City Council
Regular Meeting
AGENDA
(to be held both at the physical and virtual locations below) Civic Center Council Chamber ♦ 300 Seminary Avenue ♦ Ukiah, CA 95482 To participate or view the virtual meeting, go to the following link: https://zoom.us/j/97199426600 Or you can call in using your telephone only:
Call (toll free) 1-888-788-0099
Enter the Access Code: 971 9942 6600
To Raise Hand enter *9
To Speak after being recognized: enter *6 to unmute yourself Or One tap mobile (for easy connection on smart phones):
US: +16699009128,,97199426600# or +12532158782,,97199426600# Alternatively, you may view the meeting (without participating) by clicking on the name of the meeting at www.cityofukiah.com/meetings.
May 18, 2022 - 6:00 PM
1. ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS
3.a. Stormwater Permit Requirements Presentation.
Recommended Action: Receive presentation from Stone Creek Environmental Consulting regarding the City's stormwater permit and compliance requirements.
Attachments: None
3.b. Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) Presentation.
Recommended Action: Receive presentation from TJKM regarding City of Ukiah’s Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP).
Attachments: None
4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
5.a. Approval of the Minutes for the May 4, 2022, Regular Meeting.
Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes for the May 4, 2022, Regular Meeting.
Attachments:
1. 2022-05-04 Draft Minutes
6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION
Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council.
Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations.
7.a. Report of Disbursements for the Month of April 2022.
Recommended Action: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the Month of April 2022.
Attachments:
1. April 2022 Summary of Disbursements
2. Account Codes for Reference
3. Object Codes for Reference
4. April 2022 Disbursement Detail
7.b. Adoption of Resolution of the City Council Reconsidering the Circumstances of the State of Emergency and Implementing Teleconferencing Requirements for City Council and Board and Commission Meetings During a Proclaimed State of Emergency Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council Reconsidering the Circumstances of the State of Emergency and Implementing Teleconferencing Requirements for City Council and Board and Commission Meetings during a Proclaimed State of Emergency Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Attachments:
1. AB 361 Findings Reconsideration for All Legislative Bodies
7.c. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Approving Records Destruction for the Community Services and Human Resources/Risk Management Departments.
Recommended Action: Adopt resolution authorizing the destruction of outdated documents for the Community Services and Human Resource/Risk Management departments.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Resolution with Exhibit A
7.d. Annual Report on Mobilehome Park Stabilization Fees and Activities, and Approval to Waive Fees for the FY 2021-22.
Recommended Action: Receive report on the Mobilehome Park Stabilization Administrative Costs and Activities, and approve waiving fees for FY 2020-21, and authorized the use of the account reserves for current year administrative activities.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance No. 1126
2. Resolution No. 2020-26
3. Letter to Mobilehome Residents
4. Proposed Resolution - redline and clean
7.e. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Appointing Zhao Qiu to the Diversity and Equity Standing Committee.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution appointing Zhao Qiu to the Persons of Color position on the Diversity and Equity Committee, to fill the unexpired term of L. Jani Sheppard, which expires on February 17, 2023.
Attachments:
1. CC Reso 2020-59 - Establishing Equity and Diversity Standing Committee
2. Application
3. Nomination
4. Proposed Resolution
7.f. Report of Purchase Order No. 47885 Issued to JM Integration for the Emergency Purchase of Repair Parts for the Waste Water Treatment Plant in the Amount of $36,192.57.
Recommended Action: Council will receive report of Purchase Order No. 47885 issued to JM Integration for the emergency purchase of repair parts for the Waste Waterwater Treatment Plant (WWTP) in the amount of $36,192.57
Attachments:
1. City Manager Approval Letter
2. JMIntegration Invoice
7.g. Letter of Interest to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Regarding Consolidation of Municipal Water Providers.
Recommended Action: Approve Letter of Intent to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regarding Consolidation of Municipal Water Providers.
Attachments:
1. Letter of Intent to Consolidate Example Council
7.h. Approval of the Purchase of Professional Design Engineering and Construction Management Services for the Suspended Air Floatation (SAF) and Screw Press at the Waste Water Treatment Plant from West Yost in the Amount of $522,087.
Recommended Action: Approve the purchase of Professional Design Engineering and Construction Management Services for the Suspended Air Floatation (SAF) and Screw Press from West Yost in the amount of $522,087.
Attachments:
1. Proposal - West Yost Scope - Solids Treatment
8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS
10. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM)
11.a. Consideration of 1) Adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) Authorization to Issue a Demolition Permit for a Structure Over the Age of 50 Years Old at 101
South Main Street; File No. 21-6155 and 21-6623 - Continued Item from the May 4, 2022, Council Meeting.
Recommended Action: Approve the Resolution adopting the ISMND with the substituted mitigation, and authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit for 101 South Main Street, based on the market analysis information provided by the applicant indicating that a viable market does not exist and consistent with Findings in Attachment 4.
Attachments:
1. Draft Minute Report for Agenda Item 11a, of the May 4, 2022, Council Meeting
2. May 4 2022 CC Staff Report (attachments omitted)
3. Initial Study & Mitigated Neg Dec, Rev May 11, 2022
4. Draft Findings
5. Draft Resolution to Adopt ISMND
6. Market Analysis Information Provided by the Applicant
12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12.a. Receive Report on 2019-2027 Housing Element Implementation Program 2c, Monitoring of the Conversion of Single Family Residential Homes to Commercial Uses, and Provide Direction to Staff as Necessary.
Recommended Action: Receive the report and provide direction to Staff as necessary.
Attachments:
1. Excerpt from Housing Plan
12.b. Review and Update, if Warranted, the Ukiah City Council Strategic Plan Recommended Action: Review the Ukiah City Council Strategic Plan and provide direction as may be warranted to update the document.
Attachments:
1. City Council Strategic Plan 2022
12.c. Review of the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan.
Recommended Action: Receive a presentation, and provide Staff with further comments and direction.
Attachments:
1. CIP -5 year-FYE 2023 - In Progress - Working Draft
2. Draft Vehicle & Heavy Equipment Request & Justification Sheets - Placeholder
13. NEW BUSINESS
13.a. Discussion and Possible Action Regarding the Cancellation of the July 6, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting, with the Option for the Mayor and/or City Manager to Call for a Special Meeting on an Alternate Date if Time Sensitive Business Arises.
Recommended Action: Approve the cancellation of the July 6, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting, with the option for the Mayor and/or City Manager to call for a special meeting on an alternate date if time sensitive business arises.
Attachments: None
13.b. Receive Updates on City Council Committee and Ad Hoc Assignments, and, if Necessary, Consider Modifications to Assignments and/or the Creation/Elimination of Ad Hoc(s).
Recommended Action: Receive report(s). The Council will consider modifications to committee and ad hoc assignments along with the creation/elimination ad hoc(s).
Attachments:
1. 2022 City Council Special Assignments
14. CLOSED SESSION - CLOSED SESSION MAY BE HELD AT ANY TIME DURING THE MEETING
14.a. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2 & 3))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)(Number of potential cases: 1)
Recommended Action:
Attachments: None
14.b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Name of case: Roofing & Solar Construction, Inc. v. City of Ukiah et al., Mendocino County Superior Court Case No. 22CV00048
Recommended Action:
Attachments: None
14.c. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUK-CVPT-2018-70200 Recommended Action:
Attachments: None
14.d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Russian River Keepers et al. v. City of Ukiah, Case No. SCUK-CVPT-20-74612 Recommended Action:
Attachments: None
14.e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Siderakis v. Ukiah, et al, Mendocino County Superior Court, Case No. 21CV00603
Recommended Action:
Attachments: None
14.f. Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6)
Agency Representative: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Employee Organizations: All Bargaining Units
Recommended Action:
Attachments: None
15. ADJOURNMENT
Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed in order for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at the front counter at the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482, during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting
set forth on this agenda.
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Dated: 5/13/22
Agenda Item No: 3.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1583
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Stormwater Permit Requirements Presentation.
DEPARTMENT: Public Works PREPARED BY: Andrew Stricklin, Associate Engineer PRESENTER: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Summary: Council will receive a presentation by Stone Creek Environmental Consulting regarding the obligations and requirements the City has as part of our stormwater MS4 permit.
Background: The City of Ukiah is subject to municipal storm water requirements of the federal Clean Water Act as required as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program.
Requirements are described in the City’s municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permit issued by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. Under this permit, the City is required to reduce pollution in storm water runoff to the maximum extent practicable by implementing best management practices (BMPs).
The permit is prescriptive in nature, detailing the BMPs required to maintain compliance. The permit is complex, lengthy, and requires intense City resources for compliance. The cost of compliance is difficult for many municipalities throughout California, due to the lack of funding and no enterprise funds for storm water infrastructure. Many cities, including Ukiah, are left funding programs with general funds, usually competing with other city programs and priorities. However, compliance with NPDES programs is essential to protect the City from both regulatory enforcement and penalties and third-party lawsuits. The balance of maintaining compliance and allocating sufficient resources remains one of the biggest challenges facing municipalities.
Discussion: This presentation is a high level overview of the requirements of the permit, anticipated future requirements, and the challenges the City of Ukiah faces with the implementation of the permit, including fiscal and Staff resources.
Recommended Action: Receive presentation from Stone Creek Environmental Consulting regarding the City's stormwater permit and compliance requirements.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer
Agenda Item No: 3.b.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1681
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) Presentation.
DEPARTMENT: Public Works PREPARED BY: Jason Benson, Senior Civil Engineer PRESENTER: Divya Gandhi (TJKM), Ruta Jariwala (TJKM)
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Summary: Council will receive a presentation by TJKM regarding City of Ukiah’s Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP).
Background: The City is teamed with Mendocino County of Governments (MCOG) and Caltrans to work with TJKM on a Local Roadway Safety Plan. TJKM is a multi-disciplinary firm with extensive expertise in broad areas of transportation, parking, and land use. TJKM provides expertise and services for transportation planning, traffic operations, freeway and corridor studies, traffic engineering design (including PS&E), intelligent transportation systems (ITS), traffic safety, and multimodal studies. This work includes complete street services to meet the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians, and public transportation riders.
The Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) is a localized data-driven traffic safety plan that provides opportunities to address unique highway safety needs and reduce the number of fatal and severe injury collisions. The LRSP creates a framework to systemically identify and analyze traffic safety-related issues, and recommend safety projects and countermeasures. The LRSP facilitates the development of local agency partnerships and collaboration, resulting in the development of a prioritized list of improvements that can qualify for Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funding.
The LRSP is a proactive approach to addressing safety needs and is viewed as a living document that can be constantly reviewed and revised to reflect evolving trends, and community needs and priorities.
Discussion: This presentation of the City of Ukiah’s Local Roadway Safety Plan is a comprehensive plan that creates a framework to systemically identify and analyze traffic safety related issues and recommend projects and countermeasures. The LRSP aims to reduce fatal and severe injury collisions through a prioritized list of improvements that can enhance safety on local roadways.
The LRSP takes a proactive approach to addressing safety needs. It is viewed as a guidance document that can be a source of information and ideas. It can also be a living document, one that is routinely reviewed and updated by City Staff and their safety partners to reflect evolving collision trends and community needs and priorities. With the LRSP as a guide, the City will be able to ready to apply for grant funds, such as the federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP).
Recommended Action: Receive presentation from TJKM regarding City of Ukiah’s Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP).
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: NO
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works / City Engineer
AGENDA ITEM 5a
CITY OF UKIAH
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Regular Meeting
300 Seminary Ave, Ukiah, CA 95482
Virtual Meeting Link: https://zoom.us/j/97199426600
May 4, 2022
6:00 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL
Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on May 4, 2022, having been legally noticed on April 30, 2022. The meeting was held in person and virtually at the following link:
https://zoom.us/j/97199426600. Mayor Brown called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers Present: Juan V. Orozco, Douglas, F. Crane, Mari Rodin, Josefina Dueňas, and Jim O. Brown. Staff Present: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager; David Rapport, City Attorney; and Kristine Lawler, City Clerk.
MAYOR BROWN PRESIDING.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Kevin Jennings, Retired Fire Marshal.
3. PROCLAMATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS/PRESENTATIONS
a. Proclamation: Recognizing Older Americans' Month in the City of Ukiah.
Presenter: Mayor Brown
Proclamation was received by Corinne Jones, Community Care Multi-purpose Program Director. b. Proclamation: Recognizing Asian American Pacific Islander Heritage Month in the City of Ukiah.
Presenter: Councilmember Orozco
Proclamation was issued.
c. Proclamation: Recognizing May 15th - 21st as Police Week in the City of Ukiah.
Presenter: Mayor Brown
Proclamation was received by Noble Waidelich, Police Chief. d. Proclamation: Recognizing May 15th - 21st as National Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Week in the City of Ukiah.
Presenter: Councilmember Rodin
Proclamation was received by Doug Hutchison, Fire Chief Revised 5-16-22 to correct vote count on final motion of item 11a and motion of item 13a.
City Council Minutes for May 4, 2022, Continued:
e. Presentation from Manzanita Services Regarding Recent Community Meetings and their Upcoming Event.
Presenters: Raven Price and Kate Gaston, Manzanita Services.
Presentation was received.
RECESS: 6:28 – 6:35 P.M. for technical difficulties.
4. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a. Approval of the Minutes for the April 20, 2022, Special Meeting. b. Approval of the Minutes for the April 20, 2022, Regular Meeting.
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin to approve Minutes of the Special and Regular Meetings of April 20, 2022, as submitted. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
6. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Contract (COU No. 2122-228) Between the City of Ukiah and the County of Mendocino to Receive PG&E Disaster Settlement Funds for the Acquisition of a Fire Training Tower; Approve Corresponding Budget Amendments; and Approve the Purchase of the Fire Training Tower Recommended by the Mendocino County Fire Chief's Association - Fire.
b. Report to Council the Contract (COU No. 2122-123) Expenditure with Solar Otter Inc. for Consulting, Design, and Engineering Services for Solar Projects, not to Exceed $20,000 – Electric Utility.
c. Approval of Notice of Completion for Team Ghilotti for the 2020 East Gobbi Street Traffic Signal Improvement Project, Specification 20-11, and Direct the City Clerk to File the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder – Public Works.
d. Report of a Contract Amendment (COU No. 2122-188) for Additional Right of Way Survey Work for the Talmage Road Rehabilitation Project, and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendment Using 2022 Lease Revenue Bonds in the Amount of $14,000 – Public Works. e. Approval of Purchase (PO No. 47914) of a Suspended Air Floatation System in the Amount of $298,920, plus Tax and Shipping, from Heron Innovators, as Approved in the Fiscal Year 2021- 2022 Capital Budget, and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendment Using Wastewater Reserve Funds – Water Resources.
f. Consideration of Accepting $143,128.93 from the County of Mendocino in One Time Pacific Gas and Electric Disaster Settlement Funds to Reimburse the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority for the Purchase of Emergency Medical Transport Equipment, and Receive Report on those Purchases; Authorized the City Manager to Execute Corresponding Agreement (COU No. 2122-229) with the County; and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendments - Fire.
City Council Minutes for May 4, 2022, Continued:
g. Authorize the Acceptance of $90,909.10 from the County of Mendocino's One Time Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Disaster Settlement Funds for the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority to Fund Radio and Safety Gear; Authorize the City Manager to Execute Corresponding Agreement (COU No. 2122-230) with the County of Mendocino; and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendments - Fire.
h. Request for Authorization of a New Contract (COU No. 2122-231) with Redwood Empire Officials Association for Sports Officiating – Community Services. i. Consideration to Award Contract (COU No. 2122-232) for the Gobbi Street Underground Communications Rework Project, Specification Number 22-03, to Diamond D Construction, in the Amount of $116,649.00, and Approve Budget Amendment in the Amount of $50,000 – Electric Utility.
j. Discussion and Possible Action to Adopt Resolution (2022-27) Waiving 60-Day Notice Requirement Under Government Code Section 25351 Notifying the City of its Intent to Lease Real Property in the City Limits at 1101 South Dora Street - Administration. k. Approval of a Budget Amendment to Advance 2022-23 CIP Funds to be Used Immediately to 1) Allow Contracting (PO No. 47912) with Comfort Air/Heating Cooling this Fiscal Year in the Amount of $19,500 to Replace the Heating and Cooling System in the Grace Hudson Sunhouse, and 2) Provide Approximately $4000 to Install an Upgraded Electrical Panel to Support the New System – Community Services.
Sean White, Water Resources Director presented agenda item 7e at Councilmember Crane’s request.
Tim Eriksen, Public Works Director/City Engineer addressed questions for agenda item 7c at Councilmember Rodin’s request.
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin to approve Consent Calendar Items 7a-7k, as submitted. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES:
None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
No public comment was received.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS
Presenters: Councilmember Orozco, Vice Mayor Duenas,
10. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS
No City Manager or City Clerk reports were received.
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM)
a. Consideration of 1) Adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) Authorization to Issue the Demolition Permit for Two Structures Over the Age of 50 Years Old at 101 and 105 South Main Street, as Recommended by the Demolition Review Committee; File No. 21-6155 and 21-6623.
Presenters: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director and Michelle Irace, Planning Manager.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:32 P.M.
Public Comment: Todd Schapmire Jr., owner and Pinky Kushner.
City Council Minutes for May 4, 2022, Continued:
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:47 P.M.
Motion by Councilmember Crane, Seconded by Councilmember Rodin to disapprove of the idea of demolishing the building.
The maker amended the motion to declare that the southern building is not significant and is acceptable to demolish.
Motion withdrawn by the maker and the second.
Motion by Councilmember Crane, Seconded by Councilmember Rodin to support demolition for 105 South Main Street, and finds that it does not qualify for special consideration [regarding historical value].
The maker and the second amended the motion to read:
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin that the City Council finds that the building at 105 South Main Street has no historic architectural significance under the standards in Ukiah City Code (UCC) Section 3016. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
Motion/Second: Rodin/Crane to deem 101 South Main Street ‘historic’ because it meets two of the three criteria in 3016(e)[of the Ukiah City Code], by having a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind – in this case the metal clad; and 2) it exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history because it is the only remaining building to tell the story of how this block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce. Motion carried by the following roll call votes:
AYES: Crane, Rodin, and Dueňas. NOES: Brown. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Orozco.
RECESS: 8:23 – 8:30 p.m. to consult with City Attorney and Staff.
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin to continue this item to the May 18, 2022, City Council meeting at 6:15 p.m. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Authorization of City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration, and Award of Bid for Spec. 21-06 Runway 15-33 Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 2, Contingent on Grant Offer to Complete the Runway 15- 33 Width Reduction from 150 Feet to 75 Feet; and Install New Lighting (Construction); and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendment.
Presenter: Greg Owen, Airport Manager.
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin to authorize City Manager to execute Grant Agreement (COU No. 2122-234) with the Federal Aviation Administration and award of bid (COU No. 2122-235) for Spec. 21-06 Runway 15-33 Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 2, contingent on Grant Offer to complete the Runway 15-33 width reduction from 150 feet to 75 feet; and install new lighting (Construction); and approve corresponding budget amendment. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES:
Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
13. NEW BUSINESS
City Council Minutes for May 4, 2022, Continued:
a. Receive and File Third Quarter 2021-22 Financial Report.
Presenter: Dan Buffalo, Finance Director.
Receive and File Third Quarter 2021-22 Financial Report b. Receive Updates on City Council Committee and Ad Hoc Assignments and, if Necessary, Consider Modifications to Assignments and/or the Creation/Elimination of Ad hoc(s).
Presenters: Councilmember Rodin and Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager.
Motion/Second: Crane/Orozco to appoint Councilmember Crane and Mayor Brown to serve on a Corp Yard ad hoc. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED TO CLOSED SESSION AT 8:50 P.M.
14. CLOSED SESSION
a. Conference with Legal Counsel—Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2 & 3))
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)(Number of potential cases: 1)
b. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
Name of case: Roofing & Solar Construction, Inc. v. City of Ukiah et al., Mendocino County Superior Court Case No. 22CV00048
c. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Vichy Springs Resort v. City of Ukiah, Et Al; Case No. SCUK-CVPT-2018-70200 d. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Russian River Keepers et al. v. City of Ukiah, Case No. SCUK-CVPT-20-74612 e. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Name of case: Siderakis v. Ukiah, et al, Mendocino County Superior Court, Case No. 21CV00603 f. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.8)
Property: APN Nos: 157-050-03, 157-060-02, 157-050-04, 157-050-03, 157-030-02, 157-050- 01, 157-050-02, 157-050-10, 157-050-09, 157-070-01, 157-070-02, 003-190-01 Negotiator: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager;
Negotiating Parties: Dave Hull and Ric Piffero
Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Payment
g. Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Cal. Gov’t Code Section 54956.8)
Property: 1850 Talmage Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
Negotiator: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager, or his Designee Negotiating Parties: City of Ukiah and Rogina Water Company Under Negotiation: Price & Terms of Payment
City Council Minutes for May 4, 2022, Continued:
h. Conference with Labor Negotiator (54957.6)
Agency Representative: Sage Sangiacomo, City Manager
Employee Organizations: All Bargaining Units
No action reported; direction provided to staff.
15. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. ________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Agenda Item No: 7.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1479
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Report of Disbursements for the Month of April 2022.
DEPARTMENT: Finance PREPARED BY: Candice Rasmason, Accounts Payable PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. April 2022 Summary of Disbursements
2. Account Codes for Reference
3. Object Codes for Reference
4. April 2022 Disbursement Detail
Summary: The Council will review and consider approval of the Report of Disbursements for the month of April 2022.
Background: Payments made during the month of April 2022 are summarized in the Report of Disbursements. Further detail is supplied on the Schedule of Bills, representing the five (5) individual payment cycles within the month.
Accounts Payable Check Numbers (City & UVFA): 3047116-3047210; 3047211-3047276; 3047277-3047386; 3047387-3047472; 3047473-3047572
Accounts Payable Wire Transfers: N/A
Payroll Check Numbers: 510510-510564; 510565-510618
Payroll Manual Check Numbers: N/A
Direct Deposit Numbers: 110669-110932; 110936-111202
Manual Direct Deposit Numbers: 110933-110935
Void Check Numbers: 3047295, 3047399, 3047451, 3047188
Void Direct Deposit Numbers: 110910
Discussion: This report is submitted in accordance with Ukiah City Code Division 1, Chapter 7, Article 1.
Attachment #1: April 2022 Summary of Disbursements
Attachment #2: Account Codes for Reference
Attachment #3: Object Codes for Reference
Attachment #4: April 2022 Disbursement Detail
Recommended Action: Approve the Report of Disbursements for the Month of April 2022.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
Attachment 1
FUNDS:
100 General Fund $970,724.68 700 Sanitary Disposal Site Fund $20,632.25 101 GF-(Sub-Fund) Visit Ukiah $28,300.52 701 Landfill Corrective Fund 105 GF-(Sub-Fund) Fire Authority $106,546.76 702 Disposal Closure Reserve Fund $16,546.70 110 Special General Fund 704 Post Closure Fund - Solid Waste 120 Streets Capital Improvement $274,940.65 710 Ambulance Services Fund $14,507.35 130 Gov'tl Debt SVC/Reserve Fund 720 Golf Fund $3,516.36 200 City Adminstrative Services $98,172.88 730 Confernence Center Fund $4,966.46 201 Worker's Comp Fund $302,655.00 750 Visit Ukiah
202 Liability Fund 777 Airport Fund $42,112.85
203 Garage Fund $6,418.72 778 Airport Capital Improvement Fund $623.92 204 Purchasing Fund $2,002.17 779 Special Aviation Fund 205 Billing & Collections Fund $35,894.53 800 Electric Fund $829,250.54 206 Public Safety Dispatch Fund $9,639.62 801 Electric Capital Reserve Fund $358,539.72 207 Payroll Posting Fund $335,293.74 803 Lake Mendocino Bond Reserve 208 Building Maintenance/Corp Yard Fund $56,081.05 805 Street Lighting Fund $28,678.29 209 IT Fund $33,097.32 806 Public Benefits Fund $5,055.00 220 Equipment Reserve Fund 807 Cap and Trade
249 City Housing Bond Proceeds 820 Water Fund $582,753.84 250 Special Revenue Fund $0.00 822 Water Capital Improvement Fund $123,751.30 251 Special Projects Reserve Fund 830 Recycled Water Fund $82,921.77 253 CITY PROP 172 840 City/District Sewer Fund $144,835.04 300 Park Development Fund 841 Sewer Contruction Fund
301 Anton Stadium Fund $0.00 843 Sewer Capital Fund $4,582.62 302 Observatory Park Fund 900 Special Deposit Trust $4,409.58 304 Swimming Pool Fund $0.00 901 General Service (Accts Recv) $453.33 305 Riverside Park Fund $0.00 902 U.S.W. Billing & Collection $45,820.60 306 Skate Park Fund $0.00 903 Public Safety - AB 109 $0.00 310 Museum Grants 905 Federal Emergency Shelter Grant
311 Alex Rorbaugh Recreation Center Fund $3,388.06 905 Mendocino Emergency Service Authority 312 Downtown Business Improvement Fund $11,506.33 911 Russian River Watershed Association $38,692.78 313 LMIHF Housing Asset Fund 915 UVFD $729.28
314 Winter Special Events 916 UVFD PROP 172
315 Advanced Planning Fund $0.00 917 UVFD Measure B
500 2106 Gas Tax Fund $69,021.92 918 UVFD Mitigation $1,361.78 501 2107 Gas Tax Fund 940 Sanitation District Special Fund 503 2105 Gas Tax Fund 942 Rate Stabilization - UVSD Fund 505 Signalization Fund 943 Sanitation District Capital Improvement Fund 506 Bridge Fund 952 REDIP Sewer Enterprise Fund
507 1998 STIP Augmentation Fund 960 Community Redevelopment Agency 508 SB325 Reimbursement Fund 961 RDA Housing Pass-Through 509 S.T.P. Fund $88,025.57 962 Redevelopment Housing Fund 510 Trans-Traffic Congest Relief Fund 963 Housing Debt
511 Rail Trail Fund $36,350.51 964 RDA Capital Pass-Through 600 Community Development Block Grant 965 Redevelopment Capital Improvement Fund 601 EDBG 94-333 Revolving Loan 966 Redevelopment Debt Service 602 Community Development Fund 967 Housing Bond Proceeds 603 08-HOME-4688 968 Non-Housing Bond Proceeds
604 CDBG Grant 09-STBG-6417 969 RDA Obligation Retirement Fund 605 11-HOME-7654 Fund $0.00 844/944 Sewer Capital Projects Fund $30,014.66 606 CDBG Grant 10-EDEF-7261
607 Prop 84 Grant Fund
609 13-CDBG-8940
610 City RDA Projects Fund
613 Home Program Activities
620 CASP Train
630 Asset Seizure Fund $7,042.15 Retainage Withheld $6,974.44 631 Asset Seizure Fund (Drug/Alcohol) 611 CDBG 16-CDBG-11147 $9,161.07 633 H & S Education 11489(B)(2)(A1)
634 Federal Asset Seizure Grants
635 SUP Law Enforcement Service Fund
636 CBTHP Officer $2,840.50
637 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant
638 Asset Forfeiture 11470.2 H & S
639 Special Revenue - Police
640 Parking District Fund $937.03
670 Federal American Rescue Fund
691 Museum Fund
695 Transfer Station Fund
696 Solid Waste Mitigation Fund
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 510510-510564 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- A/P CHECKS $4,879,771.24 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS: 110669-110935 TOTAL DEMAND PAYMENTS- EFT's $0.00 PAYROLL PERIOD: 3/20/22-4/2/22 TOTAL PAYROLL CHECKS & DIRECT DEPOSITS $1,234,781.30 PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS: 510565-510618 TOTAL PAYROLL EFT's (TAXES, PERS, VENDORS) $700,037.74 DIRECT DEPOSIT NUMBERS: 110936-111202 * vendor name( if applicable) PAYROLL PERIOD: 4/3/22-4/16/22
PAYROLL CHECK NUMBERS:
DIRECT DEPOST NUMBERS:
PAYROLL PERIOD:
VOID CHECK NUMBERS: TOTAL PAYMENTS $6,814,590.28
3047295, 3047399, 3047451, 3047188
N/A
WIRE TRANSFER NUMBERS:
N/A
CERTIFICATION OF CITY CLERK
This register of Payroll and Demand Payments was duly approved by the City Council on ____________________.
City Clerk
APPROVAL OF CITY MANAGER CERTIFICATION OF DIRECTOR OF FINANCE I have examined this Register and approve same. I have audited this Register and approve for accuracy and available funds.
____________________________________________ ________________________________________________ City Manager Director of Finance
MANUAL CHECK NUMBERS:
CITY OF UKIAH
REPORT OF DISBURSEMENTS
REGISTER OF PAYROLL AND DEMAND PAYMENTS
FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL
Account Code Summary Attachment 2
10000000 GENERAL FUND 20012500 CITY CLERK
10017200 SUCCESSOR AGENCY 20012600 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 10020000 POLICE - GEN FUND 20012800 EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 10020210 POLICE PATROL 20013210 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE
10020214 POLICE VOLUNTEERS 20013220 PAYROLL
10020216 COPS GRANT 20013400 ACCOUNTING
10020217 POLICE ANIMAL CONTROL 20013401 BUDGET MANAGEMENT 10020218 POLICE CSO 20014000 CITY ATTORNEY
10020220 CODE ENFORCEMENT 20015100 CITY TREASURER
10020224 MAJOR CRIMES TASK FORCE 20016100 HUMAN RESOURCES 10021210 CITY FIRE 20023510 HOUSING GRANTS
10022100 PARKS 20023520 NON-HOUSING GRANTS
10022300 AQUATICS 20100000 WORKER'S COMP FUND
10022700 MUSEUM - GEN FUND 20116220 WORKERS COMPENSATION 10022810 RECREATION ADMINISTRATION 20200000 LIABILITY FUND 10022821 ADULT BASKETBALL 20216200 RISK MANAGEMENT
10022822 ADULT SOFTBALL 20300000 GARAGE FUND
10022824 CO-ED VOLLEYBALL 20324100 GARAGE
10022831 YOUTH BASKETBALL 20324110 FLEET MAINTENANCE
10022832 YOUTH SOFTBALL 20400000 PURCHASING FUND
10022840 DAY CAMP 20413500 PURCHASING
10022850 CLASSES & CLINICS 20413510 CAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT 10022860 SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 20413520 GRANTS AND SPECIAL PROJECTS 10022900 COMM SVCS SPECIAL SERVICES 20414000 LEGAL SERVICES/EXPENSES 10023100 PLANNING SERVICES 20500000 BILLING AND COLLECTION FUND 10023110 CURRENT PLANNING 20513300 UTILITY BILLING
10023300 BUILDING INSPECTION 20513380 METERING-ELECTRIC 10023320 BUILDING INSPECTION 20513382 METERING-WATER
10023411 CDBG GENERAL ADMIN 20600000 PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCH FUND 10024200 ENGINEERING/STREETS 20620231 POLICE UKIAH DISPATCH 10024210 ENGINEERING 20620232 POLICE FT BRAGG DISPATCH
10024214 TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS 20700000 PAYROLL POSTING FUND 10024224 STORM WATER 20800000 BUILDING & MAINTENANCE
10024310 CORP YARD MAINTENANCE 20822500 BUILDING & MAINTENANCE 10024620 STREETS 20824300 BLDG MAINT CORP YARD
10100000 GF- (SUB-FUND) VISIT UKIAH 20900000 IT FUND
10112700 GF-(SUB-FUND) VISIT UKIAH 20913900 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 10500000 MEASURE S GENERAL FUND 22000000 FIXED ASSET FUND 10521210 FIRE AUTHORITY 25100000 SPECIAL PROJECTS RESERVE FUND 12000000 STREET REHABILITATION 25300000 PROP 172 FUND
12024200 PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING 25321210 CITY FIRE
13000000 GOV'TL DEBT SVC/RESERVE FUND 30000000 PARK DEVELOPMENT FEES FUND 20000000 CITY ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 30022200 PARK DEVELOPMENT 20010000 CITY COUNCIL 30100000 ANTON STADIUM FUND
20012100 CITY MANAGER 30200000 OBSERVATORY PARK FUND
20012200 ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT 30300000 PLAYGROUND & PARK AMENITIES FU 20012300 COMMUNITY OUTREACH/PUBLIC INFO 30322230 PLAYGROUND AND PARK AMENITIES
Account Code Summary Attachment 2
30400000 SWIMMING POOL FUND 63820210 ASSET FORFEITURE 11470 EXPENDI 30522250 RIVERSIDE PARK 63900000 SPECIAL REVENUE POLICE 30600000 SKATE PARK FUND 64000000 PKG. DIST. #1 OPER & MAINT FUN 30700000 SOFTBALL COMPLEX FUND 64012600 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 31100000 ARRC GENERAL OPERATING FUND 64020213 POLICE PARKING ENFORCEMENT 31122000 ARRC 67000000 FEDERAL AMERICAN RESCUE FUNDS
31200000 DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT 69500000 TRANSFER STATION 31212600 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 69624000 SOLID WASTE MITIGATION FUND 31300000 LMIHF HOUSING ASSET FUND 70000000 SANITARY DISPOSAL SITE FUND 31323400 HOUSING 70024500 LANDFILL 700
31323431 LMI GENERAL ADMIN 70124500 LANDFILL CORRECTIVE 31500000 ADVANCED PLANNING FUND 70200000 DISPOSAL CLOSURE RESERVE FUND 31523100 COMMUNITY PLANNING 70224500 LANDFILL CLOSURE
50000000 GAS TAX FUND 70400000 POST CLOSURE FUND-SOLID WASTE 50024214 TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS 71000000 AMBULANCE SERVICES FUND 50500000 SIGNALIZATION FUND 71021100 AMBULANCE SERVICES 50800000 SB325 REIMBURSEMENT FUND 72000000 GOLF FUND
50824210 SB325 ENGINEERING 72022400 GOLF
50900000 S.T.P. 73000000 CONFERENCE CENTER FUND
50924210 STP ENGINEERING 73022600 CONFERENCE CENTER
51100000 RAIL TRAIL FUND 77700000 AIRPORT FUND
51124210 Rail Trail 77714000 CITY ATTORNEY
60000000 COMM. DEVELOPMT. BLOCK GRANT F 77725200 AIRPORT OPERATIONS 60023411 CDBG GENERAL ADMIN 77800000 AIRPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FU 60023412 CDBG ACTIVITY DELIVERY 77825200 AIRPORT CAPITAL 61100000 CDBG 16-CDBG-11147 77900000 SPECIAL AVIATION FUND 61112600 CDBG ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 77925200 AIRPORT SPECIAL 61123410 16-CDBG-11147 80000000 ELECTRIC FUND
61123411 CDBG GENERAL ADMIN 80014000 CITY ATTORNEY
61200000 FUND 612 UNASSIGNED 80026110 ELECTRIC OVERHEAD 61223400 HOME CDD HOUSING 80026120 ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND 61223422 HOME ACTIVITY DELIVERY 80026200 TELEMETRY & CALIBRATION 61323400 HOME HOUSING ACTIVITIES 80026210 SUBSTATION
61323421 HOME GENERAL ADMIN 80026220 HYDROELECTRIC PLANT 62000000 CASP CERTIF & TRAINING 80026400 ELECTRIC ADMINISTRATION 62023320 CASP CERTIF & TRAINING 80026440 POWER PURCHASES 63000000 ASSET SEIZURE FUND 80100000 ELECTRIC CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 63020210 ASSET SEIZURE EXPENDITURE 80126100 ELECTRIC CIP 63300000 H&S EDUCATION 11489(B)(2)(A1) 80126220 HYDROELECTRIC PLANT 63320210 H&S ASSET SEIZURE EXPENDITURE 80500000 STREET LIGHTING FUND 63400000 FEDERAL ASSET SEIZURE GRANTS F 80526150 STREET LIGHTING 63420250 FED ASSET SEIZURE EXPENDITURE 80600000 PUBLIC BENEFITS CHARGES FUND 63500000 SUP.LAW ENFORCE.SVC.FD(SLESF) 80626450 PUBLIC BENEFITS 63520210 SLESF 80700000 ELECTRIC CAP AND TRADE FUND
63600000 CBTHP OFFICER 80800000 ELECTRIC LOW CARBON FUEL STDS 63620210 CBTHP OFFICER 80826100 ELECTRIC LOW CARBON FUEL STDS 63800000 ASSET FORFEITURE 11470.2 H&S F 82000000 WATER FUND
Account Code Summary Attachment 2
82027110 WATER
82027111 PROD OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
82027114 DISTRIB OPERATIONS & MAINT
82100000 WATER CAPITAL RESERVE FUND
82200000 WATER CONNECTION FEE FUND
82227113 WATER DISTRIBUTION CAPITAL
83000000 RECYCLED WATER
83027330 RECYCLED WATER
84000000 CITY/DIST. SEWER OPERATING FUN
84027220 WASTE WATER
84027221 CITY WASTE O & M
84027225 WASTE TREATMENT O & M
84100000 SEWER BOND DEBT SERVICE FUND
84127226 WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPITAL
84200000 RATE STABILIZATION-CITY FUND
84300000 CONNECTION FEE SEWER FUND (CAP
84400000 CITY SEWER CAPITAL PROJECTS FU
84427221 CITY WASTEWATER O&M 844
84427222 CITY WASTE CAPITAL
90000000 SPECIAL DEPOSIT TRUST FUND
91500000 UKIAH VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT
91521400 UVFD FIRE ADMINISTRATION
91600000 UVFD PROP 172
91621400 UVFD PROP 172
91700000 UVFD MEASURE B UNASSIGNED
91721400 UVFD FIRE
91800000 UVFD MITIGATION FEES
91821400 UVFD MITIGATION
96900000 REDEVELOPMENT OBLIGATION RETIR
96917200 SUCCESSOR AGENCY
96995669 969 - RDA OBLIGATION RETIREMEN
51211 PERS UNFUNDED LIABILITY 54101 POSTAGE
51220 INSURANCE 54102 SMALL TOOLS
51230 WORKERS COMP 54103 LAB SUPPLIES
51240 MEDICARE 54106 SPECIALTY SUPPLIES
51260 FICA 54107 EMS SUPPLIES
51270 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 54120 PW - SPECIAL SUPPLIES
51290 CELL PHONE STIPEND 54121 PW - ASPHALT CONCRETE
52100 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 54122 PW - AGGREGATE BASE
52110 AMBULANCE BILLING 54124 PW - CONCRETE/SUPPLIES
52111 DEFIBRILLATOR MAINTENANCE 54125 PW - TRAFFIC PAINT 52112 M. S. OVERSIGHT 54126 PW-PREMARKS
52113 PLANNING STUDIES 54127 PW - SIGN POSTS/SHEETING
52114 COMPLIANCE STUDIES 54128 PW - COLD PATCH MATERIAL 52130 EDUCATIONAL & MARKETING MATL'S 54129 PW - TACK OIL 52131 ASSISTANCE TO SENIORS 54130 PW - SAFETY
52133 MONTHLY DISCOUNT PROGRAM 54131 PW - BARRICADES & CONES 52134 GENERAL ADMIN 54161 BACKGROUND & PHYSICALS
52135 ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM 54162 ADVERTISING
52137 PUBLIC BENEFITS PROGRAM MGMT 54163 INTERVIEW SUPPLIES 52139 RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT & DEMO 54165 NEW EMPLOYEE FINGERPRINT 52150 LEGAL SERVICES/EXPENSES 54166 DOT TESTING PROGRAM 52151 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT ADMIN FEES 54167 EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT 52155 ACTIVITY DELIVERY 54169 LIVESCAN
52180 SECURITY SERVICES 54201 PRISONER EXPENSE
52181 VOLUNTEER EXPENSES 54202 MAJOR CRIME INVESTIGATIONS 52301 PROPERTY TAX ADMIN FEE 54203 RECRUITMENT
52304 LAFCO FEES AND PROP TAX EXP 54320 SOFTWARE
52500 TRUSTEE FEES 54330 COMPUTER AND TECHNOLOGY
52510 ADVERTISING & PROMOTION 54500 EQUIP RENTS AND LEASES 52515 ADVERTISING & PUBLICATION 54700 FINES & PENALTIES 52521 LIABILITY INSURANCE PREMIUM 55100 TELEPHONE
52522 LIABILITY & PROPERTY DEDUCT 55200 PG&E
52524 PROPERTY INSURANCE PREMIUM 55210 UTILITIES
52525 WORKER'S COMP. EXPENSE 56100 VEHICLE & EQUIPMENT MAINT. & R 52526 REMIF ASSESSMENT PAYMENTS 56112 EQUIPMENT PARTS FOR RESALE 52527 A.D.P. PREMIUM & DEDUCTIBLE 56120 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 52528 LIABILITY INSURANCE 56125 LAB EQUIP-REPAIR & MAINT. 52529 EARTHQUAKE & FLOOD (DIC) 56130 EXTERNAL SERVICES
52532 SAFETY & TRAINING SUPPORT 56210 FUEL & FLUIDS
52533 UVFA RETIREE HEALTH INS 56300 BUILDING MAINT. & REPAIR 52600 RENT 56410 EQUIPMENT RENTAL - PRIVATE
52601 DATA STORAGE & CONNECTIVITY 56504 FACILITY MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 52602 RENTAL OF CITY PROPERTY 56600 AIRFIELD MAINTENANCE & REPAIR 52841 SUCCESSOR AGENCY ADMIN 57100 LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT 53000 LAWSUIT SETTLEMENT 57101 CONF & TRAINING-AQUATICS 54100 SUPPLIES 57300 MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS
Object Code Summary Attachment 3
58101 NCPA PLANT GENERATION
58102 NCPA POWER PURCHASES
58103 NCPA TRANSMISSION
58104 NCPA MANAGEMENT SERVICES
58105 NCPA THIRD PARTY SALES
58202 CHEMICALS
58401 AVIATION FUEL
58410 GARAGE LUBRICANTS & PARTS
58510 REIMBURSABLE JOBS
59100 PROPERTY TAXES PAID
59101 FEES
59102 FRANCHISE FEES
59105 CONTRIBUTIONS TO OTHER AGENCY
59106 SENIOR TRASH SUBSIDY
59108 BANK FEES
59400 OTHER EXPENSES
59500 LOANS ISSUED
59502 SCHOLARSHIPS
61200 PURCHASING ALLOCATION
61300 BILLING & COLLECTION ALLOCATIO
61410 RENT ALLOCATION
61420 BUILDING MAINTENANCE ALLOCATIO
61422 IT ALLOCATION
61430 CORP YARD ALLOCATION
61500 INSURANCE ALLOCATION
61600 GARAGE ALLOCATION
61700 DISPATCH
62100 ADMIN & OVERHEAD ALLOCATION
63000 INTERFUND SERVICES USED
70101 LOAN PAYMENTS MADE
70102 BOND INTEREST EXPENSE
70103 LOAN INTEREST
70201 LOAN PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS
70202 BOND PRINCIPAL PAYMENTS
74500 CAPITAL LEASE PRINCIPAL
74501 CAPITAL LEASE INTEREST
80100 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT
80210 LAND ACQUISITION
80220 BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS
80230 INFRASTRUCTURE
90100 LOAN PROCEEDS
90101 LOAN PAYMENT RECEIVED
Attachment 4
Agenda Item No: 7.b.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1641
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution of the City Council Reconsidering the Circumstances of the State of Emergency and Implementing Teleconferencing Requirements for City Council and Board and Commission Meetings During a Proclaimed State of Emergency Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
DEPARTMENT: City Attorney PREPARED BY: Darcy Vaughn, Assistant City Attorney PRESENTER: Consent Calendar
ATTACHMENTS:
1. AB 361 Findings Reconsideration for All Legislative Bodies Summary: The City Council will consider adopting a resolution reconsidering the circumstances of the state of emergency and implementing teleconferencing requirements for public meetings of the Council and all City Commissions and Boards during the current state of emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Background: The City Council is being asked to consider adopting a resolution authorizing continued remote meetings of the Council and its subordinate legislative bodies due to the imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees due to possible transmission of COVID-19 and the recent spread of variants. The current County health orders strongly recommends masking in all indoor facilities due to health and safety concerns. COVID19 is highly transmissible in indoor settings and requires multi-component prevention strategies to reduce its spread. The California Department of Public Health is currently investigating the length of vaccine protection.
The Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends avoiding indoor spaces that do not offer fresh air from the outdoors as much as possible. Returning to meeting in the Council Chambers or smaller conference rooms means being in an enclosed space for meetings that commonly last for one to five hours and would seem to create additional exposure for participants to a possible transmission of the virus.
The Ralph M. Brown Act (“Brown Act”) requires that all meetings of a legislative body of a local agency be open and public and that any person may attend and participate in such meetings. The Brown Act allows for legislative bodies to hold meetings by teleconference, but imposes specific requirements for doing so, including allowing public access to that location. On March 17, 2020, in order to address the need for public meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order No. N-29-20, temporarily suspending the Brown Act’s teleconferencing requirements, Executive Order No. N-8-2 then continued the suspension of the Brown Act’s teleconferencing requirements from June 11, 2021 through September 30, 2021. These Executive Orders allowed legislative bodies to meet virtually as long as certain notice and accessibility requirements were met.
The State Legislature amended the Brown Act through Assembly Bill No. 361 (“AB 361”) on September 16, 2021. As with the Executive Orders, AB 361 requires that certain notice and accessibility requirements continue to be met for holding virtual public meetings. In addition, AB 361 states that a local agency may use teleconferencing without complying with the regular teleconferencing requirements of the Brown Act, where the legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and makes certain findings; and requires that the legislative body make additional findings every 30 days in order to continue such teleconferencing.
As such, Staff recommends that the Council reconsider the circumstances of the state of emergency, and make findings regarding the state of emergency by adopting the Resolution Implementing Teleconferencing
Requirements for City Council and Board and Commission Meetings During a Proclaimed State of Emergency Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic (“Resolution”) attached here as Attachment 1.
Discussion: AB 361, codified in part in Government Code § 54953, allows a local agency legislative body to hold a public meeting utilizing teleconferencing without giving public access to a teleconference location but allowing public comment virtually if the Governor has proclaimed a State of Emergency and any of the following circumstances also apply:
1. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
2. The meeting is being held for the purposes of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
3. The legislative body has determined that as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
As amended by AB 361, Government Code § 54953(e)(3) requires cities that are conducting public meetings via teleconferencing during a declared State of Emergency to make findings, within 30 days of the first virtual meeting after AB361 going into effect, and every 30 days thereafter, that the legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and either 1) the emergency continues to impact the ability to meet safely in person, and/or 2) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend social distancing.
Council adopted these findings at their April 20, 2022 meeting. The Council must now adopt, via this Resolution (Attachment 1), the findings that confirm the circumstances of the state of emergency and justify holding public meetings of the Council and all subordinate commissions, boards, and committees utilizing teleconferencing and allowing public comment virtually, pursuant to Government Code § 54953(e)(3).
Given recent modifications to the health order, Staff is currently utilizing and fine-tuning a hybrid meeting option that allows for in-person and remote participation in an effort to accommodate all needs and choices.
Staff will be working with the Mayor to coordinate continued implementation.
Recommended Action: Adopt a Resolution of the City Council Reconsidering the Circumstances of the State of Emergency and Implementing Teleconferencing Requirements for City Council and Board and Commission Meetings during a Proclaimed State of Emergency Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: City Clerk
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH IMPLEMENTING
TELECONFERENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD AND
COMMISSION MEETINGS DURING A PROCLAIMED STATE OF EMERGENCY DUE TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
WHEREAS:
1. The City of Ukiah is committed to preserving and nurturing public access and participation in meetings of the City Council and its Boards and Commissions; and
2. All meetings of City’s legislative bodies are open and public, as required by the Ralph M.
Brown Act, so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business;
3. The Brown Act allows for legislative bodies to hold meetings by teleconference, but imposes specific requirements for doing so; and
4. On March 17, 2020, in order to address the need for public meetings during the present public health emergency, i.e. the COVID-19 Pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order No. N-29-20, suspending the Act’s teleconferencing requirements; and
5. On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order No. N-8-21, continuing the suspension of the Brown Act’s teleconferencing requirements through September 30, 2021; and
6. The State Legislature amended the Brown Act through Assembly Bill No. 361 (AB 361) on September 16, 2021; and
7. AB 361, codified in part at Government Code section 54953(e), makes provisions for remote teleconferencing participation in meetings by members of a legislative body, without compliance with the requirements of Government Code section 54953(b)(3), subject to the existence of certain conditions; and
8. Such conditions now exist in the City, specifically, the Governor has proclaimed a state of emergency exists for the state of California due to the conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact on the health and safety of its residents; and
9. The Delta variant is highly transmissible in indoor spaces, the California Department of Public Health is currently investigating how long vaccine protection lasts, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends avoiding indoor spaces that do not offer fresh air from the outdoors;
10. Current County health orders impose or measures to promote social distancing due to health and safety concerns; and
2 11. In accordance with Assembly Bill 361, the City Council does hereby find that as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees and the Council desires to authorize continued remote teleconferenced meetings of its legislative bodies; and
12. As a consequence of the local emergency, the City Council does hereby find that the legislative bodies of the City shall conduct their meetings without compliance with Government Code § 54953(b)(3), as authorized by § 54953(e), and that such legislative bodies shall comply with the requirements to provide the public with access to the meetings as prescribed in § 54953(e)(2); and
13. The City has taken measures to conduct public meetings via virtual tools that allow members of its legislative bodies and members of the public to join and participate in meetings remotely and provide public testimony in the virtual environment and via teleconference.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council for the City of Ukiah hereby finds, determines, declares, orders, and resolves as follows:
1. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporates them by this reference; and
2. The Governor of the State of California issued a Proclamation of State of Emergency, which remains in effect; and
3. County of Mendocino officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; and
4. Meeting in person would present imminent risk to the health or safety of attendees; and
5. The City Council of the City of Ukiah has reconsidered the circumstances of the State of Emergency, and finds that:
a. The factors triggering the State of Emergency continue to directly impact the ability of the members of the legislative bodies of the City of Ukiah, their staff, and members of the public to meet safely in person; and
b. State and County officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
6. The City Manager or his designee and the legislative bodies of the City of Ukiah are authorized to take all steps and perform all actions necessary to execute and implement this Resolution in compliance with Government Code § 54953; and
7. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective until the earlier of (i) June 17th, 2022, or (ii) such time the City Council adopts a subsequent resolution in accordance with Government Code section 54953(e)(3) to extend the time during which the legislative bodies of the City may continue to teleconference without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of § 54953(b)(3).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
3 AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jim O. Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Agenda Item No: 7.c.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1647
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Approving Records Destruction for the Community Services and Human Resources/Risk Management Departments.
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk PRESENTER: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Resolution with Exhibit A
Summary: The Community Services and Human Resources departments, along with the City Attorney and City Clerk, have reviewed records that have been identified as being ready for destruction. Council is being asked to approve their destruction.
Background: City of Ukiah's Records Retention Guidelines were constructed based on the State of California's recommended retention schedule and various government regulations, as well as recommendations from the City's departments. The Community Services and Human Resources/Risk Management departments, along with the City Attorney and City Clerk, have reviewed the Transfer Notices for 41 boxes that are due for destruction per the Guidelines, and have approved them for shredding.
Discussion: The estimated cost for shredding 41 boxes is $380. The City Clerk budget includes funds for annual records destruction and no budget amendment is necessary at this time.
Staff recommends that Council adopt the resolution (Attachment 1), authorizing the destruction of 41 boxes of outdated documents, listed in full and attached as Exhibit A to the resolution
Recommended Action: Adopt resolution authorizing the destruction of outdated documents for the Community Services and Human Resource/Risk Management departments.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: No
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: $1,500
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: $380
FINANCING SOURCE: 20012500.52100 - City Clerk Contracted Services PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Neil Davis, Community Services Director and Sheri Mannion, Human Resources Director/Risk Manager
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING THE
DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS
WHEREAS, the Community Services and Human Resources departments, along with the City Attorney and City Clerk have reviewed and approved the list of records that are attached as Exhibit A, and determined that said records are no longer necessary and may at this time be destroyed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council hereby approves the destruction of certain records, contained in Exhibit A of this Resolution, and authorizes the City Clerk to destroy the records.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
____________________________
Jim O. Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
Darcy Vaughn (May 4, 2022 12:53 PDT)
VaughnMay 4, 2022 Darcy
EXHIBIT A
Moved to Location 4ff1294, Box # 00706
Moved to Location 4ff1294, Box # 00706
Moved to Location 4ff1294, Box # 00706
Moved to Location 4ff1294, Box # 00706
Darcy Vaughn (May 4, 2022 12:54 PDT) VaughnMay 4, 2022 Darcy
HUMAN RESOURCES
CONTAINER SHELF LOCATION BOX # Date Rec'd Central
File #
RECORD TITLE RECORD DATES RETAIN
UNTIL
USER/SENDER DEPARTMENT COMMENT
1 a 30 4247 2/3/2014 Immigrant; Fingerprint App.; Motor Vehicle Pulls
2003-2013 2021 Denise Olmstead HR/Risk Mgmt
2 k 431 202 8/23/2019 902.23 Training Records: Safety 1/1/94-12/31/14 2021 Lory Limbird HR/Risk Mgmt3 s 789 4594 6/22/2016 Incident Reports 2008 - 2014 2021 Melody Harris HR/Risk Mgmt EXTRA SPACE AVAILABLE HERE3 s 792 4595 6/22/2016 Claims for Damage 2011 - 2016 2021 Melody Harris HR/Risk Mgmt
Agenda Item No: 7.d.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1648
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Annual Report on Mobilehome Park Stabilization Fees and Activities, and Approval to Waive Fees for the FY 2021-22.
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk PRESENTER: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Ordinance No. 1126
2. Resolution No. 2020-26
3. Letter to Mobilehome Residents
4. Proposed Resolution - redline and clean
Summary: Council will receive an annual report on the administrative costs and activities regarding the mobilehome park rent stabilization program, and consider waiving the fees for the Fiscal Year 2021-22.
Background: In October 2010, the City Council adopted Ordinance 1126 (Attachment 1) to provide regulations surrounding mobilehome park rent increases and capital improvement pass-through costs. This Ordinance works in tandem with an adopted resolution that sets the administrative fees associated with Section 2715 of the Ordinance, and is reviewed annually.
In 2018, Council gave direction to Staff to charge the mobilehome park stabilization account each year to cover the City administrative costs incurred to maintain the requirements laid out in the Resolution; only invoicing the mobilehome park owners/residents when the balance in the account falls below the estimated costs for arbitration and administrative activities. Staff was also directed to implement an annual educational program to inform the tenants of their rights through the ordinance and resolution, and include those actions and results in the yearly report to Council.
As part of the educational program, a webpage was established and has been maintained on the City’s website at: http://www.cityofukiah.com/mobile-home-park-rent-stabilization-2/. The webpage contains links to the following: Ordinance 1126 and Resolution 2020-26 that govern the stabilization process and costs; the December 20, 2017, Staff Report to Council that details how the fees are assessed; and the annual letter sent to the mobilehome park owners regarding the October CPI, which dictates the amount that rent can be increased. All correspondence and documents pertaining to the mobilehome park rent stabilization are added on an on-going basis to this webpage.
In May of 2020, Council adopted Resolution 2021-26 (Attachment 2) that amended and updated the arbitration and administrative costs. In May of 2021, there was no need to update the resolution.
In addition, a letter (Attachment 3) was sent out on May 9, 2022, to all mobilehome park residents to bring their awareness to the website resource. As of the publication of this agenda item, the Clerk’s office has received three calls from park residents who wished to learn more about the program.
Discussion: The current before-year-end-close balance in the Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Trust Fund (90000000.23251) is $24,020. The estimated administrative and educational outreach costs for the 21-22 Fiscal Year is $878 (using the higher rate of the two invoicing rates specified in the resolution), which would
leave a remaining balance of $23,142. After acquiring an updated fee schedule from JAMS and ADR Services, the total reasonable estimate for the annual cost to administer Chapter 8, including arbitrations is $12,278. As the estimated remaining balance would still exceed the suggested reasonable estimate of costs, Staff recommends waiving the annual billing to the mobilehome parks for the fiscal year 2021-22, and authorized the use of the account reserves for current year administrative activities.
Costs to implement the program shown on Exhibit A to Resolution 2020-26, have changed due to the hourly arbitration costs. Therefore, Staff is recommending adoption of a new resolution amending Exhibit A to include the cost differences. Red-line and clean versions of the proposed resolution are included as Attachment
4. These changes would not affect the recommendation to waive the annual fee to the mobilehome parks for the fiscal year 2021-22.
Recommended Action: Receive report on the Mobilehome Park Stabilization Administrative Costs and Activities, and approve waiving fees for FY 2020-21, and authorized the use of the account reserves for current year administrative activities.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: $24,020
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: $523
FINANCING SOURCE: 90000000.23251 - Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Trust Fund PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
ORDINANCE NO. 1126
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
UKIAH ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 8, ENTITLED:
MOBILEHOME RENT STABILIZATION," TO DIVISION 1
OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE.
SECTION ONE.
The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains that a new Chapter 8, entitled "Mobilehome Rent Stabilization" is hereby added to Division 1 of the Ukiah City Code to read as follows.
DIVISION 1 BUILDING
CHAPTER 8 MOBILEHOME RENT STABILIZATION
2700: FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
A) The State of California has recognized, by the adoption of special legislation regulating tenancies of mobilehome owners in mobilehome parks, that there is a significant distinction between homeowners in mobilehome parks and other dwelling units, and the State likewise has recognized that homeowners in mobilehome parks, unlike apartment tenants or residents of other rental stock, are in the unique position of having made a substantial investment in a residence, the space for which is rented or leased as distinguished from owned.
The physical removal and relocation of a mobilehome from a rented or leased space within a mobilehome park can be accomplished only at substantial cost and inconvenience with a limited concurrent ability to find another location and, in many instances, the removal requires a separation of the mobilehome unit from appurtenances which have been made permanent, thus creating severe damage and depreciation in value to the mobilehome.
Because of the limited availability of vacant spaces in mobilehome parks, the age and condition of some mobilehomes and the cost of moving mobilehomes, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to move a mobilehome from one park to another within the City.
B) There is presently within the City and the surrounding areas a shortage of sites for the placement of mobilehomes.
C) According to the Ukiah General Plan Housing Element, mobilehomes presently constitute an important source of housing for persons of extremely low, ATTACHMENT 1
very low, low, and moderate income levels, who as a group are unable to afford unreasonably large rent increases.
D) A large number of persons living in mobilehomes are elderly, some of whom live on small fixed incomes. These persons may expend a substantial portion of their income on rent and may not be able to afford other housing within the City.
E) Rents for sites within mobilehome parks in the City have, prior to the adoption of this chapter, increased substantially, with recent increases in one park exceeding by a substantial amount the annual increase in the cost of living.
F) Space rent increases at the time of sale or other transfer of a mobilehome within a park have been shown to be substantially over the pre-transfer rent.
Such large rent increases at the time of sale of a mobilehome may unfairly depress the sales price of the mobilehome and work an economic hardship on the mobilehome owner. The annual rent increases and vacancy control provisions of this chapter prevent this economic hardship while protecting the property rights of owners.
G) Because of the space shortage and potential for rapidly rising rents, regulation is necessary to assure that economic hardship to a substantial number of mobilehome owners in the City, many of whom are senior citizens on low fixed incomes, does not occur.
H) It is the purpose of this chapter to establish a speedy and efficient method of reviewing certain requested mobilehome space rent increases in mobilehome parks to protect mobilehome owners from arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable site rent adjustments while insuring owners and/or operators and investors a fair and reasonable return on their investment in their mobilehome park. 2701: DEFINITIONS.
For the purpose of this chapter, the following words, terms and phrases shall be defined as follows:
A) "Affected mobilehome owners" means those mobilehome owners whose space is not covered by a valid lease meeting the requirements of section 798. b) 17(of the California Civil Code or otherwise legally exempt from local rent control regulation.
B) "Arbitrator" means a person who is neither a mobilehome owner nor has an interest in a mobilehome park of a nature that would require disqualification under the provisions of the Political Reform Act if the person were a designated City employee, has experience in analysis of financial records, and meets one of the following criteria:
2
1) Licensed attorney or CPA who is qualified by experience or training to conduct the arbitrations authorized by this chapter.
2) Membership in the American Arbitration Association with expertise in rental dispute arbitration; or
3) Service as a judge in a state or federal court.
C) "Capital improvement" means those improvements which directly and primarily benefit and serve the existing mobilehome owners by materially adding to the value of the park or adapting it to new uses, and which are required to be amortized over the useful life of the improvements pursuant to the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. "Capital improvement costs" means all costs reasonably and necessarily related to the planning, engineering and construction of capital improvements and shall include debt service costs, if any, incurred as a direct result of the capital improvement. Capital improvement does not include ordinary maintenance or repairs or Capital replacements.
D) "Capital replacement" means a capital expenditure as defined by the Internal Revenue Code which replaces, upgrades or repairs an existing improvement, such as, but not limited to, an on-site water or electrical distribution or sewage collection system, a street, a parking area, or common facility, such as a laundry, community kitchen or meeting room. If the expenditure qualifies for treatment as a capital expenditure which must be depreciated under the Internal Revenue Code, it is a capital replacement. If it can be fully deducted in one year as a business expense, it does not qualify as a capital replacement.
E) "City" means the City of Ukiah, California.
F) "Clerk" means Clerk of the Ukiah Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Program, who shall be an employee or independent contractor designated by the City Manager as the Clerk and assigned the Clerk's duties as prescribed by this chapter or as needed for the proper implementation of this chapter.
G) "Consumer Price Index" or "CPI" means the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers in the San Francisco/ SanOakland/Jose area published by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.
H) "Department" means the Department of Community Development of the City of Ukiah.
1) " MRL" means the California Mobilehome Residency Law.
J) "Mobilehome" means
1) a structure designed for human habitation and for being moved on a street or highway under permit pursuant to Section 35790 of the Vehicle Code, including a manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code, and a mobilehome, as defined in Section 18008 of the Health and Safety Code, but, except as provided in subdivision (2), does not include a recreational vehicle, as defined in Section 799.29 of the Civil Code and Section 18010 of the Health and Safety Code or a commercial coach as defined in Section 18001.8of the Health and Safety Code.
2) "Mobilehome," for purposes of this chapter, also includes trailers and other recreational vehicles of all types defined in Section 18010 of the Health and Safety Code, other than motor homes, truck campers, and camping trailers, which are used for human habitation, if the occupancy criteria of either paragraph (i) or (ii), as follows, are met:
i) The trailer or other recreational vehicle occupies a mobilehome site in the park, on November 15, 1992, under a rental agreement with a term of one month or longer, and the trailer or other recreational vehicle occupied a mobilehome site in the park prior to January 1, 1991. ii) The trailer or other recreational vehicle occupies a mobilehome site in the park for nine or more continuous months commencing on or after November 15, 1992.
Mobilehome" does not include a trailer or other recreational vehicle located in a recreational vehicle park subject to Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 799.20) of the Civil Code.
K) "Mobilehome park" or "park" means any area of land within the City of Ukiah where two or more mobilehome spaces are rented, or held out for rent, to accommodate mobilehomes used for human habitation.
L) "Mobilehome space" means the site within a mobilehome park intended, designed or used for the location or accommodation of a mobilehome and any accessory structures or appurtenances attached thereto or used in conjunction therewith.
M) "Mobilehome owner" means a person who is the owner of a mobilehome and legally occupies the mobilehome within a mobilehome park. Unless otherwise indicated, mobilehome owner includes tenants.
N) "Owner" means the owner or operator of a mobilehome park or an agent or representative authorized to act on said owner's or operator's behalf in connection with the maintenance or operation of such park. 4
O) "Party" as used in this chapter refers to any affected mobilehome owner and/or owner involved in proceedings under this chapter.
P) "Prospective mobilehome owner" means a person who is in the process of negotiating a tenancy in a mobilehome park.
Q) "Rent" means the consideration paid for the use or occupancy of a mobilehome space.
R) "Rent stabilization administration fee" means the fee established from time to time by resolution of the City Council in accordance with the provisions of the chapter.
S) "Rent increase" means any increase in base rent charged by an owner to a mobilehome owner or offered to a prospective mobilehome owner.
T) "Tenant" means the person or persons who have signed a lease of a mobilehome park space as the lessee of the space.
2702: BASE RENT.
Except as provided in this chapter, an owner shall not demand, accept or retain rent for a mobilehome space exceeding the base rent which shall be the rent in effect for that space on the date this section becomes effective (the Effective Date"). If a previously rented mobilehome space was not rented on the Effective Date, the base rent shall not exceed the rent in effect during the last month the space was rented prior to that date, except as provided in this chapter.
For a mobilehome space first rented after the Effective Date, the owner shall establish the base rent. For parks annexed into the City after the Effective Date, the base rent shall be the rent charged on the effective date of a park's annexation into the City.
2703: CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, UTILITIES AND OTHER PASS
THROUGHS.
A) Consumer Price Index. An owner, once in any 12-month period, may impose a rent increase for a mobilehome space by 100 percent of the percentage increase, if any, in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) during the most recent 12-month period ending in October; provided, however, the rental increase shall not exceed five percent of the previous rent charged for the space.
If an owner has obtained a rent increase under subsection 2704(B), the owner may calculate the rent increase allowed by this subsection based upon the approved comparable rent as allowed in subsection 2704(8) instead of upon the actual rent in effect at the time of the increase.
B) If the change in the CPI exceeds five percent for two consecutive years, the Clerk shall review the maximum rent increase and recommend an ordinance amendment if appropriate.
C) Government Mandated Expense Pass Through. An owner may pass through to affected mobilehome owners any new or increase in government mandated capital expenditures and operating expenses including taxes (other than the two percent annual increase authorized by California Constitution Article XIIIA, section 2(b)) and assessments, fees and mandated expenses due to code changes subject to the following procedure:
1) Upon a petition signed by one adult mobilehome owner for each of 50 percent of the spaces subject to rent control in a mobilehome park or 50 spaces, whichever is less, and filed with the Clerk within 30 days of the date the owner gives notice of a government mandated expense pass through to every affected mobilehome owner, the Arbitrator, in accordance with the meet and confer and arbitration procedures provided in this chapter, may disallow or decrease the proposed pass through based upon substantial evidence in the record that the pass through is not legally proper, or is excessive, or that during the pass through period the owner is including an unreasonably high financing cost and/or return on the expense being passed through.
D) Utilities. If not billed by the utility directly to the mobilehome owner, an owner may separately pass through to a mobilehome owner charges for all utilities, including, but not limited to, sewer, water, garbage, cable TV., gas and electricity, and any increases in such charges, subject to compliance with Sections 3960-3963. Notwithstanding any provision to the contrary in this section, the owner shall not pass through any charge or expense for gas or electric service to the extent prohibited by section 739.5 of the California Public Utilities Code.
E) Capital Improvement Pass Through. An owner may charge to the affected mobilehome owner as additional rent the pro rata share of new service and capital improvement costs including reasonable financing costs if, prior to initiating the service or incurring the capital improvement cost, the owner has:
1) Consulted with the mobilehome owners prior to initiating construction of the improvements or initiating the new service regarding the nature and purpose of the improvements or services and the estimated cost of the improvements or services;
2) Obtained the prior written consent of at least one adult mobilehome owner in each of a majority of the mobilehome spaces which are occupied by the mobilehome owner to the proposed service or capital improvement. Each space shall have only one vote.
6
F) Capital Replacement Pass Through. Notwithstanding the provision of subsection E of this section, an owner may charge to the mobilehome owner as additional rent the pro rata share of capital replacement costs including reasonable financing costs, if not otherwise prohibited by law, subject to the following procedure:
1) The owner may seek advance approval for the proposed pass through, before undertaking the capital project, by following the procedures set forth in Sections 2709 to 2711. If the increase is approved by the Arbitrator, it shall not be effective until the next regularly scheduled annual rent increase date, provided that the 90-day notice is issued, the expense is actually incurred and that proper verification is submitted. This verification shall include, at a minimum, proof of actual costs and payment to vendors or contractors. In the event that the actual cost of the capital expense is less than the approved amount, the increase shall be adjusted to reflect this decreased amount;
2) The owner shall give notice of the proposed pass through to each affected mobilehome owner no later than 12 months after completion of the capital replacement work;
3) Upon a petition signed by one adult mobilehome owner of each of 50 percent of the spaces subject to rent control in a park or 50 spaces subject to rent control, whichever is less, and filed with the Clerk within 30 days of the date the owner gives notice of the pass through to every affected mobilehome owner, the Arbitrator, in accordance with the arbitration procedure provided in this chapter, may disallow or decrease the pass through for capital replacements based upon substantial evidence in the record that the capital replacement was not necessary, or that the cost of the capital replacement was excessive, or that during the pass through period, the owner is including an unreasonably high financing cost and/or return on the expense being passed through. The owner shall have the burden of proving the necessity for and reasonable cost of the capital replacements. In determining whether the owner has met its burden of proving the necessity for and reasonable cost of the capital replacement, the Arbitrator may consider, among other factors, the reasonableness of the owner's history of maintenance of the property or improvement to be replaced. The Arbitrator'sreview will include, but not necessarily be limited to, the records reflecting past maintenance work and the cost.
G) All charges passed through by the owner to the mobilehome owners pursuant to subsection C and D of this section and additional rent charged pursuant to subsections E and F of this section must be separate from the base rent and listed separately. All billings used to calculate a pass through or additional rent to mobilehome owners must be disclosed within a reasonable time upon request by a mobilehome owner.
7
H) Notice. A written notice of each rent increase or new or increased capital improvement or capital replacement pass through charge made under the provisions of this section shall be filed by the owner with the Clerk, and provided to each affected mobilehome owner, at least 90 days before the rent increase goes into effect or as required by the MRL. The notice shall identify the park and shall specify the dollar amount of the increase, the percentage of the increase, an itemization of all new or increased pass throughs and additional rent charges, the specific space affected, the date the increase will go into effect, how each increase was calculated, and the date the rent on each affected space was last increased. The notice shall also advise each affected mobilehome owner of any right to petition for review of a proposed rent increase and that a petition form may be requested from the Clerk.
1) Whenever a time period is prescribed for filing an application or petition, the application or petition shall be deemed filed when it is first filed with the Clerk, even if the Clerk determines that the application or petition is not complete, provided that the Clerk determines that application or petition is complete, as a result of additional submissions by the applicant or petitioner, within thirty days of the initial filing.
2704: IN-PLACE TRANSFER RENT INCREASES-ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW BASE RENT.
A) Whenever either of the following events occurs, an owner shall be permitted to charge a new base rent for the mobilehome space as provided in this section:
1) The termination of the tenancy of the affected mobilehome owner in accordance with the MRL (California Civil Code sections 798.55 through 798.60, as amended, excepting section 798.59); or
2) The voluntary permanent removal of a mobilehome by a mobilehome owner. A removal of the mobilehome from the space for the purpose of performing rehabilitation or capital improvements to the space or for the purpose of upgrading the mobilehome shall not constitute a voluntary removal of the mobilehome.
B) Upon the sale of a mobilehome in-place, an owner may implement an increase of the base rent for that space in an amount equal to 10% of the rent for that space then in effect.
C) Except as provided in subsections (A) and (B), an owner may not condition an in-place transfer of a mobilehome or condition assignment of an existing lease to a prospective mobilehome owner, upon agreement to an increased rent in anticipation of the in-place transfer. This subsection shall not apply to specific conditions included in a lease exempt from rent control which
allows an owner to condition assignment in a manner prohibited by this section.
For purposes of this subsection, "a lease exempt from rent control" means a lease meeting, in all respects, the criteria of Civil Code section 798. b), 17(as such criteria are presently enacted or may hereafter be amended. 2705: FAIR RETURN RENT INCREASES.
If an owner presents evidence to the Arbitrator, including any financial records requested by the Arbitrator, which proves that the owner is denied a fair return by the rent control provisions of this chapter, the Arbitrator may authorize an increase in rents as deemed appropriate by the Arbitrator to provide a fair return to the owner. The Arbitrator shall use the method set forth in subsection 2711(C) to determine the fair return.
2706: RENT FREEZE OR RENT ROLLBACK.
A) Upon the petition signed by one adult mobilehome owner of 50 percent of the spaces subject to rent control in a park or 50 spaces subject to rent control, whichever is less, the Arbitrator may prohibit future rent increases for spaces governed by this chapter, upon its determination that maintenance by the owner has been substantially reduced and is insufficient to adequately maintain the park in a habitable condition. The determination shall be based upon substantial evidence in the record. The prohibition may be continued until the Arbitrator determines that maintenance by the owner has been restored to a reasonable level.
B) Upon petition by one or more affected mobilehome owners, an Arbitrator may prohibit future rent increases, or order a rollback of the existing rent as to those petitioners, upon its determination that after the Effective Date, an owner instituted a rent increase inconsistent with the criteria established by this chapter.
The determination shall be based upon substantial evidence in the record. The prohibition may be continued until the Arbitrator determines that the rent has become consistent with this chapter.
2707: TIME OF ALLOWED RENT INCREASE/ADJUSTMENT.
A) Once within a 12-month period, the owner may implement a CPI rent adjustment (subsection 2703(A)), if any, or a fair return increase (Section 2703), but not both.
B) A capital replacement pass through under subsection 2703(F) may only be implemented on the effective date of the CPI or fair return rent adjustment.
C) The following increases or adjustments may be implemented at any time during the year:
9
1) Government mandated expense pass through (subsection 2703(C)); 2) Utility pass throughs (subsection 2703(D));
3) Capital improvements (subsection 2703(E));
4) In-place transfer rent increases (Section 2704).
Any increases subject to arbitration shall be implemented after the final ruling of the Arbitrator.
D) Rent freeze and rent rollbacks shall be implemented at the time they are ordered (Section 2706).
2708: ARBITRATION.
A) Matters Subject to Arbitration.
1) An owner shall file with the Clerk:
a) An application seeking to increase space rents beyond 100 percent of the CPI to provide a fair return to the owner as allowed by Section 2705. 2) Affected mobilehome owners may file with the Clerk:
a) A petition objecting to a government mandated expense pass through as allowed by subsection 2703(C);
b) A petition objecting to a capital replacement pass through as allowed by subsection 2703(F);
c) A petition for rent freeze as allowed by subsection 2706(A); d) A petition for rent rollback as allowed by subsection 2706(B).
B) These petitions and applications shall be decided by the Arbitrator.
C) Cost of Arbitration. The cost of arbitration shall be paid by the Clerk out of revenue from the rent stabilization administration fee. The Arbitrator may reimburse the City by assessing the cost of the arbitration to either party if the Arbitrator determines that the position taken by the party is frivolous. 2709: PROCEDURES FOR FAIR RETURN NOTICE AND APPLICATION AND PETITION FORMS.
10
A) Notice. At least 10 days prior to submission of a fair return application or a petition to the Clerk, the applicant or petitioner shall mail or deliver a notice and a copy of the application or petition to the owner and each affected mobilehome owner in the park. The notice shall be on a form specified by the Clerk. The at the park's office and shall be posted on the City'swebsite. One copy of the supporting documents shall be provided by the applicant or petitioner at no cost to the other party. All fair return notices shall include the following information:
1) The amount of the rent increase both in dollars and as a percentage of the existing rent, how it was calculated, an itemization of all pass throughs and additional rent charges, information that explains and supports the level of increase proposed including, at a minimum, a summary of the owner's net operating income for the base year and the preceding 24 months and other relevant information that supports the level of rent increase desired, the effective date of the increase and that copies of the supporting documents shall be provided by the owner at no cost to the mobilehome owners' representative and be available to the mobilehome owners at the park's office for inspection and on the City's website;
2) The name, address and telephone number of the Clerk or designee, a statement to inform the mobilehome owners to contact the Clerk or designee for an explanation of the provisions of this chapter, and that a roster of affected mobilehome owners can be requested from the Clerk; and
3) A copy of the official petition form which is to be used for the process established by this chapter.
B) Application/Petition Forms. The application or petition shall be filed with the Clerk on the form prescribed by the Clerk and must be accompanied by all supporting material necessary to support the request. The application and petition shall contain the following declaration: "I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct." The application shall be dated and subscribed by the applicant(s) and shall state the place of execution. 1) Within five working days of receipt, the Clerk shall complete a preliminary review of the application or petition. Applications or petitions which are incomplete will not be considered properly filed.
2) No further action shall take place on applications or petitions which are not properly filed, and the Clerk may decline to accept such application and/or return them to the petitioner immediately after the preliminary review with a notice of the defects.
11
3) When the Clerk determines that the application or petition is complete, the Clerk shall send a written notice of confirmation of receipt of a completed application or petition to the parties.
4) In capital replacement proceedings and in government mandated capital expenditure and operating expense proceedings, affected mobilehome owners shall have 30 calendar days after receipt of the confirmation of the completed application to file with the Clerk a petition objecting to the rent increase signed by one adult tenant in at least 50 percent of the mobilehome spaces subject to rent control.
C) Insufficient Objection-Capital Replacement or Government-Mandated Pass Through Proceeding-Clerk Action. If less than the required number of affected mobilehome owners object to a proposed capital replacement or government-mandated pass through, or if objection is withdrawn, including any amendments, before or after the meet and confer process, the Clerk shall approve the requested pass through.
2710: PROCEDURE FOR MEET AND CONFER.
Within 10 working days of the date of the Clerk's notice of a completed application or petition and prior to assignment of an Arbitrator, affected mobilehome owners and owners shall meet and confer with each other's representatives. The time, place and date of the meeting shall be agreed to by the parties or, if the parties cannot agree, determined by the Clerk. Written notice of the scheduled meeting shall be given by the applicant or petitioner. At the meeting, representatives of the parties shall exchange documentary evidence that the parties, in good faith then know, will be used to support their respective positions in an arbitration and discuss the issues in dispute. In the case of an owner, all financial data upon which any proposed increase is claimed shall be supplied to affected mobilehome owner representatives at the time of the meet and confer meeting. The parties may request that the Clerk provide a mediator, at no cost to the parties, to assist with the meet and confer process. The Arbitrator may deny an application based on the applicant'sfailure to participate in good faith in the meet and confer process.
2711: PROCEDURES FOR ARBITRATION.
A) The Clerk shall give written notice to the applicant or petitioners and mobilehome owner representative that the application/petition has been referred to arbitration.
1) An Arbitrator shall be appointed in the following manner:
a) The Clerk shall maintain a list of qualified arbitrators. 12
b) Assignment of Arbitrator and Hearing Date. The Clerk shall choose three possible Arbitrators and present them to the residents' representative and the owner. Within five days each party may challenge one candidate. The one remaining shall be the selected Arbitrator. If both parties challenge the same candidate, the Clerk shall choose between the two remaining candidates. The Clerk shall set a date for the arbitration hearing no sooner than 30 or no later than 40 days after the Arbitrator is assigned. The owner and affected mobilehome owners shall be notified immediately in writing by the Clerk of the date, time and place of the hearing and this notice shall be served either in person or by ordinary mail. The parties may agree, in writing, to extend these times. The Arbitrator may extend the date for the arbitration hearing upon a showing of good cause.
2) The Arbitrator shall conduct a hearing with the parties and/or their representatives. During this hearing process, the concerns of each party shall be discussed and the Arbitrator shall indicate the amount and nature of information needed from any party in order to reach a determination. In fair return proceedings in Section 2705, this shall include four years of the income and expense portion of the general ledgers for the park. All information submitted shall be in writing and shall be certified in the same manner as set forth in subsection 2709( TheB).applicant or petitioner shall have the burden of proof unless other sections of this chapter specify otherwise. Each party shall comply with the Arbitrator'srequest for information within seven days of the request.
Additional information provided to the Arbitrator shall be immediately available to the owner or affected mobilehome owner representative which will have seven days to give written comment to the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator may proceed under this part regardless of whether any party defaults in providing any of the requested information.
B) Arbitration Determination.
1) Within 21 days of the hearing, but no later than 90 days from the date of the owner'srent increase notice, the Arbitrator shall deliver his or her decision on the application or petition and a bill for services to the Clerk. 2) The rent increase in a fair return proceeding shall not exceed the increase requested in the application.
3) The Clerk shall provide the result of the Arbitrator'sdecision to the affected parties.
4) The Arbitrator'sdecisions are final and not appealable to the City Council.
C) Method to Determine a Fair Return.
13
1) The base year for the purpose of this section shall be the last full fiscal year prior to the park becoming subject to this chapter. The Arbitrator may establish an alternative base year if the owner is unable to produce records of the last full fiscal year prior to the park becoming subject to rent control. 2) It shall be presumed that the net operating income produced by the property during the base year provided a fair return. An owner shall be entitled to rents to earn a just and reasonable return and to maintain and increase their base year net operating income in accordance with subsection (C)(4) of this section. This method is called maintenance of net operating income (MNOI) and shall be included in all applications.
3) The applicant or the affected mobilehome owners may present evidence to rebut the presumption of fair and reasonable return based upon the base year net operating income. To make such a determination and in order to adjust to the base year net operating income, the Arbitrator must make the following finding:
a) The owner'soperating and maintenance expenses in the base year were unusually high or low in comparison to other years. In such instances, adjustments may be made in calculating such expenses so that the base year operating expenses reflect average expenses for the property over a reasonable period of time. In considering whether the base year net operating income yielded more or less than a fair net operating income, the Arbitrator shall consider the following factors:
i) Substantial repairs were made due to damage caused by uninsured disaster or vandalism;
ii) Maintenance and repairs were below accepted standards so as to cause significant deterioration of housing services;
iii) Other expenses were unreasonably high or low notwithstanding prudent business practice; and
iv) The rent in the base year was disproportionately low due to the fact that it was not established in an arms-length transaction or other peculiar circumstances.
4) Fair Net Operating Income. The Arbitrator shall submit a determination based on rental income which will provide the owner a net operating income which shall be increased by 100 percent of the percentage increase in the CPI over the base year's CPI index. The base year CPI shall be the CPI for the first day of June. For purposes of this section, the current CPI shall be the CPI last reported as of the date of the completed application.
14
5) Net operating income of a mobilehome park means the gross income of the park less the operating expenses of the park.
6) Gross income means the sum of the following:
a) Gross space rents computed as gross space rental income at 100 percent occupancy (but excluding rent attributed to a space occupied by a park employee who receives the space rent free as part of the employee's compensation); plus
b) Other income generated as a result of the operation of the park, including, but not limited to, fees for services actually rendered; plus c) All other pass through revenue received from mobilehome owners except capital pass throughs and gas and electric; minus
d) Uncollected space rents due to vacancy and bad debts to the extent that the same are beyond the owner'scontrol. There is a rebuttable presumption that uncollected space rents in excess of the average of the current and past three years uncollected rents (each year's rent shall be adjusted by the change in the CPI between that year and the final year of the four-year period) are excessive and shall not be deducted from gross income.
7) Operating expenses means:
a) Real property taxes and assessment;
b) Advertising costs;
c) Management and administrative expenses including the compensation of administrative personnel;
d) Repair and maintenance expenses for the grounds and common facilities including, but not limited to, landscaping, cleaning and repair of equipment and facilities;
e) In addition to the management expenses listed above, where the owner performs onsite managerial or maintenance services which are uncompensated, the owner may include the reasonable value of such services. Owner-performed labor shall be limited to five percent of gross income unless the Arbitrator finds that such a limitation would be substantially unfair in a given case. No credit for such services shall be authorized unless an owner documents the hours utilized in performing such services and the nature of the services provided; f) Operating supplies such as janitorial supplies, gardening supplies, stationery and so forth;
15
g) Insurance premiums related to operation of the park prorated over the life of the policy;
h) Payroll taxes, business, utility, license and permit fees; i) Dues;
j) Consultant services for park operation and maintenance; k) All operating expenses must be reasonable and necessary. Whenever a particular expense exceeds the normal industry or other comparable standard, the owner shall bear the burden of proving the reasonableness of the expense.
To the extent that an Arbitrator finds any expense to be unreasonable, the Arbitrator shall adjust the expense to reflect the normal industry or other comparable standard;
1) There is a rebuttable presumption that expenditures in the current year are unreasonable to the extent that they substantially exceed the average of the current and past three years (each year's expenses shall be adjusted by the change in the CPI between that year and the final year of the four-year period); m) Operating expenses shall not include the following:
i) Mortgage debt service expenses;
ii) Land-lease expenses;
iii) Depreciation;
iv) Income taxes;
v) Electric and gas expenses included in Section 739.5 of the California Public Utility Codes;
vi) The cost of government mandated expenses (subsection 2703(C)), capital improvements (subsection 2703(D)), or capital replacements (subsection 6- 040(66. F)).
8) Notwithstanding any other provisions of the ordinance codified in this chapter, the Arbitrator is authorized to approve any rent increase that is constitutionally required by law to yield a fair return.
E) Subpoenas. The parties may obtain the issuance and service of a subpoena for the attendance of witnesses or the production of other evidence at the arbitration hearing. Subpoenas shall be issued and attested by the Clerk. 16
Issuance of the subpoena must be obtained upon the filing with the Clerk of the City of an affidavit or declaration, under oath, setting forth the name and address of the proposed witness; specifying the exact things to be produced and the relevancy to the issues involved; and stating that the witness as the desired things in his/her possession or under his/her control.
Service of the subpoena on a witness to attend arbitration must be at least five working days before the hearing. Service of a subpoena duces tecum must be at least 21 days before the hearing. Any party served with a subpoena duces tecum must produce copies of the requested items to the subpoenaing party no later than 10 days before the hearing.
A subpoena need not be issued when the affidavit or declaration is defective in any particular. No arbitration hearing may be continued due to the failure to file a timely request, or to timely serve a subpoena. Any person who refuses, without lawful excuse, to attend the arbitration or to produce relevant evidence as required by a subpoena served upon that person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
No subpoena shall issue until after the parties have met and conferred as required in Section 2710.
F) Increases for Capital Expense. Increases attributed to a capital expense, as approved by the Arbitrator to provide a park with a fair return, shall not be included in base rent. These increases must be separately itemized on the monthly rent invoice and terminate at the end of the approved amortized period.
Advance approval and effective date of the increase shall be as allowed in subsection 2703( 1). F(
G) Rent Increase Effective Date. Rent increases approved by the Arbitrator, as determined necessary to provide an owner with a fair return, shall be allowed upon the effective date given by the applicant in the notice to the affected mobilehome owners, required in section 798.30 of the California Civil Code. 2712: REFUSAL OF MOBILEHOME OWNER TO PAY ILLEGAL RENT.
An affected mobilehome owner may refuse to pay any rent in excess of the maximum rent permitted by this chapter. The fact that such unpaid rent is in excess of the maximum rent shall be a defense in any action brought to recover possession of a mobilehome space for nonpayment of rent or to collect the illegal rent.
2713: DISCLOSURES.
An owner shall disclose to each prospective tenant the current and proposed base rent for the mobilehome space and the rental agreement options required 17
by this section and Section 2714, provide each prospective tenant with a copy of this chapter, and disclose to the prospective tenant that if the prospective tenant signs a lease with a term of more than one year, that lease will be exempt from rent control. The owner shall give the required disclosure and provide a copy of this chapter to the prospective tenant at the time that the owner, or owner's representative, receives the prospective tenant'sapplication for tenancy. The required disclosures shall be made in a form approved by the Clerk, and the owner shall obtain a signature of the prospective tenant on the disclosure form acknowledging receipt of the disclosures. An owner must retain the signed disclosure form throughout the entire tenancy of the tenant. This signed form shall be made available to the Clerk upon reasonable written notice. 2714: PROSPECTIVE MOBILEHOME OWNER-TENANCY 12 MONTHS OR LESS.
All prospective tenants shall be offered the option of a tenancy of 12 months or less upon terms consistent with the provisions of the ordinance codified in this chapter. This section shall not apply to prevent a mutually agreed upon assignment between an owner and an existing mobilehome owner of an existing lease, provided any such assignment does not violate subsection 2704(C). 2715: RENT STABILIZATION ADMINISTRATION FEES.
All or any portion of the costs to administer this chapter may be collected by the imposition of an annual rent stabilization administration fee established by resolution of the City Council. The fee shall be chargeable against the total number of mobilehome spaces in the City subject to rent control determined on a date certain each year to be established by the City Council. The owner who pays these fees may pass through to the mobilehome owners, subject to rent control on the date established by the City Council, 50 percent of the fees assessed against a mobilehome space. The fee shall be due on a date established by the City Council but may be paid in quarterly installments by the owners. Owners of parks annexed to the City after the Effective Date, shall be charged the fee established by resolution beginning on the effective date of the annexation.
2716: AMENDMENT.
Any amendment to this chapter shall require a prior public hearing before the City Council with notice thereof published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the hearing.
2717: VIOLATION.
18
Every person who violates any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor. This section shall not apply to the Arbitrator or officers or employees of the City.
SECTION TWO
1. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060( 2) ( c(the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment), 15061( 3) ( b(there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.)
2. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid.
3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty 30) days after its adoption.
4. MANDATORY REVIEW. The City Council shall review this ordinance at the next regular City Council meeting occurring after the first anniversary of the Effective Date of this ordinance. The review shall consider whether the ordinance should be amended or repealed based on the City's experience of the implementation of the ordinance over that one year period.
Introduced by title only on October 6, 2010, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas NOES: Councilmember Crane
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Adopted on October 20, 2010, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Thomas NOES: Councilmember Crane
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
s/ Benj Thomas, Mayor
ATTEST:
s/JoAnne M. Currie, City Clerk
19
Re-adopted on January 5, 2011, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Landis, Thomas, Baldwin, and Mayor Rodin NOES: Councilmember Crane
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: one
Mari Rodin, Mayor
ATTEST:
foAnne Currie, City Clerk
20
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-26
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2019- 42 ADOPTING RENT STABILIZATION FEES FOR ARBITRATION AND
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS TO CITY OF UKIAH MOBILEHOME PARKS
WHEREAS:
1. Ukiah City Code (" UCC") Section 2715, provides that " all or any portion of the costs to administer this chapter [Division 2, Chapter 8 of the UCC (" Chapter 8")] may be collected by the imposition of an annual rent stabilization administration fee established by resolution of the City Council"; and
2. Costs to administer the program have been assessed and are shown in Exhibit A; and
3. With the elimination of redevelopment agencies by the State of California, all of the cost to administer Chapter 8 is borne by the City' s General Fund; and
4. Under UCC Section 2708. C, the cost of arbitrations must be paid from the rent stabilization administration fee. Exhibit A states a reasonable estimate for the annual cost to administer Chapter 8, including potential arbitrations; and
5. There are 382 mobilehome park spaces subject to rent control in the City of Ukiah, with the final annual per space cost being determined each year based on occupied non- longterm leased spaces; and
6. Under UCC Section 2715, the owner who pays these fees may pass through to the tenant of the space 50 percent of the fees assessed for the space: and
7. Under UCC 2715, the resolution establishing the fee must specify the date by which the fee is due, but the fee may be paid by the park owners in quarterly installments; and
8. There are six City of Ukiah mobilehome parks that are subject to the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, including Circle Trailer Court ( 60 units), Manor Home Mobile Estates ( 137 units), Shady Grove Mobile Home Park ( 4 units subject to rent control), Modern Mobile Home Park (26 units), Harold' s Square Mobile Home Park (59 units), and Rancho Del Ray Mobile Home Park (96 units).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The City Council of the City of Ukiah approves an annual administration fee an amount equally divided between billable spaces subject to rent control to be paid by the City' s six mobilehome parks.
2. The fee is due on July 30 of each year, but may be paid in quarterly installments on July 30, October 30, January 30, and April 30.
3. The City Council shall review the administration costs, including the cost of any arbitrations, on an annual basis, during budget preparation as part of the annual fee review 1 ATTACHMENT 2
in May and June, and make any adjustments so that the fee does not exceed the cost to administer Chapter 8.
4. This resolution supersedes resolution 2019-42.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on May 20, 2020, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Mulheren, Brown, Scalmanini, Orozco, and Mayor Crane NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Douglas F ran , Mayor
ATTEST:
Kri tine Lawler, City Clerk
2
EXHIBIT A
2020 COST ASSESSMENT FOR IMPLEMENTING RESOLUTION 2020/ 2021 RENT STABILIZATION FEES Estimated Arbitration Costs:
TOTAL -$ 9, 450
The Northern California rates charged for arbitrations conduct by ADR Service, Inc., an alternate dispute resolution service that has rates in the middle between JAMS at the high end and Ione arbitrators at the low end.
An arbitration through ADR includes a $ 450 administrative fee, plus the hourly or daily rate charged by the arbitrator and the fees charged by ADR. ADR arbitrators are retired judges or attorneys. The hourly rates vary from $ 450 at the low end to $ 975 at the high end. The average hourly rate is $ 712. 50.
Assuming an arbitration hearing takes one 8- hour day and the arbitrator takes 4 hours to prepare a written decision, 12 hours @ $ 712. 50 = 8, 550+ $ 900 ( admin fee, assuming only two parties) for a total of$ 9, 450.
Estimated Administrative Costs:
TOTAL - $1, 850 ( Using the higher rate of the two invoiced rates below and rounding) MHP = Mobile Home Park
Estimated Attorney Fees for Various Matters Pertaining to Mobilehome Parks: $ 1, 000 Note. only the actual expenses would be billed to the account) Educational Outreach Costs: $294 ( rounded)
Draft Letter to Residents
Print, fold, label, and stuff envelopes
Postage to send letters
If MHP owners are invoiced: $ 556 ( rounded and includes postage) Includes:
Review CPI and write annual letter to MHP owners regarding the CPI.
Review MHP rent increase letters per Ordinance 1126. Section 2703( H) Staff Report to Council
Send Letters to MHP owners requesting number of billable spaces Prep invoices
Receive and process payments
Total divided by 382" spaces = $1. 46 per space.
If MHP owners are not invoiced: $ 201
Includes:
Review CPI and write annual letter to MHP owners regarding the CPI.
Review MHP rent increase letters per Ordinance 1126, Section 2703( H) Staff Report to Council
Send post-Council decision to waive fee letters to MHP owners Total divided by 382* spaces= . 53 cents per space (rounded).
TOTAL REASONABLE ESTIMATE FOR THE ANNUAL COST TO ADMINISTER CHAPTER 8, INCLUDING POTENTIAL ARBITRATIONS IS $ 11, 300**.
Note— This is the number of spaces calculated in Ordinance 1126, however, the actual number of billable spaces is determined each year depending on the number of occupied spaces by non-long-term leases.
Note— This number is comprised as follows. Arbitration= $ 9, 450; MHP Owners invoiced= $556; Educational Outreach= $ 294; Attorney Fees = $ 1, 000.
300 Seminary Avenue • Ukiah • CA • 95482-5400
Phone: (707) 463-6200 · Fax: (707) 463-6204 ·www.cityofukiah.com May 6, 2022
SUBJECT: Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Resource Information Dear Mobilehome Park Residents,
This letter is an educational outreach, so that you are aware of your rights – per ordinance 1126 and resolution 2020-26 - as a mobilehome park resident.
In 2011, the Ukiah City Council adopted an ordinance to establish a mobilehome park rent stabilization. In an effort to assist mobilehome park residents to better understand how the rent increases, fees, and pass-through charges operate, a webpage was created on the City of Ukiah’s website, which can be found at: http://www.cityofukiah.com/mobilehome-park-rent-stabilization-2/.
Mobilehome park residents are encouraged to explore the webpage, which contains the full ordinance and resolution that explains how the rent stabilization works. There are also links to annual correspondence sent to the mobilehome park owners regarding the October CPI index that determines the amount that can be charged for rent increases, and staff reports presented to the City Council explaining in detail how the yearly fees operate.
In respect to State legislation regarding COVID-19 as it relates to tenancy and protections, please see the following articles for more information:
Assembly Bill No. 2179:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2179 HansonBridgett Update Regarding Senior Housing and Care:
https://www.hansonbridgett.com/Publications/articles/220405-5100-covid-tenantprotections The City Clerk’s office is available to address any questions or concerns that you may have, and can be reached by email at [email protected], or by calling 707-463- 6217.
Sincerely,
Kristine Lawler
City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 3
1 RESOLUTION NO. 20202022-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 20192020-42 26 ADOPTING RENT STABILIZATION FEES FOR ARBITRATION
AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS TO CITY OF UKIAH MOBILEHOME PARKS WHEREAS:
1. Ukiah City Code (“UCC”) Section 2715, provides that “all or any portion of the costs to administer this chapter [Division 2, Chapter 8 of the UCC (“Chapter 8”)] may be collected by the imposition of an annual rent stabilization administration fee established by resolution of the City Council”; and
2. Costs to administer the program have been assessed and are shown in Exhibit A; and
3. With the elimination of redevelopment agencies by the State of California, all of the cost to administer Chapter 8 is borne by the City’s General Fund; and
4. Under UCC Section 2708.C, the cost of arbitrations must be paid from the rent stabilization administration fee. Exhibit A states a reasonable estimate for the annual cost to administer Chapter 8, including potential arbitrations; and
5. There are 382 mobilehome park spaces subject to rent control in the City of Ukiah, with the final annual per space cost being determined each year based on occupied non-longterm leased spaces; and
6. Under UCC Section 2715, the owner who pays these fees may pass through to the tenant of the space 50 percent of the fees assessed for the space; and
7. Under UCC 2715, the resolution establishing the fee must specify the date by which the fee is due, but the fee may be paid by the park owners in quarterly installments; and
8. There are six City of Ukiah mobilehome parks that are subject to the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, including Circle Trailer Court (60 units), Manor Home Mobile Estates (137 units), Shady Grove Mobile Home Park (4 units subject to rent control), Modern Mobile Home Park (26 units), Harold’s Square Mobile Home Park (59 units), and Rancho Del Ray Mobile Home Park (96 units).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The City Council of the City of Ukiah approves an annual administration fee an amount equally divided between billable spaces subject to rent control to be paid by the City’s six mobilehome parks.
2. The fee is due on July 30 of each year, but may be paid in quarterly installments on July 30, October 30, January 30, and April 30.
3. The City Council shall review the administration costs, including the cost of any arbitrations, on an annual basis, during budget preparation as part of the annual fee review ATTACHMENT 4
2 in May and June, and make any adjustments so that the fee does not exceed the cost to administer Chapter 8.
4. This resolution supersedes resolution 20192020-4226.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on May 2018, 20202022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
______________________________
Douglas F. CraneJim O. Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
EXHIBIT AATTACHMENT 3a
Estimated Administrative Costs:
TOTAL - $850 870 (Using the higher rate of the two invoicing rates below) MHP = Mobile Home Park
Estimated Attorney Fees for Various Matters Pertaining to Mobilehome Parks: $1,000 (Note: only the actual expenses would be billed to the account) Estimated Arbitration Costs:
TOTAL - $8,85010,400
The Northern California rates charged for arbitrations conduct by ADR Service, Inc., an alternate dispute resolution service that has rates in the middle between JAMS at the high end and lone arbitrators at the low end.
An arbitration through ADR includes a $450 500 administrative fee, plus the hourly or daily rate charged by the arbitrator and the fees charged by ADR. ADR arbitrators are retired judges or attorneys. The hourly rates vary from $450 at the low end to $975 1,200 at the high end. The average hourly rate is $712.50825.
Assuming an arbitration hearing takes one 8-hour day and the arbitrator takes 4 hours to prepare a written decision, 12 hours @ $712.50825 = $8,5509,900 + $900 500 (admin fee; assuming only two parties) for a total of $9,45010,400.
Educational Outreach Costs: $294 314
Draft Letter to Residents
Print, fold, label, and stuff envelopes
Postage to send educational outreach letters
If MHP owners are invoiced: $556 + postage
Includes:
Review CPI and write annual letter to MHP owners regarding the CPI. Review MHP rent increase letters per Ordinance 1126, Section 2703(H) Staff Report to Council
Send Letters to MHP owners requesting number of billable spaces Prep invoices
Receive and process payments
Total divided by 382* spaces = $1.451.46 per space.
If MHP owners are not invoiced: $201
Includes:
Review CPI and write annual letter to MHP owners regarding the CPI. Review MHP rent increase letters per Ordinance 1126, Section 2703(H) Staff Report to Council
Send post-Council decision to waive fee letters to MHP owners Total divided by 382* spaces = .53 cents per space (rounded).
*Note – This is the number of spaces calculated in Ordinance 1126, however, the actual number of billable spaces is determined each year depending on the number of occupied spaces by non-long-term leases.
TOTAL REASONABLE ESTIMATE FOR THE ANNUAL COST TO ADMINISTER CHAPTER 8, INCLUDING POTENTIAL ARBITRATIONS IS $11,30012,270.
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2020-26 ADOPTING RENT STABILIZATION FEES FOR ARBITRATION AND
ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS TO CITY OF UKIAH MOBILEHOME PARKS
WHEREAS:
1. Ukiah City Code (“UCC”) Section 2715, provides that “all or any portion of the costs to administer this chapter [Division 2, Chapter 8 of the UCC (“Chapter 8”)] may be collected by the imposition of an annual rent stabilization administration fee established by resolution of the City Council”; and
2. Costs to administer the program have been assessed and are shown in Exhibit A; and
3. With the elimination of redevelopment agencies by the State of California, all of the cost to administer Chapter 8 is borne by the City’s General Fund; and
4. Under UCC Section 2708.C, the cost of arbitrations must be paid from the rent stabilization administration fee. Exhibit A states a reasonable estimate for the annual cost to administer Chapter 8, including potential arbitrations; and
5. There are 382 mobilehome park spaces subject to rent control in the City of Ukiah, with the final annual per space cost being determined each year based on occupied non-longterm leased spaces; and
6. Under UCC Section 2715, the owner who pays these fees may pass through to the tenant of the space 50 percent of the fees assessed for the space; and
7. Under UCC 2715, the resolution establishing the fee must specify the date by which the fee is due, but the fee may be paid by the park owners in quarterly installments; and
8. There are six City of Ukiah mobilehome parks that are subject to the Rent Stabilization Ordinance, including Circle Trailer Court (60 units), Manor Home Mobile Estates (137 units), Shady Grove Mobile Home Park (4 units subject to rent control), Modern Mobile Home Park (26 units), Harold’s Square Mobile Home Park (59 units), and Rancho Del Ray Mobile Home Park (96 units).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that:
1. The City Council of the City of Ukiah approves an annual administration fee an amount equally divided between billable spaces subject to rent control to be paid by the City’s six mobilehome parks.
2. The fee is due on July 30 of each year, but may be paid in quarterly installments on July 30, October 30, January 30, and April 30.
3. The City Council shall review the administration costs, including the cost of any arbitrations, on an annual basis, during budget preparation as part of the annual fee review
2 in May and June, and make any adjustments so that the fee does not exceed the cost to administer Chapter 8.
4. This resolution supersedes resolution 2020-26.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council held on May 18, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
______________________________
Jim O. Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
Estimated Administrative Costs:
TOTAL - $870 (Using the higher rate of the two invoicing rates below) MHP = Mobile Home Park
Estimated Attorney Fees for Various Matters Pertaining to Mobilehome Parks: $1,000 (Note: only the actual expenses would be billed to the account) Estimated Arbitration Costs:
TOTAL - $10,400
The Northern California rates charged for arbitrations conduct by ADR Service, Inc., an alternate dispute resolution service that has rates in the middle between JAMS at the high end and lone arbitrators at the low end.
An arbitration through ADR includes a $500 administrative fee, plus the hourly or daily rate charged by the arbitrator and the fees charged by ADR. ADR arbitrators are retired judges or attorneys. The hourly rates vary from $450 at the low end to $1,200 at the high end. The average hourly rate is $825.
Assuming an arbitration hearing takes one 8-hour day and the arbitrator takes 4 hours to prepare a written decision, 12 hours @ $825 = $9,900 + $500 (admin fee; assuming only two parties) for a total of $10,400.
Educational Outreach Costs: $314
Draft Letter to Residents
Print, fold, label, and stuff envelopes
Postage to send educational outreach letters
If MHP owners are invoiced: $556 + postage
Includes:
Review CPI and write annual letter to MHP owners regarding the CPI. Review MHP rent increase letters per Ordinance 1126, Section 2703(H) Staff Report to Council
Send Letters to MHP owners requesting number of billable spaces Prep invoices
Receive and process payments
Total divided by 382* spaces = $1.46 per space.
If MHP owners are not invoiced: $201
Includes:
Review CPI and write annual letter to MHP owners regarding the CPI. Review MHP rent increase letters per Ordinance 1126, Section 2703(H) Staff Report to Council
Send post-Council decision to waive fee letters to MHP owners Total divided by 382* spaces = .53 cents per space (rounded).
*Note – This is the number of spaces calculated in Ordinance 1126, however, the actual number of billable spaces is determined each year depending on the number of occupied spaces by non-long-term leases.
TOTAL REASONABLE ESTIMATE FOR THE ANNUAL COST TO ADMINISTER CHAPTER 8, INCLUDING POTENTIAL ARBITRATIONS IS $12,270.
Agenda Item No: 7.e.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1649
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Appointing Zhao Qiu to the Diversity and Equity Standing Committee.
DEPARTMENT: City Clerk PREPARED BY: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk PRESENTER: Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:
1. CC Reso 2020-59 - Establishing Equity and Diversity Standing Committee
2. Application
3. Nomination
4. Proposed Resolution
Summary: Council will review and consider adopting a resolution appointing Zhao Qiu to the Persons of Color position on the Diversity and Equity Committee.
Background: On October 7, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-59 to establish an eleven (11) member Diversity and Equity Standing Committee, and set forth the procedure for filling vacancies (Attachment 1). The structure of the standing committee is designed to ensure optimal representation from the diverse demographic groups represented in the population of the City of Ukiah and the larger community living and working in the Ukiah Valley. The Standing Committee consists of eleven (11) members. The members consist of two members of the City Council and nine members of the city of Ukiah or the Ukiah Valley, including Redwood and Potter Valleys who serve or represent: individuals and families who are low income, persons with physical or mental disabilities, persons from the LGBTQA community, members of Native American tribes and communities in Mendocino County, members of the Hispanic/Latino community, persons of color, people whose primary language is not English, youth ages 21 and younger, and seniors 65 years and older.
Discussion: On January 6, 2022, the City Clerk's office received a resignation letter from L. Jani Sheppard, who was serving in the Persons of Color position on the Diversity and Equity Committee, and whose term doesn't expire until February 17, 2023. The Clerk's office noticed the vacancy starting on January 6, 2022.
One application, from Zhao Qiu, has been received and has been vetted to meet the position requirements (Attachment 2), with no other applications having been received. Councilmember Crane has made a nomination for the appointment of Zhao Qiu (Attachment 3). Staff is recommending that Council adopt the proposed resolution (Attachment 4) appointing Zhao Qiu to the Diversity and Equity Standing Committee, to fill the unexpired term of L. Jani Sheppard.
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution appointing Zhao Qiu to the Persons of Color position on the Diversity and Equity Committee, to fill the unexpired term of L. Jani Sheppard, which expires on February 17, 2023.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Traci Boyl, Management Analyst and Darcy Vaughn, Assistant City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH APPOINTING ZHAO QIU TO
THE DIVERSITY AND EQUITY STANDING COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-59 to establish an eleven (11) member Equity and Diversity Standing Committee, and set forth the procedure for filling vacancies; and
WHEREAS, on January 6, 2022, the City Clerk’s office received a resignation letter from L. Jani Sheppard, whose term expires on February 17, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the vacancy has been noticed since January 6, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk’s office has received an application from Zhao Qiu, which was vetted and determined to meet the position requirements; with no other applications having been received; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ukiah City Council does hereby appoint the following persons and terms:
BOARD/
COMMISSION
NAME POSITION TERM ENDING
Equity and Diversity Standing
Committee Zhao Qiu Persons of Color
2/17/23
(filling the unexpired term of
L. Jani Sheppard)
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
_______________________________
Jim O. Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Kristine Lawler, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT 4
Agenda Item No: 7.f.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1655
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Report of Purchase Order No. 47885 Issued to JM Integration for the Emergency Purchase of Repair Parts for the Waste Water Treatment Plant in the Amount of $36,192.57.
DEPARTMENT: Water Resources PREPARED BY: Mary Williamson, Buyer II PRESENTER: Sean White, Water Resources Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. City Manager Approval Letter
2. JMIntegration Invoice
Summary: Pursuant to Section 1522 of the Municipal Code, Staff is reporting to Council Purchase Order #47885 issued to JM Integration for the emergency purchase of repair parts for the WWTP in the amount of $36,192.57.
Background: On the night of April 26th, the WWTP experienced a power outage caused by the failure of the utility main breaker. As a result, the WWTP was running on generator power until a replacement breaker could be sourced. Fleet Services contacted a number of vendors in an effort to secure a replacement, but due to supply chain issues none were available. A subsequent search was started with the help of Jack Miller of JM Integration, and the only Digitrips and Power Relay Modules available in the US were located. The WWTP was temporarily placed back online by utilizing parts from non-essential equipment and assistance from the Electric Utility. The replacement parts were received on the 27th and the plant was returned to normal configuration that day.
A purchase order was issued with the approval of the City Manager (Attachment A), in order to get these parts shipped as soon as possible and get the plant back up and running. A copy of the invoice from JM Integration is also provided here as Attachment B. That purchase order included two spares in case of future failure. Previous efforts to secure spares were unsuccessful due to supply chain issues.
Discussion: Staff placed the order with JM Integration, who was able to locate them for us, and recommends receiving this report of Purchase Order No. 47885 issued to JM Integration for the emergency purchase of repair parts for the Waste Waterwater Treatment Plant (WWTP) in the amount of $36,192.57
Recommended Action: Council will receive report of Purchase Order No. 47885 issued to JM Integration for the emergency purchase of repair parts for the Waste Waterwater Treatment Plant (WWTP) in the amount of $36,192.57
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: NO
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 84027225.56120: $97,214.86
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: 47885
COORDINATED WITH: Dave Kirch, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor
Attachment A
Attachment B
Agenda Item No: 7.g.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1673
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Letter of Interest to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Regarding Consolidation of Municipal Water Providers.
DEPARTMENT: Water Resources PREPARED BY: Sean White, Water Resources Director PRESENTER: Sean White, Water Resources Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Letter of Intent to Consolidate Example Council
Summary: Council will consider approval of a Letter of Intent to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regarding Consolidation of Municipal Water Providers.
Background: There are a number of municipal water providers in the greater Ukiah Valley, including the City of Ukiah, Willow County Water District (CWD), Millview CWD, Callpella CWD, and Redwood Valley CWD. Consolidation of these providers has been a long-time community goal.
Discussion: The SWRCB recently developed the Safe and Affordable Funding for Equity and Resilience (SAFER) program. A major goal of the SAFER program is to facilitate the consolidation of small water systems. As part of that program, the SWRCB is offering significant financial incentives to help fund the necessary infrastructure that would allow the interconnection and overall improvement of small systems into single resilient provider.
City Staff and City Council Water Ad Hoc members have been meeting with representatives of URRWA (Upper Russian River Water Agency) and the SWRCB to explore the concept of consolidation and better understand the SAFER program. After a series of positive and productive meetings, the next step is to submit a "Letter of Intent" to the SWRCB. The letter will allow staff from the SAFER Program to formally engage in discussions with the City and URRWA. The letter does not commit either the City or URRWA to any actions. URRWA approved submittal of a letter at its last board meeting.
Staff is recommending approval of a Letter of Intent (Attachment 1) to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regarding Consolidation of Municipal Water Providers.
Recommended Action: Approve Letter of Intent to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regarding Consolidation of Municipal Water Providers.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: NA
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: NA
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: NA
FINANCING SOURCE: NA
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: NA
COORDINATED WITH: Water Ad Hoc (Jim Brown and Doug Crane)
May 10, 2022
Michelle Frederick, P.E.
Supervising Engineer, Division of Drinking Water
State Water Resource Control Engineer
1 Lower Ragsdale Dr., Suite 120
Monterey, CA 93940
Dear Michelle,
In January of 2022 the City of Ukiah was contacted by a representative of the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) about potentially consolidating with adjacent water districts.
Outreach highlighted opportunities for funding and incentives to help facilitate consolidation.
As a result, the City of Ukiah attended the SWRCB Water System Partnership Workshop on February 16th, 2022. Following the workshop, the City of Ukiah had a series of meetings with staff and elected representatives from the Upper Russian River Water Agency (URRWA) to discuss the potential benefits of participating in the program.
The City of Ukiah has 5030 connections. URRWA is comprised of four water districts (Willow, Millview, Calpella, and Redwood Valley) with approximately 4,080 connections combined.
URRWA is a JPA that was developed to facilitate consolidation amongst its members. The City of Ukiah has a large and diverse water supply, but there is no mechanism to share it at a regional scale. Currently the City of Ukiah and URRWA are only connected with emergency interties.
However, there is an opportunity to combine all five entities into a single resilient system with additional infrastructure.
The City of Ukiah would like to express our intent to consider consolidating with URRWA. We arecommitted to representing the interests of our community to the best of our abilities in our conversations with URRWA about consolidation.
Please reply with your availability to meet and discuss funding process and next steps to initiate the consolidation process. We look forward to working with you in creating a sustainable regional solution.
Sincerely,
Jim Brown
Mayor
Attachment 1
Agenda Item No: 7.h.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1674
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Approval of the Purchase of Professional Design Engineering and Construction Management Services for the Suspended Air Floatation (SAF) and Screw Press at the Waste Water Treatment Plant from West Yost in the Amount of $522,087.
DEPARTMENT: Public Works PREPARED BY: Seth Strader, Administrative Analyst PRESENTER: Sean White, Director of Water/Sewer
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposal - West Yost Scope - Solids Treatment
Summary: Council will consider approval of professional services for the design engineering and construction management of the Suspended Air Floatation (SAF) and screw press systems to be installed at the Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP).
Background: The City has recently purchased a Screw Press Dewatering System from FKC Co and a Suspended Air Floatation (SAF) Thickening System from Heron Innovators. Delivery of these systems is expected near the end of 2022. Engineering and construction management is needed to facilitate an efficient and smooth plant transition from the old equipment to the new.
Discussion: Staff at West Yost have been involved in various aspects of the City‘s Waste Water Treatment Plant for years and have a strong background in design and operation of the existing equipment. West Yost worked with Staff on comparing different replacement systems for the belt filter press and dissolved air floatation (DAF) and providing expertise on what systems would provide the best solution for the conditions experienced at the WWTP. West Yost would provide engineering and construction management services to bring the screw press and SAF online.
These services include detailed design, bid assistance (meetings, responding to RFI and addenda), engineering services during construction as well as project management and QA/QC as well as the development of an engineer's estimate for construction costs. Please see Attachment 1 for a copy of the proposal. Once engineering design and specification is completed, the construction project will be bid. Staff estimates that construction will begin before the end of 2022 and has a preliminary cost estimate of $1,500,000 for both items.
An internal budget transfer will be performed to move excess funds currently approved and encumbered in the FY21/22 CIP under the screw press project to cover the outstanding $241,920.75 shortfall currently in the SAF's current budget.
Recommended Action: Approve the purchase of Professional Design Engineering and Construction Management Services for the Suspended Air Floatation (SAF) and Screw Press from West Yost in the amount of $522,087.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: NO
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: 84027225.80100.18130: $567,270.87 84027225.80100.18248: $10,831.25 PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: 84027225.80100.18130: $269,326.00 84027225.80100.18248: $252,752.00 FINANCING SOURCE: General Fund
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: Tim Eriksen, Director of Public Works, Sean White, Director of Water & Sewer and Jason Benson, Senior Engineer
1001 Galaxy Way
Suite 310
Concord CA 94520
925.949.5800 phone
530.756.5991 fax
westyost.com
May 9, 2022 SENT VIA: EMAIL
Mr. Jason Benson
Senior Engineer
Public Works
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, CA 95482
SUBJECT: Proposal for Solids Improvements – SAF Thickening and Screw Press Installation Dear Mr. Benson:
West Yost is pleased to submit this proposal for providing professional engineering services to support the City of Ukiah (City) with their Suspended Air Flotation (SAF) Thickening System Project and Screw Press Dewatering System Project (Project). The City is in the process of purchasing the SAF system from Heron Innovators and purchasing the Screw Press System from FKC. Delivery of those systems is expected by the end of the 2022. This proposal is based on using the shop drawings provided by the equipment manufacturers, our knowledge of the project and the plant, reusing existing drawings where available, and our recent discussions with you to develop Construction Documents for the Project.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
West Yost proposes to execute the Project under the following tasks:
• Task 1. Review Existing Background Information and Manufacturer Provided Equipment Submittals
• Task 2 and 3. Detailed Design (SAF and Dewatering)
• Task 4 and 5. Bid Period Assistance (SAF and Dewatering) • Task 6 and 7. Engineering Service during Construction (SAF and Dewatering) • Task 8. Project Management and QA/QC
The scope of work included in this proposal assumes there will be two separate bid packages and construction periods. The scope of work can be simplified and the fee reduced if the SAF and Dewatering unit were bid and constructed as one package.
Task 1. Review Existing Background Information and Manufacturer Provided Equipment Submittals
The purpose of this task is to review existing materials (site and building layouts) related to the solids thickening and dewatering areas and review the manufacturer equipment submittals.
ATTACHMENT 1
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
Task 1 Assumptions
• Equipment manufacturers will provide shop drawings to be used for design of the SAF solids thickening and the screw press solids dewatering systems. • The City will provide hydraulic and solids loading design criteria. West Yost will check the calculations used to develop the design criteria.
Task 1 Deliverables
• No deliverables are associated with this task.
Task 2. Detailed Design (SAF) and Task 3. Detailed Design (Dewatering) The detailed design will consist of three submittals: 60 percent design, 90 percent design, and Final Contract Documents for bidding. The documents will be divided into two bid packages. The drawings that will be provided in the two bid packages are indicated in Table 1. A total of 62 drawings will be provided between the two bid packages.
Table 1. Drawing List
No. Drawing Title
Use
Existing
Drawing
60 Percent
90 Percent
/ Final
SAF
Package
Dewatering
Package
General and Civil Drawings
1 Title Sheet X X X X
2 Drawing List and Design Criteria X X X X
3 Abbreviations and Symbols X X X X
4 Equipment Naming, Pipe Designation System X X X X
5 Site Plan X X X X X
6 Paving and Grading Plan – DAFT Area X X X X
Demolition Drawings
7 Demolition 1 – DAFT Plan X X X X
8 Demolition 2 – DAFT Sections X X X X
9 Demolition 3 – Belt Filter Press Plan X X X X
10 Demolition 4 – Belt Filter Press Sections X X X X
Structural Drawings
11 General Notes X X X X
12 General Notes, Legend and Abbreviations X X X X
13 General Notes and Special Inspections X X X X
14 Structural Details – Concrete I X X X
15 Structural Details – Miscellaneous I X X X X
16 Miscellaneous Concrete Slabs for Supports X X X X
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
Table 1. Drawing List
No. Drawing Title
Use
Existing
Drawing
60 Percent
90 Percent
/ Final
SAF
Package
Dewatering
Package
17 SAF – Plans and Sections X X X
18 SAF – Section and Details X X
19 Dewatering – Foundation Plan and Sections X X X
Mechanical Drawings
20 Mechanical Standard Details 1 X X X X
21 Mechanical Standard Details 2 X X X X
22 SAF Equipment Plan X X X X
23 SAF Equipment Sections X X X
24 SAF Equipment Details 1 X X X
25 Dewatering Temporary Unit Plan X X X
26 Dewatering Plan X X X X
27 Dewatering Sections 1 X X X
28 Dewatering Sections 2 and Details X X
Electrical Drawings
29 General Notes, Symbols and Abbreviations X X X X
30 DAFT Demolition Plan X X X X
31 SAF One-line Diagram X X X X
32 SAF Building New Power Plan X X X X
33 Dewatering Building Demolition Plan X X X X
34 Dewatering Building One-line Diagram X X X X
35 Dewatering Power Plan X X X X
36 Control Diagrams 1 X X X X
37 Control Diagrams 2 X X X X
P&IDs
38 Process Symbols X X X X
39 Instrumentation Symbols & Naming Systems X X X X
40 SAF Generator System X X X
41 SAF Chemical Systems X X X
42 Dewatering System X X X
43 Dewatering Feed Pump Modifications X
44 Dewatering Pump Modification X
In addition to the drawing listed in Table 1, the following will also be prepared under Task 2/3:
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
• Specifications including Division 00 and approximately 40 technical specifications (Division 01 through 17) will be provided. The 60 percent submittal will include a draft of major equipment specifications. The 90 percent and final submittals will include a draft of all specifications. • The 90 percent submittal will contain an opinion of probable construction cost (OPCC). The OPCC will be in accordance with the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineers (AACE International).
• Each submittal will contain a construction sequencing plan. • A review workshop will be held after the 60 percent submittal. West Yost will conduct the presentation and develop summary notes.
Task 2 and 3 Assumptions
• Existing pdf files will be used as background for drawings where possible. • No surveying or geotechnical is required.
• Front-end contract documents will be developed by West Yost using EJCDC specifications, West Yost documents, or the City standard documents.
• Hazardous materials such as asbestos, lead, PCBs, etc. are not present. • Scanned images of existing drawings will be used when available including for demolition and equipment installation
• A temporary dewatering unit will be provided by the contractor. A performance specification will be written.
• Existing thickened sludge pumps and dewatering sludge pumps will be reused. • New SAF system including coagulation and acid/caustic chemical systems will be located in shipping containers.
• Electrical power for the SAF system will be from the DAFT Equipment Building and electrical power for the dewatering system will be from the existing Sludge Dewatering Facility Building. • The SAF and Dewatering systems will be package systems controlled by a PLC provided by the equipment manufacturer. Signals back to the Plant’s SCADA system will be limited and only include alarms and necessary monitoring information.
• The Contractor or equipment supplier will hire a SCADA and I&C integrator to complete the programming outside the manufacturer supplied PLC.
• Pipe supports will be designed by the Contractor.
• The City will be responsible for administrating and issuing bid documents to prospective bidders.
Task 2 and 3 Deliverables
• Design submittals for City review at the 60 and 90 percent design level. • Review workshop agenda, presentation materials, and summary notes • Sealed and signed bid documents
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
Task 4. Bid Period Assistance (SAF) and Task 5. Bid Period Assistance (Dewatering)
West Yost will provide support to the City during bidding under this task. West Yost will specifically perform the following services:
• Pre-Bid Meetings: West Yost will conduct a pre-bid meeting for each project. West Yost will prepare the meeting agenda, presentation materials, meeting minutes, and attendee list for each meeting. The meeting summary and attendee list will be included in the first addenda. • Respond to Bidder Questions: West Yost will prepare responses to bidder questions during the bid period for each project.
• Prepare addenda: West Yost will prepare revised drawings, specifications, and issue addenda, as needed, during the bid period. West Yost has assumed that up to two (2) addenda will need to be prepared for this subtask
• Review Bids and Recommend Award: West Yost will review bids for compliance with specifications, totals of itemized costs, balance of bids, bid exceptions, and proposed alternates. West Yost will also provide a recommendation on award.
Task 4 and 5 Assumptions
• The City will be responsible for maintaining a list of bidders and distributing addenda and information to the list of bidders.
• Conformed documents are not included.
Task 4 and 5 Deliverables
• Pre-bid meeting agenda, presentation and meeting summary • Addenda
• West Yost will provide email or phone call feedback regarding evaluated bids.
Task 6. Engineering Services during Construction (SAF) and Task 7.
Engineering Services during Construction (Dewatering)
West Yost will provide engineering services during construction under this task. This task assumes that the solids treatment improvements will be constructed as two separate projects with two separate bid documents. This task includes the following services:
Submittals
West Yost will review Contractor submittals (e.g. shop drawings, product data, samples, operations and maintenance (O&M) manuals, etc.) for conformance with the design concepts and general compliance with the Contract Documents and provide review comments on a West Yost standard submittal review
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
form. Construction related submittals such as work plans, safety plans, stormwater pollution control plans, etc. will also be reviewed by West Yost. West Yost will also maintain a log listing each submittal and its status.
The budget assumes the West Yost team will provide responses to up to 40 submittals and resubmittals. Twenty submittals are assumed for the SAF unit and 20 submittals are assumed for the dewatering unit. The budget assumes approximately five hours per submittal review. The budget also assumes that the submittal review process will be conducted in PDF format.
RFIs
The West Yost team will review requests for information (RFIs) submitted by the Contractor and will provide responses to each RFI on a West Yost standard response form. If the response appears to have changed the contract scope, quality, or time, a potential change order (PCO) number will be assigned and used to track its resolution to closeout. West Yost will maintain a log listing each RFI and its status. A total of 20 RFIs at approximately three hours per RFI has been budgeted. Ten RFIs are assumed for the SAF unit and ten RFIs are assumed for the Dewatering unit.
Meetings
West Yost will conduct a pre-construction meeting for the SAF and Dewatering projects. West Yost will prepare an agenda, meeting materials, and meeting summary for each pre-construction meeting.
West Yost will prepare agendas and conduct bi-weekly virtually progress meetings with the general contractor, City staff, and other members of the project team to review overall progress, coordination, and communication related to safety, submittals, RFIs, changes, progress payments, coordination with plant operations, progress schedules, and quality. If other special meetings are necessary, West Yost will conduct the meetings and collect summaries of the discussions that occurred at the meetings. Open items will be tracked to completion. A total of 24 bi-weekly meetings at two hours per meeting has been budgeted. Twelve bi-weekly meetings are assumed for the SAF unit and twelve bi-weekly meetings are assumed for the Dewatering unit.
Site Visits
West Yost will complete six eight-hour site visits. Three site visits are assumed the SAF unit and three are assumed for the dewatering unit. Site visit reports will be developed that include a summary of the weather and conditions of the site, the type and quantity of equipment and manpower on-site, and a general description of the work performed. Photos of the work will be included with the report.
Weekly Reporting Review and Final Report Review
West Yost will review the weekly and final reports prepared by the general contractor. Comments and/or questions will be addressed to the general contractor.
Punch List and Final Inspection
West Yost will arrange a final inspection for each project once the general contractor requests Substantial Completion. The inspection will create a final punch list of work items remaining to be completed. The punch list will be transmitted to the general contractor with the decision on the
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
substantial completion request. The remainder of the contract will be to confirm that the items on the punch list have been addressed and any other remaining deliverables are received.
Task 6 and 7 Assumptions
• The construction schedule is assumed to be 24 weeks for each project. • Submittal review comments and RFI responses will be provided on standard West Yost forms • Site visits will be 8 hours each and includes travel time. • Record drawings are not included.
Task 6 and 7 Deliverables
West Yost will provide the following:
• Preconstruction agenda, presentation and summary notes • Submittal Log and Formal submittal responses (email)
• RFI Log and Formal RFI responses (email)
• Progress meeting and site visit notes (email)
• Final punch list
Task 8. Project Management and QA/QC
This task includes overall project management of scope, schedule, and budget; regular communication with City; coordination with subconsultants; quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC); and preparation of monthly progress reports and invoices.
Task 8 Deliverables
• West Yost will prepare monthly invoices and descriptions of services performed in electronic (PDF) format.
PROJECT BUDGET
West Yost’s proposed level of effort and budget for each of the tasks described above is shown in Table 2. West Yost will perform the Scope of Services described above on a time-and-expenses basis, at the billing rates set forth in West Yost’s attached 2021 Billing Rate Schedule, with a not-to-exceed budget of $522,078. Any additional services not included in this Scope of Services will be performed only after receiving written authorization and a corresponding budget augmentation. Efforts are limited to the hours and budget defined in the Project Budget section of this proposal. Hours and budgets may be moved between tasks depending on the progression of work.
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
Table 2. Estimated Project Hours and Budget
Task
West Yost Services
Subconsultant
Services
Total
Estimated
Budget
Level of Effort,
hours
Estimated
Budget
Task 1. Review Existing Background
Information and Manufacturer
Provided Equipment Submittals
42 $10,754 $2,200 $12,954
Task 2. Detailed Design (SAF) 564 $119,370 $23,540 $142,910 Task 3. Detailed Design (Dewatering) 634 $135,944 $23,540 $159,484 Task 4. Bid Period Assistance (SAF) 36 $9,932 $1,760 $11,692 Task 5. Bid Period Assistance
(Dewatering)
36 $9,932 $1,760 $11,692
Task 6. Engineering Services during
Construction (SAF)
199 $50,404 $18,150 $68,554
Task 7. Engineering Services during
Construction (Dewatering)
199 $50,404 $18,150 $68,554
Task 8. Project Management and
QA/QC
150 $46,238 $46,238
Total Project Hours and Budget 1,860 $432,978 $89,100 $522,078
SCHEDULE
West Yost estimates the following durations for completing the tasks described in the Scope of Services.
The task durations defined below may change depending on City timing and availability and the ability to obtain information.
Table 3. Proposed Schedule
Task Anticipated Schedule
Design 20 weeks
Bid Period 8 weeks
Construction 24 weeks (each project)
Jason Benson
May 8, 2022
Thank you for providing West Yost the opportunity to be of service to the City of Ukiah. We look forward to working with you on this important project. Please call if you have any questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
WEST YOST
Timothy R. Banyai, PE
Managing Engineer
RCE #60715
Attachments: A. West Yost 2022 Billing Rate Schedule
B. Fee Worksheet
West Yost 2021 Billing Rate Schedule
Attachment A
(Effective January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022)*
POSITIONS
ENGINEERING
Principal/Vice President $318
Engineer/Scientist/Geologist Manager I / II $301 / $315 Principal Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I / II $272 / $289 Senior Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I / II $244 / $256
Associate Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I / II $209 / $224 Engineer/Scientist/Geologist I / II $168 / $195
Engineering Aide $98
Field Monitoring Services $90
Administrative I / II / III / IV $86 / $109 / $130 / $144
ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY
Engineering Tech Manager I / II $313 / $315
Principal Tech Specialist I / II $287 / $297
Senior Tech Specialist I / II $263 / $275
Senior GIS Analyst $238
GIS Analyst $225
Technical Specialist I / II / III / IV $168 / $191 / $215 / $240 Technical Analyst I / II $120 / $144
Technical Analyst Intern $97
Cross-Connection Control Specialist I / II / III / IV $125 / $136 / $152 / $170 CAD Manager $189
CAD Designer I / II $147 / $166
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
Senior Construction Manager $304
Construction Manager I / II / III / IV $185 / $199 / $211 / $267 Resident Inspector (Prevailing Wage Groups 4 / 3 / 2 / 1) $162 / $180 / $201 / $209 Apprentice Inspector $147
CM Administrative I / II $79 / $106
Field Services $209
2022 Billing Rate Schedule
LABOR CHARGES
(DOLLARS PER HOUR)
■ Hourly rates include Technology and Communication charges such as general and CAD computer, software, telephone, routine in-house copies/prints, postage, miscellaneous supplies, and other incidental project expenses. ■ Outside Services such as vendor reproductions, prints, shipping, and major West Yost reproduction efforts, as well as Engineering Supplies, etc. will be billed at actual cost plus 15%. ■ The Federal Mileage Rate will be used for mileage charges and will be based on the Federal Mileage Rate applicable to when the mileage costs were incurred. Travel other than mileage will be billed at cost. ■ Subconsultants will be billed at actual cost plus 10%. ■ Expert witness, research, technical review, analysis, preparation and meetings billed at 150% of standard hourly rates. Expert witness testimony and depositions billed at 200% of standard hourly rates. ■ A Finance Charge of 1.5% per month (an Annual Rate of 18%) on the unpaid balance will be added to invoice amounts if not paid within 45 days from the date of the invoice. * This schedule is updated annually Page 1 of 2
(Effective January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022)*
Equipment Charges
EQUIPMENT
2" Purge Pump & Control Box $270 / day
Aquacalc / Pygmy or AA Flow Meter $28 / day
Emergency SCADA System $35 / day
Gas Detector $80 / day
Generator $39 / day
Hydrant Pressure Gauge $10 / day
Hydrant Pressure Recorder, Impulse (Transient) $55 / day Hydrant Pressure Recorder, Standard $40 / day
Low Flow Pump Controller $75 / day
Powers Water Level Meter $32 / day
Precision Water Level Meter $19 / day
Stainless Steel Wire per foot $0.03 / day
Storage Tank $15 / day
Sump Pump $24 / day
Transducer Components (per installation) $23 / day
Trimble GPS – Geo 7x $220 / day
Tube Length Counter $22 / day
Turbidity Meter $22 / day
Vehicle $10 / day
Water Flow Probe Meter $20 / day
Water Quality Meter $27 / day
Water Quality Multimeter $185 / day
Well Sounder $30 / day
BILLING RATES
2022 Billing Rate Schedule
* This schedule is updated annually Page 2 of 2
Engineering and CM Fee Worksheet
Attachment B
Costs
West Yost Associates P/VP EM/SM/GM I AE/AS/AG I EM/SM/GM I PE/PS/PG II TS III CAD II ADM III P/VP Hours Fee TJCAA Sub. Other Total $318 $301 $209 $301 $289 $215 $166 $130 $318 w/ markup Direct Costs PROJECT: Solids Treatment Improvements Banyai PE Electrical I&C Elect/I&C CAD Mech CAD WP QC/QA 10% Task 1 Review Background Data
1.01 Review Existing Information 2 6 4 4 4 20 5,076 $ $ 1,000 $ 6,176 1,100 $
1.02 Review Manufacturer's Shop Drawings 4 6 4 4 4 22 5,678 $ $ 1,000 $ 6,778 1,100 $ Subtotal, Task 1 (hours) 0 6 12 8 8 8 0 0 0 42Subtotal, Task 1 ($) 1,806 $ 2,508 $ 2,408 $ 2,312 $ 1,720 $ 10,754 $ 2,000 $ 2,200 $ 12,954 $ Task 2 Detailed Design (SAF)
2.01 60 Percent Design 8 52 8 4 80 60 20 232 46,600 $ $ 9,000 $ 400 9,900 $ 56,900 $
2.02 60 Percent Design Workshop 8 8 4 4 4 28 6,960 $ 150 $ 7,110 $
2.03 90 Percent Design 12 36 24 12 100 40 20 244 52,568 $ $ 10,000 $ 63,568 11,000 $
2.04 Final Design 8 12 4 4 8 16 8 60 12,692 $ $ 2,400 $ 15,332 2,640 $ Subtotal, Task 2 (hours) 0 36 108 40 24 188 116 52 0 564Subtotal, Task 2 ($) 10,836 $ 22,572 $ 12,040 $ 6,936 $ 40,420 $ 19,256 $ 6,760 $ 118,820 $ 21,400 $ 23,540 $ 550 $ 142,910 $ Task 3 Detailed Design (Dewatering)
3.01 60 Percent Design 8 48 12 6 100 60 20 254 51,846 $ $ 9,000 $ 400 9,900 $ 62,146 $
3.02 60 Percent Design Workshop 8 8 4 4 4 28 6,960 $ 150 $ 7,110 $
3.03 90 Percent Design 12 32 32 16 140 40 20 292 63,896 $ $ 10,000 $ 74,896 11,000 $
3.04 Final Design 8 12 4 4 8 16 8 60 12,692 $ $ 2,400 $ 15,332 2,640 $ Subtotal, Task 3 (hours) 0 36 100 52 30 248 116 52 0 634Subtotal, Task 3 ($) 10,836 $ 20,900 $ 15,652 $ 8,670 $ 53,320 $ 19,256 $ 6,760 $ 135,394 $ 21,400 $ 23,540 $ 550 $ 159,484 $ Task 4 Bid Period Assistance (SAF)
4.01 Conduct Pre-bid Meeting 6 6 1,806 $ 150 $ 1,956 $
4.02 Respond to Contractor Questions 2 4 2 2 10 2,618 $ 2,618 $
4.03 Develop Addenda 4 4 4 2 2 16 4,154 $ $ 1,600 $ 5,914 1,760 $
4.04 Review Bids 4 4 1,204 $ 1,204 $
Subtotal, Task 4 (hours) 0 16 8 6 4 0 2 0 0 36Subtotal, Task 4 ($) 4,816 $ 1,672 $ 1,806 $ 1,156 $ 332 $ 9, $ 1,600 782 $ 1,760 $ 150 $ 11,692 $ Task 5 Bid Period Assistance (Dewatering)
5.01 Conduct Pre-bid Meeting 6 6 1,806 $ 150 $ 1,956 $
5.02 Respond to Contractor Questions 2 4 2 2 10 2,618 $ 2,618 $
5.03 Develop Addenda 4 4 4 2 2 16 4,154 $ $ 1,600 $ 5,914 1,760 $
5.04 Review Bids 4 4 1,204 $ 1,204 $
Subtotal, Task 5 (hours) 0 16 8 6 4 0 2 0 0 36Subtotal, Task 5 ($) 4,816 $ 1,672 $ 1,806 $ 1,156 $ 332 $ 9, $ 1,600 782 $ 1,760 $ 150 $ 11,692 $ Labor
Costs
West Yost Associates P/VP EM/SM/GM I AE/AS/AG I EM/SM/GM I PE/PS/PG II TS III CAD II ADM III P/VP Hours Fee TJCAA Sub. Other Total $318 $301 $209 $301 $289 $215 $166 $130 $318 w/ markup Direct Costs PROJECT: Solids Treatment Improvements Banyai PE Electrical I&C Elect/I&C CAD Mech CAD WP QC/QA 10% Labor
Task 6 Engineering Services during Construction
(SAF)
6.01 Review Submittals 12 50 8 5 75 17,120 $ $ 9,000 $ 27,020 9,900 $
6.02 Respond to RFIs 6 20 4 30 7,190 $ $ 4,500 $ 12,140 4,950 $
6.03 Meetings 32 32 9,632 $ 100 $ 9,732 $
6.04 Site Visits 8 8 16 4,080 $ $ 3,000 $ 300 3,300 $ 7,680 $
6.05 Review of Weekly Reports 12 12 24 6,120 $ 6,120 $
6.06 Final Punch List 8 8 4 2 22 5,862 $ 5,862 $
Subtotal, Task 6 (hours) 0 78 98 16 2 0 0 5 0 199Subtotal, Task 6 ($) 23,478 $ 20,482 $ 4,816 $ 578 $ 65 $ 50,004 0 $ 16,500 $ 18,150 $ 400 $ 68,554 $ Task 7 Engineering Service during Construction
(Dewatering)
7.01 Review Submittals 12 50 8 5 75 17,120 $ $ 9,000 $ 27,020 9,900 $
7.02 Respond to RFIs 6 20 4 30 7,190 $ $ 4,500 $ 12,140 4,950 $
7.03 Meetings 32 32 9,632 $ 100 $ 9,732 $
7.04 Site Visits 8 8 16 4,080 $ $ 3,000 $ 300 3,300 $ 7,680 $
7.05 Review Weekly Reports 12 12 24 6,120 $ 6,120 $
7.06 Final Punchlist 8 8 4 2 22 5,862 $ 5,862 $
Subtotal, Task 7 (hours) 0 78 98 16 2 0 0 5 0 199Subtotal, Task 7 ($) 23,478 $ 20,482 $ 4,816 $ 578 $ 65 $ 50,004 0 $ 16,500 $ 18,150 $ 400 $ 68,554 $ Task 8 Project Management
8.01 Project Coordination 16 80 96 29,168 $ 29,168 $
8.02 QA/QC 6 48 54 17,070 $ 17,070 $
Subtotal, Task 8 (hours) 16 86 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 150Subtotal, Task 8 ($) $ 25,886 5,088 $ 15,264 $ 46,238 $ 46,238 $ TOTAL (hours) 16 352 432 144 74 444 236 114 48 1,860TOTAL ($) $ 105,952 5,088 $ 90,288 $ 43,344 $ 21,386 $ 95,460 $ 39,176 $ 14,820 $ 15,264 $ 430,778 $ 81,000 $ 89,100 $ 2,200 $ 522,078 $
Agenda Item No: 11.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/18/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1660
AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration of 1) Adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) Authorization to Issue a Demolition Permit for a Structure Over the Age of 50 Years Old at 101 South Main Street; File No. 21-6155 and 21-6623 - Continued Item from the May 4, 2022, Council Meeting.
DEPARTMENT: Community
Development PREPARED BY: Michelle Irace, Planning Manager PRESENTER: Michelle Irace, Planning Manager; Craig
Schlatter, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Draft Minute Report for Agenda Item 11a, of the May 4, 2022, Council Meeting rev 5-16-22
2. May 4 2022 CC Staff Report (attachments omitted)
3. Initial Study & Mitigated Neg Dec, Rev May 11, 2022
4. Draft Findings
5. Draft Resolution to Adopt ISMND
6. Market Analysis Information Provided by the Applicant
7. 11a Correspondence Received - Todd Schapmire
Summary: As a continuation of the public hearing from the May 4, 2022, City Council meeting, Council will consider 1) adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) authorization to the Building Official to issue a Demolition Permit for a structure located at 101 South Main Street, as recommended by the Demolition Review Committee.
Background: At the May 4, 2022 Council meeting, Council considered authorization to issue the Demolition Permit for 101 and 105 South Main Street, as well as approval of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) for the Project. At this meeting, Council determined that the 105 South Main Street building has no historic significance (5-0 vote) under UCC Section 3016. As such, no further action by Council is needed for 105 South Main Street and the Demolition Permit for that building may be issued.
Regarding the building at 101 South Main Street, Council determined by a carried vote of 3-1-1 (with Mayor Brown dissenting and Councilmember Orozco abstaining) that the following UCC 3016(e) criteria apply to the building: 1) has special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind- in this case, the pressed metal building element; and 2) exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history- in this case, because it is the only remaining building to tell the story of how this block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce.
A Draft Minutes Report for Agenda Item 11a, of the May 4, 2022 meeting is included as Attachment 1. The May 4, 2022, Staff Report is included in Attachment 2. Pertinent attachments from the May 4 Staff Report that are related to the actions being considered by Council at this hearing (May 18) have been included in this Staff Report. The remaining May 4 Staff Report attachments and the full agenda packet may be found online by clicking on this link or by navigating to the May 4 meeting through the City's meetings webpage at:
https://www.cityofukiah.com/meetings/.
After Council made the aforementioned determinations, there was discussion regarding next steps under UCC 3016 and the analysis contained within the ISMND. After further discussion, the item was continued to a date
certain of May 18, 2022, so Staff could further research the implications of Council’s findings. Below is a discussion of findings and determinations made by Staff regarding the actions being considered by Council.
Discussion: Council will consider the following two actions: 1) adoption of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND); and 2) authorization to the Building Official to proceed with the issuance of the Demolition Permit for 101 South Main Street. The following actions should be considered concurrently.
Action 1, Adoption of the ISMND. The analysis in the ISMND found that the 101 S. Main St. building is historically significant due to its association with the commercial development in downtown Ukiah after the 1917 fire. While the 1999 update to the 1985 Historic Resources Survey of the City of Ukiah notes that the pressed metal clad building is “an excellent example of its type and the only one left in Ukiah,” the APD Preservation, LLC 2022 Historical Resource Evaluation found that the many changes to the building after it was reconstructed in 1921 disqualified it as architecturally significant. However, the evaluation determined that the building retains enough physical integrity to convey its early twentieth century commercial origins, which render it historic.” Accordingly, the 101 S. Main St. building qualifies as a local historic resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for its association with the 1917 fire and subsequent commercial development in central Ukiah. However, the analysis also states that the “dilapidated utilitarian building” is not architecturally distinctive. The ISMND proposes Mitigation Measure CUL-1, requiring photo documentation of the building to catalogue its existence and Mitigation Measure CUL-2, requiring an educational plaque to be erected on-site to acknowledge its historic significance related to the 1917 fire. With incorporation of these mitigation measures, impacts to cultural (historic) resources were found to be less than significant.
As noted in the Background above, at their May 4, 2022 meeting, Council found that the building qualifies as historic under UCC 3016(e), criteria 1) for being the only remaining building with metal clad siding; and 2) for being the only remaining building to tell the story of how this block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce. Because of these findings, Staff is proposing the following mitigation measure to replace Mitigation Measure CUL-2 (previously related to the building's associated with the 1917 fire):
CUL-2: The 101 South Main Street building shall not be demolished until there is a development proposal approved, in accordance with the Ukiah City Code and specifically, the Downtown Zoning Code. At the time of demolition, the pressed metal siding on the west and north portions of the building shall be salvaged to the extent feasible. Because the pressed metal is in several narrow strips and may not be in useable condition, salvaging all of the material as-is may not be feasible. Alternatively, new development shall be designed to incorporate a portion of the façade of the existing building. This may include using a portion of the pressed metal as an architectural feature, or using masonry brick or other materials and/or design components that are visually similar to pay homage to the building. New development shall require review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, in accordance with the Downtown Zoning Code.
The proposed substituted CUL-2 also further mitigates the impact of demolishing the building that is associated with the 1917 fire rebuild efforts and association with agricultural commerce in the area.
Additionally, Mitigation Measure CUL-1, requiring photo documentation, aids in lessening impacts from demolition and is not proposed to be revised. With incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and the substituted CUL-2, impacts to historic resources would be less than significant. Under CEQA Guidelines Section §15074.1, Substitution of Mitigation Measures in a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, if, prior to project approval, the City Council determines during the public review process that mitigations identified in the ISMND are infeasible or otherwise undesirable, it may delete those mitigation measures and substitute other measures that the City Council determines are more effective. This can be done at a public hearing that is combined with the public hearing on the project itself. Before substituting new mitigation measures for those in the ISMND, the City Council must adopt a written finding that the new measure is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. Under this procedure no recirculation of the ISMND is required where the new mitigation measures are made conditions of or otherwise incorporated into the approval of the project.
The proposed substituted mitigation measure has been incorporated into the ISMND and Mitigation Monitoring
Reporting Program contained therein (dated May 11, 2022), which is included in Attachment 3. The Findings to Adopt the ISMND are included in Attachment 4, and the Resolution to adopt the ISMND is included in Attachment 5.
Action 2, Demolition Permit Review Process. In accordance with UCC 3016(g), the next step in the Demolition Permit process is for Council to consider whether a viable market exists for the 101 South Main Street building, taking into account the condition of the building, the probable cost to put the building into marketable condition, and the uses of the property allowed under existing or probable future zoning regulations. The Council shall consider such evidence offered by the applicant and any other information presented at the meeting by any interested party or by Staff, to determine whether or not a viable market exists. "Viable market" means that it is reasonably likely that the building could be sold within a commercially reasonable period of time for more than the seller would be required to invest in the purchase of the property and preparing the property for sale, or that the property could produce a reasonable return on the amount of money it would take to purchase the property and prepare the building for income producing purposes. "Reasonable return" means the average rate of return on real estate investments in the Ukiah Valley. Market Analysis information provided by the Applicant is included in Attachment 6.
Option A: If the Council finds, based on substantial evidence, that a viable market does not exist, the issuance of the permit shall be stayed for a period of 90 days. During that 90-day period, the City shall determine whether other alternatives to demolition exist, which are acceptable to the applicant, that would preserve the historic, architectural or cultural significance of the building. If no agreement is reached within the 90-day stay, the Building Official can issue the demolition permit. Here, if an agreement can be reached during the public hearing that satisfies the City Council and the applicant, they can mutually waive the 90-day stay in exchange for an enforceable commitment by the applicant to perform the mitigations proposed by the City Council. In this case, this can be accomplished by the Council and the Applicant agreeing to approve the ISMND with a finding by the City Council that the substitute mitigation (CUL-2) is more effective in mitigating the effect of demolishing the building on historic resources and will not by themselves cause any potentially significant adverse effect on the environment. Upon approval of this substitution, the City Council can vote to:
1) approve the ISMND with the substituted mitigation; and 2) authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit.
Option B: However, if the Council finds, based on substantial evidence that a viable market exists, the Building Official will be notified of Council’s finding and the Demolition Permit shall not be issued. In this instance, the ISMND would not have to be approved, as CEQA is only required for projects that are approved (in this case, demolition with the aforementioned mitigation measures). Not more than once within any 12- month period, the applicant may submit a new application for a permit and the City Council may reconsider whether a viable market exists: 1) upon a showing by the applicant that market conditions have changed; or 2) based upon new information that in the exercise of reasonable diligence the applicant could not have produced at the first hearing. Approval of the ISMND could be reconsidered at that time.
Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the ISMND with the substituted mitigation, and authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit for 101 South Main Street, based on the market analysis information provided by the applicant in Attachment 6, indicating that a viable market does not exist. Findings to adopt the ISMND and authorize the issuance of the Demolition Permit are included in Attachment 4, and the Draft Resolution to Adopt the ISMND is included in Attachment 5.
Recommended Action: Approve the Resolution adopting the ISMND with the substituted mitigation, and authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit for 101 South Main Street, based on the market analysis information provided by the applicant indicating that a viable market does not exist and consistent with Findings in Attachment 4.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: David Rapport, City Attorney; Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director
City Council Minutes for May 4, 2022, Continued:
11. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:15 PM)
a. Consideration of 1) Adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) Authorization to Issue the Demolition Permit for Two Structures Over the Age of 50 Years Old at 101 and 105 South Main Street, as Recommended by the Demolition Review Committee; File No. 21-6155 and 21-6623.
Presenters: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director and Michelle Irace, Planning Manager.
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED AT 7:32 P.M.
Public Comment: Todd Schapmire Jr., owner and Pinky Kushner.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED AT 7:47 P.M.
Motion by Councilmember Crane, Seconded by Councilmember Rodin to disapprove of the idea of demolishing the building.
The maker amended the motion to declare that the southern building is not significant and is acceptable to demolish.
Motion withdrawn by the maker and the second.
Motion by Councilmember Crane, Seconded by Councilmember Rodin to support demolition for 105 South Main Street, and finds that it does not qualify for special consideration [regarding historical value].
The maker and the second amended the motion to read:
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin that the City Council finds that the building at 105 South Main Street has no historic architectural significance under the standards in Ukiah City Code (UCC) Section 3016. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
Motion/Second: Rodin/Crane to deem 101 South Main Street ‘historic’ because it meets two of the three criteria in 3016(e)[of the Ukiah City Code], by having a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind – in this case the metal clad; and 2) it exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history because it is the only remaining building to tell the story of how this block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce. Motion carried by the following roll call votes:
AYES: Crane, Rodin, and Dueňas. NOES: Brown. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Orozco.
RECESS: 8:23 – 8:30 p.m. to consult with City Attorney and Staff.
Motion/Second: Crane/Rodin to continue this item to the May 18, 2022, City Council meeting at 6:15 p.m. Motion carried by the following roll call votes: AYES: Orozco, Crane, Rodin, Dueňas, and Brown. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
12. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Authorization of City Manager to Execute a Grant Agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration, and Award of Bid for Spec. 21-06 Runway 15-33 Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 2, Contingent on Grant Offer to Complete the Runway 15- 33 Width Reduction from 150 Feet to 75 Feet; and Install New Lighting (Construction); and Approval of Corresponding Budget Amendment.
Presenter: Greg Owen, Airport Manager.
Revised 5-16-22 to correct final vote count for item 11a
Agenda Item No: 11.a.
MEETING DATE/TIME: 5/4/2022
ITEM NO: 2022-1599
AGENDA SUMMARY
REPORT
SUBJECT: Consideration of 1) Adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) Authorization to Issue the Demolition Permit for Two Structures Over the Age of 50 Years Old at 101 and 105 South Main Street, as Recommended by the Demolition Review Committee; File No. 21-6155 and 21-6623.
DEPARTMENT: Community
Development PREPARED BY: Michelle Irace, Planning Manager PRESENTER: Michelle Irace, Planning Manager; Craig
Schlatter, Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Application Materials
2. 101 & 105 S Main St Demo Permit _Final Draft ISMND 042522
3. Demolition Review Committee Minutes_122821
4. Draft Findings for Approval
5. Draft Resolution to Adopt ISMND
6. Public Hearing Comments Received as of 046522
7. Supplemental Market Analysis Info. Provided by the Applicant Summary: City Council will consider 1) Adoption of an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) authorization to issue a Demolition Permit for two structures located at 101 and 105 South Main Street, as recommended by the Demolition Review Committee. Both structures are over the age of 50 years old, and therefore, according to Ukiah City Code, the City Council must hold a public hearing to review and consider the historical and architectural significance of the structures before authorizing the Building Official to issue the Demolition Permit.
Background: The ±0.48-acre Project site (APN 002-231-01) is located at the corner of Perkins Street and South Main Street in downtown Ukiah. The parcel is developed with a parking lot and two buildings with separate street addresses: one ±3,328 sf building at 101 South Main Street; and one ±2,880 sf building at 105 South Main Street. A brief history of the buildings is provided below. 101 South Main Street. The existing building was originally constructed in 1921 as a hay barn. The building was constructed to replace the previous hay barn that was destroyed in the 1917 fire that began at a restaurant (currently occupied by a law firm at 116 South State Street, just south of the Ukiah Brewing Company) two blocks west of the site. The existing building was modified significantly between 1938 and 1963 when it was converted for use as a commercial retail establishment. Modifications made to the building during this time included replacing two open bays with windows, replacing the front doors, replacing and reconfiguring the awning, and installing an additional window. The false brick front that defines the building was also modified in 1938. The building currently houses the Dragon’s Lair retail business.
The building is listed on the City of Ukiah’s 1985 ‘Historic Resources Survey” (prepared by Historic Environment Consultants) as well as in the updated 1999 “City of Ukiah Architectural Survey” (prepared by P.S. Preservation Services). These documents (herein referred to as the City’s “local historic inventories”) identify the 101 South Main Street building as being listed on the State Register, and eligible for the National Register of Historic Places based on its architecture and "prominent" location. However, as described in detail throughout the Initial Study, after conducting extensive research on the matter, it has been clarified that this is ATTACHMENT 2
incorrect. According to the State Historic Preservation Office’s (SHPO’s) most recent classification system and database of historic buildings, also known as the “Built Environment Resource Directory” (updated March 2020), the building status code is “5S2”, meaning that the local government has identified it as individually eligible for local listing. As such, the building is not listed on the State of California’s inventory of historic resources or National Register of Historic Places. In 2020, a prospective buyer of the property hired a consultant (APD Preservation, LLC) to prepare Historic Resources Evaluation to evaluate the building’s significance under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Evaluation was later updated in 2022 for this Demolition Permit application after it was discovered that the State had updated their database of historic resources and the listing of the building was clarified. See Discussion Section of this Staff Report for more information.
105 South Main Street. According to the Mendocino County Assessor’s records, the building that houses Tom’s Glass repair shop is a warehouse that dates back to 1947. The building is a rectangular, approximately 2,880 sf one-story building located on the south side of the parcel and comprised of silver corrugated metal.
This building is not included in either of the city’s local historic inventories, nor is it listed in the State of California’s inventory of historic resources or National Register of Historic Places.
On October 28, 2021, an application for a Demolition Permit to demolish both structures was submitted by the property owner. Application materials, including a location map and photos of the existing buildings, are included in Attachment 1. Demolition of the buildings is expected to take approximately three weeks during daylight hours, Monday through Friday. Although the property owner notes that he believes another commercial building/use is the best use of the site, no development is proposed at this time. A detailed Project Description is included within the ISMND, which is included in Attachment 2 and further discussed in the Discussion Section below.
On December 28, 2021, the City’s DRC reviewed the Demolition Permit, in accordance with Ukiah City Code Section 3016, which states that buildings more than 50 years old that are proposed for demolition that do not meet the exemption criteria of being either an immediate safety hazard, or an accessory building that is not listed on the local historic inventory, shall be reviewed by the DRC for their historical and architectural significance. Specifically, the following three criteria regarding the structure proposed for demolition shall be reviewed and the DRC shall make a recommendation to the Ukiah City Council (UCC 3016(e)):
1) Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; or
2) Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history; or
3) Is strongly identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
The DRC found that the buildings did not meet any of the aforementioned criteria and recommended that the City Council authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit for 101 South Main Street (2-1 vote; one member absent) and 105 South Main Street (3-0 vote; one member absent). Minutes of the December 28, 2021, DRC meeting are included as Attachment 3. The meeting recording, Staff Report and associated documents, including department and agency referral comments, the Historic Evaluation prepared for the 101 South Main Street building (2020), and public comments received for the meeting can be found online at:
https://ukiahca.civicclerk.com/Web/Player.aspx?id=1323&key=-1&mod=-1&mk=-1&nov=0 , or can be accessed through the City’s meetings webpage at: http://www.cityofukiah.com/meetings/.
Discussion: The UCC places the authority for adoption of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND), as well as authorization to the Building Official to proceed with the issuance of the Demolition Permit, with the City Council. Typically, standard construction activities requiring Building Permits (including Demolition Permits) are considered ministerial actions and do not require additional environmental analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, because UCC Section 3016 requires discretionary review of Demolition Permits for buildings over 50 years old and the 101 South Main Street building was listed on the city’s local historic inventories, the Project was determined to require additional CEQA review. As such, regardless of the DRC’s recommendation for the City Council to authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit based on their determination that the buildings do not meet the historic significance criteria listed in UCC
3016(e), additional environmental review was conducted. In accordance with CEQA, the Planning Division of the City of Ukiah Community Development Department prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) for the Project. The Draft ISMND (State Clearinghouse No. 2022030389) was circulated for public review from March 14, 2022, through April 15, 2022. No public comments were received on the ISMND during the public review period. The Draft ISMND and noticing documents can be found online at: http://www.cityofukiah.com/ceqa-review/.
As described throughout the ISMND (Attachment 2), the Project would result in a less than significant impact to Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gases, Hazards Materials, Land Use, Mineral Resources, Noise and Public Services; the Project would have no impact on Agriculture and Forestry Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Population and Housing. However, the Project would have a potential impact to Air Quality, and Cultural/Tribal Cultural Resources if not properly mitigated.
Specifically, activities associated with demolition over the three-week construction period could result in temporary direct significant impacts to Air Quality, but would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, requiring adherence to Mendocino County Air Quality Management District regulations.
Regarding Cultural (historic) Resources, the building located at 105 South Main Street is not located on a local, state, or federal historic register. Therefore, no impact to historic resources per CEQA would occur as a result of its demolition. However, as noted above, the building at 101 South Main Street is listed on the city’s local historic inventories warranting additional analysis of its historic significance. A Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared by APD Preservation, LLC (updated January, 2022; Attachment A of the ISMND in Attachment 2 of this Staff Report) to further research and evaluate the building’s historic significance and the Project’s impacts to historic resources under CEQA. In summary, the evaluation (2022) notes that although the building has some character-defining architectural features (such as the false brick front, metal clad siding, and “clipped” corner entrance), the building’s architecture is not historically unique or significant. It also notes that the building “appears” to be significant for its association with post fire development after the 1917 fire and how the block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce in the region. The Draft ISMND incorporates information from the evaluation (specifically in Section V.5, Cultural Resources) and concludes that based on substantial evidence, including its listing in the city’s local historic inventories, the building at 101 South Main Street qualifies as a historic resource under CEQA. The Draft ISMND proposes Mitigation Measure CUL-1, requiring photo documentation of the building to catalogue its existence and Mitigation Measure CUL-2, requiring an educational plaque to be erected on-site to acknowledge its historic significance related to the 1917 fire. Because the Project proposes to demolish the building that is not historically significant for its architecture, and does not propose new development at this time, the Draft ISMND found that these mitigation measures are considered adequate for reducing impacts to less than significant levels. As such, impacts to Cultural (historic) Resources were found to be less than significant with implementation of mitigation.
However, to ensure a comprehensive evaluation prior to the review of the City Council, Staff conducted additional specific research into UCC Section 3016 and the city’s local inventory. Through this research, Staff found that the local inventories were never adopted by the City. Public Resource Code 5020.1(k) specifically defines “local register of historical resources” as a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution. Because the city’s local historic inventories were never adopted by ordinance or resolution, the 101 South Main Street building does not meet the criteria listed in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k) to qualify as a significant historic resource under CEQA. To be sure, Staff consulted with the City Attorney regarding this determination, and the City Attorney affirmed this information per a verbal conversation on April 12, 2022 . However, the Community Development Department recognizes the importance of the City’s inventory as it relates to local history, and has a precedent of processing Demolition Permits for buildings listed on the inventory featuring local historic significance. As such, Staff finds the analysis in the Draft ISMND and proposed mitigation measures necessary and adequate for reducing potential impacts to historic resources under CEQA. Staff also found that when UCC Section 3016 was adopted (Ordinance 1014; 1998) it was intended to be an interim measure to protect historic buildings in the City until the City updates the local historic inventory and develops a historic preservation policy in place of UCC Section 3016. However, these actions have not been completed to date.
This information has been clarified in the Final Draft ISMND (Attachment 2), but no other changes have been made since publication of the Draft ISMND.
Per UCC Section 3016(g), Council shall conduct a public hearing to consider the recommendation of the DRC, and to determine if any of the criteria listed in subsection (e) apply to the buildings proposed for demolition. If the City Council determines that any one of the criteria applies, it shall make a corresponding finding to that effect. If the Council finds that the buildings do not meet the three criteria to establish the buildings as historic, the Council should make a finding to that effect, allowing the Demolition Permit to be issued by the Building Official. However, if the Council finds that any of the criteria in the aforementioned section is met, Council shall make a finding to that effect and also consider market analysis information provided by the applicant to determine if a market exists to pursue other options for acquiring or salvaging the building, while issuance of the Demolition Permit is stayed for 90 days. See UCC Section 3016(g) for more information:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Ukiah/#!/html/Ukiah03/Ukiah0301-0300.html.
Staff considered the DRC’s determination that the buildings do not qualify for the criteria listed in 3016(e) and their recommendation to issue the Demolition Permit, together with the analysis in the ISMND, as well as the information found during the additional research conducted, and agrees that the buildings do not meet the criteria in 3016(e) for the following reasons. Because the 105 South Main Street building is not listed on the city’s local historic inventories, and was unanimously determined by the DRC to not meet this criteria, the analysis below is specific to the 101 South Main Street building. • Although the building is comprised of a particular type of metal that may no longer be common, construction of metal buildings is not uncommon today, and there are several other buildings with metal siding within the city that have a similar appearance. Similarly, the false brick front of the building may be uncommon; however, the downtown area contains several buildings that are comprised of masonry brick.
Lastly, it is noted throughout the Historic Evaluation that with all things considered, the “dilapidated”, “utilitarian” building is not considered historically significant for its architecture. • The building has not been used for agricultural-related uses since 1961, and the building has been significantly altered as it was converted to retail. The building alone does not tell the story of historic agricultural practices and historic changes in land use patterns in and around Ukiah. • Whereas the CEQA criteria that was analyzed within the Historic Evaluation and ISMND use the term “is associated”, the UCC criterion being analyzed uses the term “strongly identified”. As previously noted, the 1917 fire began two blocks west of the building and destroyed several buildings that were rebuilt over the next decade. The building is one of many buildings that was rebuilt over the decade following the fire. The city’s local historic inventories mention the 1917 fire, but do not identify the building as being historically significant for this specific reason. The building has an association with the 1917 fire, but this does not exclusively qualify the building as being “strongly identified” with a significant local event.
For the reasons discussed above, Staff finds that the buildings do not meet the criteria for historic or architectural significance outlined in UCC Section 3016. Based on Staff’s analysis, and the DRC’s finding that the two buildings do not meet the criteria, and their recommendation to authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit, in addition to the CEQA analysis provided in the ISMND, and additional research regarding UCC Section 3016 outlined above, Staff recommends the City Council adopt the ISMND and authorize issuance of the Demolition Permit for the two structures located at 101 and 105 South Main Street. Findings to adopt the ISMND and authorize the issuance of the Demolition Permit are included in Attachment 4 and the Draft Resolution to Adopt the ISMND is included in Attachment 5. Public correspondence received for this public hearing as of April 26, 2022, is included in Attachment 6. However, in the event Council determines either of the buildings to be historic per UCC Section 3016, supplemental market analysis has been provided by the applicant as Attachment 7 for consideration. If the Council determines that the buildings do not meet the criteria listed in UCC Section 3016(b), Council need not consider this supplemental information.
Recommended Action: 1) Adopt the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 2) Authorize
issuance of the Demolition Permit for two structures over 50 years old, located at 101 and 105 South Main Street, based on the Findings included with the Staff Report as Attachment 1.
BUDGET AMENDMENT REQUIRED: N/A
CURRENT BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
PROPOSED BUDGET AMOUNT: N/A
FINANCING SOURCE: N/A
PREVIOUS CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER NO.: N/A
COORDINATED WITH: N/A
ATTACHMENT 3
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
FINAL DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY AND
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR
DEMOLITION PERMIT FOR TWO BUILDINGS
OVER 50 YEARS OLD
101 AND 105 SOUTH MAIN STREET
March 14, 2022
Last Revised May 11, 2022
SCH No: 2022030389
Prepared by:
City of Ukiah
Community Development Department
Planning Division
300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, CA 95482
2 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Table of Contents
I. PROJECT INFORMATION 3
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4
1. Project Location 4
2. Environmental Setting and Background 5
3. Project Components 8
III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED 10
IV. DETERMINATION 13
V. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 14
1. Aesthetics 14
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources 18
3. Air Quality 19
4. Biological Resources 23
5. Cultural Resources 24
6. Energy 30
7. Geology and Soils 32
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 33
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 35
10. Hydrology and Water Quality 38
11. Land Use and Planning 39
12. Mineral Resources 41
13. Noise 41
14. Population and Housing 45
15. Public Services 46
6. Recreation 47
17. Transportation 48
18. Tribal Cultural Resources 50
19. Utilities and Service Systems 52
20. Wildfire 54
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance 55
VI. REFERENCES 57
VII. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 60
ATTACHMENTS
A. Historic Resource Evaluation for 101 South Main Street
3 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
I. PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Title:
Demolition Permit to Demolish Two Buildings Over the Age of 50 Years Old Lead Agency Address and Phone Number:
City of Ukiah
300 Seminary Avenue
Ukiah, California 95482
(707) 463-6200
CEQA Contact Person and Phone Number:
Michelle Irace, Planning Manager
City of Ukiah Community Development Department
(707) 463-6203
[email protected]
Applicant:
Todd Schapmire, Property Owner
Project Location: 101 and 105 South Main Street (APN 002-231-01) General Plan Designation: Commercial (C)
Zoning District: Urban Center (UC) within Downtown Zoning Code
4 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Project Location
The ±0.48-acre Project site (APN 002-231-01) is located on the corner of Perkins Street and South Main Street in downtown Ukiah, approximately 0.5-mile west of U.S. Highway 101. Both Main Street and Perkins Street are developed with a mixture of commercial, residential and public uses. The parcel is developed with a parking lot and two buildings with separate street addresses: one ±3,328 sf building that has been occupied by the Dragon’s Lair retail business (101 South Main Street); and one ±2,880 sf building that has been occupied by Tom’s Glass repair service (105 South Main Street).
Figure 1 below provides a location map, Figure 2 provides an aerial image of the Project site, and Figures 3 and 4 depict the two existing buildings.
Figure 1, Project Location Map
5 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Figure 2, Project Site Aerial Image
2. Environmental Setting and Background
The Project site is situated within the City of Ukiah, within the Ukiah Valley in central Mendocino County. The Ukiah Valley is located approximately 30 miles east and inland from the Pacific Ocean as the crow flies. The Ukiah Valley runs north-south for approximately nine miles, with a maximum width of three miles, and elevations varying from approximately 600-feet above mean sea level to approximately 3,000 feet in the hills surrounding the City. Vegetation communities in the Ukiah Valley include mixed oak, chaparral, and manzanita, with some sparse redwood groves. The Russian River enters the valley at the north end and runs south along the valley floor. This area is characterized by a Mediterranean climate; the winters are cool and wet, and the summers are hot and dry. Annual average temperatures for this region range from about 30 to 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
Ukiah is located along the Highway 101 corridor and near the east/west intersection of Highway 20, two hours north of the Golden Gate Bridge. Incorporated in 1876, Ukiah is the county seat and largest city in Mendocino County.
As noted above, the Project site is developed with two existing buildings and a paved parking lot. The parcel is accessed via a driveway from South Main Street, as well as a driveway located along Perkins Street. Additionally, there is a shared driveway that shares access with the adjacent parcel immediately to the east (225 East Perkins Street) that is currently occupied by Romi’s Brew and BBQ (see Figures 2 through 4). For several decades, buildings on the parcel have been used for
6 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
commercial uses. Vegetation on the site is limited to the following: two California juniper shrubs, one Chinese pistache tree located against the 101101 South Main Street building (east side); blackberry bushes against the 105105 South Main Street building (east side) and four Valley oak trees approximately 14 to 60 ft away from the building. Additionally, large oak trees line the east side of the parcel but are located within the adjacent parcel (see Figure 3). 101 South Main Street (Dragon’s Lair building). The Dragon’s Lair building is located at the southeast corner of the parcel at the intersection of Perkins Street and South Main Street, fronting on both streets. The building consists of one story with a roughly rectangular footprint, and “chamfered” or “clipped” flat northwest corner to accommodate the primary entrance. It is comprised of red and peach colored pressed tin siding on west and north elevations and corrugated metal siding on the east and south elevations (see Figures 2-4). The existing approximately 3,328 sf building originally dates from 1921 and was included in the City of Ukiah’s 1985 ‘Historic Resources Survey” (prepared by Historic Environment Consultants) and updated in 1999 by the “City of Ukiah Architectural Survey” (prepared by P.S. Preservation Services). According to the 1985 survey, the building was assigned a “5” status code, which includes buildings that are ineligible for the national register, but are identified as having historic importance at the local level. Specifically, the 1985 survey notes that the building is representative of a type of commercial structure common to its era that is a “rather rare survivor of the type in Ukiah, and is located prominently. Its surfacing materials and form create a rather strong image of past lifestyles.” The 1999 survey was completed as an update to the 1985 survey, and reviewed each property’s eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places. The 1999 survey notes that the building is vernacular commercial style and originally constructed in 1921 as a hay barn and feed store. The survey notes that the pressed metal clad building is “an excellent example of its type and the only one left in Ukiah”, and was therefore assigned a “3S” status code, which is defined as appearing to be eligible for the National Register as an individual property through survey information.
However, the 1999 survey does not provide additional information regarding the change in status from the 1985 survey.
Although the 1999 survey identifies the building as eligible for the National Register, this does not accurately depict the building’s status. In order for a building to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places, a building must first be listed on the State Register. In order to be listed on the State Register the survey form completed by the local jurisdiction must be submitted to State of California’s Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO) for review. SHPO then reviews the survey forms and determines if the building is eligible for listing on the State Register. Once listed on the State Register SHPO must submit a nomination form to the National Park Service for review and consideration. Upon extensive research, it was determined that Dragon’s Lair building is not listed on either the State or Federal Registers. This is further supported by SHPO’s most recent classification system and database of historic buildings, also known as the “Built Environment Resource Directory” (updated March, 2020), which identifies the building status code as “5S2”, meaning that the local government has identified it as individually eligible for local listing. As such, the building is not listed on the State Register, nor is it identified as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
A Historic Resource Evaluation was prepared by APD Preservation, LLC (January, 2020; revised in January, 2022) to further research and evaluate the building’s historic significance (Attachment A).
The evaluation found that the original building was constructed in 1857 was replaced once in 1890 with a new hay barn but was destroyed during the 1917 fire that began at a restaurant (currently occupied by a law firm at 116 South State Street, just south of the Ukiah Brewing Company) two blocks west of the building. A new building was constructed in 1921 but was significantly modified between 1938 and 1963 when it was converted to retail. Modifications made to the building during this time included replacing two open bays with windows, replacing the front doors, replacing and reconfiguring the awning, and installing an additional window. The false front that most defines the building was
7 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
modified in 1938, but retains its basic early twentieth century appearance. During this time, the building was occupied by several feed stores, a cheese and wine store, and office/retail space. The existing Dragon’s Lair retail business has been within the building since 1995. The evaluation (2022) notes that although it has some character-defining architectural features, the building’s architecture is not historically significant. It also notes that the building is considered most significant for its association with post fire development after the 1917 fire and how the block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce in the region. The evaluation states, “The building appears to be significant for its association with the post-fire redevelopment of Ukiah. Its period of significance is 1921 (its inferred construction date), and the building retains enough physical integrity to convey its early twentieth century commercial origins, which render it historic. The dilapidated utilitarian building does not appear to be significant for its architectural merit.” See Section V.5, Cultural Resources, for more information. 105 South Main Street (Tom’s Glass building). According to the Mendocino County Assessor’s records, the Tom’s Glass building is a warehouse that dates back to 1947. The building is a rectangular approximately 2,880 sf one-story building located on the south side of the parcel and comprised of silver corrugated metal. There is a firewall between the Tom’s Glass building and the building on the adjacent parcel located at 123 South Main Street (currently occupied by the Little Brown Bear business). However, the firewall was constructed as part of construction for 123 South Main Street (Little Brown Bear) and is not located within the boundaries of the Project site. As such, the firewall is not proposed for demolition. The Tom’s Glass building is not included in either of the City’s 1985 and 1999 historic inventories surveys, nor is it listed in the State of California’s inventory of historic resources or National Register of Historic Places. Because the building is not listed in a local, state or national register, a detailed Historic Resource Evaluation was not prepared.
Per Ukiah City Code Section 3016(b), buildings over 50 years old proposed for demolition that do not meet the exemption criteria of being either an immediate safety hazard, or an accessory building that is not listed on the local historic inventory, shall be reviewed for their historic or architectural significance. Specifically, the City’s Demolition Review Committee shall review the proposal and make a recommendation to the Ukiah City Council. Because the buildings do not meet the exemption criteria noted within the code, on December 28, 2021, the City’s Demolition Review Committee reviewed the Project and voted to recommend demolition of both buildings to the City Council. See Section V.11, Land Use and Planning, for more information. This Initial Study is intended to analyze the impacts associated with demolition of the buildings, in accordance with CEQA. The Demolition Permit, together with this Initial Study, will be reviewed by City Council for final consideration. See Summary of Findgins Section for information updated on May 11, 2022.
Figure 3, Views of Existing Buildings from Perkins St. (looking southwest)
8 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Figure 4, Views of Existing Buildings from S. Main St. (looking northeast)
3. Project Components
The property owner proposes to demolish the existing buildings on-site. Standard demolition construction techniques and equipment including a mechanical ram, dump truck, pickup truck, excavator, backhoe, front end loader, bobcat & stinger for concrete demolition would be used. The existing buildings will be disassembled via mechanical means and by hand labor where necessary. Mechanical means will include large track-driven excavators with mechanical arms. Onsite concrete pads and foundations will be demolished with mechanical rams. Demolished concrete and rebar will be off-hauled and recycled at a local rock quarry. Other demolished debris will be loaded into dump trucks staged on site. Dump trucks would off-haul debris and deliver to the Ukiah Transfer Station & Recycling Center, where metal materials would be recycled and non-recyclable materials would be disposed.
Demolition would take approximately three weeks with a crew of six construction workers. All work would be performed Monday through Friday, during daylight hours (between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., depending on the season). Construction equipment would be staged on-site and all activities will be performed within the site boundaries. It is anticipated that two to three dump truck trips a day (Monday through Friday) would be necessary to transfer demolished materials for disposal and recycling. Construction equipment and trucks would utilize existing driveways and access routes on Main and Perkins Streets. No road closures are anticipated for the Project.
The existing Chinese pistache tree located on the south side of the building and the two Juniper shrubs located on the east side of the building would be removed for demolition, as they are located against the building and partially growing into the foundation. In addition, the blackberry would be removed.
None of the oak trees on-site would be removed. Dust on the site will be minimized with the use of a
9 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
water truck. Although the property owner has noted that he believes another commercial building/use is the best use of the site, no development is proposed at this time.
The application was referred to departments and agencies with jurisdiction or interest in the Project, including the City of Ukiah Community Development Department- Building Official, City of Ukiah Police Department, City of Ukiah Public Works Department, City of Ukiah Electric Utility Department, Ukiah Valley Fire Authority, Mendocino County Air Quality Management District, Mendocino County Environmental Health Department, and the Mendocino County Historic Society. Comments and requirements identified by these entities have been included as Conditions of Approval for the permit and the applicant will obtain all necessary regulatory permits.
10 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
Purpose of the Initial Environmental Study: This Initial Study has been prepared consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, to determine if the Project, as proposed, would have a significant impact upon the environment.
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture & Forestry Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology / Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
Summary of Findings: The Project site is developed with a parking lot and two buildings with separate street addresses: one ±3,328 sf building that has been occupied by the Dragon’s Lair retail business (101 South Main Street); and one ±2,880 sf building that has been occupied by Tom’s Glass repair service (105 South Main Street). Both of the buildings are more than 50 years old and are proposed for demolition; no new development is proposed. The Tom’s Glass building at 105 South Main Street is not located on a local, state or national register for historic places. However, the Dragon’s Lair building at 101 South Main Street is identified in the 1985 “Ukiah Historic Resource Survey” and the 1999 “City of Ukiah Architectural Survey” as a local historic resource, and is included in the State of California’s “Built Environmental Resource Database (BERD)” with a designation of “5S2,” meaning that a local government has recognized the resource as “eligible for local listing or designation.” However, the building is not listed on the State Register or National Register of Historic Places.
Per Ukiah City Code Section 3016(b), buildings over 50 years old proposed for demolition that do not meet the exemption criteria of being either an immediate safety hazard, or an accessory building that is not listed on the local historic inventory, shall be reviewed for their historic or architectural significance. Specifically, the City’s Demolition Review Committee shall review the proposal and make a recommendation to the Ukiah City Council. Because the buildings do not meet the exemption criteria noted within the code, on December 28, 2021, the City’s Demolition Review Committee reviewed the Project and voted to recommend demolition of both buildings to the City Council. See Section V.11, Land Use and Planning, for more information. This Initial Study is intended to analyze the impacts associated with demolition of the buildings, in accordance with CEQA. The Demolition Permit, together with this Initial Study, will be reviewed by City Council for final consideration.
As described and analyzed throughout the Initial Study, impacts to Air Quality, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources could be significant. However, with the implementation of mitigation measures, all impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Specifically, temporary activities associated with
11 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
demolition over the three-week construction period could result in direct significant impacts to Air Quality, but would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, requiring adherence to Mendocino County Air Quality Management District regulations. The Tom’s Glass building is not located on a local, state, or federal historic register.
Therefore, no impact to historic resources would occur as a result of its demolition. However, because the Dragon’s Lair building qualifies as a local historic resource under CEQA that would be demolished, the Project would result in a significant impact to that resource if not properly mitigated. Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would require photo documentation of the building to catalogue its existence and Mitigation Measure CUL-2 requires an educational plaque to be erected on-site to acknowledge its historic significance related to the 1917 fire. As such, impacts to historic resources would be less than significant with implementation of mitigation. The Project would result in either no impact, or less than significant impact to all other resources. See Section V, Evaluation of Environmental Impacts, for more information.
The Draft ISMND was circulated for public review from March 14, 2022 through April 15, 2022. No comments were received on the ISMND during the public review period. However, to ensure a comprehensive evaluation prior to the review and consideration of the ISMND by the City Council, City Community Development Department Staff conducted specific research into UCC Section 3016 and the City’s local historic inventories (1985 and 1999). Through this research, Staff found that the local inventories were never adopted by the City. Public Resource Code 5020.1(k) specifically defines “local register of historical resources” as a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution. Because the City’s local historic inventories were never adopted by ordinance or resolution, the 101 South Main Street building does not meet the criteria listed in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k) to qualify as a significant historic resource under CEQA. The City’s Community Development staff consulted with the City Attorney regarding this determination, and the City Attorney affirmed this information per a verbal conversation on April 12, 2022. However, the City recognizes the importance of the local historic inventories as it relates to local history, and has a precedent of processing Demolition Permits for buildings listed on the inventory featuring local historic significance. As such, the Community Development Department finds the analysis and proposed mitigation measures contained within this ISMND necessary and adequate for reducing potential impacts to historic resources.
At the May 4, 2022 City Council meeting, Council considered authorization to issue the Demolition Permit for 101 and 105 South Main Street, as well as approval of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) for the Project (dated April 25, 2022). At this meeting, Council determined that the 105 South Main Street building has no historic significance under UCC Section 3016 and the Demolition permit may be issued. Because of this finding, together with the analysis contained within the ISMND stating that the building has no historical significance, the mitigation measures noted herein are specific to 101 South Main Street.
Regarding 101 South Main Street, the Council determined that the following UCC 3016(e) criteria applies to the building: 1) Has special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind-in this case the metal clad; and 2) Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history because it is the only remaining building to tell the story of how this block functioned as a service hub for agricultural commerce.Because of these findings, Staff is proposing the following mitigation measure to substitute Mitigation Measure CUL-2(previously requiring an educational plaque):
CUL-2: The 101 South Main Street building shall not be demolished until there is a development proposal approved, in accordance with the Ukiah City Code, specifically the Downtown Zoning Code. At the time of demolition, the metal clad siding on the west and
12 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
north portions of the building shall be salvaged to the extent feasible. Because the metal clad is in several narrow strips and may not be in useable condition, using all of the material as is may not be feasible. Alternatively, new development shall be designed to incorporate a portion of the façade of the existing building. This may include using a portion of the metal clad as an architectural feature, or using masonry brick or other materials and/or design components that are visually similar to pay homage to the building. New development shall require review by the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission, in accordance with the Downtown Zoning Code.
The proposed substituted CUL-2 also further mitigates the impact of demolishing the building that is associated with the 1917 fire rebuild efforts and association with agicultural commerce in the area.
Additonally, Mitigation Measure CUL-1, requiring photo documentation aids in lessening impacts from demolition and is not proposed to be revised. With incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1 and the substituted CUL-2, impacts to historic resources would be less than significant. Under CEQA Guidelines Section § 15074.1, Substitution of Mitigation Measures in a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, if, prior to project approval, the City Council determines during the public review process that mitigations identified in the ISMND are infeasible or otherwise undesirable, it may delete those mitigation measures and substitute other measures that the City Council determines are more effective. This can be done at a public hearing that is combined with the public hearing on the project itself. Before substituting new mitigation measures for those in the ISMND, the City Council must adopt a written finding that the new measure is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment.
Under this procedure no recirculation of the ISMND is required where the new mitigation measures are made conditions of or otherwise incorporated into the approval of the project.
13 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
IV. DETERMINATION
On the basis of the initial evaluation that follows:
____ I find that the proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. __X__ I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures and project revisions have been identified that would reduce all impacts to a less than significant level. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. _____ I find that the proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
_____ I find that the proposed Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. _____ I find that although the proposed Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed Project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Craig Schlatter, Director
Community Development Department
City of Ukiah
[email protected]
14 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
V. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The purpose of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) is to provide an analysis of the potential environmental consequences as a result of the proposed Project. The environmental evaluation relied on the following categories of impacts, noted as column headings in the IS checklist, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Appendix G.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.”
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where the Project would not result in a significant effect (i.e., the Project impact would be less than significant without the need to incorporate mitigation). “No Impact” applies where the Project would not result in any impact in the category or the category does not apply. This may be because the impact category does not apply to the proposed Project (for instance, the Project Site is not within a surface fault rupture hazard zone), or because of other projectspecific factors.
1. Aesthetics
AESTHETICS. Would the project: Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Significance Criteria: Aesthetic impacts would be significant if the Project resulted in the obstruction of any scenic vista open to the public, damage to significant scenic resources within a designated
15 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
State scenic highway, substantial degradation to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings from public views, or generate new sources of light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area, including that which would directly illuminate or reflect upon adjacent property or could be directly seen by motorists or persons residing, working or otherwise situated within sight of the Project.
Environmental Setting: Views of expansive hillsides, mostly within the County’s jurisdiction, surround the City. Some hillsides are densely forested with evergreen trees, while others are relatively open in comparison, dominated by mature oak trees set amid scrub and grasslands. Specific to resources within the City limits, one of the most notable scenic resources are the Western Hills, rising above the valley floor on the west side of Ukiah. Views on the Valley floor within the City of Ukiah include those typical of existing residential and commercial development and the majority of the land within the City limits is previously developed. In addition, some views of agricultural land uses within the City limits, or immediately outside of City limits, are available.
Generally speaking, scenic vistas are typically described as areas of natural beauty with features such as topography, watercourses, rock outcrops, and natural vegetation that contribute to the landscape’s quality. Noted throughout the City of Ukiah’s 1995 General Plan are views of hillsides, open space areas and agricultural areas as scenic resources within the Ukiah Valley. Water in the form of creeks, streams, and rivers is often a prominent feature in the scenic landscape as well. The General Plan generally identifies U.S. Highway 101 through the entire Ukiah Valley as a local scenic corridor, but does not identify location-specific scenic resources within the City limits. According to the California Department of Transportation’s (Caltrans) State Scenic Highway System Map, there are no designated state scenic highways within the vicinity of the Project. In addition, there are no highways identified as eligible for state designation. From the Project site, partial views Western Hills are available in the background to the west, while commercial and residential development within the downtown area development is visible in the foreground in all directions. Example views are shown in Figures 5 and 6 below.
Figure 5, Views Facing West
16 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Figure 6, Views Facing East
Discussion: (a and c) Less than Significant. As noted in the Project Description and shown in Figures 2-6, the Project site consists of a developed parcel with two buildings and a paved parking lot.
The Tom’s Glass building (105 South Main Street) is a rectangular one-story building located on the south side of the parcel and made of silver corrugated metal. The Dragon’s Lair building (101 South Main Street) is located at the southeast corner of the parcel and intersection of Perkins Street and South Main Street, fronting on both streets. It is a one-story building with a roughly rectangular footprint, with “chamfered” or “clipped” flat northwest corner to accommodate the primary entrance. It is comprised of red/peach colored pressed tin siding on west and north elevations and corrugated metal siding on the east and south elevations. There is a painted mural of a dragon on the north side of the building and white columns painted on the east side. As noted in the Historic Resources Evaluation (2020; Attachment A), the building has some character defining features including the false front, irregular window placement, flat entrance on the northwest corner, and a gable roof.
However, according to the Historic Resources Evaluation, “The dilapidated utilitarian building does not appear to be significant for its architectural merit.” See Cultural Resources Section for more information.
Demolition of the buildings could result in temporary visual impacts from temporary construction equipment on-site and piled materials temporarily waiting for transport to the landfill. However, construction is anticipated to take approximately three weeks and occur during daylight hours, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Demolition of the buildings would not have a substantial negative effect on available views of the nearest scenic resource, the Western Hills, as no new buildings are proposed that could potentially further restrict views of this resource. Once the buildings are demolished, the site would be cleared and remain vacant until a proposal for development is submitted by a future applicant and approved through the discretionary process. All new development would be subject to the requirements contained within the Downtown Zoning Code, a form-based code with design guidelines related to aesthetics. In addition, all new development would be reviewed by the City’s Design Review Board.
For the aforementioned reasons, the Project would not result in a significant impact to scenic vistas and would not degrade the existing visual character of the site or vicinity. Impacts would be less than significant.
17 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
(c) Less than significant impact. Although the General Plan notes that U.S. Highway 101 provides scenic views throughout the Ukiah Valley, it does not provide specific information regarding these views within the City limits. In addition, U.S. Highway 101 is approximately 0.5 mi east of the Project and does not offer clear views of the Project site, nor existing buildings due to the distance and other development in the downtown area. Although three trees located against the Dragon’s Lair building would be removed for demolition, the trees are not listed on the City’s Heritage Trees list, nor are they noted as species that should be preserved within the Downtown Zoning Code (UCC Section 9229). In addition, all of the oak trees, which are identified as species that should be preserved, would remain.
As noted above in discussion a and c, the Project would not negatively impact existing views of the Western Hills, which are also available from the highway. Lastly, there are no designated state scenic highways within the vicinity of the Project, which is what is analyzed under this criterion. Therefore, the Project would not substantially damage scenic resources within view of a state scenic highway.
For the aforementioned reasons, impacts would be less than significant. (d) Less than significant impact. Existing development with reflective materials such as metal and windows, as well as street signs, and parked and moving vehicles are existing sources of glare during daylight hours. Street lights, vehicle headlights, and lighting associated with business in the vicinity of the Project are existing sources of light at nighttime. Construction would take place between daylight hours and would not occur outside of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., depending on the season the work is conducted within. As such, the Project would not result in a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None
18 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
RESOURCES. Would the project:
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
Significance Criteria: The Proposed Project would have a potentially significant impact on agricultural resources if it would convert prime farmland to a non-agricultural use, conflict with a Williamson Act contract, or disrupt a viable and locally important agricultural use. The Project would have a potentially significant impact on forestry resources if it would result in the loss, rezoning or conversion of forestland to a non-forest use.
Environmental Setting: Early agricultural efforts in the Ukiah Valley included the raising of livestock, and the growing of various grains, hay, alfalfa, and hops. When the Northwestern Pacific Railroad was completed in 1889; prunes, potatoes, pears, and hops could be grown and sent to San Francisco and other regional markets. Wine grapes were planted, and irrigation was practiced on a small scale.
Through the 1950s, hops, pears, prunes and grapes were the most widely planted crops in the Ukiah Valley. After the railroad was completed, lumber mills sprang up in the Ukiah Valley and became the major industry in Mendocino County as trains took redwood logs and processed boards south to the San Francisco region. Today, much of the active agricultural land is located on the Valley floor and lower elevations along the Russian River system. Only a limited percentage of the Valley’s agricultural lands are currently protected under Williamson Act Agricultural Preserve contracts. According to the County of Mendocino’s Public GIS system, there are no Williamson Act contracts within the Project site or immediate vicinity.
19 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
There are no zoning districts within the City limits for Agriculture or Timber Preserve. While there is an overlay for agriculture in the Zoning Ordinance, it is not applied over any parcel within the City limits. There are a small number of City parcels that have current agricultural uses such as existing vineyards. However, these are ongoing non-conforming uses within non-agricultural zoning districts.
According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program, California Important Farmland Finder, the majority of lands within the City of Ukiah are identified as “Urban Built-Up Land”.
Discussion: (a-e) No Impact. According to the California Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program, California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site is designated as “Urban Built-Up Land” and does not contain Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. As such, the Project would not convert Farmland, conflict with existing zoning for agriculture or forest land, and would not involve changes to the environment that would result in the conversion of agricultural resources to non-agriculture uses. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: None
3. Air Quality
AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people?
Significance Criteria: The Proposed Project would have a significant impact to air quality if it would conflict with an air quality plan, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutant which the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD) has designated as nonattainment, expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of air pollutants, or result in emissions that create objectionable odors or otherwise adversely affect a substantial number of people.
20 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Environmental Setting: The Project is located within the North Coast Air Basin (NCAB), which includes Del Norte, Humboldt, Trinity, Mendocino, and northern Sonoma Counties, and is under the jurisdiction of the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District (MCAQMD). The area’s climate is considered Mediterranean, with warm, dry summers and cooler, wet winters. Summer high temperatures average in the 90s with high temperatures on very warm days exceeding 105 degrees.
Summer low temperatures range between 50-60 degrees. Winter high temperatures generally range in the 50s and 60s. The average annual temperature is 58 degrees. Winter cold-air inversions are common in the Valley from November to February.
Prevailing winds are generally from the north. Prevailing strong summer winds come from the northwest; however, winds can come from the south and east under certain short-lived conditions.
In early autumn, strong, dry offshore winds may occur for several days in a row, which may cause air pollution created in the Sacramento Valley, Santa Rosa Plain, or even San Francisco Bay Area to move into the Ukiah Valley.
The MCAQMD, which includes the City of Ukiah and surrounding areas, is designated as nonattainment for the State Standard for airborne particulate matter less than 10 microns in size (PM10 ).
Particulate matter (PM) has significant documented health effects. The California Clean Air Act requires that any district that does not meet the PM10 standard make continuing progress to attain the standard at the earliest practicable date. The primary sources of PM10 are wood combustion emissions, fugitive dust from construction projects, automobile emissions and industry. Nonattainment of PM10 is most likely to occur during inversions in the winter. Regulation 1 of the MCAQMD contains regulations (known as “Rules”) to regulate particulate matter; these Rules prohibit activities that would result in the injury, detriment, or annoyance of a considerable number of people, or which endanger the health and safety of the public.
The MCAQMD also provides the following significance thresholds for construction emissions:
1. 54 pounds per day of ROG (reactive organic gas)
2. 54 pounds per day of NOx (oxides of nitrogen as nitrogen dioxide)
3. 82 pounds per day of PM10 (particulate matter less than 10 microns in size)
4. 54 pounds per day of PM2.5 (airborne particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less)
5. Best Management Practices for Fugitive Dust – PM10 and PM2.5 Discussion: (a-d) Less than significant with mitigation. Typically, short-term construction related air quality impacts result from large projects requiring a significant amount of grading, demolition, or new construction that results in increased emission sand dust. Additionally, projects that require a large amount of vehicle trips and use of diesel equipment over an extended period (months) of time can result in air quality impacts. Long-term air quality impacts are typically from land uses that produce a significant amount of emissions, or sources of dust or other airborne irritants.
As described in the Project Description, standard demolition construction techniques and equipment including a mechanical ram, dump trucks, excavator, pickup truck, backhoe, front end loader, bobcat & stinger for concrete demolition would be used. The existing buildings will be disassembled via mechanical means and by hand labor where necessary. Mechanical means will include large track driven excavators with mechanical arms. On-site concrete pads and foundations will be demolished with mechanical rams. Demolished concrete and rebar will be off hauled and recycled at a local rock quarry. Other demolished debris will be loaded into dump trucks staged on site. Dump trucks would off-haul debris and deliver to the Ukiah Transfer Station & Recycling Center, where metal materials would be recycled and non-recyclable materials would be disposed of. Demolition would take approximately three weeks with a crew of six construction workers. All work would be performed during
21 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
daylight hours and would not occur outside of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., depending on the season the work is conducted within.
The Project is anticipated to produce up to five dump truck trips per day to haul materials off-site, in addition to six vehicle trips for construction workers, for a total of 11 trips per day. Demolition activities including the use of diesel engine equipment would be subject MCAQMD regulations intended to address air quality impacts. Specifically, MCAQMD has a set of standard Best Management Practices (BMPs) for projects involving demolition, grading, construction, and the use of diesel engine equipment that could result in emissions or fugitive dust. These regulations have been incorporated into Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-2. Additionally, demolition of all commercial buildings are subject to the requirements of MCAQMD Regulation 1, Rule 492, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) for asbestos. As required by Mitigation Measure AQ-3, prior to receiving a demolition permit from the City, the MCAQMD requires the applicant to complete an Asbestos Survey, submit the results to the MCAQMD, and obtain written authorization indicating that all requirements have been met.
The nearest “sensitive receptor” (includes schools, libraries, child care facilities, health care facilities, senior facilities, and residences) is the Mendocino County Library (Ukiah Branch), located at 105 North Main Street, approximately 68 ft (0.1 mi) north of the site. Additional sensitive receptors in the area include the following: residences including the Circle Trailer Park, located at 317 North Main Street, approximately 676 ft (0.13 mi) north of the site; a single-family residence located at 412 South Main Street, approximately 763 ft (0.14 mi) south of the site; and Adventist Health Ukiah Valley Hospital, located at 275 Hospital Drive, approximately 1,087 ft (0.21 mi) northeast of site. The nearest school is South Valley High School, located at 429 South Dora Street, approximately 1,880 ft (0.36 mi) southwest of the Project site.1
Demolition activities have the potential to expose sensitive receptors to diesel particulate, fugitive emissions and dust. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 and AQ-3 below, the would reduce impacts to sensitive receptors over the three-week construction period. In addition, the Project would not exceed the construction thresholds established by the MCAQMD, and air quality impacts associated with short-term construction would be less than significant with mitigation.
Because the Project does not propose new development, no impact would occur once demolition is complete.
The nature of operational air emissions is largely a cumulative impact. As a result, no single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts.
The MCAQMD developed the operational thresholds of significance based on the level above which a project’s individual emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the North Coast Air Basin’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, a project that exceeds the MCAQMD operational thresholds would also be a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. However, because the Project does not propose new development that would result in operational emissions, no cumulative impact would occur.
Based on the aforementioned, air quality impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. 1 Instilling Goodness Elementary appears on Google Earth as being located near the Mendocino County Superior Court House, located at 100 North State Street. However, it was confirmed that the school is located in Talmage approximately 2.5 miles southeast, and there are no classes at this location.
22 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Mitigation Measures:
AQ-1: Diesel Engines – Stationary and Portable Equipment and Mobile Vehicles:
a. All stationary onsite diesel IC engines 50 horsepower or greater (i.e. large power generators or pumps) or any propane or natural gas engines 250 horsepower or greater require a permit from the MCAQMD.
b. Portable diesel-powered equipment that may be used are required to be registered with the state Portable Equipment Registration Program (PERP) or obtain permits from MCAQMD.
c. Heavy duty truck idling and off-road diesel equipment or other diesel engine idling is limited to less than 5 minutes.
AQ-2: Grading Projects: All grading activities must comply with the following fugitive dust mitigation measures in accordance with District Regulation 1, Rule 1-430:
a. All visibly dry disturbed soil road surfaces shall be watered to minimize fugitive dust emissions.
b. Open bodied trucks shall be covered when used for transporting materials likely to give rise to airborne dust.
c. All unpaved surfaces, unless otherwise treated with suitable chemicals or oils, shall have a posted speed limit of 10 mph.
d. Earth or other material that has been transported by trucking or earth moving equipment, erosion by water, or other means onto paved streets shall be promptly removed. e. Asphalt, oil, water, or suitable chemicals shall be applied on materials stockpiles, and other surfaces that can give rise airborne dusts.
f. All earthmoving activities shall cease when sustained winds exceed 15 mph. g. The operator shall take reasonable precautions to prevent the entry of unauthorized vehicles onto the site during non-work hours.
h. The operator shall keep a daily log of activities to control fugitive dust. i. For projects greater than one acre or one mile of road not located within a Naturally Occurring Asbestos Area, prior to starting any construction the applicant is required to:
i. Submit a Large Area Grading permit application to the District. ii. Obtain a final determination from the Air Quality Management District as to the need for an Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan and/or Geologic Survey to comply with CCR sections 93106 and 93105 relating to Naturally Occurring Asbestos. iii. Obtain written verification from the District stating that the project is in compliance with State and Local regulations relating to Naturally Occurring Asbestos. iv. If the project is located within a Naturally Occurring Asbestos Area, additional mitigations shall be required.
AQ-3: Asbestos Survey. Demolition of all commercial buildings are subject to the requirements of MCAQMD Regulation 1, Rule 492, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) for Asbestos. Prior to receiving a demolition permit from the City, the applicant shall:
a. Have an Asbestos Survey completed by a licensed Asbestos contractor for the presence of asbestos containing materials;
b. Submit a completed Asbestos Demolition/Renovation form, all test results and applicable notification fees to the District at least 10 days prior to beginning the Project; c. Have asbestos containing materials abated by a licensed abatement contractor prior to beginning and demolition or renovation activities, if applicable; and d. Obtain written authorization from MCAQMD indicating that all requirements have been met prior to receiving the demolition permit.
23 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
4. Biological Resources
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of
any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Significance Criteria: Project impacts upon biological resources would be significant if any of the following resulted: substantial direct or indirect effect on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local/regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) or any species protected under provisions of the Migratory Bird treaty Act (e.g. burrowing owls); substantial effect upon riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities identified in local/regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the agencies listed above; substantial effect (e.g., fill, removal, hydrologic interruption) upon state or federally protected wetlands; substantially interfere with movement of native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors; conflict with any local policies/ordinances that protect biological resources or conflict with a habitat conservation plan.
24 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Environmental Setting: As noted in the Project Description, the Project site is located within the downtown area of Ukiah and surrounded by existing development. The site is developed with two buildings and a paved parking lot. Vegetation on the site is limited to the following: two California juniper shrubs (Juniperus californica), one Chinese pistache tree (Pistacia chinensis) located against the Dragon’s Lair building (east side); Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) against the Tom’s Glass building (east side) and four Valley oak trees (Quercus lobata) approximately 14 to 60 ft away from the building. Additionally, large oak trees line the east side of the parcel but are located on the adjacent parcel (see Figure 4).
Discussion: (a-d & f) No impact. Databases queried for the presence of biological resources included the California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Critical Habitat Mapper; these databases showed no biological resources including sensitive species, critical habitat, riparian habitat, sensitive natural communities, wildlife habitat corridors, water resources, or wetlands on the site, nor in the immediate vicinity. As such, the Project would have no impact on sensitive species, riparian habitat or wetlands.
Additionally, because the site is fully developed and surrounded by development within the downtown area, there are no wildlife corridors going through the site and the Project would not impede the movement of wildlife. Lastly, there are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans for the City of Ukiah, nor the larger Ukiah Valley that are applicable to the Project. As such, no impact to the aforementioned biological resources would occur.
Discussion: (e) Less than significant impact. The existing Chinese pistache tree and the two Juniper shrubs located on the east side of the Dragon’s Lair building would be removed for demolition, as they are located against the building and partially growing into the foundation. In addition, the blackberry against the Tom’s Glass building would be removed. None of the species that are proposed for removal are listed as sensitive species at the state or federal level. Additionally, they are not identified as Heritage Trees, nor species needing preservation within the City’s Downtown Zoning Code (as identified in Tables 19 and 20 in Section 9229). None of the oak trees, which are listed as species that should be preserved in the Downtown Zoning Code, would be removed. As such, the Project would not conflict with any policy or plan intended to protect trees. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: None.
5. Cultural Resources
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those
interred outsides of dedicated cemeteries?
25 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Significance Criteria: The proposed Project would significantly impact cultural resources if the significance of a historical or archaeological resource were substantially changed, or if human remains were disturbed. Historical resources under CEQA include historic-era architectural resources within the built environment such buildings, structures, and other objects. Archaeological and unique archeological resources can also be considered historical resources, according to CEQA Section 15064.5 and Section 21083.2(g).
Section 15064.5 states the term “historical resources” includes the following:
1) A resource listed in, or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq.);
2) A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in section 5020.1(k) of the Public Resources Code or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements section 5024.1(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant;
3) Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be an historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be “historically significant” if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code § 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the following:
a. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage;
b. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past; c. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or
d. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Section 21083.2(g) identifies a unique archeological resource as an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
1) Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information.
2) Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type.
3) Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.
Assembly Bill 52 (effective on July 1, 2015) requires that before a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report for a project is prepared, the lead agency for the project must seek consultation with tribes associated with the location of the project. To receive referrals, each tribe must have previously made a written request to the lead agency in order to be
26 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
consulted on projects occurring in their geographic areas of interest. The Guidiville Rancheria of California is the only tribe that has made such request. As such, an AB 52 notice was sent to them on January 18, 2022. No responses were received.
Environmental Setting: The Ukiah Township lies in a valley of the Russian River, bounded on the north by Calpella Township, on the east by Lake County, on the south by Sanel Township, and on the west by Anderson Township. The City of Ukiah was first settled in 1856 by Samuel Lowry. Initially incorporated into Sonoma County, an independent Mendocino County government was established in 1859 with Ukiah as the chosen county seat. Logging, cattle, and agricultural ventures contributed to the early settlement and growth of Ukiah throughout the remainder of the 19th century and early 20th century. 1889 is the date recorded for the first arrival of the train to Ukiah, quickly resulting in increased settlement of the City and its environs. The City of Ukiah is within the territory of the Northern Pomo. Permanent villages were often established in areas with access to staple foods, often times along eco-tones (transitions between varying environments), with access to good water, and generally flat land.
The late 19th century saw slow growth in the community, with a slight decline after the turn of the century. The town grew steadily, though it remained a relatively remote outpost in the hinterlands of Northern California for several more decades. The area around the intersection of the current Perkins and Main streets was one of the earliest settlement locations for the town. Absalom Tidwell Perkins built a house for his family near the southwest corner of the current Perkins and Main streets, and built a feed stable on the Project site around 1857. By 1860, Ukiah had approximately 25 dwellings and a budding commercial district. Ukiah’s sparse population and relative remoteness delayed the arrival of the railroad. In 1886 the Cloverdale and Ukiah Railroad was formed to extend north to Ukiah; and the line was completed in 1889, 20 years after it began in Petaluma in 1869. The improved transportation network did open up Mendocino County to greater commercial and industrial growth, though the population did not expand rapidly.
A 1906 earthquake damaged a number of Ukiah buildings, particularly in the commercial core, and considerable rebuilding and remodeling activity occurred after that time. Additionally, in June 1917, a fire began at a restaurant (currently occupied by a law firm at 116 South State Street) and strong winds pushed the flames east, encompassing the two blocks between State street to the railroad tracks, including the Project site. The area was rebuilt over the next decade.
The City contains a number of Colonial Revival and Craftsman style derivations, popular during this era, that reflect the community’s prosperity. The City of Ukiah’s 1985 “Historic Resources Survey” (prepared by Historic Environmental Consultants) that was updated in 1999 by the “City of Ukiah Architectural Survey” (prepared by P.S. Preservation Services) identified 23 properties with local historic importance within the City limits. Per Ukiah City Code Section 3016(b), buildings over 50 years old proposed for demolition that do not meet the exemption criteria of being either an immediate safety hazard, or an accessory building that is not listed on the local historic inventory, shall be reviewed for their historic or architectural significance. Specifically, the City’s Demolition Review Committee shall review the proposal and make a recommendation to the Ukiah City Council. Per UCC Section 3016(e):
In reviewing proposed permits, and formulating recommendations to the city council, the demolition review committee shall consider any information provided during the meeting, and shall use the following criteria. The structure:
1. Has a special or particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; or
2. Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the city’s cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history; or
3. Is strongly identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
27 Demolition Permit for Two Buildings Over 50 Years Old 101 and 105 South Main Street
Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
City of Ukiah
Per UCC Section 3016(f), if the Demolition Review Committee finds that any of the criteria listed in subsection (e) apply to the building proposed for demolition, it shall recommend denial of the permit to the City Council. This section of the UCC also describes procedures for review by the City Council.2 As detailed in the below analysis, the buildings do not meet the exemption criteria noted within the City code; and as such, on December 28, 2021, the City’s Demolition Review Committee reviewed the Project and voted to recommend demolition of both buildings to the City Council. This Initial Study is intended to analyze the impacts associated with demolition of the buildings, in accordance with CEQA. The Demolition Permit, together with this Initial Study, will be reviewed by City Council for final consideration.
Discussion: (a) Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Because the Tom’s Glass building at 105 South Main Street is not located on a local, state or national register for historic places, demolition of it would not result in a significant impact to a historic resource. However, the existing Dragon’s Lair building originally dates from 1921, and was included in the City of Ukiah’s 1985 “Historic Resources Survey” (prepared by Historic Environmental Consultants) and updated in 1999 with the “City of Ukiah Architectural Survey” (prepared by P.S. Preservation Services). According to the 1985 survey, the building was assigned a “5” status code, which includes buildings that are identified as historic at the local level. Specifically, the 1985 survey notes that the building is representative of a type of commercial structure common to its era that is a “rather rare survivor of the type in Ukiah, and is located prominently. Its surfacing materials and form create a rather strong image of past lifestyles.” The 1999 survey was completed as an update to the 1985 survey, and reviewed each property’s eligibility for the National Register of Historic Places. The 1999 survey notes that the building is vernacular commercial style and originally constructed in 1921 as a hay barn and feed store. The survey notes that the pressed metal clad building is “an excellent example of its type and the only one left in Ukiah”, and was therefore assigned a “3S” status code, which is defined as appearing to be eligible for the National Register as an individual property through survey information. However, the 1999 survey does not provide additional information regarding the change in status from the 1985 survey.
Although the 1999 survey identifies the building as eligible for the National Register, this does not accurately depict the building’s current status. In order for a building to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places, a building must first be listed on the State Register. In order to be listed on the State Register, the survey form completed by the local jurisdiction must be submitted to State of California’s Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO). SHPO then reviews the survey forms and determines if the building is eligible for listing on the State Register. Once listed on the State Register SHPO must submit a nomination form to the National Park Service for review and consideration.
Upon extensive research, it was determined that Dragon’s Lair building is not listed on either the State or Federal Registers. This is further supported by SHPO’s most recent classification system and database of historic buildings, also known as the “Built Environment Resource Directory” (updated March, 2020), which identifies the building status code as “5S2”, meaning that the local government has identified it as individually eligible for local listing. As such, the building is not listed on the State Register, nor is it identified as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. This is further supported by SHPO’s most recent classification system and database of historic buildings, also known as the “Built Environment Resource Directory” (updated March, 2020), which identifies the building status code as “5S2”, meaning that the local government has identified it as individually eligible for local listing. As such, the building is not listed on the State Register, nor is it identified as eligible for 2 Ukiah City Code Section 3016 may be found online at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/Ukiah/#!/html/Ukiah03/Ukiah0301-0300.html