS, there are sufficient funds available in the City’s operating budget to fund the agreement for a total not-to-exceed amount of $32,994.50; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside authorizes the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Willdan Financial Services in an amount not to exceed $29,995.00 for the completion of the Citywide Comprehensive User Fee Study; and
Meeting Date: 6/24/2025
Item X.X
Packet Page 186
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to approve up to a 10% contingency for written amendments and extensions to the professional services agreement such that the full value shall not exceed $32,994.50.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 24th day of June 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:
________________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
________________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 187

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.I.

TO: City Council
FROM: Greg McDanel, City Manager
BY: Samantha Alcaraz, Human Resources Director/Risk Manager DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTIONS TO AUTHORIZE SIDE LETTER
AMENDMENTS TO LABOR AGREEMENTS AND NONREPRESENTATIVE GROUPS

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the resolutions and side-letter agreements to the existing labor agreements and plans of the Seaside Public Safety Managers' Association, Seaside City Employees' Association, Seaside Firefighters' Association, Seaside Police Officers' Association, Seaside Supervisory and Management Association, and benefit plan listings for nonrepresented groups of Seaside for the Confidential Exempt and Non-Exempt Employees', Unclassified Exempt and Non-Exempt Employees, and the Department Director Compensation Plan.

BACKGROUND
When the fiscal year 2024-25 budget was adopted, the long-term forecast projected that the City would have a short-fall of -$2.7M at the end of the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year.

The City was not ready to make a request for authority to move forward to the "Meet & Confer Process", based on the budget information received. The City could not afford the Meet & Confer Process, cost and legal expenses associated with fees, including, but not limited to; 2024 new law requiring part-time positions equivalent to full-time to receive the same benefits and pay as full-time employees (Retirement, Incentives, Benefits, etc.), Equity Adjustments, and COLA increases, in addition to the proposals of the Associations on the table.

The City had to reconcile its current budgetary situation with the amount of -$4.7M.

The City Manager proposed a cost-effective option, a Side-Letter Agreement to extend the current contracts/plans to December 31, 2025. In order to present a balanced Packet Page 188

Item No. 8.I. Page 2 of 2
budget for the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year, the Finance Director and City Manager worked hard and diligently to cut back significantly on personnel costs, while providing its employees with a 3% salary increase and a one-time payment of $1500.00, which equates to a total of a 4% salary increase.

The non-represented Confidential and Unclassified employee groups and Executive Plan, in conjunction with represented bargaining groups of the Seaside Public Safety Managers' Association, Seaside City Employees' Association, Seaside Firefighters' Association, Seaside Police Officers' Association, Seaside Supervisory and Management Association, will receive upon approval, a 3% salary increase and a one-time payment of $1500.00, the first pay period of July 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT
The costs associated with this agreement are included in the 2025-2026 Fiscal Year budget.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY
Community Safety & Quality of Life, Effective Accessible Governance

ATTACHMENTS

1. Confidential_Unclassified Mgmt Listing of Benefit Amendment_SideLetter

2. Confidential_Unclassified_NonMgmt Listing of Benefit Amendment_SideLetter

3. SCEA LIUNA 25-26 Side Letter Extension

4. SFFA 25-26 Side Letter Extension

5. SMESA 25-26 Side Letter Extension

6. Department Director Compensation Plan_SideLetter

7. Resolution_SideLetters

8. SPOA 25-26 TA Side Letter

9. Safety Mgmt 25-26 Side Letter Extension
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

____________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 189
53293787.1/006593.00011
SIDE LETTER: EXTENSION OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE CONFIDENTIAL &

UNCLASSIFIED MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES
June 24, 2025
Effective upon ratification by the membership and approval by the City Council, and pursuant to the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) dated July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2025 between the City of Seaside (“City”) and the Seaside Confidential and Unclassified Management (collectively “Parties”), the Parties concerning matters set forth in Government Code Section 3504 as set forth below in this Side Letter Agreement:

1. The Confidential and Unclassified Management Group is a non-represented employees’ organization for the classifications of City employees identified in the MOU.

2. The term of the MOU is extended by six (6) months to December 31, 2025.

3. In exchange for and in consideration of this extension, on the pay period inclusive of July 1, 2025, the City will provide each employee a 3% General Salary Increase.

4. In further exchange for and in consideration of this brief extension, on the pay period inclusive of July 1, 2025, the City will provide each employee with a one-time, nonpensionable, lump-sum extension bonus payment of $1500.00.

5. Except as expressly modified in this Side Letter, all other terms of the MOU remain in effect and unchanged except for law updates and/or modifications.

6. This Side Letter is the entire agreement between the Parties, and supersedes all previous written or oral representations, agreements and understandings, whether expressed or implied in regards to any matter related to the extension of the MOU.

7. This Side Letter is subject to approval by the City Council.

Signed on Behalf of City: ___________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 190
53293787.1/006593.00011
SIDE LETTER: EXTENSION OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE CONFIDENTIAL &

UNCLASSIFIED NON-MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES
June 24, 2025
Effective upon ratification by the membership and approval by the City Council, and pursuant to the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) dated July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2025 between the City of Seaside (“City”) and the Seaside Confidential and Unclassified NonManagement (collectively “Parties”), the Parties concerning matters set forth in Government Code Section 3504 as set forth below in this Side Letter Agreement:

1. The Confidential and Unclassified Non-Management Group is a non-represented employees’ organization for the classifications of City employees identified in the MOU.

2. The term of the MOU is extended by six (6) months to December 31, 2025.

3. In exchange for and in consideration of this extension, on the pay period inclusive of July 1, 2025, the City will provide each employee a 3% General Salary Increase.

4. In further exchange for and in consideration of this brief extension, on the pay period inclusive of July 1, 2025, the City will provide each employee with a one-time, nonpensionable, lump-sum extension bonus payment of $1500.00.

5. Except as expressly modified in this Side Letter, all other terms of the MOU remain in effect and unchanged except for law updates and/or modifications.

6. This Side Letter is the entire agreement between the Parties, and supersedes all previous written or oral representations, agreements and understandings, whether expressed or implied in regards to any matter related to the extension of the MOU.

7. This Side Letter is subject to approval by the City Council.

Signed on Behalf of City: ___________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 191
Packet Page 192
Packet Page 193
Packet Page 194
53293787.1/006593.00011
SIDE LETTER: EXTENSION OF LISTING OF BENEFITS

BETWEEN CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE EXECUTIVE GROUP June 24, 2025
Effective upon ratification by the membership and approval by the City Council, and pursuant to the provisions of the Department Director Compensation Plan dated July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2025 between the City of Seaside (“City”) and the matters set forth in Government Code Section 3504 this Side Letter Agreement as set forth below:

1. The recognized employees’ for the classifications of City employees identified in the Department Director Compensation Plan.

2. The term of the MOU is extended by six (6) months to December 31, 2025.

3. In exchange for and in consideration of this extension, on the pay period inclusive of July 1, 2025, the City will provide each employee a 3% General Salary Increase.

4. In further exchange for and in consideration of this brief extension, on the pay period inclusive of July 1, 2025, the City will provide each employee with a one-time, nonpensionable, lump-sum extension bonus payment of $1500.00.

5. Except as expressly modified in this Side Letter, all other terms of the Compensation Plan remain in effect and unchanged.

6. This Side Letter is subject to approval by the City Council and ratification by the bargaining unit represented by the Association.

Signed on Behalf of City: ___________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 195
RESOLUTION NO. 25-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

ADOPTING THE SIDE-LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGERS’ ASSOCIATION, THE CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE POLICE OFFICERS’

ASSOCIATION, THE CITY OF SEASIDE AND THE SEASIDE MANAGERS AND SUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION, THE SEASIDE
FIREFIGHTERS’ ASSOCIATION, SEASIDE CITY EMPLOYEES’

ASSOCIATION, AND THE NON- REPRESENTED GROUPS, CONFIDENTIAL EXEMPT AND NON-EXEMPT, UNCLASSIFIED EXEMPT AND NONEXEMPT, AND DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR COMPENSATION PLAN WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Section 3500 et. seq., Government Code), representatives of the City Manager of the City of Seaside and the Seaside Public Safety Managers’, Seaside Police Officers’, Seaside Firefighters’, Seaside Managers and Supervisory Employees’, Seaside Employees’ Association, and Non-Represented Confidential, Department Directors, and Unclassified Employees’, have conferred in good faith regarding wages, and other terms and conditions of contract; in an attempt to reach a six-month extension to existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Compensation Plans; and
WHEREAS, the Associations mentioned above, and the representatives of the City Manager of the City of Seaside have reached agreement with respect to matters herewith jointly set forth, and have developed a written understanding of such matters for the purpose of presenting it to the City Council of the City of Seaside for its determination; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Section 3500 et. seq., Government Code), representatives of the City Manager of the City of Seaside and the Seaside represented Associations, conferred in good faith regarding wages, and other terms and conditions of the extension of the contract to six months; and WHEREAS, the Seaside Associations mentioned above, and the representatives of the City Manager of the City of Seaside have reached agreement with respect to matters herewith jointly set forth, and have developed a written understanding of such matters for the purpose of presenting it to the City Council of the City of Seaside for its determination; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the attached Side Letter Agreements with the Seaside represented bargaining units, as mentioned above, and the non-represented employees’ shall be effective as stated therein; and Packet Page 196
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 24th day of June 2025.

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Dominique D. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 197
Packet Page 198
Packet Page 199
Packet Page 200

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.J.

TO: City Council
FROM: Greg McDanel, City Manager
BY: Thomas Korman, Public Works Director/City Engineer
Leslie Llantero, Assistant Engineer
DATE: June 24, 2025
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AWARDING A CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACT TO KRAEMER ENGINEERING INC. FOR AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $699,978.94 FOR THE SAN PABLO AVENUE

TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution approving the plans and specifications for the San Pablo Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements Project; awarding a construction contract to Kraemer Engineering Inc. for an amount not to exceed $699,978.94; establishing a 30% construction contingency for a total project construction amount not to exceed $910,000.00; authorizing the City Manager to execute the construction contract and approve any amendments, extensions, and change orders until completion of the project in accordance with the plans and specifications up to the total project construction amount.

BACKGROUND
The San Pablo Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements Project is located on San Pablo Avenue between Mescal Street and General Jim Moore Boulevard. The scope of work includes the installation of three sets of speed cushions, raised medians, curb extensions, flush medians with stamped asphalt, a speed feedback sign, painted bulbouts, red curb zones, slurry sealing, signage, and new striping.

As a bid alternate, improvements on Baker Street—between Olympia Avenue and Phoenix Avenue—were also included. These improvements consist of one set of speed cushions, painted bulb-outs, and centerline striping.

Packet Page 201

Item No. 8.J. Page 2 of 3
The project was advertised for construction bids on May 22, 2025. Four bids were received and publicly opened on June 12, 2025, from the following contractors:

Contractor Base Bid Bid
Alternate
(Baker
Street)
Total
Base + Alt 1
Kraemer Engineering Inc. $674,933.94 $25,045.00 $699,978.94 JMS Cement Contractors Inc. $716,399.00 $32,000.00 $748,399.00 Don Chapin Co. $758,499.00 $39,350.00 $797,849.00
Monterey Peninsula Engineering $837,086.00 $22,000.00 $859,086.00 The contract award is based on the total Base Bid plus Bid Alternate for Baker Street.

Kraemer Engineering, Inc. submitted the lowest responsive and responsible bid at $699,978.94. Staff reviewed the bid and confirmed it meets all requirements, and that Kraemer and its subcontractors possess the necessary qualifications and experience to successfully complete the project.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Class 1, Section 15301: Existing Facilities Class 1 exemptions consist of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alternation of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use.

Evidence: The proposed project would consist of slurry seal pavement treatment, median islands, curb extensions, speed bumps, and signage and striping and would not result in an expansion or significant modification of the existing roadway. Therefore, there are no significant activities associated with the San Pablo Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements Project.

FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed construction contract with Kraemer Engineering, Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $699,978.94 for traffic calming improvements on San Pablo Avenue and Baker Street, as identified in the FY 2024/2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). A construction contingency of $210,021.06, representing 30% of the contract amount, brings the total construction budget to $910,000.00.

The FY 2024/2025 CIP also includes planned traffic calming improvements on Noche Packet Page 202

Item No. 8.J. Page 3 of 3
Buena Street near Del Rey Woods Elementary and Sonoma Avenue near the Dual Language Academy of the Monterey Peninsula (DLAMP). Funding for these locations is included within the proposed contingency. As the lowest bid received was below the engineer’s estimate, staff plans to incorporate these additional improvements through a change order, if determined to be practical. Sufficient funding is available in the Traffic Calming Account (212-8960-9580) to proceed with the Project as outlined above.

STRATEGIC PRIORITY
Community Safety & Quality of Life, Enhanced Physical Infrastructure & Abundant Water Supply

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Construction Contract

3. Specifications

4. Plans
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

____________________________________
Greg McDanel, City Manager
Packet Page 203
RESOLUTION NO. 25-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE SAN PABLO AVENUE

TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND AWARDING A
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TO KRAEMER ENGINEERING, INC. FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $699,978.94 AND TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST INCLUDING CONTINGENCY OF $910,000.00
WHEREAS, the San Pablo Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements Project (Project) is an approved Project in the FY 2024/2025 Capital Improvement Program (CIP); and WHEREAS, the Project will install traffic calming features on San Pablo Avenue between Mescal Avenue to General Jim Moore Boulevard which includes speed cushions, raised medians, curb extensions, flush medians with stamped asphalt, a speed feedback sign, painted bulb-outs, red curb zones, slurry sealing, signage, centerline and edgeline striping; and
WHEREAS, as a bid alternate, improvements on Baker Street—between Olympia Avenue and Phoenix Avenue—were also included. These improvements consist of one set of speed cushions, painted bulb-outs, and centerline striping; and WHEREAS, the design plans were complete and the Project bid documents were released for construction bids on May 22, 2025 and bids were opened on June 12, 2025; and
WHEREAS, four bids were received and Kraemer Engineering Inc. was determined to have the lowest responsive and responsible bid in the amount of $699,978.94; and WHEREAS, in addition to San Pablo Avenue and Baker Street, the CIP also includes improvements on Noche Buena Street near Del Rey Woods Elementary and Sonoma Avenue near Dual Language Academy of the Monterey Peninsula (DLAMP); and WHEREAS, due to the nature of the bid amount, the City plans to include these additional improvements through a change order, if practical; and WHEREAS, their budgets are an accounted for within the contingency amount of $210,021.06, approximately 30% of the contract value, and should be authorized on an as required basis; and
WHEREAS, Kraemer Engineering, Inc. has successfully similar projects; and WHEREAS, the Project is categorical exempt per Article 19, section 15301 of CEQA Meeting Date: 06/24/25
Item # 8.K.

Packet Page 204
because the project consists of installation of speed cushions, slurry seal pavement treatment, signing and striping improvement and involves negligible or no expansion of use.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby approve the Plans and Specifications for the San Pablo Avenue Traffic Calming Project dated May 2, 2025; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute a construction agreement with Kraemer Engineering, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $699,978.94; and BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Seaside does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute up to an additional 30% contingency for written amendments, extensions, and change orders to the construction contract outlined above such that the total construction value does not exceed $910,000.00.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 24th day of June 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:
________________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED TO FORM:
________________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 205