• Based on our consultant’s sales trends, we anticipated a decrease of $477,000 in sales tax revenue as compared to budgeted numbers. Sales tax revenue is attributed to autos and transportation, inflation and interest rate trends, labor costs, fluctuating prices of taxable products and consumer spending. • Utility User's Tax revenue is proposed to increase by $943,000 based on actuals received in Q1 & Q2 of FY 24-25.
• The business license tax is anticipated to increase by $217,000 based on our consultants analysis of actual payments received and estimated renewals for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Departmental program revenues are expected to decrease by $1,424,000 due to a decrease in permit fees for Planing & Developmental Services and Public Works.
Measure P revenues are expected to decrease by $293,000 from the prior projection.
B. FY 2024-25 General Fund Expenditure Changes
On February 11, 2025, City Council approved Non-Discretionary funds of $1,978,000. The items below are being brought back for reconsideration for City to implement much needed essential projects before end of fiscal year:
Council:
• Increase of $3,000 for Council meals provided during special meetings, closed session and study sessions.
City Manager:
• Increase of $175,000 for unhoused strategic plan consultant. An RFP was conducted to provide the following services, review the current operations of the City, review available resources and the strategic plan from Solano County to identify gaps and duplications in services across organizations and recommending a specific strategy to address homelessness in Vallejo. • Increase of $22,598 for CAP Solano JPA for FY 24-25 invoice contract as part of an MOU partnership agreement.
Economic Development:
• Increase of $24,450 for Century Urban, LLC Agreement to pay for economic assessment and study of the city-owned waterfront site at 50 Solano
• An additional $10,000 for Solano Business Development Center (SBDC) service agreement to provide monthly advice to Vallejo clients and small business owners and offer training for participants in the MEHKO program
• An increase of $4,500 for professional services Smith & Associates to provide the market value of 50 Solano Avenue.
Fire:
• Increase of $18,000 for Fire Fee Study.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: PROVIDE NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 BUDGET, MID-
YEAR FOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE & EXPENDITURE AND OTHER FUNDS (STEP 1 OF 2)
Planning and Development Services:
• Increase of $44,000 for Building and Planning Fee Study. • Increase of $50,000 for Development Impact Fee Study.
Police:
• Increase of $25,000 for Veritone provides essential redaction services which will reduce the amount of staff time required for these tasks.
Human Resources:
• Increase of $77,000 for recruitment cost. There were four (4) executive level recruitments required after adoption of the budget. Executive level recruitments are larger scale recruitments necessitating a lot of attention, connections/networks, and capacity to plan and execute successfully. • Increase of $7,000 for publicity and advertising
C. FY 2024-25 General Fund Salaries and Benefit Changes • Proposing to increase Salary Savings to cover Fire overtime of $2,616,150. • Citywide budgeted salary savings of $6,650,000 are being reallocated to departments during midyear.
III. Other Funds: Changes of Note
Outside Funded Services Fund (#129)
• The current budget for Fund 129 is $55,434. The available ending fund balance as of FY 23-24 is $149,270. A midyear budget adjustment of $93,836 is requested to provide additional funding for professional services.
State Gas Tax (#133)
• Requesting $250,000 to cover gas and electricity bills through the end of the fiscal year due to a rate increase. Electricity charges for traffic signals, streetlights and other traffic and road safety functions are paid from the Gas Tax Fund.
Solid Waste Disposal Fund (#135)
• An additional $1,046,071 in revenue is allocated to fully cover anticipated payments to Recology for unpaid garbage bills.
Supplemental Law Enforcement Grant Fund (#151)
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: PROVIDE NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 BUDGET, MID-
YEAR FOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE & EXPENDITURE AND OTHER FUNDS (STEP 1 OF 2)
• Additional funding of $368,500 to cover VPD-Flock Safety and safety services AXON.
Somerset I and II Fund (#173)
• An additional $10,000 is needed for a tree project in Region 7, District 173 (Somerset I & II). This funding will support the ongoing efforts to enhance the green spaces in these areas.
Woodridge LMD Fund (#174)
• Additional funds are needed for tree work to ensure firebreak compliance in Region 3, District 174 (Woodridge). Specifically, an additional $10,000 is required to support these efforts and maintain safety standards in the area.
College Hills Fund (#175)
• Additional funds are needed for water expenses in Region 1, District 175. An additional $3,000 is required to cover costs through June 2025.
Bordoni Ranch LMD Fund (#177)
• Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. An extra $300 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025.
Garthe Ranch LMD Fund (#180)
• Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. An extra $700 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025.
Glen Cove I and II Fund (#182)
• Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. An extra $500 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025.
Garthe Ranch Est Fund (#188)
• Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. An extra $400 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025.
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (#219)
• This adjustment of $60,000 will involve reallocating funds from Fund 201 MY2304 back to Fund 219, thus restoring the funds to their appropriate allocation within Fund 219 MY2304.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: PROVIDE NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 BUDGET, MID-
YEAR FOR GENERAL FUND REVENUE & EXPENDITURE AND OTHER FUNDS (STEP 1 OF 2)
Capital Grant & Contribution Fund (#221)
• Correction to reduce the HUD grant funding available to the grantee by $55,488 to align with grant award.
Measure P Fund (#228)
• Transfer the revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget of $5,000,000 from Fund #201 to Fund #228.
Fleet Vehicle Fund (#501)
• The increase of $220,000 for fuel and lube supplies due to the California Air Resources Board voting to make updates to low-carbon fuel standards which requires state to reduce the environmental impact of gas and other transportation fuels by incentivizing producers to cut emissions.
FISCAL IMPACT
The notice of intent does not have any fiscal impact. If the City Council approves tonight's recommendation, the fiscal impact of the final action that is scheduled for City Council consideration on March 25, 2025, will be as follows:
1. The proposed mid-year changes decrease the General Fund revenue by $1,239,216 and increase General Fund Expenditure by $460,548 which will be funded from the fund balance.
2. All Other Funds expenditure and transfer-out budget will increase by $1,635,353. These additional costs will be covered by a combination of increased revenues, transfer-in and fund balance.
Exhibit 1 summarizes the proposed financial impact on the overall City budget, including the General Fund and all other funds.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is not a project which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15378.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Exhibit 1 FY 24-25 Midyear budget
CONTACT
Rekha Nayar, Finance Director (707) 648-4592
[email protected]
City of Vallejo
2024-25 Midyear Budget Review
Proposed Budget Adjustments
Exhibit 1
SUMMARY Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out
Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Ref # General Fund
To update the June 30, 2024 total beginning available fund balance assumption for unaudited FY 2023-24 results:
Transfer from General Fund# 001 - - - (3,832,723) - Transfer from Measure B Fund# 003 - - - (1,426,970) - Transfers to Unappropriated Reserve Fund # 002 - - - 5,259,693 - - - - - - Increases (Decrease) in Projected Revenues:
1 Property-related taxes (205,953) - - - - 2 Sales tax (213,687) - - - - 3 Other unrestricted revenues (including offsets) 1,159,864 - - - - 740,224 - - - - 4 Program revenues (1,423,516) - - - - Total Revenue Adjustments (683,292) - - - (683,292) Increase (Decrease) in Projected Expenditures:
Draw from Reserves:
Salaries & Benefits, and related expenditures:
5 Fire - - - - - 6 Police - - (3,332,400) - - 7 Planning & Development Services - - (980,100) - - 8 Economic Development - - (142,700) - - 9 Public Works - - (505,900) - - 10 Administration - - (1,688,900) - - 11 Citywide - - 6,650,000 - - Subtotal - - - - - Departmental expenditures (Service and Supplies)
8 Economic Development - - 460,548 - (460,548) Total Salaries & Expenditures - - 460,548 - (460,548) Net Operational Change (683,292) - 460,548 - (1,143,840) - - -
General Fund Measure B #003
2 Decrease in Projected Revenue (262,924) - - - (262,924) (262,924) - - - (262,924) General Fund Measure P #005
2 Decrease in Projected Revenue (293,000) - - - (293,000) (293,000) - - - (293,000) Total General Fund (1,239,216) - 460,548 - (1,699,764)
TRANSACTION TYPE
Ref # Other Funds Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
20 Outside Funded Services Fund # 129 - - 93,836 - (93,836) 21 State Gas Tax # 133 - - 250,000 - (250,000) 22 Solid Waste Disposal Fund # 135 1,046,071 - 813,605 - 232,466 23 Supplemental Law Enforcement Grant Fund # 151 - - 368,500 - (368,500) 24 Somerset I and II Fund # 173 - - 10,000 - (10,000) 25 Woodridge LMD Fund # 174 - - 10,000 - (10,000) 26 College Hills Fund # 175 - - 3,000 - (3,000) 27 Bordoni Ranch LMD Fund # 177 - - 300 - (300) 28 Garthe Ranch LMD Fund #180 - - 700 - (700) 29 Glen Cove I and II Fund # 182 - - 500 - (500) 30 Garthe Ranch Est Fund # 188 - - 400 - (400) 31 Ca pital Outlay Fund # 201 - (5,060,000) (5,060,000) - - 32 Traffic Con gestion Relief Fund # 219 - - 60,000 (60,000) - 33 Ca pital Grant & Contribution Fund # 221 (55,488) - (55,488) - - 34 Measure P Fund# 228 - 5,000,000 5,000,000 - - 35 Water Fund # 401 - - - - - 36 Cor poration Shop Fund # 501 - - 200,000 - (200,000) 37 General Liabilit y Fund # 508 - - - - - Total, 2023-24 Other Funds Adjustments 990,583 (60,000) 1,695,353 (60,000) (704,770) - - - - - Note: 1 Draw from assigned reserves -
2 of 10
Ref # General Fund Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Revenues
General Tax and Other Unrestricted Revenues:
To update general tax/unrestricted revenues to match current projections:
Property-related taxes:
1 Property Tax (180,347) - - - - 1 SB 1096 Vehicle License Fee (25,606) - - - - Sales Tax
2 Sales Tax (213,687) - - - - Other unrestricted revenues:
3 Utility Users Tax 942,886 - - - - 3 Business License Tax 216,978 - - - - Subtotal others 1,159,864 - - - - Subtotal General tax and others 740,224 - - - (293,000) Program Revenues
To update department revenue projections:
Fire
4 Ambulance Savings 344,301 - - - - 4 East Vallejo Fire District 32,064 - - - - 4 Fire Fees 22,200 - - - - 4 Misc Fire Revenues 3,200 - - - - Subtotal - Fire 401,765 - - - - Planning and Development Services
4 Building Fees (1,108,507) - - - - 4 Planning Fees (118,372) - - - - 4 Code Enforcement (238,402) - - - - Subtotal - Planning and Development Services (1,465,281) - - - - Public Works
4 Public Works Fees (362,500) - - - - 4 Misc Public Works Revenue 2,500 - - - - (360,000) - - - - Subtotal - Program Revenues (1,423,516) - - - - Total Revenue Adjustments (683,292) - - - (683,292) 2 Transaction and Use Tax Measure B (262,924) - - - (262,924) 2 Transaction and Use Tax Measure P (293,000) - - - (293,000) Total General Fund Revenues (1,239,216) - - - (1,239,216) 3 of 10
Ref# General Fund Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Expenditures - Salaries & Benefits
Salaries & Benefits:
Increase Overtime budget
5 Fire
The midyear overtime budget increase for the fire department is based on current trends projected from the prior year's expenditures. For FY23-24, the initial budget was $2,313,000, but the actual expenditures amounted to $4,844,824. Thistrend is projected to continue into FY24-25, with current spending 4% higher than the previous year to date. The current budget remains at $2,313,000 for FY24-25. To address these rising costs and ensure the fire department can continue to operate effectively and meet the community's needs, an increase in the overtime budget is essential.
- - 2,616,150 - - Fire Salary Savings (2,616,150)
- - - - - Reallocate Salaries Saving Budget from Citywide to Departments 6 Police - - (3,332,400) - - 7 P&DS - - (980,100) - - 8 Economic Development - - (142,700) - - 9 PW - - (505,900) - - 10 City Manager's Office - - (862,400) - - 10 City Attorney's Office - - (206,000) - - 10 Finance - - (486,800) - - 10 HR - - (117,800) - - 10 Information Technology - - (15,900) - - 11 Citywide - - 6,650,000 - - Subtotal of Salaries Saving Budget - - - - - 4 of 10
Ref # General Fund Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Expenditures - Service & Supplies
8 Council
3,000
8 City Manager's Office
175,000
22,598
Economic Development Department
8 - - 24,450 - 8 - - 10,000 - 8 - - 4,500 - Increase Professional Services for Century Urban
The City is conducting an economic assessment of its waterfront site at 50 Solano, and technical support from Century Urban is essential for this study. The evaluation will cover identifying the highest and best use of the site, preparing a conceptual program for potential new development, and creating a high-level economic model. It will also include a revenue analysis to determine potential city revenue from the development, an estimate of the economic and fiscal benefits of extending the Waterfront Specific Plan to the south, and an estimation of the residual land value for the proposed development. A confidential memorandum summarizing the economic and fiscal analysis findings will beprepared and delivered to the City Attorney.
Increase Professional Services for Solano Business Development Center (SBDC) SBDC will coordinate with business and economic development entities in the Solano region, including the Vallejo Business Alliance and local business associations. They will provide at least 30 hours of monthly advising to Vallejo clients, facilitate a monthly round table for small business owners, and offer training for participants in the MEHKO program.
SBDC will also manage marketing outreach activities, promote SBA loan programs, conduct small business training programs such as the annual Lenders Fair,and host at least six tailored workshops. Progress reports detailing their activities and economic impact will be submitted to the City, with presentations to the City Council and Economic Vitality Commission as needed. This request would cover an invoice for these services.
Increase Professional Services for Smith & Associates
To provide an opinion on the current market value of 50 Solano Avenue, considering the property in its current, vacant state. The purpose of this report is for internal analysis and to evaluate the potential sale of the property.
Council Meals provided during special meetings which occurs prior to 6pm, closed session and study sessions
Increase professional serivces for unhoused strategic plan An RFP was conducted to include but not limited to reviewing the current operations of the City, reviewing available resources and the strategic plan from Solano County, identifying gaps and duplications in services across organizations, and recommending a specific strategy to address homelessness in Vallejo
Increase professional serivces for CAP Solano JPA
As part of an MOU partnership agreement to cover staffing cost of 6.5 FTE, IT infrastructure, office space, furniture, utilities, insurance and other overhead expenses. 5 of 10
Ref # General Fund Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Expenditures - Service & Supplies
Fire
18 - - 18,000 - Human Resources
17 - - 77,000 - 17 - - 7,000 - Planning and Development Services
18 - - 44,000 - 18 - - 50,000 - Increase Publicity & Advertising
This request is due to an uptick in recruitments for FY 24-25. General recruitment advertising is estimated at $500 per recruitment, with approximately 30 recruitments requiring advertising. Additionally, police advertising costs are projected to be approximately $1,600 for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Increase Recruitment Cost
This request addresses increased recruitment activities in FY24-25, covering costs for executive recruitments, public safety promotional assessments, and recruitment tests for various positions. It includes expenses for supplies, meals for raters and panels, career fair supplies, and venue usage. These funds ensure the successful recruitmentand assessment of essential personnel to support the city's operations.
Increase Professional Services - MGT Fee Study
A fee study is an analysis conducted to determine the appropriate charges for services based on the cost of providing those services. The vendor, MGT Consulting,will conduct a fee study for the Fire. They will also identify peer comparisons, gather data, prepare a narrative report, develop presentation materials, and deliver final presentations to the City.
Increase Professional Services - Willdan Financial Services A development impact fee study is pursuant to State Law. The vendor, Willdan Financial Services, will conduct a fee study by estimating existing development andfuture growth, identify facility standards, determine facilities required to serve newdevelopment and their costs, calculate fee scheduel, prepare a narrative report, develop presentation materials, and deliver final presentations to the City.
Increase Professional Services - MGT Fee Study
A fee study is an analysis conducted to determine the appropriate charges for services based on the cost of providing those services. The vendor, MGT Consulting,will conduct a fee study for the Building, Planning and TRL departments. They will also identify peer comparisons, gather data, prepare a narrative report, develop presentation materials, and deliver final presentations to the City.
6 of 10
Ref # General Fund Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Beginning Available Fund Balance Update
General Fund #001
Police
18 - - 25,000 - Subtotal - - 460,548 - (460,548) Subtotal, Use of Current Resources (1,239,216) - 460,548 - (1,699,764) Total, 2024-25 General Fund Adjustments (1,239,216) - 460,548 - (1,699,764) Transfer out to Unapproppriated Reserve Fund#002 - - - 3,832,723 - Total, 2024-25 General Fund Unappropriated Reserves Adjustments - - - 3,832,723 - Unappropriated Reserve Fund # 002
Transfer in from General Fund # 001 and Measure B Fund# 003 - - - (5,259,693) - Total, 2024-25 General Fund Unappropriated Reserves Adjustments - - - (5,259,693) - Measure B Fund # 003
Transfer out to Unapproppriated Reserve Fund#002 - - - 1,426,970 - Total, 2024-25 General Fund Unappropriated Reserves Adjustments - - - 1,426,970 - Ref# Other Funds
Outside Funded Services Fund # 129
20 - - 93,836 - (93,836) Subtotal - - 93,836 - (93,836) State Gas Tax # 133
21 - - 250,000 - (250,000) Subtotal - - 250,000 - (250,000) Outside Funded Services Balance Adjustment
Additional budget to cover anticipated expenditures through the end of FY 2024-25 Increase Gas & Electricity
The allocated budget is insufficient to cover gas and electricity bills through the end of the fiscal year. Additionally, PG&E will implement a 1.6% rate increase effective 2025. Electricity charges for traffic signals, streetlights, and other traffic and road safety functions are paid from the Gas Tax fund (Fund 133), with monthly charges totaling approximately $83,000. An additional budget is needed to cover these costs through the end of FY24-25. Paid through fund balance.
Increase Veritone redaction services
Veritone provides essential redaction services, significantly reducing the amount of staff time required for these tasks. We plan to use existing funds to pay outstanding invoices but require additional funding to cover a new year of service. The contract forthe upcoming year is currently being negotiated with the assistance of the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO).
7 of 10
Ref# Other Funds Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Solid Waste Disposal Fund # 135
22 1,046,071 - 813,605 - 232,466 Subtotal 1,046,071 - 813,605 - 232,466 Supplemental Law Enforcement Grant Fund # 151
23 - 298,500 - (298,500) 23 - 70,000 - (70,000) Subtotal - - 368,500 - (368,500) Somerset I and II Fund # 173
24 - - 10,000 - (10,000) Subtotal - - 10,000 - (10,000) Woodridge LMD Fund # 174
25 - - 10,000 - (10,000) Subtotal - - 10,000 - (10,000) College Hills Fund # 175
26 - - 3,000 - (3,000) Subtotal - - 3,000 - (3,000) Bordoni Ranch LMD Fund # 177
26 - - 300 - (300) Subtotal - - 300 - (300) Increase Garbage Disposal Assessments
Additional budget is needed to cover annual payments of unpaid garbage bills to Recology.
The FY 24-25 payment to recology covering April 2023 to March 2024, totals $2,322,692.57.
The FY24-25 budget was only for $1,509,088 resulting in a shortfall of $813,605. Delinquent amounts are added to property tax assessments, and the City is paying thosebills from the Solano County remittance of delinquent garbage assessments.
Increase Region 3 Rehab
Additional funds are needed for tree work to ensure firebreak compliance in Region 3, District 174 (Woodridge). Specifically, an additional $10,000 is required to support these efforts and maintain safety standards in the area. Paid through fund balance.
Increase Region 1 Water
Additional funds are needed for water expenses in Region 1, District 175. Currently, there is $1,000 budgeted, but the account shows a negative balance of $2,125.40. Anadditional $3,000 is required to cover costs through June 2025. Paid through fund balance.
Increase Region 7 Gas & Electric
Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. Anextra $300 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025. Paid through fund balance.
Increase VPD-Flock Safety
The fund balance in SLEF will need to be reallocated to cover the Flock Safety invoice 46358, which is due on September 25, 2024.
Increase saftey services AXON
This request is due to a new contract with Axon Enterprise, Inc. Axon has been providing important hardware, software, and services to the Vallejo Police Department, including body- worn and in-car camera systems, Taser equipment, and data storage solutions.
Increase Region 7 Rehab
An additional $10,000 is needed for a tree project in Region 7, District 173(Somerset I & II).
This funding will support the ongoing efforts to enhance the green spaces in these areas. Paid through fund balance.
8 of 10
Ref# Other Funds Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Garthe Ranch LMD Fund #180
27 - - 700 - (700) Subtotal - - 700 - (700) Glen Cove I and II Fund # 182
28 - - 500 - (500) Subtotal - - 500 - (500) Garthe Ranch Est Fund # 188
30 400 (400)
Subtotal - - 400 - (400) Capital Outlay Fund # 201
31 - (60,000) (60,000) - - 31 - (2,000,000) (2,000,000) - - 31 - (500,000) (500,000) - - 31 - (1,000,000) (1,000,000) - - 31 - (1,500,000) (1,500,000) - - Subtotal - (5,060,000) (5,060,000) - - Transfer to Fund #228, Street Overlay/Preservation Project PWC109 Transfer the revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from the Capital Outlay Fundto the new Measure P Fund 228 PWC109. (Ref #34)
Transfer to Fund #228, Street Overlay/Preservation Project PWC109 Transfer the revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from the Capital Outlay Fundto the new Measure P Fund 228 PWC109. (Ref #34)
Correction from Fund 201 to Fund 219 Project MY2304
Due to the inappropriate transfer of Traffic Congestion Relief funds fromFund 219 into Fund 201, there is a need to decrease Fund 201 MY2304 and transfer the funds back to the correct account. (Ref #32)
Increase Region 8 Gas & Electricity
Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. Anextra $500 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025. Paid through fund balance.
Increase Region 7 Gas & Electric
Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. Anextra $400 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025. Paid through fund balance.
Transfer to Fund #228, Citywide Slurry Seal Project Project PW9745 Transfer the revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from the Capital Outlay Fundto the new Measure P Fund 228 PW9745. (Ref #34)
Transfer to Fund #228, ADA Curb Ramps Project PW9705
Transfer the revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from the Capital Outlay Fundto the new Measure P Fund 228 PW9705. (Ref #34)
Increase Region 7 Gas & Electricity
Additional funds are required for PG&E bills due to an increase in costs. Anextra $700 is needed to cover these expenses through June 2025. Paid through fund balance. 9 of 10
Ref# Other Funds Revenue Transfer In Expenditure Transfer out Inc./Dec.
Fund Balance 1
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund # 219
32 - - - (60,000) - 32 - - 60,000 - - Subtotal - - 60,000 (60,000) - Capital Grant & Contribution Fund # 221
33 (55,488) - (55,488) - - Subtotal (55,488) - (55,488) - - Measure P Fund# 228
34 - 2,000,000 2,000,000 - - 34 - 500,000 500,000 - - 34 - 1,000,000 1,000,000 - - 34 - 1,500,000 1,500,000 - - Subtotal - 5,000,000 5,000,000 - - Corporation Shop Fund # 501
Increase Budget for the Following: -
36 - - 200,000 - (200,000) Subtotal - - 200,000 - (200,000) Total, Other Funds Adjustments 990,583 (60,000) 1,695,353 (60,000) (704,770) -
Summary:
Water Funds - - - - - All Other Funds 990,583 (60,000) 1,695,353 (60,000) (704,770) Total 990,583 (60,000) 1,695,353 (60,000) (704,770) Transfer from Fund #201, Street Overlay/Preservation Project PWC109 Transfer revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from Fund 201 to Fund 228 (Ref #31) Transfer from Fund #201, Street Overlay/Preservation Project PWC109 Transfer revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from Fund 201 to Fund 228 (Ref #31) Correction from Fund 201 to Fund 219 Project PWC109
Adjusting Fund 219 to correct an inappropriate transfer out entry, ensuring funds remain within Fund 219 as originally intended. (Ref #31)
Correction from Fund 201 to Fund 219 Project MY2304
This adjustment will involve reallocating funds from Fund 201 MY2304 backto Fund 219, thus restoring the funds to their appropriate allocation within Fund 219 MY2304. (Ref #31) Transfer from Fund #201, Citywide Slurry Seal Project PW9745 Transfer revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from Fund 201 to Fund 228 (Ref #31) Transfer from Fund #201, ADA Curb Ramps Project PW9705
Transfer revised FY 23-24 Measure P budget from Fund 201 to Fund 228 (Ref #31) Correction to align to Grant Award Project PW9442
The HUD grant funding available to the grantee is $1,219,000, while the current budget is set at $1,274,448.
Increase Fuel
The current budget is not enough to cover fuel costs through 06/30/2025, and fuel prices are expected to rise in 2025. The California Air Resources Board voted to make significant updates to the low carbon fuel standard, which requires the state to reducethe environmental impact of gas and other transportation fuels by incentivizing producers to cut emissions.
10 of 10
ACTION ITEM 9.C.
DATE: March 11, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Kristin Pollot, AICP, Planning & Development Services Director Cesar Orozco, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
RECOMMENDATION
Conduct a public hearing to consider and take action on an appeal (APP24-0003) of the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission's decision to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR22-0031) to allow the development of a new single-family residence at 128 Carolina Street (APN: 0055-121-120).
Following the public hearing, adopt a Resolution denying the Appeal (APP24-0003) and granting the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR22-0031) to allow the development of a new single-family residence at 128 Carolina Street, after finding the project exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(c) - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that City Council deny the appeal and grant the Certificate of Appropriateness and Development Review approval for the following reasons: (1) the project is consistent with the General Plan 2040 and all applicable provisions of the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC); (2) the project complies with all objective development standards and would contribute to the city’s housing stock, as required by the State Housing Accountability Act; (3) of the project would provide investment on a currently vacant site within an established neighborhood; and (4) the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission appropriately made all the required findings to grant the subject Certificate of Appropriateness, Development review, and related actions.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The project site, located at 128 Carolina Street, has been vacant for over 40 years. According to historical mapping, there was a small one-story cottage that existed on the site in 1919. By 1959, a second one-story structure had been constructed on the site, resulting in two separate dwelling units on the site. Staff is uncertain when the structures were removed, but historical aerial imagery indicates that the site has been vacant since at least 1985.
On August 22, 2022, Rob Kelly and Mario Vazquez, on behalf of Luis Rivera, the property owner, submitted a planning application to the City of Vallejo to develop the vacant site with a new two-story, single-family residence. The project plans were routed to various City departments and outside agencies for review, and the application was subsequently determined to be complete on September 15, 2023.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
On November 21, 2024 the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission (AHLC) held a duly noticed public hearing, and after considering all public testimony and written comments, voted 5-0 (with two commissioners absent), to find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a) and to approve Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR22-0031). Minutes from the meeting, as well as written public comment received regarding the project, are included as attachments to this report.
On December 2, 2024, Liana Berube and Abbey Schlageter filed an Appeal (APP24-0003) requesting that the City Council overturn the AHLC’s November 21, 2024, approval of the project (as referenced above).
PROPOSED PROJECT
Project Description:
The proposed project consists of a new, two-story, three-bedroom, two-and-one-half-bathroom single-family residence measuring 1,732 square feet, with an attached 280-square-foot one-car garage on a 3,200-square- foot lot located at 128 Carolina Street (see Figure 3 in Attachment 2). The proposed residence would have an overall building height of 24 feet. The proposed exterior facade incorporates Hardie lap siding painted “Bennjamin Moore – New Hope Gray,” bay windows facing Carolina Street, black vinyl windows and gray asphalt shingles. The project also includes 1,250 square feet of new landscaping along Carolina Street and throughout the site (see Figure 4 of Attachment 2).
Location Characteristics and Land Use Context:
The project site is currently vacant with an existing concrete stairwell leading from the Carolina Street frontage up to the elevated lot. The site is sloping with a low point elevation of 59-feet above sea level in the southwest corner (front of lot), and a high point elevation of 76-feet above sea level in the northeast corner (back of the lot). Direct access is also provided at the rear of the lot by way of Lozier Alley, which is an existing paved (but poorly maintained) public alleyway. The average slope for the site is 22.62 percent, as calculated using the contour line method in accordance with VMC Section 16.212.01 (A.1).
The project site has a General Plan 2040 Land Use designation of “Primarily Single-Family” (P-SF), and the site is zoned “Residential Low Density” (RLD), which implements the P-SF General Plan Land Use designation. The immediate vicinity of the project site is characterized by other existing residential uses (see Figure 1 in Attachment 2). The project site is located within St. Vincent’s Historic District, listed in 2003 on the National Register of Historic Places as the Vallejo Old City Historic District (see Figure 2 in Attachment 2 for a map of the district boundaries). The District has a period of significance from 1868 to 1947, and comprises a wide range of architectural styles spanning the mid-nineteenth to late-twentieth century and includes examples of Greek & Gothic Revival, Vernacular, Italianate, Queen Anne, Eastlake, Shingle Style, Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Mission, Craftsman, Prairie and Art Deco Styles.
Required Entitlements and Findings:
A Certificate of Appropriateness is required for a proposed new single-family dwelling within the Saint Vincent's Historic District. (Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) Section 16.614.09.) The required findings are as follows:
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
1. The project is in conformance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties applicable to the project and any ordinance designating the historic district or landmark.
2. For projects located in a historic district, the proposed project is consistent with any conservation plan or specific plan adopted for the historic district.
3. For projects that require demolition, the architectural heritage and landmarks commission shall also find, as applicable:
a) It is not feasible to preserve or restore the structure after considering alternatives and balancing interest in preservation versus cost.
b) The retention of the structure constitutes a hazard to public safety. c) The structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program which substantially benefits the city. d) Retention of the structure in the judgment of the commission is not in the interest of the majority within the historic district.
e) Conditions of Approval. [The Review Authority shall impose conditions] necessary to accomplish the purposes of this code and prevent or minimize adverse impacts upon the public. These conditions shall run with the land and not be affected by a change in ownership.
A Development Review is required for all permits for new construction. (VMC Section 16.605.01.) VMC Section 16.605.03 requires the Review Authority to make findings with regard to the project prior to granting the Development Review. Specifically, that the project:
1. Complies with all applicable specific standards and criteria of this Zoning Code;
2. Is consistent with the general plan and any applicable approved specific plan or planned development;
3. Complies with any design conditions, standards, or requirements imposed by a discretionary approval including but not limited to a major or minor use permit, variance, specific plan, planned development, or tentative map applicable to the project or the location where it is proposed;
4. Is in substantial compliance with any applicable adopted design guidelines;
5. Will serve to achieve groupings of structures that are well related one to another and which, taken together, will result in a well-composed urban design, with consideration given to site, height, arrangement, texture, material, color and appurtenances, the relation of these factors to other structures in the immediate area, and the relation of the development to the total setting as seen from key points in the surrounding area; only elements of design which have some significant relationship to outside appearance shall be considered;
6. Will be of a quality and demonstrates thoughtful site planning that will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area; and
7. That the project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this chapter.
General Plan Consistency:
As mentioned above, the General Plan 2040 Land Use Designation for the subject property is Primarily Single Family (RSF). The General Plan characterizes this designation as follows:
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
The R‐SF designation applies to residential neighborhoods primarily characterized by detached single- family homes, although some older areas have attached dwellings and small stores. Dwellings typically have front and rear yards, as well as side setbacks. Permitted land uses include single‐family homes, in some instances duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and small commercial spaces, and public facilities such as schools, religious institutions, parks, and other community facilities appropriate within a residential neighborhood. The maximum permitted residential density in the R‐SF designation is nine dwelling units per acre; however, in single‐family areas where accessory dwelling units are allowed, maximum permitted residential density is 12 dwelling units per acre.
The project is consistent with the R-SF land use designation in that it proposes a detached single-family home with both a front and rear yard in a residential neighborhood. Additionally, the project is consistent with applicable General Plan 2040 policies and actions, such as Policy NBE-1.11 - Historic Districts and NBE-2.8 - Infill Development (refer to Table 1 of Attachment 2).
Zoning Code Consistency:
The project site has a zoning designation of Residential Low Density (RLD). The Zoning Code provides the following description for the RLD Zoning District:
The RLD Zoning District is for low-density residential areas in which permanent single unit residences, including detached and attached (duplexes and townhouses) units, are the primary use. Other residential types including cottages and bungalows around courts may be seen in this district as well as small neighborhood serving retail. This district also allows a variety of neighborhood supportive services, public and educational facilities, open spaces and community facilities. The maximum permitted residential density is nine dwelling units per acre, excluding accessory dwelling units.
According to VMC Table 16.301 – A: Land Use Regulations, a “Single-Family, Detached” unit is a permitted use in the RLD zoning district. The subject site is considered a legal non-conforming lot due to it being less than the minimum 5,000 square foot lot. VMC Section 16.105.05 “Non-conforming lots” states, “C. A non- conforming lot within a residential zoning district shall conform to the maximum allowable density of that zoning district. However, at a minimum, one single-unit dwelling unit and customary accessory buildings may be established on a non-conforming lot, provided the unit and accessory buildings conform to the current standards of the zoning district.”
The project is consistent with all applicable development standards in the RLD zoning district, including required setbacks, density, building height, landscaping requirements, etc. (refer to Table 2 in Attachment 2).
In addition to the RLD development standards, the project is also subject to the objective design standards for single-unit housing, which include standards for building entrances, architectural articulation for building facades, design of garage frontages, paving standards, and driveway design (see Table 3 in Attachment 2 for compliance).
Regarding landscaping, VMC Chapter 16.504 requires 20% of the front yard to be landscaped and to have at least one street tree per every 50 feet of frontage. The proposed project has a 25-foot frontage and would include two trees and 282 square feet of landscaping in the front yard adjacent to Carolina Street. Throughout the site, there would be a total of 1,250 square feet of new drought-tolerant landscaping including fruit trees, lavender, rosemary and walkable kurapia groundcover.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
STAFF ANALYSIS:
Staff believes all the applicable findings for the Certificate of Appropriateness and Development Review, as listed above, can be made for the proposed project. A summary of staff’s analysis is included below, with specific analysis associated with each required finding, including recommended statements of fact, incorporated into the attached Resolution (Attachment 1 of this report).
Certificate of Appropriateness: In order to grant a Certificate of Appropriateness, the project must be in conformance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (“Secretary’s Standards”), as well as the guidelines/standards of the historic district within which the site is located (St. Vincent’s Historic District).
The St. Vincent’s Historic District has no adopted design guidelines for new construction. However, as mentioned above, the district has a period of significance extending from 1868 to 1947, and it currently includes many structures with a wide variety of architectural styles. The architectural style proposed for the project would be compatible with the existing surrounding residential neighborhood, as it would comply with the required setbacks for the site and would include architectural elements from the period of significance, including a projected covered porch at the primary entrance, bay windows, and wooden architectural details of accent brackets and pickets.
The Secretary’s Standards were adopted by the Federal Government in 1976. The Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation are generally silent on entirely new structures. Nonetheless, they do include the following statements (below) which staff have used to evaluate the proposed single-family residence:
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are applicable to the Project and are as follows:
A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
Staff Response: Agree. According to historical mapping (Sandborn Maps), there was a small one-story cottage that existed on the site in 1919. By 1959, a second one-story structure had been constructed, resulting in two separate dwelling units on the site. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site
The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
Staff Response. Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years. There are no known records available to confirm the historic character of the property and, in any event, the Housing Accountability Act limits the City’s ability to require design features for the new construction beyond the objective requirements outlined in the VMC.
The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
Staff Response. Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years. There are no known records available to confirm the historic character of the property and, in any event, the Housing Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
Accountability Act limits the City’s ability to require design features for the new construction beyond the objective requirements outlined in the VMC.
Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
Staff Response. Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of the property, aside from historical mapping (Sandborn Maps). The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential developments in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act). It should be noted that the proposed architectural style of the new construction is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which would help to protect the integrity of the historic district.
Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
Staff Response: Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years and has no historical significance.
Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
Staff Response: Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of any former structures on the property. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential developments in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act). It should be noted that the proposed architectural style of the new construction is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which (while not required) will help to protect the integrity of historic district.
Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
Staff Response: Not Applicable/Unenforceable. There are no structures on the site and no replacement or repair of historic features are proposed.
Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
Staff Response:Not Applicable. There are no structures or historic materials on the site.
Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
Staff Response: The Project proposes new construction on a vacant lot. Archeological resources are not expected to be found at the site. However, if they are discovered during construction activities, then construction activities would halt and any resources would be protected, in accordance with applicable State requirements and General Plan Action Policy NBE-1.9A.
New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
Staff Response:Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of any former structures on the property. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential development in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act). It should be noted that the proposed architectural style of the new construction is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which (while not required) will help to protect the integrity of the historic district.
New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Staff Response: Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of any former structures on the property. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential development in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act).
Development Review: The proposed project is in compliance with all applicable development standards of the zoning code, as well as all objective design standards set forth in VMC Section 16.202.02 “Design Standards for Single-Unit Housing.” The proposed dwelling has also been designed with consideration to the existing structures within the nearby vicinity. The dwelling features comparable setbacks (to the extent feasible with current setback standards) and massing, and incorporates desirable features such as a covered front porch, a high degree of fenestration, quality exterior materials, and landscaping improvements which overall relate well to other structures in the neighborhood. The new dwelling would fill a currently vacant lot within an existing neighborhood, helping to complete the urban framework of the neighborhood. Overall, the proposed project demonstrates thoughtful site planning in that it has been sited to not only meet all development standards but also to blend with the existing adjacent structures with respect to setback, massing, and architectural design.
THE APPEAL
The Appellant provided a project comment letter prior to the initial hearing on November 21, 2024. The Appellant's three main arguments for the appeal are restated below in bold, with staff’s responses following in italics. A copy of the full appeal request (provided in its entirety) is attached to this report.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
Appellant Claim: No precedent of a two-story building on the lot; the original structure cannot be rebuilt in original dimensions due to current code.
The cottage that originally existed on the property was no larger than 700 square feet. The footprint of the historic building was nearly identical to the neighboring cottage, according to a 1919 Sanborn map. We are in a historically protected neighborhood, and the average home in this neighborhood on a full lot is 1,450 sqft. The proposed home, at over 1700 sqft of living space plus 280 sqft attached garage on a non-conforming half lot, is grossly disproportionate to the norm of the area even if it was on a full lot, which it’s not. The proposed house would also be the only building from the start of Carolina St at Butte St all the way to Sacramento St to be set back from the street front. It would be the only single family home within the immediate area (100 block of Carolina St, the 100 block of Butte St, and the 100 block of Branciforte St) to be taller than 1.5 stories. No discussion of this was brought up in the AHLC meeting on Nov 21, 2024, while the next proposal under review, on a lot just two blocks away, was discussed extensively and unfavorably for such criteria, including referencing Sanborn maps to decide on appropriateness. Not only is the proposed building at 128 Carolina St an anomaly with the norms of the area, but the allowed discussion and reasoning of the AHLC was blatantly inconsistent during the Nov 21 hearing.
Staff Response: The RLD zoning for the site allows for a single-family dwelling to be built, subject to the development standards of the district (VMC Chapter 16.202 – Residential Districts). As proposed and conditioned, the project would be consistent with all the applicable development standards, including maximum building height, front, interior side and rear setbacks for the residence and garage, and maximum lot coverage. The proposed building height of 24 feet is within the maximum allowable building height of 35 feet.
The proposed building front yard setback of 35 feet meets the minimum front yard setback of 15 feet. The proposed side yard setback of 5 feet complies with the “narrow lot” requirement which allows for setbacks that are 10% the lot width (or 3-feet for this site, as described in VMC Section 16.202.02.5).
In addition, all residential development with the City must comply with California Housing Accountability Act (Government Code Section 65589.5), including that in an historic district. The Housing Accountability Act limits a local government’s ability to deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects, that are consistent with objective local development standards and contribute to meeting housing need. The project as proposed, complies not only with all development standards required, but also with all applicable objective design standards set forth in the VMC, and as such, the decision-making body has no legal authority to require any design modifications beyond the objective requirements outlined in the VMC.
Appellant Claim: Survey legitimacy is questionable. (Markers not industry standard)
The survey of the property is not legal. In addition to the previously stated issue with the survey, a call was made to the Solano Recorders Office in Fairfield on November 25, 2024. A search was done for any recorded survey for 128 Carolina Street, and no survey has been recorded. This supposed survey was conducted at least a year ago or more, on a holiday (which is another red flag). According to California law: “(c) The record of survey required to be filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within 90 days after the setting of boundary monuments during the performance of a field survey or within 90 days after completion of a field survey, whichever comes first.” (Ca. Bus. And Prof’l. Code § 8762) Therefore, this survey is not legal. A legitimate survey is required to build a new residence on a Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
vacant lot. (CBC Ch. 1, Div. 11, §107.1(c); CRC Ch. 1, Div. II, § R106.1(c))
Staff Response: A survey is not required for a Certificate of Appropriateness application; however, a 'boundary survey' is required for a Development Review application. According to the Planning Division's published application submittal checklist, the boundary survey shall: 1) be prepared by a licensed California Surveyor or Civil Engineer licensed to perform survey; 2) include a drawing to scale (utilizing an Engineer’s Scale and a Scale Bar); 3) include the date of survey preparation and any subsequent revisions; 4) include the street address and Assessor’s Parcel Map Number; and 5) include information on any existing easements. A boundary survey for the proposed project was submitted as part of the planning application, and it was reviewed by staff and deemed to have met the submittal requirements for processing of the planning application.
Further, as part of a subsequent building permit review, the Building Division will also require submittal of a 'survey report' since this project involves new construction at five-feet from the property line (this requirement is described in the Building Division's published "C-03R Checklist for New Residential Construction"). As a standard practice in Vallejo, once a building permit has been issued and construction has commenced, the Building Division will require a signed letter from the engineer or surveyor to confirm the accuracy of the foundation in accordance with approved plans.
Lastly, it should be noted that a "record of survey" as described in the California Business and Professional Code Section 8762 referenced by the appellant, is only required when certain discrepancies exist and is not required to be recorded for every property.
Appellant Claim: The only access to this lot for materials and vehicles is an alley which is heavily damaged and not maintained on both Carolina and Florida streets in this block, and for many neighbors, this is the only access to their property. Due to this, for years neighbors have been dragging huge chunks of displaced concrete as well as pouring concrete to fill holes so people will not lose their oil pans, or worse. This alley is most of the neighbors’ driveway. The construction vehicles would not only heavily damage the already severely compromised and unmaintained alley further, it would often block many neighbors’ collective access to their properties.
It was stated at the Nov 21, 2024 AHLC meeting that the public right-of-way for most neighbors to access their properties off Lozier Alley would be blocked for an extended time frame. This includes houses on the alley that only are accessible via the alley. This is an issue of quality of life for everyone in the block who rely on the alley for access to their properties.
What was not stated at the meeting was by blocking residents public right-of-way to their properties, first responders and other public services such as trash pickup would also be blocked. (CPC §148.2) This absolutely is a public health and safety issue for most houses on the block, but is especially crucial for houses located directly on the Alley with no other street access. Residents of the block who use Lozier Alley are will aware of the difficulties the dimensions and condition of the Alley present; despite what Public Works or other city employees may see on a map, we who have daily lived experiences of Lozier Alley know that it is often not even large enough for two small cars to pass, and is certainly not large far-fetched scenario: in mid November, one of the residences on Lozier Alley had a house fire and a fire truck had to drive down the Alley to access it; in fact, a fire truck had to return Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
less than a week later for another emergency.
If construction was going on, without question VFD would have been blocked from accessing a situation in which seconds can make the difference between houses burning, the whole block burning, and between life and death for occupants. On Nov 26, 2024, a medium sized truck hired by a neighbor was loading in a polite and respectful way, to the side of the alley, and made it impossible for even a small car to pass. Visitors who have parked as far to the side of the alley as possible have received notes threatening fines and/or towing from trash collectors due to blocking the alley. Furthermore, there is no possible way for the construction to not continuously obstruct the alley as the proposed building’s footprint goes up to the back of the lot. There is no place to pull in construction vehicles and work on the building simultaneously. In its current state and physical dimensions and restrictions, Lozier Alley cannot support the construction of the proposed structure.
Staff Response: Lozier Alley stretches the entire block and can be accessed by vehicles from either end. During future construction of this site, if any construction equipment is required to be parked in any manner that would block access through the alley for an extended duration of time (typically considered 2-4 hours, or longer in some cases), then an encroachment permit would be deemed necessary. Encroachment permits are issued by the Public Works Department, and they are intended to ensure appropriate traffic controls are in place in the event there is private, temporary occupancy of any public right of way. The requirement to obtain an encroachment permit in this event has been made a condition of approval of the Project.
FISCAL IMPACT
Approval of the project would provide property tax revenues to the City both directly from the subject property development, and indirectly through potential property value increases resulting from development of a currently vacant site and potential further investment in the surrounding area.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines (Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Section 15303 (a) (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”). The project includes the construction of a new single-family residence.
None of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
NOTICE AND COMMENTS
On December 6, 2024, the March 11, 2025 appeal hearing date was scheduled by the Planning Director, as required by VMC 16.602.14.D, and both the applicant and appellant were informed on that date via email.
On February 25, 2024, pursuant to VMC Section 16.602.08 – Noticing, a 14-calendar-day notice of this appeal Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON AN APPEAL (APP24-0003) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK
COMMISSION'S DECISION TO APPROVE A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET (APN: 0055-121-120)
hearing was published in the Times Herald, mailed to all active neighborhood groups and all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property, and any other local agency expected to provide water, wastewater treatment, or other essential facilities or services to the project, as well as to members of the AHLC and City Council, the appellant and property owner.
On February 27, 2025, the AHLC members were notified via email of the scheduled March 11th City Council appeal hearing.
As of the writing this report, staff has not received any new written comments or questions in response to the March 11th public hearing notice.
ATTACHMENTS
1. APP24-0003 - Resolution_CAO Stamp
2. Exhibit A - CarolinaSt.128.Conditions of Approval
3. AHLC Staff Report and Supporting Documentation
4. AHLC24-03_12.16.24 Resolution signed
5. Project Plans
6. 11.21.24 - Minutes
7. Written Comments Received Prior to AHLC Meeting
8. Appeal (APP24-0003) Request and Supporting Information
CONTACT
Kristin Pollot, AICP, Planning & Development Services Director [email protected]
Cesar Orozco, Planning Manager (707) 648-5436
[email protected]
RESOLUTION NO. 25-_____ N.C.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO DENYING THE APPEAL (APP24-0004) OF THE ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARK COMMISSION’S DECISION TO APPROVE, AND HEREBY GRANTING, A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA22-0007) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031) TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 128 CAROLINA STREET, AFTER FINDING THE PROJECT
EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 – NEW CONSTRUCTION OR CONVERSION OF SMALL
STRUCTURES
APN: 0055-121-120
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2017, the City Council adopted General Plan 2040; and WHEREAS, the property which is the subject of the above-referenced proposed entitlements (Subject Property) has a General Plan 2040 land use designation of Primarily Single-Family; and
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2021, the City Council adopted a new Zoning Code and Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located in the Residential Low Density Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2022, Rob Kelly and Mario Vazquez, on behalf of Luis Rivera, property owner, filed an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR#22-0031) (“application”), seeking approval to construct a new single-family dwelling and associated site improvements on a vacant lot at 128 Carolina Street (APN:0055-121-120) located in the St. Vincent’s Historic District; and WHEREAS, on November 7, 2024, pursuant to Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) Section16.602.08(A), notice of this hearing was published in the Times Herald and mailed to all active neighborhood groups and property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and electronically mailed to the members of the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission and to the applicant; and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2024, the City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission after giving all public notices required by State law and the Vallejo Municipal Code, conducted a duly noticed public hearing; and ATTACHMENT 1
WHEREAS, the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission considered testimony and evidence, both written and oral, provided at the public hearing, as well as other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the Project, which record is maintained in the offices of the City of Vallejo Planning Division; and
WHEREAS, based on evidence received in the staff report and at the public hearing, the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission made factual findings and approved the Project with a 5-0 vote (with two commissioners absent); and WHEREAS, on December 2, 2024, Liana Berube and Abbey Schlageter, on behalf of themselves and other neighbors on the block, filed an appeal requesting that the City Council overturn the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission approval of Certificate of Appropriateness and Development Review; and WHEREAS, the Record of Proceedings (“Record”) upon which the City Council bases its decision on the Project at issue herein, includes, but is not limited to: (1) the staff reports, City files, records and other documents, prepared for and/or submitted to the City relating to the Project; (3) the evidence, facts, findings and other determinations set forth in this resolution; (4) the City of Vallejo General Plan and its related EIR; (5) the Vallejo Municipal Code and its related environmental documents; (6) all designs, plans, studies, data and correspondence submitted to the City in connection with the Project; (7) all documentary and oral evidence received at the public hearing regarding the Project; and (8) all other matters of common knowledge to the City Council including, but not limited to, City, state, and federal laws, policies, rules, regulations, reports, records and projections related to development within the City of Vallejo and its surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, Said Record is maintained in the offices of City of Vallejo Planning and Development Services Division, 555 Santa Clara Street, Vallejo, California 94590.
NOW THEREFORE, based on the Record, the City Council hereby makes the following findings:
I. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING
The Project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ((CEQA) Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Section 15303(c) (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”). The Project proposes the construction of a new single-family residence in a residential district.
None of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the Project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the Project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the Project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
II. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS PERMIT (VMC Section 16.614.09.E)
The City Council hereby finds that:
A. The Project is in conformance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties applicable to the Project and any ordinance designating the Historic District or Landmark.
FACTS IN SUPPORT: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are applicable to the Project and are as follows:
1) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
Agree. According to historical mapping (Sandborn Maps), there was a small one- story cottage that existed on the site in 1919. By 1959, a second one-story structure had been constructed, resulting in two separate dwelling units on the site. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site.
2) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years. There are no known records available to confirm the historic character of the property and in any event, the Housing Accountability Act limits the City’s ability to require design features for the new construction beyond the objective requirements outlined in the VMC.
3) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of the property, aside from historical mapping (Sandborn Maps). The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential development in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act).
It should be noted that the proposed architectural style of the new construction is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which would help to protect the integrity of historic district. 4) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years and has no historical significance.
5) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of any former structures on the property. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential development in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act).
It should be noted that the proposed architectural style of the new construction is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which (while not required) will help to protect the integrity of historic district.
6) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. There are no structures on the site and no replacement or repair of historic features proposed.
7) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
Not Applicable. There are no structures or historic materials on the site. 8) Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
The Project proposes new construction on a vacant lot. Archeological resources are not expected to be found at the site; however, if they are discovered during construction activities, then construction activities would halt and any resources would be protected, in accordance with applicable State requirements and General Plan Action Policy NBE-1.9A.
9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of any former structures on the property. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential development in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act).
It should be noted that the proposed architectural style of the new construction is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which (while not required) will help to protect the integrity of historic district.
10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
Not Applicable/Unenforceable. The site has been vacant for over 40 years, and there are no known records available to confirm the historic character of any former structures on the property. The current proposal includes one new single-family home, which is consistent with the historic use of the site and consistent with all applicable development standards and objective design requirements outlined in the VMC (which are the only standards that can be applied to new residential development in accordance with the Housing Accountability Act).
B. For projects located in a Historic District, the proposed project is consistent with any conservation plan or specific plan adopted for the Historic District.
The Project site is within the St. Vincent’s Historic District for which there is no adopted conservation plan or specific plan.
C. For projects that require demolition, the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission shall also find, as applicable: (a) It is not feasible to preserve or restore the structure after considering alternatives and balancing interest in preservation versus cost. (b) The retention of the structure constitutes a hazard to public safety. (c) The structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program which substantially benefits the City. (4) Retention of the structure in the judgment of the commission is not in the interest of the majority within the Historic District.
Not applicable. There is no demolition proposed as part of this Project.
III. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (VMC Section 16.605.03)
1. Complies with all applicable specific standards and criteria of this Zoning Code.
The proposed Project is located on a property zoned Residential Low Density (RLD).
The RLD zone is intended for low-density residential areas in which permanent single unit residences, including detached and attached (duplexes and townhouses) units, are the primary use. The Project is consistent with the RLD zoning district in terms of land use, in that it involves the construction of a new single-family residence within an established neighborhood. The Project is consistent with the applicable development standards, such as setbacks, lot coverage, building height, objective design standards, etc., as outlined in VMC Title 16, as proposed and conditioned.
2. Is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable approved Specific Plan or Planned Development.
The site has a General Plan designation of Primarily Single Family (R-SF), which is consistent with the current RLD zoning of the site. The R-SF General Plan designation applies to residential neighborhoods primarily characterized by detached single‐ family homes. Dwellings typically have front and rear yards, as well as side setbacks. Permitted land uses include single ‐family homes, in some instances duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and small commercial spaces, and public facilities such as schools, religious institutions, parks, and other community facilities appropriate within a residential neighborhood. The maximum permitted residential density in the R ‐SF designation is 12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed new dwelling is consistent with the permitted density range. The Project is consistent with R-SF land use designation in that it involves the construction of a single-family residence within an established neighborhood that is primarily characterized by a mixture of detached single-family residences or multifamily residential. The buildings and its uses are consistent with applicable actions and policies of the General Plan, such as Policy NBE-1.11 - Historic Districts and NBE-2.8 - Infill Development, and the General Plan Designation.
3. Complies with any design conditions, standards, or requirements imposed by a discretionary approval including but not limited to a Major or Minor Use Permit, Variance, Specific Plan, Planned Development, or tentative map applicable to the project or the location where it is proposed.
The proposed single-family residence and associated improvements are consistent with the applicable development standards outlined in VMC Title 16 as proposed and conditioned. A Minor Use Permit is required to develop on a slope greater than 15%, which will be processed by the Director subsequent to this action, should Council grant its approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness and Development Review.
4. Is in substantial compliance with any applicable adopted design guidelines.
VMC Section 16.202.03 – Design Standards for single-unit housing (detached and attached), provides objective design standards as detailed in Table 3 of Attachment
2. As proposed, the dwelling complies with all applicable development and design standards for single-unit dwellings within the RLD zone.
5. Will serve to achieve groupings of structures that are well related one to another and which, taken together, will result in a well-composed urban design, with consideration given to site, height, arrangement, texture, material, color and appurtenances, the relation of these factors to other structures in the immediate area, and the relation of the development to the total setting as seen from key points in the surrounding area; only elements of design which have some significant relationship to outside appearance shall be considered.
The proposed dwelling has been designed with consideration to the existing structures within the nearby vicinity. The dwelling features comparable setbacks (to the extent feasible with current setback standards) and massing and incorporates desirable features such as a covered front porch, high degree of fenestration, quality exterior materials, and landscaping improvements which overall relate well to other structures in the neighborhood. The new dwelling will fill a currently vacant lot within an existing neighborhood and will work to complete the urban framework of the neighborhood.
6. Will be of a quality and demonstrates thoughtful site planning that will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area.
The proposed Project demonstrates thoughtful site planning in that it meets all applicable development standards required and as conditioned, and the proposed dwelling is sited to blend with the existing adjacent structures with respect to setback, massing, and architectural design. Therefore, it will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area.
7. That the project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this Chapter.
The proposed Project is exempt under Section 15303 (a) (Class 3 “New Construction”) of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, the City has considered whether any of the exceptions found under Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines exist, which would preclude the Project from being categorically exempt from CEQA.
The Project is consistent with Section 15300.2 as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the Project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the Project site is not located on an open a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the Project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
IV. FINDINGS RELEVANT TO THE DENIAL OF THE APPEAL
The appellant provided a project comment letter prior to the initial hearing on November 21, 2024. The main arguments are restated below in bold, with staff’s responses following in italics.
1. No precedent of a two-story building on the lot; the original structure cannot be rebuilt in original dimensions due to current code. The cottage that originally existed on the property was no larger than 700 square feet. The footprint of the historic building was nearly identical to the neighboring cottage, according to a 1919 Sanborn map. We are in a historically protected neighborhood, and the average home in this neighborhood on a full lot is 1,450 sqft. The proposed home, at over 1700 sqft of living space plus 280 sqft attached garage on a non- conforming half lot, is grossly disproportionate to the norm of the area even if it was on a full lot, which it’s not. The proposed house would also be the only building from the start of Carolina St at Butte St all the way to Sacramento St to be set back from the street front. It would be the only single family home within the immediate area (100 block of Carolina St, the 100 block of Butte St, and the 100 block of Branciforte St) to be taller than 1.5 stories. No discussion of this was brought up in the AHLC meeting on Nov 21, 2024, while the next proposal under review, on a lot just two blocks away, was discussed extensively and unfavorably for such criteria, including referencing Sanborn maps to decide on appropriateness. Not only is the proposed building at 128 Carolina St an anomaly with the norms of the area, but the allowed discussion and reasoning of the AHLC was blatantly inconsistent during the Nov 21 hearing.
Staff Response: The RLD zoning for the site allows for a single-family dwelling to be built, subject to the development standards of the district (VMC Chapter
16.202 – Residential Districts). As proposed and conditioned, the project would be consistent with all the applicable development standards, including maximum building height, front, interior side and rear setbacks for the residence and garage, and maximum lot coverage. The proposed building height of 24 feet is within the maximum allowable building height of 35 feet. The proposed building front yard setback of 35 feet meets the minimum front yard setback of 15 feet. The proposed side yard setback of 5 feet complies with the “narrow lot” requirement which allows for setbacks that are 10% the lot width (or 3-feet for this site, as described in VMC Section 16.202.02.5).
In addition, all residential development with the City must comply with California Housing Accountability Act (Government Code Section 65589.5), including that in an historic district. The Housing Accountability Act limits a local government’s ability to deny, reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects, that are consistent with objective local development standards and contribute to meeting housing need. The project as proposed, complies not only with all development standards required, but also with all applicable objective design standards set forth in the VMC, and as such, the decision making body has no legal authority to require any design modifications beyond the objective requirements outlined in the VMC.
2. Survey legitimacy is questionable. (Markers not industry standard) The survey of the property is not legal. In addition to the previously stated issue with the survey, a call was made to the Solano Recorders Office in Fairfield on November 25, 2024. A search was done for any recorded survey for 128 Carolina Street, and no survey has been recorded. This supposed survey was conducted at least a year ago or more, on a holiday (which is another red flag). According to California law: “(c) The record of survey required to be filed pursuant to this section shall be filed within 90 days after the setting of boundary monuments during the performance of a field survey or within 90 days after completion of a field survey, whichever comes first.” (Ca. Bus. And Prof’l. Code § 8762) Therefore, this survey is not legal. A legitimate survey is required to build a new residence on a vacant lot. (CBC Ch. 1, Div. 11, §107.1(c); CRC Ch. 1, Div. II, § R106.1(c))
Staff Response: A survey is not required for a Certificate of Appropriateness application; however, a 'boundary survey' is required for a Development Review application. According to the Planning Division's published application submittal checklist, the boundary survey shall: 1) be prepared by a licensed California Surveyor or Civil Engineer licensed to perform survey; 2) include a drawing to scale (utilizing an Engineer’s Scale and a Scale Bar); 3) include the date of survey preparation and any subsequent revisions; 4) include the street address and Assessor’s Parcel Map Number; and 5) include information on any existing easements. A boundary survey for the proposed project was submitted as part of the planning application, and it was reviewed by staff and deemed to have met the submittal requirements for processing of the planning application.
Further, as part of a subsequent building permit review, the Building Division will also require submittal of a 'survey report' since this project involves new construction at five- feet from the property line (requirement is described in the Building Division's published "C-03R Checklist for New Residential Construction"). As a standard practice in Vallejo, once a building permit has been issued and construction has commenced, the Building Division will require a signed letter from the engineer or surveyor to confirm the accuracy of the foundation in accordance with approved plans.
Lastly, it should be noted that a "record of survey" as described in the California Business and Professional Code Section 8762 referenced by the appellant, is only required when certain discrepancies exist and is not required to be recorded for every property.
3. The only access to this lot for materials and vehicles is an alley which is heavily damaged and not maintained on both Carolina and Florida streets in this block, and for many neighbors, this is the only access to their property. Due to this, for years neighbors have been dragging huge chunks of displaced concrete as well as pouring concrete to fill holes so people will not lose their oil pans, or worse.
This alley is most of the neighbors’ driveway. The construction vehicles would not only heavily damage the already severely compromised and unmaintained alley further, it would often block many neighbors’ collective access to their properties. It was stated at the Nov 21, 2024 AHLC meeting that the public right- of-way for most neighbors to access their properties off Lozier Alley would be blocked for an extended time frame. This includes houses on the alley that only are accessible via the alley. This is an issue of quality of life for everyone in the block who rely on the alley for access to their properties. What was not stated at the meeting was by blocking residents public right-of-way to their properties, first responders and other public services such as trash pickup would also be blocked. (CPC §148.2) This absolutely is a public health and safety issue for most houses on the block, but is especially crucial for houses located directly on the Alley with no other street access. Residents of the block who use Lozier Alley are will aware of the difficulties the dimensions and condition of the Alley present; despite what Public Works or other city employees may see on a map, we who have daily lived experiences of Lozier Alley know that it is often not even large enough for two small cars to pass, and is certainly not large far-fetched scenario: in mid November, one of the residences on Lozier Alley had a house fire and a fire truck had to drive down the Alley to access it; in fact, a fire truck had to return less than a week later for another emergency. If construction was going on, without question VFD would have been blocked from accessing a situation in which seconds can make the difference between houses burning, the whole block burning, and between life and death for occupants. On Nov 26, 2024, a medium sized truck hired by a neighbor was loading in a polite and respectful way, to the side of the alley, and made it impossible for even a small car to pass. Visitors who have parked as far to the side of the alley as possible have received notes threatening fines and/or towing from trash collectors due to blocking the alley. Furthermore, there is no possible way for the construction to not continuously obstruct the alley as the proposed building’s footprint goes up to the back of the lot. There is no place to pull in construction vehicles and work on the building simultaneously. In its current state and physical dimensions and restrictions, Lozier Alley cannot support the construction of the proposed structure.
Staff Response: Lozier Alley stretches the entire block and can be accessed by vehicles at either end. During future construction of this site, if any construction equipment is required to be parked in any manner that would block access through the alley for an extended duration of time (typically considered 2-4 hours, or longer in some cases), then an encroachment permit would be deemed necessary. Encroachment permits are issued by the Public Works Department, and they are intended to ensure appropriate traffic controls are in place in the event there is private, temporary occupancy of any public right of way.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby finds and resolves that, based on substantial evidence in the record:
1. The above findings and recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein.
2. The Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15303(c) (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”). The Project proposes the construction of a new single-family residence in a residential district.
None of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows:
(a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the Project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the Project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the Project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
3. Appeal (APP24-0003) is DENIED.
4. The decision of the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission is UPHELD.
5. Certificate of Appropriateness (COA#22-0007) and Development Review (DVR#22-0031) are GRANTED, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit A, and in accordance based on the analysis contained in the staff report and the findings contained herein and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit A.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VALLEJO at an adjourned regular meeting held on March 11, 2025, with the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
________________________________________
ANDREA SOURCE
City of Vallejo City Council
Attest:
________________________________________
DAWN ABRAHAMSON, CITY CLERK
City of Vallejo City Clerk
Exhibit A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATNESS (COA22-0007)
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031)
128 CAROLINA STREET
APN # 0055-121-120
PERMIT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a new two-story 1,732 square foot single-family residence, with an attached 280 square-foot one-car garage on a vacant lot within the Saint (St.) Vincent Historic District. Access to the garage will be off Lozier Alley. The residence façade will have Hardie lap siding and wood accent brackets both painted different shades of gray, with black vinyl windows. The project also includes 1,249.52 square feet of new landscaping along Carolina Street and throughout the site.
A.PLANNING DIVISION
Laura Solomon, Associate Planner | [email protected] | (707) 648-5391 Pre-Building Permit:
1. Prior to building permit submittal, this project must receive approval of the required Minor Use Permit (MUP23-0018) per Vallejo Municipal Code Chapter 16.212 - Hillside Development Standards.
2. Prior to building permit submittal, submit a numbered list to the Planning Division with a written response on how each condition of project approval contained in this report will be satisfied. The list should be submitted to the project planner who will coordinate further development of the project. The approved conditions shall also be included with the building permit set, after the cover sheet.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the Planning Division shall confirm that the building permit drawings and subsequent construction substantially conform with the approved Planning entitlement.
4. Prior to building permit issuance, the Planning Division shall confirm that the building permit, grading permit and all other drawings and documents substantially conform with the documents and/or representations, whether oral or written that were presented to and approved by the Planning and Development Services Director. Pursuant to VMC 16.602.10.b the site plan, floor plans, building elevations and/or any additional information or representations, whether oral or written, indicating the proposed structure or manner of operation submitted with an application or submitted during the approval process shall be deemed conditions of approval. Any approval may be subject to requirements that the applicant guarantees, warranties, or ensures compliance with the plans and conditions in all respects.
During Construction:
5. Construction activities shall be managed in compliance with the following requirements:
a. Site Watering. During the construction of a project, all portions of the site shall be watered as necessary to reduce emissions of dust and other particulate matter, and all stockpiles shall be covered.
b. Maintenance. Streets and sidewalks shall be made dirt free at the completion of construction.
c. Noise. All construction and transport equipment shall be muffled in accordance with state and federal laws.
d. Emissions. Construction and transport equipment shall be operated to minimize exhaust emissions. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary.
2 e. Lozier Alley access. An encroachment permit from the Public Works Department shall be required if any construction equipment will be parked in any manner that would block access through the alley for more than two hours,
f. Hours of Operation. Grading and pile driving operations within ¼ mile of residential units shall be limited to between 8:00 am and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays to ensure compliance with the requirements for construction activity in Subsection 16.502.12.D.1., Maximum Noise Level for Temporary Construction Activity, or as otherwise restricted as part of an approval.
g. Water Run-off. All water run-off from construction sites shall be controlled. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary and shall comply with Chapter 12.41 of the Vallejo Municipal Code.
6. No person shall make, or cause to suffer, or permit to be made upon any public property, public right-of-way or private property, any excessive noise, annoying noise, amplified sound or vibrations that are physically annoying to reasonable persons of normal sensitivity or that are so harsh or so prolonged or unnatural or unusual in their use, time or place as to cause or contribute to the unnecessary and unreasonable discomfort of any persons of normal sensitivity located at the lot line of the property from which these noises emanate or that interfere with the peace and comfort of residents or their guests, or the operators or customers in places of business in the vicinity, or that may detrimentally or adversely affect such residences or places of business. (VMC Section 16.502.09 (C))
7. Construction, demolition, and related loading/unloading activities that may generate noise shall be limited to the following: 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. in Monday- Friday, Saturday 9 am- 6 pm. No construction is to occur on Sunday or federal holidays. Construction equipment noise levels shall not exceed the City’s maximum allowable noise levels
8. The fencing for construction sites shall not be installed until a building permit or grading permit has been issued and shall be removed prior to final inspection. In the event that the building permits expire before the construction is completed, the Planning and Development Services Director may issue a temporary use permit pursuant to Chapter 16.339, Temporary Uses, to allow the fencing to remain for a longer period of time. (VMC Section 16.505.08 (B)) Landscaping:
9. Prior to first final building inspection, the landscape architect shall provide a Certificate of Completion and Certificate of Installation according to the Landscape Documentation in accordance with VMC Chapter 16.504.09: Water Efficient Landscape Requirements. The documentation shall include the following:
a. Irrigation Scheduling (VMC Section 16.504.11)
b. Schedule of Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance (VMC Section 16.504.08) c. Landscape Irrigation Audit Report (VMC Section 16.504.13) d. Soil Management Report (VMC Section 16.504.10)
10. Prior to first final building inspection, all landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the landscape architect shall provide written verification that the landscaping and irrigation have been installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans, particularly with respect to size, health, number and species of plants, and the overall design concept.
11. All landscaping shall be permanently maintained in a healthy and thriving condition at all times, in compliance with the approved landscape plan. Irrigation systems and their components shall be maintained in a fully functional manner consistent with the original approved design or upgraded to reflect current best practices for water efficiency. Regular maintenance shall include but is not limited to:
3 a. Adjusting, checking, and repairing irrigation equipment; resetting automatic controllers; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; adding/replenishing fertilizer, mulch, soil amendments; insect control; the replacement of dead or diseased plants; pruning; watering; and weeding all landscaped areas.
b. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to maintain the effective functioning of solar energy facilities and passive solar design features installed both on site and on adjacent properties.
c. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to keep pedestrian and bicycle paths clear. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (A))
d. Pruning, cultivating, weeding, fertilizing, replacement of plants, and watering on a regular basis.
e. Pruning or removal of overgrown vegetation, cultivated or uncultivated, that may harbor rats, vermin, or other nuisances, or otherwise be detrimental to neighboring properties. f. The removal of dead, decayed, diseased, or hazardous trees, weeds and debris that create an unsightly appearance and may be dangerous to public safety and welfare or detrimental to neighboring properties or property values. Compliance shall be by removal, replacement, or maintenance.
g. Landscaping (trees, shrubs, ground cover, turf, etc.) which, due to accident, damage, disease, lack of maintenance, or other cause, fails to show a healthy appearance and growth, shall be replaced. Replacement plants shall conform to all standards that govern the original planting installation, approved landscaping plan, or as approved by the director. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (D))
12. Litter shall be removed from all landscaped areas in a timely fashion. (VMC Section16.504.08 (B))
13. Turf areas shall be mowed on a regular basis and be kept green. Accumulation of leaves, twigs, bark, and other similar materials shall be removed on a regular basis. Planting areas shall be kept free of weeds at all times. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (C)) Fences, Walls and Screening:
14. Fencing and walls shall be continuously maintained with no sign of rust or disrepair. Any graffiti shall be removed within forty-eight hours of discovery by the property manager. (VMC Section
16.505.02 (B)).
15. All exterior mechanical equipment, whether on a roof, on the side of a structure, or located on the ground, shall be screened from public view. Exterior mechanical equipment to be screened includes, without limitation, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork, transformers, smoke exhaust fans, water meters, backflow preventers, service entry section, back-up and emergency generators, and similar utility devices. a. Screening shall be architecturally integrated into the main structure with regard to materials, color, shape, and size to appear as an integral part of the building or structure. b. Equipment shall be screened on all sides, and screening materials shall be opaque. c. When screening with plants, evergreen types of vegetation shall be planted and maintained. Plant material sizes and types shall be selected and installed so that, at the time of building occupancy, such plants effectively screen their respective equipment. d. The use of wood expanded metal lath, and chain link for the purpose of screening is prohibited. (VMC Section 16.505.10)
Lighting:
16. Lighting shall be designed, located, and installed to be directed downward or toward structures, be shielded or fully shielded, and shall be well-maintained in order to prevent glare, light trespass (unwanted light on adjacent lots and public rights-of-way), and light pollution to the maximum 4 extent feasible. No permanently installed lighting shall blink, flash, or be of unusually high intensity or brightness, as determined by the Planning and Development Services Director. (VMC Section 16.506.04 (B))
Overall Project:
17. This entitlement shall automatically expire within two years of the effective date of this approval, on November 21, 2026, unless the use is exercised or extended (VMC Section 16.602.12 (A)).
Issuance of a building permit shall constitute exercise of rights; provided, however, that, unless otherwise specified as a condition of project approval, the permit shall expire if:
a. The building permit expires.
b. Final inspection is not completed, or certificate of occupancy issued within the time specified as a condition of project approval.
c. The rights granted under the permit are not exercised within one year following the earliest to occur of the following: issuance of a certificate of occupancy; or if no certificate of occupancy is required, the last required final inspection for the new construction. (VMC Section 16.602.11 (B))
18. The Planning and Development Services Director may approve a one-year extension of any permit or approval granted for a residential or non-residential project under the Zoning Code upon receipt of a written application and fees received fifteen calendar days) before the expiration date with the required fee prior to expiration of the permit. (VMC Section 16.602.11 (C.1))
19. No change in the use for which a permit or other approval has been issued is permitted, in accordance with Government Code section 66411.7.
20. For new developments, utilities including, but not limited to, all electrical, telephone, cable television, fiber-optic cable, gas, water, sewer, irrigation/recycled water, and similar distribution lines providing direct service to a project shall be installed underground within the site. This requirement may be waived by the Planning and Development Services Director upon determining that underground installation is infeasible, or the electrical line is otherwise exempt from an under-grounding requirement. (VMC Section 16.501.10)
21. Applicant shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend City, its officers, officials, directors, employees, agents, volunteers and affiliates and each of them from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages, costs, expenses, actual attorney’s fees, applicant’s fees, expert fees, losses or liability, in law or in equity, of every kind and nature whatsoever arising out of or in connection with Applicant’s operations, or any subcontractor’s operations, to be performed under this agreement for Applicant’s or subcontractor’s tort negligence including active or passive, or strict negligence, including but not limited to personal injury including, but not limited to bodily injury, emotional injury, sickness or disease, or death to persons and/or damage to property of anyone, including loss of use thereof, caused or alleged to be caused by any act or omission of Applicant, or any subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for the full period of time allowed by the law, regardless to any limitation by insurance, with the exception of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. No modification of the project, any application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in processing methods shall alter the Applicant’s indemnity obligation.
B. Building Division
Staff Contact: Sergio Caldera | [email protected] | (707) 648-4383
1. Plans and permits will be required for building, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical work per California Code of Regulations, Title 24 and applicable City Ordinance in effect at the time of the 5 completed Building Permit application date and required fees shall be paid at the time of application.
2. Soils report will be required for foundation design plan reviews.
3. 2022 California Code of Regulations applies if permit application(s) are received before the end of 2025. After 12-31-2025 the 2025 California Code of Regulations will apply.
4. Fees will apply to the current fiscal year of permit applications C. Water Department
Staff Contact: Melissa Cansdale | [email protected] | (707) 553-7223
1. CODE REQUIREMENTS. All code requirements as stated in Title 11 of the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) and Vallejo Standard Specifications and Standard Drawings adopted in 2011 (VSSSD) that apply to this project shall be conformed to. The project is being made aware of codes that require extra attention by the following items.
2. WATER SYSTEM PLANS (VSSSD Section 4.1). All water system improvements shall be consistent with the latest Vallejo Water System Master Plan, prepared by Kennedy/Jenks Engineers. Prior to Improvement plan approval and building permit issuance, water system improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Department for review and approval, and shall contain at least:
a. Location and size of fire sprinkler service connection(s). b. Location and size of existing and proposed domestic service connection(s). c. Location and size of irrigation service connection(s), if any. d. Location of fire hydrants.
e. Location of structures with respect to existing public water system improvements, such as mains, meters, etc.
f. Location and size of any new water mains.
g. Location and size of backflow prevention devices (required on water service connections to irrigation systems, certain commercial water users, and to commercial fire sprinkler systems, per City Ordinance 922 N.C. (2d).
3. FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Fire flow requirements of the Fire department shall be complied with. Fire flow at no less than 25 psi residual pressure shall be available within 1,000 feet of any structure. One half of the fire flow shall be available within 300 feet of any structure.
a. For single family residential units, the fire flow is 1,500 gpm. b. For other developments, see the Vallejo Water System Master Plan, 2015, prepared by Kennedy Jenks.
4. HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Prior to Improvement Plan and building permit issuance, hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Water Director demonstrating that the fire flow requirements are complied with.
5. FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Fire hydrant placement and fire sprinkler system installation, if any, shall meet the requirements of the Fire Department. For combined water and fire services, the requirements of both the Fire Department and the Vallejo Water System Master Plan, with latest revisions, shall be satisfied.
6. WATER EASEMENTS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Easements shall be granted for all water system improvements installed outside the public right-of-way in the City's Standard Form for Grant of Water Line Easement with the following widths:
a. 15 ft. wide (minimum) for water mains.
6 b. 10 ft. wide (minimum) for fire hydrants, water meters, backflow preventers, double detector check valves, etc.
c. Other facilities will be reviewed by the Water Department.
7. WATER METERS (VMC 11.04.110 and 11.16.090). Each parcel shall be metered separately and shall have a separate fire sprinkler service connection.
8. WATER SERVICE BONDS AND FEES (VMC Sections 11.16, 11.18, 11.20 and 11.24). Water service shall be provided by the City of Vallejo following completion of the required water system improvements and payment of applicable fees. Performance and payment bonds shall be provided to the City of Vallejo prior to construction of water system improvements. Fees include those fees specified in the Vallejo Municipal Code including connection and elevated storage fees, etc., and fees for tapping, tie-ins, inspections, disinfection, construction water, and other services provided by the City with respect to the water system improvements. The Water Department may be contacted for a description of applicable fees. These fees have to be paid prior to issuance of the building permit.
9. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
a) Apply and pay for Fire Flow Test with the Water Department in order to determine operation of sprinkler system and final service size.
b) Provide water meter and service sizing calculations per most recent California Plumbing Code, include a water fixture count table.
c) As of January 1, 2018, all units in multi-family, commercial, or combination thereof, buildings shall be individually metered (if existing plumbing allows or is re-configured) by the City, additional meters at the owner/applicant’s expense; or, master metered by the City, and sub-metered by the property owner, with approved/certified meters. Per California Senate Bill 7 (SB7).
10. WATER SYSTEM INSTALLATION. Prior to occupancy or final building inspection, install water system improvements as required. Backflow device/s where required shall be installed in areas hidden from public view and/or shall be mitigated by landscaping.
D. Fire Prevention
Staff Contact: Moises Zarate | [email protected] | (707) 648-4565
1. All buildings, facilities, and improvements shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of approved access roadways.
2. Prior to Final Inspection, in accordance with the 2019 CFC, approved address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall clearly contrast with their background.
The characters shall be a minimum of 4" high with a 1/2" stroke. The size of the building and distance or location of the address numbers from the roadway may necessitate larger numbers.
3. All roof material shall be rated class "C" or better.
4. Provide smoke detectors in all sleeping rooms and common hallways. Detectors shall be hardwired, interconnected with battery backup. Electrical circuits supplying detectors shall be separate dedicated lines with no other devices on the circuits.
5. Provide carbon monoxide detectors outside each sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of all bedrooms.
6. Emergency escape and rescue openings are required in each bedroom in accordance with the 2019 CA Building Code.
7 7. An NFPA 13D automatic fire sprinkler system is required for all new residential structures, please submit 2 sets of plans and calculations to the Fire Prevention Office and obtain a permit prior to installation. Adequate pressure and GPM verification is required prior to residential construction.
8. Provide a one-hour fire separation between the R-3 and U Occupancy.
9. A final inspection from the Fire Prevention Division is required.
E. Vallejo Flood and Wastewater
Staff Contact: Mariah Henderson | [email protected] | (707) 652-7810
1. Utility site plan will need to show required two-way cleanout within 2 feet of the foundation where waste plumbing exits the building and District cleanout near the public right of way.
2. Add the following notes to plans:
a. All sewer work shall conform to the Vallejo Wastewater Standards, b. Call Vallejo Wastewater a minimum of 24 hours in advance for inspections.
3. Applicant will be required to pay applicable fees and obtain VFWD Connection Permit upon final plan approval.
DATE: November 21, 2024 Item No. 7A TO: Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission
FROM: Laura Solomon, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: 128 Carolina Street - New Single-Family Residence - Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR22-0031)
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project summary: The project consists of a new two-story 1,732 square foot single -family residence, with an attached 280 square-foot one-car garage on a vacant lot within the Saint (St.) Vincent Historic District. Access to the garage is proposed off Lozier Alley. The residence façade has been designed with Hardie lap siding and wood accent brackets both painted different shades of gray, with black vinyl windows. The project also includes 1,250 square feet of new landscaping along Carolina Street and throughout the site.
Project Number(s): Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) Development Review (DVR22-0031)
Location: 128 Carolina Street / APN: 0055-121-120
Applicant: Rob Kelly/ Mario Vazquez
Owner: Luis Rivera
General Plan Land Use Designation: Primarily Single Family (R-SF)
Zoning District: Residential Low Density (RLD)
Historic District: St. Vincents Historic District
CEQA: The project is categorically exempt pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15303 (a) (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the A rchitectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission find the project exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section and 15303( a) and adopt a resolution to approve Certificate of Appropriateness (COA#22-0007) and Development Review (DVR22-0031) based on the findings and conditions contained herein.
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Background
On August 22, 2022, Rob Kelly and Mario Vazquez, the applicants, on behalf of Luis Rivera, the property owner, applied for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the development of a new single-family residence on a vacant parcel located at 128 Carolina Street. The project plans were routed to various city departments and outside agencies for their review and the application was determined to be complete by the City on September 15, 2023.
Location and Land Use Context
The project site is located off Carolina Street between Butte Street and Branciforte Street. It is surrounded by existing residential uses. The subject site is bounded by residential uses and Lozier Alley to the north, residential uses and Branciforte Street to the east, Carolina Street and multi-unit residential to the south and residential uses and Butte Street to the west.
State Route 37 is approximately 1.25 miles to the north, Sonoma Boulevard/State Route 29 is approximately 0.3 miles to the east and Interstate 80 (I-80) is approximately 1.75 miles to the east from the subject property. Each provide regional access while Carolina Street and Lozier Alley provide direct access to the project site. The immediate vicinity of the project site is characterized by existing residential uses (see Figure 1 in Attachment 4).
The site’s General Plan 2040 Land Use Designation is Primarily Single-Family (P-SF), and the site is zoned Residential Low Density (RLD), which implements the P-SF Land Use designation.
St. Vincent Historic District
The St. Vincent Historic District was formally listed in the National Register of Historic Places as the Vallejo Old City Historic District in 2003. The district is generally bounded by Mare Island Way and Butte Street to the west, Marin Street and properties adjacent to Sonoma Boulevard to the east, Quincy Alley to the north and Florida Street, Carolina Street and Kissel Alley to the south (see figure 2 in attachment 4). The district is comprised of mid- nineteenth to late-twentieth century residences, including examples of the Greek & Gothic Revival, Vernacular; Late Victorian such as Italianate, Queen Anne, Eastlake, Shingle Style; along with Colonial Revival, Tudor Revival, Mission, Craftsman, Prairie and Art Deco Styles. The period of significance is from 1868 to 1947.
Project Description
The project consists of a new two-story 1,732 square foot single-family residence with an attached 280 square- foot one-car garage on an existing, currently vacant 3,200 square-foot lot off Carolina Street (see Figure 3 in Attachment 4). The residence is proposed with an overall building height of 24 feet and includes three bedrooms and two and one half-bathrooms. The new residence façade incorporates Hardie lap siding painted Bennjamin Moore – New Hope Gray, bay windows facing Carolina Street, black vinyl windows and gray asphalt shingles. The project also includes 1,250 square feet of new landscaping along Carolina Street and throughout the site (see Attachment 3).
The subject site currently slopes from the southwest corner to the northeast corner. The average slope for the site is 22.62 percent, as calculated using the contour line method in accordance with VMC Section 16.212.01 (A.1).
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
Code Compliance:
I. Required Entitlements
The project requires the following approvals under the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC):
• Certificate of Appropriateness 1 is required for a proposed single -family dwelling within the Saint Vincents Historic District, to be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission. VMC Section 16.614.09 – Certificate of Appropriateness, states “a certificate of appropriateness shall be required prior to the construction, demolition, alteration, or relocation of, or addition to, any main or accessory structure or other designated feature in a historic district, or on the property of a designated landmark .” Additionally, VMC Table 16.614 -A: Review Authority and Public Notice provides that all new princ ipal structure s shall be reviewed by the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission (AHLC).
• Development Review (DVR)
2 is required for all permits for new construction. VMC Section 16.605.02 (A.1) procedures for a DVR states “when a development project requires a use permit, variance, or any other discretionary approval, the development review application shall be submitted to the planning division as part of the application for the use permit, variance, or other discretionary approval development review decisions shall be made by the review authority for the use permit, variance or any other discretionary permit. such as for a proposed single -family residence.” The AHLC will review and act on both the Certificate of Appropriateness and the DVR.
Provided the AHLC approves the Certificate of Appropriateness and DVR , the Planning and Development Services Director would be required to take action on a Hillside Development Permit for development of the site, since it has an average slope of 15 percent of greater.
II. General Plan Consistency
The General Plan 2040 Land Use Designation for the subject property is Primarily Single Family (R- SF). The General Plan characterizes this designation as follows:
The R
‐SF designation applies to residential neighborhoods primarily characterized by detached single-family homes, although some older areas have attached dwellings and small stores.
Dwellings typically have front and rear yards, as well as side setbacks. Permit ted land uses include single ‐family homes, in some instances duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and small commercial spaces, and public facilities such as schools, religious institutions, parks, and other community facilities appropriate within a resid ential neighborhood. The maximum permitted residential density in the R
‐SF designation is nine dwelling units per acre; however, in single ‐ family areas where accessory dwelling units are allowed, maximum permitted residential density is 12 dwelling units per acre.
1 VMC Chapter 16.614.09 – Certificate of Appropriateness 2 VMC Chapter 16.605 – Development Review
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
The project is consistent with the R-SF land use designation in that it proposes a detached single -family home with both a front and rear yard surrounded with existing residential development. A total of 0.89 units is allowed on the subject 3,250 square -foot lot. VMC Section 16.104.02 (A) General Rounding states, “fractions of one-half (0.5) or greater must be rounded up to the nearest whole number, and fractions of less than one-half (0.5) must be rounded down to the nearest whole number, except as otherwise provided.” The allowed number of units is therefore rounded up to a maximum of one unit permitted on the subject 3,250 square-foot lot.
Additionally, the project is consistent with applicable General Plan 2040 policies and actions, such as Policy NBE-1.11 - Historic Districts and NBE-2.8 - Infill Development (refer to Table 4 of Attachment 2).
III. Zoning Code Consistency
The project site has a zoning designation of Residential Low Density (RLD). The Zoning Code provides the following description for the RLD Zoning District:
The RLD Zoning District is for low -density residential areas in which permanent single unit residences, including detached and attached (duplexes and townhouses) units, are the primary use. Other residential types including cottages and bungalows around co urts may be seen in this district as well as small neighborhood serving retail. This district also allows a variety of neighborhood supportive services, public and educational facilities, open spaces and community facilities. The maximum permitted resident ial density is nine dwelling units per acre, excluding accessory dwelling units.
According to VMC Table 16.301 – A: Land Use Regulations, Single-Family, Detached is a permitted use in the Residential Low Density zoning district. The subject site is considered a legal non -conforming lot due to it being less than the minimum 5,000 square foot lot. VMC Section 16.105.05 – Non-conforming lots states, “C. A non- conforming lot within a residential zoning district shall conform to the maximum allowable density of that zoning district. However, at a minimum, one single -unit dwelling unit and customary acc essory buildings may be established on a non -conforming lot, provided the unit and accessory buildings conform to the current standards of the zoning district.”
The project is consistent with the applicable development standards in the RLD zoning district, such as setbacks, density, height, landscaping requirements, etc . (refer to Table 2 in Attachment 2). In addition to the standards mentioned above, the project is subject to the objective design standards for single unit housing (detached and attached) such as building entrances, street facing, building elevations, garage frontage, paving, and driveways (s ee Table 3 in Attachment 2 for compliance).
IV. Required Findings
Certificate of Appropriateness: VMC Section 16.614.09 (E), requires the review authority to make the applicable findings prior to granting the Certificate of Appropriateness:
1. The project is in conformance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties applicable to the project and any ordinance designating the historic district or landmark.
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
2. For projects located in a historic district, the proposed project is consistent with any conservation plan or specific plan adopted for the historic district.
3. For projects that require demolition, the architectural heritage and landmarks commission shall also find, as applicable:
a. It is not feasible to preserve or restore the structure after considering alternatives and balancing interest in preservation versus cost.
b. The retention of the structure constitutes a hazard to public safety. c. The structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program which substantially benefits the city. d. Retention of the structure in the judgment of the commission is not in the interest of the majority within the historic district.
e. Conditions of Approval. The director may impose or recommend that the architectural heritage and landmarks commission impose, such conditions in a certificate of appropriateness that are necessary to accomplish the purposes of this code and prevent or minimize adverse impacts upon the public. These conditions shall run with the land and not be affected by a change in ownership.
Development Review: Required Findings: VMC Section 16.605.03 requires the review authority to make the applicable findings prior to granting the Development Review:
1. Complies with all applicable specific standards and criteria of this Zoning Code;
2. Is consistent with the general plan and any applicable approved specific plan or planned development;
3. Complies with any design conditions, standards, or requirements imposed by a discretionary approval including but not limited to a major or minor use permit, variance, specific plan, planned development, or tentative map applicable to the project or the location where it is proposed;
4. Is in substantial compliance with any applicable adopted design guidelines;
5. Will serve to achieve groupings of structures that are well related one to another and which, taken together, will result in a well-composed urban design, with consideration given to site, height, arrangement, texture, material, color and appurtenances, the relation of these factors to other structures in the immediate area, and the relation of the development to the total setting as seen from key points in the surrounding area; only elements of design which have some significant relationship to outside appearance shall be considered;
6. Will be of a quality and demonstrates thoughtful site planning that will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area; and
7. That the project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this chapter.
Staff Analysis
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
Staff believes all the applicable Certificate of Appropriateness and Development Review findings above can be made for the proposed project. The specific findings and recommended statements of fact are incorporated into the attached Resolution in the Attachment 1 of this report. Below is a summary of the staff analysis of the project, separated by subject to facilitate review by the AHLC.
Architecture
As proposed, the project would be consistent with the development standards found in VMC Chapter 16.202. The architectural style proposed would be compatible with the existing residential neighborhood within the St.
Vincent’s Historic District. The development on the vacant narrow lot has been designed in a way to comply with the required setbacks, and the façade facing Carolina Street would be visually interesting due to the inclusion of a projected covered porch at the primary entrance as well as bay windows, and wooden architectural details of accent brackets and pickets.
Landscaping
The VMC requires 20% of the front yard to be landscaped and to have at least one street tree per every 50 feet of frontage. The proposed project has a 25-foot frontage which would include two trees and 282 square feet of landscaping in the front yard adjacent to Carolina Street. Throughout the site, there would be a total of 1,250 square feet of new drought-tolerant landscaping including fruit trees, lavender, rosemary and walkable kurapia groundcover.
Department of Interior Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties
Pursuant to VMC Section 16.38.260, any new construction within the St. Vincent’s Historic District requires a Certificate of Appropriateness. The St. Vincent’s Historic District has no formal, adopted design guidelines for new construction.
In 1976, the Federal Government created the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (“Secretary’s Standards”), which were formally published in 1978 for use in evaluating rehabilitation work in historic districts.
The Secretary’s Standards provided government officials, architects and homeowners with standardized guidance that could be provided country-wide when faced with rehabilitation and new construction in historic districts. In July of 1985, the AHLC waived the 1973 guidelines and informally adopted the Secretary’s Standards for use in evaluating new construction within the Architectural Heritage District.
The Secretary’s Standards are generally silent on entirely new structures. Nonetheless, they do include the following statements that staff has used to evaluate the proposed single-family residence (the standards are in bold, and staff’s determination follows in italics):
- Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken.
The proposed single-family residence is being constructed to be visually consistent with the neighborhood due to features such as siding, roof style, and double-hung windows, yet clearly recognizable as a modern building.
The building would be constructed with modern materials such as Hardie board siding and metal garage doors. Recreating a false sense of historical features is discouraged with new construction. The proposed Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
single-family residence is proposed to have similar scale and mass, height, setbacks and materials as homes within the district.
- Not recommended: Introducing a new building, streetscape or landscape feature that is out of scale, or otherwise inappropriate to the setting’s historic character.
The proposed single-family residence contributes to the character of neighborhood by respecting the scale and mass, site location, height, materials and orientation to other residences in the 100 block of Carolina Street, Lozier Alley, and the St. Vincent’s District in general. The height of the proposed building is 24 feet and nine inches, which is consistent with the average building height of 24 feet of buildings in close vicinity to the subject property. The location of the proposed building facing the street and its garage doors are orientated toward the alley to capture key characteristics of the neighborhood. The proposed setback from the front property line is consistent to the steep front yards of the other residences in the 100 block of Carolina Street.
The single-family residence will be visually compatible with the existing neighborhood due to the proposed materials horizontal lap siding and wood accents, with a covered porch surrounding the primary entrance, asphalt roof shingles and a combination of double-hung, slider and a large bay window structure encompassing both the first and second floors. Window and door placements on the proposed residence continues the established building rhythms along Carolina Street.
- Not recommended: Introducing new construction into a historic district that is visually incompatible or that destroys historic relationships within the district or the neighborhood.
As stated above, the proposed single-family residence would not be visually incompatible or destroy historic relationships within the district or the neighborhood. The single-family residence would be visually compatible with the existing neighborhood due to the proposed materials horizontal lap siding and wood accents, with a covered porch surrounding the primary entrance, asphalt roof shingles and a combination of double-hung, slider and a large bay window structure encompassing both the first and second floors.
Overall, the proposed project would be consistent with the existing streetscape of Carolina Street where there is a mix of architectural styles that range from Side Gable Vernacular and Modern Traditional, to more opulent Queen Anne and Eastlake buildings. The proposal would be architecturally compatible to the existing neighborhood however; it would clearly be perceived as 21st century construction.
Notice And Comments
On November 7, 2024, pursuant to VMC Section 16.602.08 – Noticing, a 14-calendar day notice of this hearing was published in the Times Herald, mailed to all active neighborhood groups and all property owners within 500 feet of the subject property, and any other local agency expected to provide water, wastewater treatment, or other essential facilities or services to the project, as well as to members of the AHLC, the applicant and property owner.
Staff has not received any comments or question as of writing this report.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines (Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Section 15303 (a) (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”). The project includes the construction of a new single-family residence.
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
None of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
Conclusion:
Based on the analysis contained in this staff report and the project’s consistency with General Plan 2040 and the Vallejo Municipal Code, staff recommends that the AHLC find the project exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a) and approve Certificate of Appropriateness (COA #22 -0007) and Development Review (DVR22-0031) subject to the Conditions of Approval provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution.
Expiration
Pursuant to VMC Section 16.602.12(A.2), approval of this Certificate of Appropriateness shall automatically expire 24 months after its approval unless authorized construction has commenced prior to the expiration date (November 21, 2026; if approved at this meeting).
Appeal Procedure
VMC Section 16.602.14, Appeals, the applicant, or any party adversely affected by the decision of the AHLC may, within ten days after the rendering of the decision of the AHLC appeal in writing to the City Council by filing a written appeal with a fee as prescribed in the Master Fee Schedule with the City Clerk. Such written appeal shall state the reason or reasons for the appeal and why the applicant believes he or she is adversely affected by the decision of the Planning Commission. Such appeal shall not be timely filed unless it is actually received by the City Clerk or designee no later than the close of business on the tenth calendar day after the rendition of the decision of the Planning Commission. If such date falls on a weekend or City holiday, then the deadline shall be extended until the next regular business day.
Notice of the appeal, including the date and time of the City Council’s consideration of the appeal, shall be sent by the City Clerk to all property owners within five hundred feet of the project boundary. The Council may affirm, reverse, or modify any decision of the Planning Commission that is appealed.
Levine Act: Government Code 84308
This item is subject to the Levine Act. City elected and appointed officials, including candidates for City elected office, (City Officers) who have received a campaign contribution of more than $250 within 12 months prior from a party, participant, or their representatives involved in this proceeding may do either of the following: (1) disclose the contribution on the record and recuse themselves from this proceeding; OR (2) return the portion of the contribution that exceeds $250 within 30 days from the time the elected official knew or should have known about the contribution and participate in the proceeding.
All parties, participants, and their representatives must disclose on the record of this proceeding any contribution of more than $250 made to the City Officers, such as the Mayor and/or Councilmembers, within 12 months prior to the date of the proceeding. City Officers are prohibited from accepting, soliciting, or directing a contribution of more than $250 from a party, participant, or their representatives during a proceeding and for 12 months following the date a final decision is rendered.
Date: November 21, 2024
Subject: NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE –
COA22-0007 AND DVR22-0031
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. AHLC 24-Xx
A. Exhibit A – Conditions of Approval
2. Supporting Information – Tables and Images
3. Project Plans
4. Material Board
CONTACT
Laura Solomon, Associate Planner
(707) 648-5436
[email protected]
CITY OF VALLEJO
ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARKS COMMISSION
RESOLUTION #24-__
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA) #22-0007 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR) #22-0031 TO DEVELOP AT NEW SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE
128 CAROLINA STREET
APN: 0055-121-120
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2017, the City Council adopted General Plan 2040; and
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject of the above-referenced proposed entitlements (Subject Property) has a General Plan 2040 land use designation of Primarily Single-Family; and
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2021, the City Council adopted a new Zoning Code and Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located in the Residential Low Density Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2022, Rob Kelly and Mario Vazquez, applicant, on behalf of Luis Rivera, property owner, filed Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR#22-0031) application (“application”), seeking approval for the construction of a new single- family dwelling and associated site improvements on a vacant lot at 128 Carolina Street (APN:0055-121-120) located in the St. Vincents Historic District; and
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2024, pursuant to Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) Section16.602.08(A), notice of this hearing was published in the Times Herald and mailed to all active neighborhood groups and property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and electronically mailed to the members of the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission and to the applicant; and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2024, the City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission (“Commission”), after giving all public notices required by State law and the Vallejo Municipal Code, conducted a duly noticed public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Commission considered testimony and evidence, both written and oral, provided at the public hearing, as well as other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the project, which are maintained in the offices of the City of Vallejo Planning Division; and
WHEREAS, based on the record of proceedings, the Commission makes the following findings:
I. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ((CEQA) Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”). The project proposes new construction within a historic district.
ATTACHMENT 1
None of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
II. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS PERMIT (VMC Section 16.614.09.E)
A. The project is in conformance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties applicable to the project and any ordinance designating the Historic District or Landmark.
FACTS IN SUPPORT: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are applicable to the project and are as follows:
1) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
Not Applicable. As this project proposes new construction of a single-family dwelling on a vacant lot within an established residential neighborhood, it proposes no changes to the use of a building, or character-defining materials, architectural details, therefore, Rehabilitation Standard 1 is not applicable.
2) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
Not Applicable. As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, no historic character of the property needs retention or preservation. Since nothing is being removed from the site, Rehabilitation Standard 2 is not applicable.
3) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, it proposes no conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings or historic periods. The proposed architectural style is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which will protect the integrity of the property and its environment. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 3.
4) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
There are no documented changes that have occurred at the property that would result in acquired historic significance. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 4.
5) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
Not Applicable. As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, there is no preservation of distinctive materials and therefore, Rehabilitation Standard 5 is not applicable.
6) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, it proposes no replacement of missing features. As proposed, the architectural design will be cohesive within the established neighborhood by matching materials such as horizontal siding and simple wood details accenting the front façade. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 6.
7) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
Not Applicable. The project proposes new construction on a vacant lot.
Rehabilitation Standard 7 does not apply to the proposed project.
8) Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
Not Applicable. The project proposes new construction on a vacant lot, therefore, there is a low chance of encountering archaeological resources. Rehabilitation Standard 8 does not apply to the proposed project.
9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, it will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the property. The proposed architectural style is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which will protect the integrity of the property and its environment. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 9.
10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
The proposed new construction has been designed in such a way as to retain the form and integrity of the property and its environment. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 10.
B. For projects located in a Historic District, the proposed project is consistent with any conservation plan or specific plan adopted for the Historic District.
The project site is within the St. Vincent’s Historic District for which there is no adopted conservation plan or specific plan.
C. For projects that require demolition, the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission shall also find, as applicable: (a) It is not feasible to preserve or restore the structure after considering alternatives and balancing interest in preservation versus cost. (b) The retention of the structure constitutes a hazard to public safety. (c) The structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program which substantially benefits the City. (4) Retention of the structure in the judgment of the commission is not in the interest of the majority within the Historic District.
Not applicable. There is no demolition proposed as part of this project.
III. Development Review Findings
VMC Section 16.605.03 (“Findings Required”) requires the decision hearing body make the following findings prior to granting a Development Review approval (the findings are in bold, and staff’s determination follows in italics):
1. Complies with all applicable specific standards and criteria of this Zoning Code.
The proposed project is located on a property zoned Residential Low Density (RLD).
The RLD zone is intended for low-density residential areas in which permanent single unit residences, including detached and attached (duplexes and townhouses) units, are the primary use. The project is consistent with the RLD zoning district in terms of land use, in that it involves the construction of a new single-family residence within an established neighborhood. The project is consistent with the applicable development standards, such as setbacks, lot coverage, building height, objective design standards, etc. as outlined in VMC Title 16, as proposed and conditioned.
2. Is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable approved Specific Plan or Planned Development.
The site has a General Plan designation of Primarily Single Family (R-SF), which is consistent with the current RLD zoning of the site. The R- SF General Plan designation applies to residential neighborhoods primarily characterized by detached single
‐ family homes. Dwellings typically have front and rear yards, as well as side setbacks. Permitted land uses include single‐family homes, in some instances duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and small commercial spaces, and public facilities such as schools, religious institutions, parks, and other community facilities appropriate within a residential neighborhood. The maximum permitted residential density in the R ‐SF designation is 12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed new dwelling is consistent with the permitted density range. The project is consistent with R-SF land use designation in that it involves the construction of a single-family residence within an established neighborhood that is primarily characterized by a mixture of detached single-family residences or multifamily residential. The buildings and its uses are consistent with applicable actions and policies of the General Plan, such as Policy NBE-1.11 - Historic Districts and NBE-2.8 - Infill Development, and the General Plan Designation.
3. C
omplies with any design conditions, standards, or requirements imposed by a discretionary approval including but not limited to a Major or Minor Use Permit, Variance, Specific Plan, Planned Development, or tentative map applicable to the project or the location where it is proposed.
The proposed single-unit dwelling and associated improvements will be consistent with the applicable development standards outlined in VMC Title 16 as proposed and
conditioned. Since the subject parcel is within the St. Vincents Historic District, the required Certificate of Appropriateness is also under review with this project. A Minor Use Permit, required to process the Hillside Development standards for development on a slope greater than 15%, is under review as part of this project, to be approved by the Director.
4. Is in substantial compliance with any applicable adopted design guidelines.
VMC Section 16.202.03 – Design Standards for single-unit housing (detached and attached), provides objective and subjective design standards as detailed in Table 3 of Attachment 2. As proposed, the dwelling complies with all applicable development and design standards for single-unit dwellings within the RLD zone.
5. Will serve to achieve groupings of structures that are well related one to another and which, taken together, will result in a well-composed urban design, with consideration given to site, height, arrangement, texture, material, color and appurtenances, the relation of these factors to other structures in the immediate area, and the relation of the development to the total setting as seen from key points in the surrounding area; only elements of design which have some significant relationship to outside appearance shall be considered.
The proposed dwelling has been designed with consideration to the existing structures within the nearby vicinity. The dwelling features comparable setbacks (to the extent feasible with current setback standards) and massing and incorporates desirable features such as a covered front porch, high degree of fenestration, quality exterior materials, and landscaping improvements which overall relate well to other structures in the neighborhood. The new dwelling will fill a currently vacant lot within an existing neighborhood and will work to complete the urban framework of the neighborhood.
6. Will be of a quality and demonstrates thoughtful site planning that will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area.
The proposed project demonstrates thoughtful site planning in that it meets all applicable development standards required and as conditioned, and the proposed dwelling is sited to blend with the existing adjacent structures with respect to setback, massing, and architectural design. Therefore, it will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area.
7. That the project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this Chapter.
The proposed project is exempt under Section 15303 (a) (Class 3 “New Construction”) of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, the City has considered whether any of the exceptions found under Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines exist, which would preclude the project from being categorically exempt from CEQA.
The project is consistent with Section 15300.2 as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on an open a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
III. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROJECT AT 128 CAROLINA STREET:
NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED that the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission hereby finds the project to be exempt from environment review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303(c) (Class 3: “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”) and , APPROVES Certificate of Appropriateness (COA#22-0007) and Development Review (DVR#22-0031) based on the analysis contained in the staff report and the findings contained herein and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as an exhibit.
VII. VOTE
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commission of the City of Vallejo, State of California, on the 21st day of November 2024 by the following vote to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_______________________________________________________
ANGELA MCDONALD, CHAIRPERSON
City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission
Attest:
_______________________________
CESAR OROZCO, SECRETARY
City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission
Exhibit A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATNESS (COA22-0007)
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031)
128 CAROLINA STREET
APN # 0055-121-120
PERMIT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a new two-story 1,732 square foot single-family residence, with an attached 280 square-foot one-car garage on a vacant lot within the Saint (St.) Vincent Historic District. Access to the garage will be off Lozier Alley. The residence façade will have Hardie lap siding and wood accent brackets both painted different shades of gray, with black vinyl windows. The project also includes 1,249.52 square feet of new landscaping along Carolina Street and throughout the site.
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Laura Solomon, Associate Planner | [email protected] | (707) 648-5391
Pre-Building Permit:
1. Prior to building permit submittal, this project must receive approval of the required Minor Use Permit (MUP23-0018) per Vallejo Municipal Code Chapter 16.212 - Hillside Development Standards.
2. Prior to building permit submittal, submit a numbered list to the Planning Division with a written response on how each condition of project approval contained in this report will be satisfied. The list should be submitted to the project planner who will coordinate further development of the project. The approved conditions shall also be included with the building permit set, after the cover sheet.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the Planning Division shall confirm that the building permit drawings and subsequent construction substantially conform with the approved Planning entitlement.
4. Prior to building permit issuance, the Planning Division shall confirm that the building permit, grading permit and all other drawings and documents substantially conform with the documents and/or representations, whether oral or written that were presented to and approved by the Planning and Development Services Director. Pursuant to VMC 16.602.10.b the site plan, floor plans, building elevations and/or any additional information or representations, whether oral or written, indicating the proposed structure or manner of operation submitted with an application or submitted during the approval process shall be deemed conditions of approval. Any approval may be subject to requirements that the applicant guarantees, warranties, or ensures compliance with the plans and conditions in all respects.
During Construction:
5. Construction activities shall be managed in compliance with the following requirements:
a. Site Watering. During the construction of a project, all portions of the site shall be watered as necessary to reduce emissions of dust and other particulate matter, and all stockpiles shall be covered.
b. Maintenance. Streets and sidewalks shall be made dirt free at the completion of construction.
c. Noise. All construction and transport equipment shall be muffled in accordance with state and federal laws.
d. Emissions. Construction and transport equipment shall be operated to minimize exhaust emissions. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary.
2 e. Hours of Operation. Grading and pile driving operations within ¼ mile of residential units shall be limited to between 8:00 am and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays to ensure compliance with the requirements for construction activity in Subsection 16.502.12.D.1., Maximum Noise Level for Temporary Construction Activity, or as otherwise restricted as part of an approval.
f. Water Run-off. All water run-off from construction sites shall be controlled. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary and shall comply with Chapter 12.41 of the Vallejo Municipal Code.
6. No person shall make, or cause to suffer, or permit to be made upon any public property, public right-of-way or private property, any excessive noise, annoying noise, amplified sound or vibrations that are physically annoying to reasonable persons of normal sensitivity or that are so harsh or so prolonged or unnatural or unusual in their use, time or place as to cause or contribute to the unnecessary and unreasonable discomfort of any persons of normal sensitivity located at the lot line of the property from which these noises emanate or that interfere with the peace and comfort of residents or their guests, or the operators or customers in places of business in the vicinity, or that may detrimentally or adversely affect such residences or places of business. (VMC Section 16.502.09 (C))
7. C
onstruction, demolition, and related loading/unloading activities that may generate noise shall be limited to the following: 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. in Monday- Friday, Saturday 9 am- 6 pm. No construction is to occur on Sunday or federal holidays. Construction equipment noise levels shall not exceed the City’s maximum allowable noise levels
8. The fencing for construction sites shall not be installed until a building permit or grading permit has been issued and shall be removed prior to final inspection. In the event that the building permits expire before the construction is completed, the Planning and Development Services Director may issue a temporary use permit pursuant to Chapter 16.339, Temporary Uses, to allow the fencing to remain for a longer period of time. (VMC Section 16.505.08 (B))
Landscaping:
9. Prior to first final building inspection, the landscape architect shall provide a Certificate of Completion and Certificate of Installation according to the Landscape Documentation in accordance with VMC Chapter 16.504.09: Water Efficient Landscape Requirements. The documentation shall include the following:
a. Irrigation Scheduling (VMC Section 16.504.11)
b. Schedule of Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance (VMC Section 16.504.08) c. Landscape Irrigation Audit Report (VMC Section 16.504.13) d. Soil Management Report (VMC Section 16.504.10)
10. Prior to first final building inspection, all landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the landscape architect shall provide written verification that the landscaping and irrigation have been installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans, particularly with respect to size, health, number and species of plants, and the overall design concept.
11. All landscaping shall be permanently maintained in a healthy and thriving condition at all times, in compliance with the approved landscape plan. Irrigation systems and their components shall be maintained in a fully functional manner consistent with the original approved design or upgraded to reflect current best practices for water efficiency. Regular maintenance shall include but is not limited to:
a. A djusting, checking, and repairing irrigation equipment; resetting automatic controllers; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; adding/replenishing fertilizer, mulch, soil
3 amendments; insect control; the replacement of dead or diseased plants; pruning; watering; and weeding all landscaped areas.
b. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to maintain the effective functioning of solar energy facilities and passive solar design features installed both on site and on adjacent properties.
c. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to keep pedestrian and bicycle paths clear. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (A))
d. Pruning, cultivating, weeding, fertilizing, replacement of plants, and watering on a regular basis.
e. Pruning or removal of overgrown vegetation, cultivated or uncultivated, that may harbor rats, vermin, or other nuisances, or otherwise be detrimental to neighboring properties. f. The removal of dead, decayed, diseased, or hazardous trees, weeds and debris that create an unsightly appearance and may be dangerous to public safety and welfare or detrimental to neighboring properties or property values. Compliance shall be by removal, replacement, or maintenance.
g. Landscaping (trees, shrubs, ground cover, turf, etc.) which, due to accident, damage, disease, lack of maintenance, or other cause, fails to show a healthy appearance and growth, shall be replaced. Replacement plants shall conform to all standards that govern the original planting installation, approved landscaping plan, or as approved by the director. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (D))
12. Li
tter shall be removed from all landscaped areas in a timely fashion. (VMC Section16.504.08 (B))
13. Turf areas shall be mowed on a regular basis and be kept green. Accumulation of leaves, twigs, bark, and other similar materials shall be removed on a regular basis. Planting areas shall be kept free of weeds at all times. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (C))
Fences, Walls and Screening:
14. Fencing and walls shall be continuously maintained with no sign of rust or disrepair. Any graffiti shall be removed within forty-eight hours of discovery by the property manager. (VMC Section
16.505.02 (B)).
15. All exterior mechanical equipment, whether on a roof, on the side of a structure, or located on the ground, shall be screened from public view. Exterior mechanical equipment to be screened includes, without limitation, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork, transformers, smoke exhaust fans, water meters, backflow preventers, service entry section, back-up and emergency generators, and similar utility devices. a. Screening shall be architecturally integrated into the main structure with regard to materials, color, shape, and size to appear as an integral part of the building or structure. b. Equipment shall be screened on all sides, and screening materials shall be opaque. c. When screening with plants, evergreen types of vegetation shall be planted and maintained. Plant material sizes and types shall be selected and installed so that, at the time of building occupancy, such plants effectively screen their respective equipment. d. The use of wood expanded metal lath, and chain link for the purpose of screening is prohibited. (VMC Section 16.505.10)
Lighting:
16. Lighting shall be designed, located, and installed to be directed downward or toward structures, be shielded or fully shielded, and shall be well-maintained in order to prevent glare, light trespass (unwanted light on adjacent lots and public rights-of-way), and light pollution to the maximum extent feasible. No permanently installed lighting shall blink, flash, or be of unusually high
4 intensity or brightness, as determined by the Planning and Development Services Director. (VMC Section 16.506.04 (B))
Overall Project:
17. This entitlement shall automatically expire within two years of the effective date of this approval, on November 21, 2026, unless the use is exercised or extended (VMC Section 16.602.12 (A)).
Issuance of a building permit shall constitute exercise of rights; provided, however, that, unless otherwise specified as a condition of project approval, the permit shall expire if:
a. The building permit expires.
b. Final inspection is not completed, or certificate of occupancy issued within the time specified as a condition of project approval.
c. The rights granted under the permit are not exercised within one year following the earliest to occur of the following: issuance of a certificate of occupancy; or if no certificate of occupancy is required, the last required final inspection for the new construction. (VMC Section 16.602.11 (B))
18. The Planning and Development Services Director may approve a one-year extension of any permit or approval granted for a residential or non-residential project under the Zoning Code upon receipt of a written application and fees received fifteen calendar days) before the expiration date with the required fee prior to expiration of the permit. (VMC Section 16.602.11 (C.1))
19. No c
hange in the use for which a permit or other approval has been issued is permitted, in accordance with Government Code section 66411.7.
20. For new developments, utilities including, but not limited to, all electrical, telephone, cable television, fiber-optic cable, gas, water, sewer, irrigation/recycled water, and similar distribution lines providing direct service to a project shall be installed underground within the site. This requirement may be waived by the Planning and Development Services Director upon determining that underground installation is infeasible, or the electrical line is otherwise exempt from an under-grounding requirement. (VMC Section 16.501.10)
21. A pplicant shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend City, its officers, officials, directors, employees, agents, volunteers and affiliates and each of them from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages, costs, expenses, actual attorney’s fees, applicant’s fees, expert fees, losses or liability, in law or in equity, of every kind and nature whatsoever arising out of or in connection with Applicant’s operations, or any subcontractor’s operations, to be performed under this agreement for Applicant’s or subcontractor’s tort negligence including active or passive, or strict negligence, including but not limited to personal injury including, but not limited to bodily injury, emotional injury, sickness or disease, or death to persons and/or damage to property of anyone, including loss of use thereof, caused or alleged to be caused by any act or omission of Applicant, or any subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for the full period of time allowed by the law, regardless to any limitation by insurance, with the exception of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. No modification of the project, any application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in pr ocessing methods shall alter the Applicant’s indemnity obligation.
B. B
uilding Division
Staff Contact: Sergio Caldera | [email protected] | (707) 648-4383
1. Plans and permits will be required for building, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical work per California Code of Regulations, Title 24 and applicable City Ordinance in effect at the time of the completed Building Permit application date and required fees shall be paid at the time of application.
5 2. Soils report will be required for foundation design plan reviews.
3. 2022 California Code of Regulations applies if permit application(s) are received before the end of 2025. After 12-31-2025 the 2025 California Code of Regulations will apply.
4. Fees will apply to the current fiscal year of permit applications
C. Water Department
Staff Contact: Melissa Cansdale | [email protected] | (707) 553-7223
1. CODE REQUIREMENTS. All code requirements as stated in Title 11 of the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) and Vallejo Standard Specifications and Standard Drawings adopted in 2011 (VSSSD) that apply to this project shall be conformed to. The project is being made aware of codes that require extra attention by the following items.
2. WATER SYSTEM PLANS (VSSSD Section 4.1). All water system improvements shall be consistent with the latest Vallejo Water System Master Plan, prepared by Kennedy/Jenks Engineers. Prior to Improvement plan approval and building permit issuance, water system improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Department for review and approval, and shall contain at least:
a. Location and size of fire sprinkler service connection(s). b. Location and size of existing and proposed domestic service connection(s). c. Location and size of irrigation service connection(s), if any. d. Location of fire hydrants.
e. Location of structures with respect to existing public water system improvements, such as mains, meters, etc.
f. Location and size of any new water mains.
g. Location and size of backflow prevention devices (required on water service connections to irrigation systems, certain commercial water users, and to commercial fire sprinkler systems, per City Ordinance 922 N.C. (2d).
3. F
IRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Fire flow requirements of the Fire department shall be complied with. Fire flow at no less than 25 psi residual pressure shall be available within 1,000 feet of any structure. One half of the fire flow shall be available within 300 feet of any structure.
a. For single family residential units, the fire flow is 1,500 gpm. b. For other developments, see the Vallejo Water System Master Plan, 2015, prepared by Kennedy Jenks.
4. HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Prior to Improvement Plan and building permit issuance, hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Water Director demonstrating that the fire flow requirements are complied with.
5. FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Fire hydrant placement and fire sprinkler system installation, if any, shall meet the requirements of the Fire Department. For combined water and fire services, the requirements of both the Fire Department and the Vallejo Water System Master Plan, with latest revisions, shall be satisfied.
6. WATER EASEMENTS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Easements shall be granted for all water system improvements installed outside the public right-of-way in the City's Standard Form for Grant of Water Line Easement with the following widths:
a. 15 ft. wide (minimum) for water mains.
b. 10 ft. wide (minimum) for fire hydrants, water meters, backflow preventers, double detector check valves, etc.
6 c. Other facilities will be reviewed by the Water Department.
7. WATER METERS (VMC 11.04.110 and 11.16.090). Each parcel shall be metered separately and shall have a separate fire sprinkler service connection.
8. WATER SERVICE BONDS AND FEES (VMC Sections 11.16, 11.18, 11.20 and 11.24). Water service shall be provided by the City of Vallejo following completion of the required water system improvements and payment of applicable fees. Performance and payment bonds shall be provided to the City of Vallejo prior to construction of water system improvements. Fees include those fees specified in the Vallejo Municipal Code including connection and elevated storage fees, etc., and fees for tapping, tie-ins, inspections, disinfection, construction water, and other services provided by the City with respect to the water system improvements. The Water Department may be contacted for a description of applicable fees. These fees have to be paid prior to issuance of the building permit.
9. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
a) Apply and pay for Fire Flow Test with the Water Department in order to determine operation of sprinkler system and final service size.
b) Provide water meter and service sizing calculations per most recent California Plumbing Code, include a water fixture count table.
c) As of J anuary 1, 2018, all units in multi-family, commercial, or combination thereof, buildings shall be individually metered (if existing plumbing allows or is re-configured) by the City, additional meters at the owner/applicant’s expense; or, master metered by the City, and sub-metered by the property owner, with approved/certified meters. Per California Senate Bill 7 (SB7).
10. WATER SYSTEM INSTALLATION. Prior to occupancy or final building inspection, install water system improvements as required. Backflow device/s where required shall be installed in areas hidden from public view and/or shall be mitigated by landscaping.
D. Fire Prevention
Staff Contact: Moises Zarate | [email protected] | (707) 648-4565
1. All buildings, facilities, and improvements shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of approved access roadways.
2. Prior to Final Inspection, in accordance with the 2019 CFC, approved address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall clearly contrast with their background.
The characters shall be a minimum of 4" high with a 1/2" stroke. The size of the building and distance or location of the address numbers from the roadway may necessitate larger numbers.
3. All roof material shall be rated class "C" or better.
4. Provide smoke detectors in all sleeping rooms and common hallways. Detectors shall be hardwired, interconnected with battery backup. Electrical circuits supplying detectors shall be separate dedicated lines with no other devices on the circuits.
5. Provide carbon monoxide detectors outside each sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of all bedrooms.
6. Emergency escape and rescue openings are required in each bedroom in accordance with the 2019 CA Building Code.
7 7. An NFPA 13D automatic fire sprinkler system is required for all new residential structures, please submit 2 sets of plans and calculations to the Fire Prevention Office and obtain a permit prior to installation. Adequate pressure and GPM verification is required prior to residential construction.
8. Provide a one-hour fire separation between the R-3 and U Occupancy.
9. A final inspection from the Fire Prevention Division is required.
E. Vallejo Flood and Wastewater
Staff Contact: Mariah Henderson | [email protected] | (707) 652-7810
1. Utility site plan will need to show required two-way cleanout within 2 feet of the foundation where waste plumbing exits the building and District cleanout near the public right of way.
2. Add the following notes to plans:
a. All sewer work shall conform to the Vallejo Wastewater Standards, b. Call Vallejo Wastewater a minimum of 24 hours in advance for inspections.
3. Applicant will be required to pay applicable fees and obtain VFWD Connection Permit upon final plan approval.
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
1 Table 1 – Surrounding Uses
Direction Land Uses
North Residential
Lozier Alley
East Residential
Branciforte Street
South Residential
Carolina Street
West Residential
Butte Street
Table 2 – Residential Low Density
Development Standards (VMC Chapter 16.202)
Table Section Development Standard Proposal Compliant
Table 16.202-A: Maximum
Density (units per acre) 9 1 Yes
Table 16.202-A: Minimum
Lot Size (sq. ft.) 5,000 sq. ft. 3,250 sq. ft. Existing, Legal Non- conforming
Table 16.202-A: Minimum
Lot Width 50 ft. 25 ft. Existing, Legal Non-
conforming
Table 16.202-A: Maximum
Height (ft.) 35 ft. 24.75 ft. Yes
Table 16.202-A: Street
Frontage 15 ft. 50 ft. Yes
Table 16.202-A: Interior
Side 5 or 10 ft. 5 ft.
Yes, for Narrow Lots,
the setback may be
10% of the lot width
Table 16.202-A: Rear 5 ft. 20 ft. Yes
Table 16.202-A: Garage
Front/Rear 20 or 5 ft. 20 ft. from rear Yes
Table 16.202-A: Maximum
Lot Coverage (% of Lot) 50% 26.6% Yes
Table 16.202-A: Covered
Parking 1 1 Yes
Table 16.202-A: Required
Landscaping 20% of Front Yard 75%
(281.5 sq. ft.) Yes
Table 16.204- A: Street
Trees (ft. frontage)
1 per 50 ft. of frontage
25 ft. frontage = 1
street tree
1 Yes
Table 16.202-A – Fence
Height Limit Rear and Side 6 ft. 6 ft. Yes
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
2 Table 3 – Design Standards for single-unit housing (detached and attached) Development Standards (VMC Chapter 16.203)
Code
Section Development Standard Proposal Compliant
16.202.03.A
Design of
Building
Additions
Rooflines, exterior materials, windows,
railings, porches, and other design
elements shall be designed in the same
style as the existing building unless an
alternative design is approved
through Chapter 16.605, Development
Review.
This project is new construction
and is designed to be compatible
with the existing established
residential neighborhood.
Yes
16.202.03.B
Building
Entrances
The principal entry shall be in a visible
location facing the street and shall
incorporate a projection (e.g., porch) or
recess, with a minimum depth of five
feet. A reduction in the depth of the
projection or an alternative design that
create a welcoming entry feature facing
the street, such as a trellis or
landscaped courtyard entry, and other
design approach that is typical of the
architectural style of the building based
on documentation provided by the
applicant may be approved subject to
the provisions of Chapter 16.605,
Development Review. (See Figure
16.202-D for example.)
The principal entry is in a visible
location facing Carolina Street
through a covered porch that
projects 5 feet from the structure
creating a welcoming architectural
style.
Yes
16.202.03.C
Architectural
Articulation
Buildings shall include design features
to create visual variety and avoid a
large-scale and bulky appearance.
1. No street-facing facade shall run in a
continuous plane of more than twenty-
five feet without a window or a minimum
four-foot projection, offset, or recess of
the building wall at least one foot in
depth. Building entrances and front
porches, and projections into required
front or street side yards such as
stoops, bays, overhangs, chimneys, and
trellises count towards this requirement.
2. Building elevations abutting street
side yards shall be designed to provide
at least one horizontal plane break of at
least 3 feet, and one vertical break of at
least one foot. Alternative designs to
create consistency with the architectural
style of the building may be approved
subject to the provisions of Chapter
16.605, Development Review.
3. Materials. All materials shall allow for
long-term durability and appearance.
The exterior use of plywood or
unfinished aluminum as siding materials
is prohibited unless approved by the
director following review and approval
As proposed the building façade
features multiple projections
including a 5-foot-deep covered
porch and a bay window which
creates visual variety and avoids a
bulky appearance. The use of
Hardie siding and high-quality
paint will provide long-term
durability and appearance.
Yes
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
3 under Chapter 16.605, Development
Review.
16.202.03.D
Garage
Frontage
1. Where an attached garage is located
on the front half of the lot and garage
doors face a street, garage width shall
not exceed fifty percent of the width of
the front facade of the building (forty
percent on lots wider than one hundred
feet). (See Figure 16.202-E)
2. On front facades with both a two- car
garage and a separate single car
garage, (a total of three garage doors)
the facades of the two garages must be
offset a minimum of two feet .
The garage is located in the rear
half of the lot and faces the alley
behind the residential structure.
Yes
16.202.03.E
Paving
The maximum amount of paving
(impervious surface) in street -facing
yards is fifty percent of the required
yard.
As proposed the front yard will
have no impervious surface and
be more than 50% landscaped
with a pervious gravel walkway
leading to the residential
structure.
Yes
16.202.03.F
Driveways
In addition to any other applicable
requirements of Chapter 16.508 , Off-
Street Parking and Loading, curb cuts
and driveways shall comply with the
following:
1. Driveway approaches (curb cuts) are
permitted only to provide access to
garages, carports and parking spaces.
2. A maximum of one driveway up to 20
feet wide is permitted to serve a single
unit. Driveways serving two or more
units shall be the minimum width
required by the Zoning Code.
3. All driveways shall be setback at
least 5 feet from side property lines.
4. Driveways must have minimum
three-foot wide planted area along a
side or rear lot line
The proposed driveway approach
is designed to access the
attached garage from the alley.
The driveway will be setback 5
feet from side property lines with
planted areas along each side.
16.202.03.G
Alley
Access
A detached garage or carport is
permitted to have access to the alley if:
1. The garage or carport entrance is
setback a minimum of 5 feet from the
rear property line;
2. The garage door does not cross the
property line when opened or closed;
3. The alley is paved; and
4. The director or traffic engineer finds
that such access will not adversely
affect vehicle or pedestrian use of the
alley
The garage is attached. Yes
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
4 Table 4 – General Plan 2040 Policies and Actions
Policies and Actions Staff’s Analysis
- Policy NBE-1.11 – Historic
Districts.
Preserve the integrity of the City’s historic
districts, including downtown, as physical
changes occur within them.
- The proposed single-family residence
architectural style preserves the integrity of
the St. Vincent’s Historic District due to its use
of materials and textures similar to the
features, size, scale, and massing of the
surrounding neighborhood.
- Policy NBE-2.8 Infill Development.
Promote infill development targets vacant
and underutilized sites for community-
desired and enhancing uses that is
compatible with surrounding uses.
- Underutilized vacant lot within a developed
historical district.
- The single-family residence will enhance and
is compatible with the surrounding uses, which
are primarily single-family residences.
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
5 Figure 2 – St. Vincent Historic District
Figure 3 – Existing Conditions
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
6 Figure 4 – Proposed Front Elevation
Attachment 2 – Supporting Information (Tables and Images)
7 Figure 5 – Proposed Landscaping Plan
Site Data
Drawing Index
Scope of Work
Owner
Code Requirements
Vicinity Map
W W
OH OH
SS SS
GAS GAS
OH
OH
OH
OH
SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
W W W W W W W W W
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
Site and Floor Plans
1/8"=1'-0" U.O.N
New Floor
Plans
1/4"=1'-0"
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
Exterior Elevations
1/4"=1'-0"
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
Sections
1/4"=1'-0"
Landscaping
Color Scheme and
Materials
Hardie Siding with Wood Trim
128 Carolina
Exterior
Finises
Black Vinyl
Windows
New Hope Gray
by Benjamin Moore
Body ColorTrim Color
128 Carolina
Exterior
Finishes
Attachment 4 – Material Board
1 CITY OF VALLEJO
ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE AND LANDMARKS COMMISSION
RESOLUTION #24-03
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS (COA) #22-0007 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR) #22-0031 TO DEVELOP AT NEW SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENCE
128 CAROLINA STREET
APN: 0055-121-120
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
RECITALS
WHEREAS, on August 29, 2017, the City Council adopted General Plan 2040; and
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject of the above-referenced proposed entitlements (Subject Property) has a General Plan 2040 land use designation of Primarily Single-Family; and
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2021, the City Council adopted a new Zoning Code and Zoning Map; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is located in the Residential Low Density Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2022, Rob Kelly and Mario Vazquez, applicant, on behalf of Luis Rivera, property owner, filed Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR#22-0031) application (“application”), seeking approval for the construction of a new single- family dwelling and associated site improvements on a vacant lot at 128 Carolina Street (APN:0055-121-120) located in the St. Vincents Historic District; and
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2024, pursuant to Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) Section16.602.08(A), notice of this hearing was published in the Times Herald and mailed to all active neighborhood groups and property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and electronically mailed to the members of the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission and to the applicant; and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2024, the City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission (“Commission”), after giving all public notices required by State law and the Vallejo Municipal Code, conducted a duly noticed public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Commission considered testimony and evidence, both written and oral, provided at the public hearing, as well as other documents contained in the record of proceedings relating to the project, which are maintained in the offices of the City of Vallejo Planning Division; and
WHEREAS, based on the record of proceedings, the Commission makes the following findings:
I. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDING
The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ((CEQA) Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000, et seq.) pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3, “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”). The project proposes new construction within a historic district.
ATTACHMENT 1
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
None of the exceptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply, as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
II. FINDINGS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS PERMIT (VMC Section 16.614.09.E)
A. The project is in conformance with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties applicable to the project and any ordinance designating the Historic District or Landmark.
FACTS IN SUPPORT: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are applicable to the project and are as follows:
1) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.
Not Applicable. As this project proposes new construction of a single-family dwelling on a vacant lot within an established residential neighborhood, it proposes no changes to the use of a building, or character-defining materials, architectural details, therefore, Rehabilitation Standard 1 is not applicable.
2) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.
Not Applicable. As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, no historic character of the property needs retention or preservation. Since nothing is being removed from the site, Rehabilitation Standard 2 is not applicable.
3) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.
As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, it proposes no conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings or historic periods. The proposed architectural style is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which will protect the integrity of the property and its environment. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 3.
4) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.
There are no documented changes that have occurred at the property that would result in acquired historic significance. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 4.
5) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
Not Applicable. As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, there is no preservation of distinctive materials and therefore, Rehabilitation Standard 5 is not applicable.
6) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.
As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, it proposes no replacement of missing features. As proposed, the architectural design will be cohesive within the established neighborhood by matching materials such as horizontal siding and simple wood details accenting the front façade. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 6.
7) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.
Not Applicable. The project proposes new construction on a vacant lot.
Rehabilitation Standard 7 does not apply to the proposed project.
8) Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.
Not Applicable. The project proposes new construction on a vacant lot, therefore, there is a low chance of encountering archaeological resources. Rehabilitation Standard 8 does not apply to the proposed project.
9) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.
As this project is new construction on a vacant lot, it will not destroy historic materials, features, or spatial relationships that characterize the property. The proposed architectural style is compatible with the features, size, scale, and massing of the surrounding neighborhood, which will protect the integrity of the property and its environment. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 9.
10) New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
The proposed new construction has been designed in such a way as to retain the form and integrity of the property and its environment. The proposed project complies with Rehabilitation Standard 10.
B. For projects located in a Historic District, the proposed project is consistent with any conservation plan or specific plan adopted for the Historic District.
The project site is within the St. Vincent’s Historic District for which there is no adopted conservation plan or specific plan.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
C. For projects that require demolition, the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission shall also find, as applicable: (a) It is not feasible to preserve or restore the structure after considering alternatives and balancing interest in preservation versus cost. (b) The retention of the structure constitutes a hazard to public safety. (c) The structure is a deterrent to a major improvement program which substantially benefits the City. (4) Retention of the structure in the judgment of the commission is not in the interest of the majority within the Historic District.
Not applicable. There is no demolition proposed as part of this project.
III. Development Review Findings
VMC Section 16.605.03 (“Findings Required”) requires the decision hearing body make the following findings prior to granting a Development Review approval (the findings are in bold, and staff’s determination follows in italics):
1. Complies with all applicable specific standards and criteria of this Zoning Code.
The proposed project is located on a property zoned Residential Low Density (RLD).
The RLD zone is intended for low-density residential areas in which permanent single unit residences, including detached and attached (duplexes and townhouses) units, are the primary use. The project is consistent with the RLD zoning district in terms of land use, in that it involves the construction of a new single-family residence within an established neighborhood. The project is consistent with the applicable development standards, such as setbacks, lot coverage, building height, objective design standards, etc. as outlined in VMC Title 16, as proposed and conditioned.
2. Is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable approved Specific Plan or Planned Development.
The site has a General Plan designation of Primarily Single Family (R-SF), which is consistent with the current RLD zoning of the site. The R- SF General Plan designation applies to residential neighborhoods primarily characterized by detached single
‐ family homes. Dwellings typically have front and rear yards, as well as side setbacks. Permitted land uses include single‐family homes, in some instances duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and small commercial spaces, and public facilities such as schools, religious institutions, parks, and other community facilities appropriate within a residential neighborhood. The maximum permitted residential density in the R ‐SF designation is 12 dwelling units per acre. The proposed new dwelling is consistent with the permitted density range. The project is consistent with R-SF land use designation in that it involves the construction of a single-family residence within an established neighborhood that is primarily characterized by a mixture of detached single-family residences or multifamily residential. The buildings and its uses are consistent with applicable actions and policies of the General Plan, such as Policy NBE-1.11 - Historic Districts and NBE-2.8 - Infill Development, and the General Plan Designation.
3. C
omplies with any design conditions, standards, or requirements imposed by a discretionary approval including but not limited to a Major or Minor Use Permit, Variance, Specific Plan, Planned Development, or tentative map applicable to the project or the location where it is proposed.
The proposed single-unit dwelling and associated improvements will be consistent with the applicable development standards outlined in VMC Title 16 as proposed and Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
conditioned. Since the subject parcel is within the St. Vincents Historic District, the required Certificate of Appropriateness is also under review with this project. A Minor Use Permit, required to process the Hillside Development standards for development on a slope greater than 15%, is under review as part of this project, to be approved by the Director.
4. Is in substantial compliance with any applicable adopted design guidelines.
VMC Section 16.202.03 – Design Standards for single-unit housing (detached and attached), provides objective and subjective design standards as detailed in Table 3 of Attachment 2. As proposed, the dwelling complies with all applicable development and design standards for single-unit dwellings within the RLD zone.
5. Will serve to achieve groupings of structures that are well related one to another and which, taken together, will result in a well-composed urban design, with consideration given to site, height, arrangement, texture, material, color and appurtenances, the relation of these factors to other structures in the immediate area, and the relation of the development to the total setting as seen from key points in the surrounding area; only elements of design which have some significant relationship to outside appearance shall be considered.
The proposed dwelling has been designed with consideration to the existing structures within the nearby vicinity. The dwelling features comparable setbacks (to the extent feasible with current setback standards) and massing and incorporates desirable features such as a covered front porch, high degree of fenestration, quality exterior materials, and landscaping improvements which overall relate well to other structures in the neighborhood. The new dwelling will fill a currently vacant lot within an existing neighborhood and will work to complete the urban framework of the neighborhood.
6. Will be of a quality and demonstrates thoughtful site planning that will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area.
The proposed project demonstrates thoughtful site planning in that it meets all applicable development standards required and as conditioned, and the proposed dwelling is sited to blend with the existing adjacent structures with respect to setback, massing, and architectural design. Therefore, it will serve to protect the value of private and public investments in the area.
7. That the project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, if applicable, and the requirements of this Chapter.
The proposed project is exempt under Section 15303 (a) (Class 3 “New Construction”) of the CEQA Guidelines. Furthermore, the City has considered whether any of the exceptions found under Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines exist, which would preclude the project from being categorically exempt from CEQA.
The project is consistent with Section 15300.2 as follows: (a) the site is not located in an environmentally sensitive area, (b) there are no cumulative impacts, (c) there are no significant effects due to unusual circumstances, (d) the project is not located near a scenic highway, (e) the project site is not located on an open a hazardous waste site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and (f) the project would not adversely affect any historical resource.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
III. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROJECT AT 128 CAROLINA STREET:
NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED that the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission hereby finds the project to be exempt from environment review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303(a) (Class 3: “New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures”) and , APPROVES Certificate of Appropriateness (COA#22-0007) and Development Review (DVR#22-0031) based on the analysis contained in the staff report and the findings contained herein and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as an exhibit and make the edit to the CEQA exemption from Section 15303 (c) to Section 15303 (a).
VII. VOTE
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commission of the City of Vallejo, State of California, on the 21st day of November 2024 by the following vote to-wit:
AYES: Chair McDonald, Vic-Chair Hall, Commissioners Riley, Adams and Chacon NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioners Quismorio and Sosa
ABSTAIN: None
_______________________________________________________
ANGELA MCDONALD, CHAIRPERSON
City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission
Attest:
_______________________________
CESAR OROZCO, SECRETARY
City of Vallejo Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
Exhibit A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATNESS (COA22-0007)
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (DVR22-0031)
128 CAROLINA STREET
APN # 0055-121-120
PERMIT DESCRIPTION: The project consists of a new two-story 1,732 square foot single-family residence, with an attached 280 square-foot one-car garage on a vacant lot within the Saint (St.) Vincent Historic District. Access to the garage will be off Lozier Alley. The residence façade will have Hardie lap siding and wood accent brackets both painted different shades of gray, with black vinyl windows. The project also includes 1,249.52 square feet of new landscaping along Carolina Street and throughout the site.
A. PLANNING DIVISION
Laura Solomon, Associate Planner | [email protected] | (707) 648-5391
Pre-Building Permit:
1. Prior to building permit submittal, this project must receive approval of the required Minor Use Permit (MUP23-0018) per Vallejo Municipal Code Chapter 16.212 - Hillside Development Standards.
2. Prior to building permit submittal, submit a numbered list to the Planning Division with a written response on how each condition of project approval contained in this report will be satisfied. The list should be submitted to the project planner who will coordinate further development of the project. The approved conditions shall also be included with the building permit set, after the cover sheet.
3. Prior to building permit issuance, the Planning Division shall confirm that the building permit drawings and subsequent construction substantially conform with the approved Planning entitlement.
4. Prior to building permit issuance, the Planning Division shall confirm that the building permit, grading permit and all other drawings and documents substantially conform with the documents and/or representations, whether oral or written that were presented to and approved by the Planning and Development Services Director. Pursuant to VMC 16.602.10.b the site plan, floor plans, building elevations and/or any additional information or representations, whether oral or written, indicating the proposed structure or manner of operation submitted with an application or submitted during the approval process shall be deemed conditions of approval. Any approval may be subject to requirements that the applicant guarantees, warranties, or ensures compliance with the plans and conditions in all respects.
During Construction:
5. Construction activities shall be managed in compliance with the following requirements:
a. Site Watering. During the construction of a project, all portions of the site shall be watered as necessary to reduce emissions of dust and other particulate matter, and all stockpiles shall be covered.
b. Maintenance. Streets and sidewalks shall be made dirt free at the completion of construction.
c. Noise. All construction and transport equipment shall be muffled in accordance with state and federal laws.
d. Emissions. Construction and transport equipment shall be operated to minimize exhaust emissions. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
2 e. Hours of Operation. Grading and pile driving operations within ¼ mile of residential units shall be limited to between 8:00 am and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays to ensure compliance with the requirements for construction activity in Subsection 16.502.12.D.1., Maximum Noise Level for Temporary Construction Activity, or as otherwise restricted as part of an approval.
f. Water Run-off. All water run-off from construction sites shall be controlled. During construction, trucks and equipment should be running only when necessary and shall comply with Chapter 12.41 of the Vallejo Municipal Code.
6. No person shall make, or cause to suffer, or permit to be made upon any public property, public right-of-way or private property, any excessive noise, annoying noise, amplified sound or vibrations that are physically annoying to reasonable persons of normal sensitivity or that are so harsh or so prolonged or unnatural or unusual in their use, time or place as to cause or contribute to the unnecessary and unreasonable discomfort of any persons of normal sensitivity located at the lot line of the property from which these noises emanate or that interfere with the peace and comfort of residents or their guests, or the operators or customers in places of business in the vicinity, or that may detrimentally or adversely affect such residences or places of business. (VMC Section 16.502.09 (C))
7. C
onstruction, demolition, and related loading/unloading activities that may generate noise shall be limited to the following: 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. in Monday- Friday, Saturday 9 am- 6 pm. No construction is to occur on Sunday or federal holidays. Construction equipment noise levels shall not exceed the City’s maximum allowable noise levels
8. The fencing for construction sites shall not be installed until a building permit or grading permit has been issued and shall be removed prior to final inspection. In the event that the building permits expire before the construction is completed, the Planning and Development Services Director may issue a temporary use permit pursuant to Chapter 16.339, Temporary Uses, to allow the fencing to remain for a longer period of time. (VMC Section 16.505.08 (B))
Landscaping:
9. Prior to first final building inspection, the landscape architect shall provide a Certificate of Completion and Certificate of Installation according to the Landscape Documentation in accordance with VMC Chapter 16.504.09: Water Efficient Landscape Requirements. The documentation shall include the following:
a. Irrigation Scheduling (VMC Section 16.504.11)
b. Schedule of Landscape and Irrigation Maintenance (VMC Section 16.504.08) c. Landscape Irrigation Audit Report (VMC Section 16.504.13) d. Soil Management Report (VMC Section 16.504.10)
10. Prior to first final building inspection, all landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the landscape architect shall provide written verification that the landscaping and irrigation have been installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans, particularly with respect to size, health, number and species of plants, and the overall design concept.
11. All landscaping shall be permanently maintained in a healthy and thriving condition at all times, in compliance with the approved landscape plan. Irrigation systems and their components shall be maintained in a fully functional manner consistent with the original approved design or upgraded to reflect current best practices for water efficiency. Regular maintenance shall include but is not limited to:
a. A djusting, checking, and repairing irrigation equipment; resetting automatic controllers; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; adding/replenishing fertilizer, mulch, soil Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
3 amendments; insect control; the replacement of dead or diseased plants; pruning; watering; and weeding all landscaped areas.
b. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to maintain the effective functioning of solar energy facilities and passive solar design features installed both on site and on adjacent properties.
c. The trimming of vegetation is necessary to keep pedestrian and bicycle paths clear. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (A))
d. Pruning, cultivating, weeding, fertilizing, replacement of plants, and watering on a regular basis.
e. Pruning or removal of overgrown vegetation, cultivated or uncultivated, that may harbor rats, vermin, or other nuisances, or otherwise be detrimental to neighboring properties. f. The removal of dead, decayed, diseased, or hazardous trees, weeds and debris that create an unsightly appearance and may be dangerous to public safety and welfare or detrimental to neighboring properties or property values. Compliance shall be by removal, replacement, or maintenance.
g. Landscaping (trees, shrubs, ground cover, turf, etc.) which, due to accident, damage, disease, lack of maintenance, or other cause, fails to show a healthy appearance and growth, shall be replaced. Replacement plants shall conform to all standards that govern the original planting installation, approved landscaping plan, or as approved by the director. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (D))
12. Li
tter shall be removed from all landscaped areas in a timely fashion. (VMC Section16.504.08 (B))
13. Turf areas shall be mowed on a regular basis and be kept green. Accumulation of leaves, twigs, bark, and other similar materials shall be removed on a regular basis. Planting areas shall be kept free of weeds at all times. (VMC Section 16.504.08 (C))
Fences, Walls and Screening:
14. Fencing and walls shall be continuously maintained with no sign of rust or disrepair. Any graffiti shall be removed within forty-eight hours of discovery by the property manager. (VMC Section
16.505.02 (B)).
15. All exterior mechanical equipment, whether on a roof, on the side of a structure, or located on the ground, shall be screened from public view. Exterior mechanical equipment to be screened includes, without limitation, heating, ventilation, air conditioning, refrigeration equipment, plumbing lines, ductwork, transformers, smoke exhaust fans, water meters, backflow preventers, service entry section, back-up and emergency generators, and similar utility devices. a. Screening shall be architecturally integrated into the main structure with regard to materials, color, shape, and size to appear as an integral part of the building or structure. b. Equipment shall be screened on all sides, and screening materials shall be opaque. c. When screening with plants, evergreen types of vegetation shall be planted and maintained. Plant material sizes and types shall be selected and installed so that, at the time of building occupancy, such plants effectively screen their respective equipment. d. The use of wood expanded metal lath, and chain link for the purpose of screening is prohibited. (VMC Section 16.505.10)
Lighting:
16. Lighting shall be designed, located, and installed to be directed downward or toward structures, be shielded or fully shielded, and shall be well-maintained in order to prevent glare, light trespass (unwanted light on adjacent lots and public rights-of-way), and light pollution to the maximum extent feasible. No permanently installed lighting shall blink, flash, or be of unusually high Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
4 intensity or brightness, as determined by the Planning and Development Services Director. (VMC Section 16.506.04 (B))
Overall Project:
17. This entitlement shall automatically expire within two years of the effective date of this approval, on November 21, 2026, unless the use is exercised or extended (VMC Section 16.602.12 (A)).
Issuance of a building permit shall constitute exercise of rights; provided, however, that, unless otherwise specified as a condition of project approval, the permit shall expire if:
a. The building permit expires.
b. Final inspection is not completed, or certificate of occupancy issued within the time specified as a condition of project approval.
c. The rights granted under the permit are not exercised within one year following the earliest to occur of the following: issuance of a certificate of occupancy; or if no certificate of occupancy is required, the last required final inspection for the new construction. (VMC Section 16.602.11 (B))
18. The Planning and Development Services Director may approve a one-year extension of any permit or approval granted for a residential or non-residential project under the Zoning Code upon receipt of a written application and fees received fifteen calendar days) before the expiration date with the required fee prior to expiration of the permit. (VMC Section 16.602.11 (C.1))
19. No c
hange in the use for which a permit or other approval has been issued is permitted, in accordance with Government Code section 66411.7.
20. For new developments, utilities including, but not limited to, all electrical, telephone, cable television, fiber-optic cable, gas, water, sewer, irrigation/recycled water, and similar distribution lines providing direct service to a project shall be installed underground within the site. This requirement may be waived by the Planning and Development Services Director upon determining that underground installation is infeasible, or the electrical line is otherwise exempt from an under-grounding requirement. (VMC Section 16.501.10)
21. A pplicant shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend City, its officers, officials, directors, employees, agents, volunteers and affiliates and each of them from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, damages, costs, expenses, actual attorney’s fees, applicant’s fees, expert fees, losses or liability, in law or in equity, of every kind and nature whatsoever arising out of or in connection with Applicant’s operations, or any subcontractor’s operations, to be performed under this agreement for Applicant’s or subcontractor’s tort negligence including active or passive, or strict negligence, including but not limited to personal injury including, but not limited to bodily injury, emotional injury, sickness or disease, or death to persons and/or damage to property of anyone, including loss of use thereof, caused or alleged to be caused by any act or omission of Applicant, or any subcontractor, or anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for the full period of time allowed by the law, regardless to any limitation by insurance, with the exception of the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. No modification of the project, any application, permit, certification, condition, environmental determination, other approval, change in applicable laws and regulations, or change in pr ocessing methods shall alter the Applicant’s indemnity obligation.
B. B
uilding Division
Staff Contact: Sergio Caldera | [email protected] | (707) 648-4383
1. Plans and permits will be required for building, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical work per California Code of Regulations, Title 24 and applicable City Ordinance in effect at the time of the completed Building Permit application date and required fees shall be paid at the time of application.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
5 2. Soils report will be required for foundation design plan reviews.
3. 2022 California Code of Regulations applies if permit application(s) are received before the end of 2025. After 12-31-2025 the 2025 California Code of Regulations will apply.
4. Fees will apply to the current fiscal year of permit applications
C. Water Department
Staff Contact: Melissa Cansdale | [email protected] | (707) 553-7223
1. CODE REQUIREMENTS. All code requirements as stated in Title 11 of the Vallejo Municipal Code (VMC) and Vallejo Standard Specifications and Standard Drawings adopted in 2011 (VSSSD) that apply to this project shall be conformed to. The project is being made aware of codes that require extra attention by the following items.
2. WATER SYSTEM PLANS (VSSSD Section 4.1). All water system improvements shall be consistent with the latest Vallejo Water System Master Plan, prepared by Kennedy/Jenks Engineers. Prior to Improvement plan approval and building permit issuance, water system improvement plans shall be submitted to the Water Department for review and approval, and shall contain at least:
a. Location and size of fire sprinkler service connection(s). b. Location and size of existing and proposed domestic service connection(s). c. Location and size of irrigation service connection(s), if any. d. Location of fire hydrants.
e. Location of structures with respect to existing public water system improvements, such as mains, meters, etc.
f. Location and size of any new water mains.
g. Location and size of backflow prevention devices (required on water service connections to irrigation systems, certain commercial water users, and to commercial fire sprinkler systems, per City Ordinance 922 N.C. (2d).
3. F
IRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Fire flow requirements of the Fire department shall be complied with. Fire flow at no less than 25 psi residual pressure shall be available within 1,000 feet of any structure. One half of the fire flow shall be available within 300 feet of any structure.
a. For single family residential units, the fire flow is 1,500 gpm. b. For other developments, see the Vallejo Water System Master Plan, 2015, prepared by Kennedy Jenks.
4. HYDRAULIC CALCULATIONS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Prior to Improvement Plan and building permit issuance, hydraulic calculations shall be submitted to the Water Director demonstrating that the fire flow requirements are complied with.
5. FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Fire hydrant placement and fire sprinkler system installation, if any, shall meet the requirements of the Fire Department. For combined water and fire services, the requirements of both the Fire Department and the Vallejo Water System Master Plan, with latest revisions, shall be satisfied.
6. WATER EASEMENTS (VSSSD Section 4.1). Easements shall be granted for all water system improvements installed outside the public right-of-way in the City's Standard Form for Grant of Water Line Easement with the following widths:
a. 15 ft. wide (minimum) for water mains.
b. 10 ft. wide (minimum) for fire hydrants, water meters, backflow preventers, double detector check valves, etc.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
6 c. Other facilities will be reviewed by the Water Department.
7. WATER METERS (VMC 11.04.110 and 11.16.090). Each parcel shall be metered separately and shall have a separate fire sprinkler service connection.
8. WATER SERVICE BONDS AND FEES (VMC Sections 11.16, 11.18, 11.20 and 11.24). Water service shall be provided by the City of Vallejo following completion of the required water system improvements and payment of applicable fees. Performance and payment bonds shall be provided to the City of Vallejo prior to construction of water system improvements. Fees include those fees specified in the Vallejo Municipal Code including connection and elevated storage fees, etc., and fees for tapping, tie-ins, inspections, disinfection, construction water, and other services provided by the City with respect to the water system improvements. The Water Department may be contacted for a description of applicable fees. These fees have to be paid prior to issuance of the building permit.
9. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
a) Apply and pay for Fire Flow Test with the Water Department in order to determine operation of sprinkler system and final service size.
b) Provide water meter and service sizing calculations per most recent California Plumbing Code, include a water fixture count table.
c) As of J anuary 1, 2018, all units in multi-family, commercial, or combination thereof, buildings shall be individually metered (if existing plumbing allows or is re-configured) by the City, additional meters at the owner/applicant’s expense; or, master metered by the City, and sub-metered by the property owner, with approved/certified meters. Per California Senate Bill 7 (SB7).
10. WATER SYSTEM INSTALLATION. Prior to occupancy or final building inspection, install water system improvements as required. Backflow device/s where required shall be installed in areas hidden from public view and/or shall be mitigated by landscaping.
D. Fire Prevention
Staff Contact: Moises Zarate | [email protected] | (707) 648-4565
1. All buildings, facilities, and improvements shall be accessible to fire department apparatus by way of approved access roadways.
2. Prior to Final Inspection, in accordance with the 2019 CFC, approved address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall clearly contrast with their background.
The characters shall be a minimum of 4" high with a 1/2" stroke. The size of the building and distance or location of the address numbers from the roadway may necessitate larger numbers.
3. All roof material shall be rated class "C" or better.
4. Provide smoke detectors in all sleeping rooms and common hallways. Detectors shall be hardwired, interconnected with battery backup. Electrical circuits supplying detectors shall be separate dedicated lines with no other devices on the circuits.
5. Provide carbon monoxide detectors outside each sleeping area in the immediate vicinity of all bedrooms.
6. Emergency escape and rescue openings are required in each bedroom in accordance with the 2019 CA Building Code.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68
7 7. An NFPA 13D automatic fire sprinkler system is required for all new residential structures, please submit 2 sets of plans and calculations to the Fire Prevention Office and obtain a permit prior to installation. Adequate pressure and GPM verification is required prior to residential construction.
8. Provide a one-hour fire separation between the R-3 and U Occupancy.
9. A final inspection from the Fire Prevention Division is required.
E. Vallejo Flood and Wastewater
Staff Contact: Mariah Henderson | [email protected] | (707) 652-7810
1. Utility site plan will need to show required two-way cleanout within 2 feet of the foundation where waste plumbing exits the building and District cleanout near the public right of way.
2. Add the following notes to plans:
a. All sewer work shall conform to the Vallejo Wastewater Standards, b. Call Vallejo Wastewater a minimum of 24 hours in advance for inspections.
3. Applicant will be required to pay applicable fees and obtain VFWD Connection Permit upon final plan approval.
Docusign Envelope ID: ED86CE1D-D649-4407-ACBC-67AD5608AD68 Site Data
Drawing Index
Scope of Work
Owner
Code Requirements
Vicinity Map
W W
OH OH
SS SS
GAS GAS
OH
OH
OH
OH
SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS
W W W W W W W W W
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS GAS
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
Site and Floor Plans
1/8"=1'-0" U.O.N
New Floor
Plans
1/4"=1'-0"
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
Exterior Elevations
1/4"=1'-0"
C Kelly & Abramson 2020
New Single
Family Home
128 Carolina St.
Vallejo, Ca 94590
Tel: (510) 316-9421
Piedmont, California 94611
1111 Warfield Avenue
KE L L Y
B R A M S O N A
&
R C H I T E C T U R E A
[email protected]
34922
Planning08_11_23
Sections
1/4"=1'-0"
Landscaping
Color Scheme and
Materials
Hardie Siding with Wood Trim
128 Carolina
Exterior
Finises
Black Vinyl
Windows
New Hope Gray
by Benjamin Moore
Body ColorTrim Color
128 Carolina
Exterior
Finishes
1 1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chair McDonald at 6:36 pm
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair McDonald, Vice-Chair Hall, Commissioners Adams, Riley, Chacon, Hall, Quismorio
Absent: Commissioner Sosa, and Quismorio
Staff present: Planning and Development Services Director Pollot and Planning Manager Orozco, Assistant City Attorney Zagaroli, Principal Planner Thacker, Associate Planner Solomon
4. CONSENT CALENDAR AND APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
A. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
B. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
i. July 18, 2024 – Regular Meeting
C. APPORVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR – None
Action: Commissioner Riley, Second by Commissioner Vice- Chair Hall, and carried unanimously (Absent – Sosa and Quismorio) to approve agenda, approval of the July 18, 2024 - regular meeting; with the following vote:
Vote:
AYES: Chair McDonald, Vice-Chair Hall, Commissioner Adams, and Riley NOES: Commissioner Chacon
ABSENT: Commissioner Sosa and Quismorio
ABSTAIN: None
5. REPORT OF THE CITY COUNCIL LIAISON - None
6. COMMUNITY FORM – None
7. PUBLIC HEARING
MINUTES
VALLEJO ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE
AND LANDMARKS COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING – 6:30 P.M.
November 21, 2024
MEETING AGENDA
Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission November 21, 2024
2 A. PROJECT TITLE: 128 Carolina Street - New Single-Family Residence
PROJECT NUMBER: Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22- 0007) Development Review (DVR22-0031)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission find the project
exempt from environmental review pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section and 15303(a) and
adopt a resolution to approve Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA#22- 0007) and
Development Review (DVR22- 0031) based on
the findings and conditions contained herein.
Planning Manager Orozco introduced Associate Planner Solomon.
Associate Planner Solomon presented the item.
Commissioners asked questions and staff and the applicant responded.
Chair McDonald opened the public hearing.
Speakers – Liana, Abby, Stuart F.
Chair McDonald closed the public hearing.
The Commission deliberated the merits of the project, and a motion was made:
Motion: Commissioner Chacon, Second by Commissioner Riley, and carried unanimously (Absent – Sosa and Quismorio), with the correction to CEQA Section from 15303(c) to 15303 (a), to find the project exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303( a) and to approve Certificate of Appropriateness (COA22-0007) and Development Review (DVR22- 0031), based on the findings provided in the attached Resolution and subject to the Conditions of Approval provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution.
B. PROJECT TITLE: 316 Florida Street - New Single-family Residence
PROJECT NUMBER: Certificate of Appropriateness (COA24- 0002) Development Review (DVR24-0004)
Landscape Review (LR24-0004)
Exception Permit (EXC24-0010)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Architectural Heritage and Landmarks Commission find the project
exempt from environmental review pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(a), and adopt a
resolution to approve Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA24- 0002), Development
Review (DVR24 -0004), Landscape Review
MEETING AGENDA
Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission November 21, 2024
3 (LR24-0004) and Exception Permit (EXC24-
0010), based on the findings and conditions
contained herein.
Planning Manager Orozco introduced Associate Planner Solomon.
Associate Planner Solomon presented the item.
Commissioners asked questions and staff responded.
Chair McDonald opened the public hearing.
Speakers – None
Chair McDonald closed the public hearing.
The Commission deliberated the merits of the project, and a motion was made:
Motion: Commissioner Riley, Second by Commissioner Chacon , and carried unanimously (Absent – Sosa and Quismorio), continued the action item to a date certain of January 16, 2025.
C. PROJECT TITLE: Hospital Building (H1) Modification at Turo University
PROJECT NUMBER: Certificate of Appropriateness (COA #23-0006)
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission find the project
exempt from environmental review pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15331 (Class 31
“Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation”)
and approve Certificate of Appr opriateness
(COA23-0006) based on the findings provided in
the attached Resolution and subject to the
Conditions of Approval provided as Exhibit A to
the Resolution.
Planning Manager Orozco introduced Principal Planner Thacker.
Principal Planner Thacker presented the item.
Commissioners asked questions and staff and applicant responded.
Chair McDonald opened the public hearing.
Speakers – None
Chair McDonald closed the public hearing.
The Commission deliberated the merits of the project, and a motion was made:
Motion: Chair McDonald, Seconded by Commissioner Adams, find the project exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15331 (Class 31 “Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation”) and approve Certificate of Appropriateness (COA23-
MEETING AGENDA
Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission November 21, 2024
4 0006) based on the findings provided in the attached Resolution and subject to the Conditions of Approval provided as Exhibit A to the Resolution, with the following vote:
Vote:
AYES: Chair McDonald, Commissioners Adams, and Riley
NOES: Vice-Chair Hall and Commissioner Chacon
ABSENT: Commissioner Sosa and Quismorio
ABSTAIN: None
8. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Staff provided the commission the written communication provided by Jimmy Ghenn regarding the Herbert House on how the city needs to appraise it and sell it to save it.
9. REGULAR REPORTS
A. SECRETARY’S REPORT - None
B. CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT – None
C. REPORT OF THE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION
Commissioner Riley commented on the Herbert House and the City is looking at potential buyers.
D. REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES
i. Records/Resources Subcommittee
ii. Goal Setting Subcommittee
iii. Review of Vallejo Municipal Code Chapter 16.614 – Architectural Heritage and Historic Preservation.
Commissioner Chacon commented on reaching out to Commissioner Riley and Quismorio about setting up a meeting.
10. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS
A. Potential Formation of Additional Subcommittees
i. Possible AHLC workplan/budget request
ii. Review of the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards iii. Create a ministerial process for non-contributing homes.
B. Future Agenda Items
i. Future Presentations
MEETING AGENDA
Architectural Heritage and Landmark Commission November 21, 2024
5 11. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:54 p.m.
___________________________________________________
ANGELA MCDONALD, CHAIR
ATTEST:
______________________________________________________________________
CESAR OROZCO, SECRETARY
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
From: Abbey *
To: Charles Palmares; Tina Arriola; Andrew Murray; Cesar Orozco; Kristin Pollot Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Proposed Building at 128 Carolina St.
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2024 10:46:58 AM
November 21, 2024
To members of Vallejo City Council, Vallejo City Manager, and Vallejo Planning Division:
We the undersigned residents of St Vincent’s Hill Historic District block at issue bring to you the following issues of serious concern regarding proposed building at 128 Carolina St., Vallejo CA:
1. There is no drawing of the building.
2. Certificate of Appropriateness application instructions indicate that drawings, including measurements and heights, are to be included. From the Certificate of Appropriateness application: “Provide building elevations or photographs of existing structures and for new construction, the height and location of major structures on adjacent properties. Provide drawings of the proposed work.”
3. Description of proposed building does not fit Historic District guidelines (vinyl windows). Other neighbors are required to meet historic criteria on homes, so exempting new builds is not reasonable or fair. Construction would not be in alignment with architectural heritage standards.
4. Lack of drawings and other specs means it’s impossible to know whether the proposed building is appropriate to the Historic District or not; from the few details given the proposal seems out of character for the Historic District.
5. No information regarding Environmental Impact Report done for this project, and the potential disruption of neighbors’ utilities.
6. No information given regarding Shadow Study and impact on neighboring properties.
7. Property is not subject to SB9 and changed offsets. Historic Districts are exempt.
Therefore:
8. Lot is not wide enough to build. With legal offsets from property line, the building’s max width would be 15’ or less.
9. No precedent of a two story building on the lot; the original structure cannot be rebuilt in original dimensions due to current code.
10. Survey legitimacy is questionable. (Markers not industry standard)
11. Direct neighbors’ privacy and right to quiet enjoyment will be seriously negatively affected- not only from construction, but from proximity of structure.
12. Proposed building will completely eradicate the upper neighbor’s views (including of the Bay and Mt Tamalpais), garden sunlight, and privacy, directly and substantially impacting their property value.
13. Building primarily on the back half of the lot is anomalous with the character of the block and neighborhood - all other buildings on the block and almost all in the neighborhood are at the front of the lot.
14. Building on the front of the lot is not feasible due to rocky, steep terrain, and would be practically right up against lower neighbor and seriously compromise their privacy and other issues mentioned here.
15. Lot is rocky and steep. For construction of a foundation or basement, blasting or drilling is likely required. This creates major concern regarding potential damage to foundations of neighboring properties, which are only a few feet away. by the city.
Due to this, for years neighbors have been dragging huge chunks of displaced concrete as well as pouring concrete to fill in holes so people will not lose their oil pans, or worse. This alley is most of the neighbors’ driveway
16. The only access to this lot for materials and vehicles is an alley which is heavily damaged and not maintained on both Carolina and Florida streets in this block, and for many of those neighbors, this is the only access to their property. The construction vehicles would not only heavily damage the already severely compromised and unmaintained alley further, it would often block many neighbors’ collective access to their properties.
17. To date, many immediate neighbors have not been officially notified.
Even with only the few details included in the notice sent to residents, it is clearly evident that the proposed building would seriously adversely affect both immediate neighbors of the property, other surrounding residents, and severely impact the upper and lower neighbor’s property value. As described, it will not be in keeping with the character of the St Vincent’s Hill Historic District, nor is it within the legal restrictions on offsets as the property is exempt from SB9. The proposed development would be to the detriment of the neighborhood and is strongly opposed by surrounding residents. We ask you to deny permission for the proposed construction.
Sincerely,
Abbey S. (Carolina St)
Liana Berube (Carolina St)
Judy Heyman ( Carolina St)
Maddie Dean (Carolina St.)
Stuart Furtwangler ( Florida St.)
Leona S. (Carolina St.)
Lindsay Ivory (Carolina St)
ACTION ITEM 9.D.
DATE: March 11, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Melissa Tigbao, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT: PROVIDING NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND THE FY 2024-25 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET TO ALLOCATE A TOTAL OF $21,861,377 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE HIGHWAY BRIDGE PROGRAM, $3,000,000 IN MEASURE P FUNDS, AND $300,000 IN
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THE MARE ISLAND CAUSEWAY BRIDGE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT (STEP 1 OF 2)
RECOMMENDATION
This staff report provides notice of intent to amend the FY 2024-25 Capital Improvement Budget to allocate a total of $21,861,377 in grant funds from the Highway Bridge Program, $3,000,000 in Measure P funds, and $300,000 in Bridge Construction funds for the Mare Island Causeway Bridge Preventative Maintenance Project (Step 1 of 2)
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION
The Mare Island Causeway Bridge has been identified by the Caltrans Division of Structure Maintenance & Investigations for painting, concrete repairs and other work as part of a long-awaited maintenance project.
This project is part of the City’s effort to maintain its infrastructure.
Failure to approve the necessary budget amendments, for which this staff report provides notice of intent, will lead to the irrevocable loss of $21.8M in grant funds as Caltrans will reassign the funding to another agency.
Per City Charter Section 703, amending the budget requires public notice and intent prior to any action taken.
A staff report recommending amendment of the budget will be presented to City Council at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
The Mare Island Causeway Bridge Preventative Maintenance Project (Project No. PW9762) (the "Project") is included in the federally funded Bridge Preventive Maintenance Project (BPMP) under the Highway Bridge Program (HBP), which is a federal program funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The purpose of the BPMP is to replace or rehabilitate public highway bridges when the State and FHWA determine that a bridge is significantly important and otherwise qualifies under the HBP guidelines. The Project represents a critical infrastructure improvement to preserve and enhance the safety and functionality of a vital transportation route.
In July 2015, the City of Vallejo submitted an application to Caltrans to receive grant funding for the Project.
On June 14, 2016, the City Council approved Resolution No. 16-064 N.C. to appropriate $437,586 in grant funds to the Project as part of the Fiscal Year 2016-17 budget. On March 9, 2021, the City Council approved Resolution No. 21-023 N.C., which amended the Fiscal Year 2020-21 budget by recognizing grant funding and allocating $621,233 to the Project. This funding, $1,058,818 in total, has been used for the Preliminary Engineering (PE) portion of the Project, which includes the preliminary design, right-of-way certification, environmental permitting coordination, California Public Utilities Commission coordination, and bringing the Plans / Specifications / Estimates (PS&E) phase of the Project design to 100% completion.
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: PROVIDING NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND THE FY 2024-25 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET TO ALLOCATE A TOTAL OF $21,861,377 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE HIGHWAY BRIDGE PROGRAM, $3,000,000 IN MEASURE P FUNDS, AND $300,000 IN BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THE MARE ISLAND CAUSEWAY BRIDGE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT (STEP 1 OF 2)
An application for grant funding to cover the construction costs of the Project, estimated at the time to be approximately $13,000,000, was approved by Caltrans in late 2021. Proceeding to the construction phase of the Project was postponed due to funding delays resulting from budgetary constraints within Caltrans' Bridge Program. In June 2024, Caltrans approved the additional construction funding in the amount of $10,925,487.
The approved scope of work for the Project includes the following:
• Spot repair and overcoat lift span and towers.
• Repair cracked, spalled and de-laminated concrete in the substructure and superstructure. • Repair cracks and apply a polyester overlay on the bridge deck. • Replace deck joint seals.
• Replace damaged sidewalk panels.
• Repair or replace deteriorating piles.
• Repair or replace metal railing posts.
• Replace underwater anodes.
• Restore the logo.
• Clean, repair, and paint metal railings.
• Repair existing timber fenders.
• Repair and replace existing lighting.
• Apply traffic striping to the bridge deck and roadway.
In August 2024, the City moved forward with advertising for construction bids. Two bids were received by the October 2024 deadline: one for $19,869,755 and the other for $25,263,632. The contractor with the lowest bid has agreed to hold its bid price until May 2025.
In October 2024, the City submitted another application to Caltrans for additional funding, which was approved in November 2024 in the amount of $10,935,890.
The grant funds cover 88.53% of the Project costs and require an 11.47% local match. The total current cost of the Project is estimated at $28.3 million dollars, leaving a shortfall of $3.3 million dollars. Staff have identified eligible funds in the Bridge Construction Fund (Fund 204) in the amount of $300,000. This fund was established in June 1978, when Ordinance 341 added Chapter 3.17 to Title 3 of the Vallejo Municipal Code, establishing a Bridge Construction Development Tax. In August 1989, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1058 N.C. (2d), repealing Ordinance 341 and Chapter 3.17 of the Vallejo Municipal Code, which stopped the collection of the Bridge Construction Development Tax. Staff recommend $300,000 of the remaining available fund balance in the Bridge Construction Fund be allocated to Project No. PW9762.
Per Resolution No. 22-222, approved by Council on December 20, 2022, there are nine priorities for the use of revenue generated by Measure P. This Project aligns with City Council's Measure P revenue spending criteria for maintaining critical city services, and therefore, the allocation of Measure P budget is being requested to cover the Project budget shortfall.
On January 13, 2025, staff presented the Project to the Measure P Oversight Committee. During the meeting, Mare Island residents shared concerns about the use of Fund 112 – Mare Island Community Facility District Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: PROVIDING NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND THE FY 2024-25 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET TO ALLOCATE A TOTAL OF $21,861,377 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE HIGHWAY BRIDGE PROGRAM, $3,000,000 IN MEASURE P FUNDS, AND $300,000 IN BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THE MARE ISLAND CAUSEWAY BRIDGE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT (STEP 1 OF 2)
Fund as matching funds for this project. The funds allocated were adopted as part of the bridge repair project during fiscal years 2012-2016. Staff confirm that the funds allocated in 2012-2016 were specific to any bridge repairs, and this $300,000 request will be toward bridge repair as intended, not toward matching funds. After some deliberation, the Committee adopted a resolution not recommending the funding request due to concerns about the use of the Community Facility District Fund.
Provided the necessary funding for the Project is approved, staff will return to Council in the very near future to award the construction contract. Construction is tentatively scheduled to begin in May 2025 and the estimated completion date is the summer of 2027.
If additional funding is not approved or the allocation of additional funding is delayed, the construction contract cannot be awarded. A new advertisement for construction bids will need to be advertised. Given the current and expected continual rise in construction costs, it is likely bids will come in even higher and would require additional budget allocations to accommodate the increased costs. In addition, failure to appropriate the necessary gap funding will lead to the irrevocable loss of $21.8M in grant funds as Caltrans will reassign the funding to another agency.
This staff report serves as the Notice of Intent to amend the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Capital Improvement budget for Project No. PW9762 to recognize and allocate the following:
1. $21,861,377 in additional grant funding from HBP
2. $3,000,000 of Measure P funding
3. $300,000 of Bridge Construction funding
A staff report requesting approval to execute the Caltrans' grant agreements and a recommendation for the second step to amend the budget will be presented to City Council at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT
This item providees the Notice of Intent to amend the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Capital Improvement budget and does not have any fiscal impact. The second step will come at the next regular City Council meeting and will amend the budget with Council's approval.
The Mare Island Causeway Project will be funded by Federal Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) funds, with local match from City funds. Project budget and estimated expenditures are as follows:
Project Funding Amount Estimated Project
Costs
Amount
Fund 221 –
Grants/Reimbursements -
Federal BPMP Grant
(allocated 2016)
$ 437,586 Design; PS&E $ 2,200,000
Date: March 11, 2025
Subject: PROVIDING NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND THE FY 2024-25 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET TO ALLOCATE A TOTAL OF $21,861,377 IN GRANT FUNDS FROM THE HIGHWAY BRIDGE PROGRAM, $3,000,000 IN MEASURE P FUNDS, AND $300,000 IN BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION FUNDS FOR THE MARE ISLAND CAUSEWAY BRIDGE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PROJECT (STEP 1 OF 2)
Fund 221 –
Grants/Reimbursements -
Federal BPMP Grant
(allocated 2021)
$ 621,233 Construction Contract $ 19,869,755
Fund 221 –
Grants/Reimbursements -
Federal BPMP Grant
(awarded 2024)
$10,925,487 Construction Contingency
15%
$ 2,980,463
Fund 221 –
Grants/Reimbursements -
Federal BPMP Grant
(awarded 2024)
$10,935,890 Construction
Management
$ 2,963,250
Fund 112 – Mare Island
Community Facility District
Fund (allocated 2012-2016)
$ 2,099,073 Project Management
(staff time, inspections)
$ 300,000
TOTAL $ 25,019,269 TOTAL $ 28,313,468
Project budget shortfall is $3,294,199. If the budget amendment item is approved at the next regularly scheduled Council meeting, the shortfall amount, which includes the required City match based on the total cost of the project, will be covered by a transfer to the project of $300,000 of Bridge Construction (Fund 204) budget and $3M of Measure P (Fund 228) budget.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This item provides Notice of Intent to amend the budget only. There is no environmental impact associated with this item.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 6-D_23C0248 _MI BPMP Approved-pg4
2. Approval - 2024-11-18 LAPG 6-D MI Causeway - BPMP-5030(060)
3. Location Map
4. Vicinity Map
CONTACT
Melissa Tigbao, P.E., Public Works Director
[email protected]
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HBP SCOPE/COST/SCHEDULE CHANGE REQUEST DOT LAPG 6-D (NEW 05/2019)Local Assistance Program GuidelinesPage 1 of 5 ADA NoticeThis document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].
See Section 6.3, Chapter 6 of the Local Assistance Program Guidelines (LAPG) for information about this form.NBI Bridge No.: 23C0248Project Number: BPMP-5030(060)Responsible Agency: City of VallejoCaltrans District: 4Project Manager: Sam KumarPhone Number: (707) 648-4432Local Bridge No.: 23C0248(Caltrans to provide project number for new projects)Email: [email protected] Location: City of VallejoProject Limits:Along G Street over the Napa RiverType of Work: Preventive MaintenanceWork Description:Mare Island Causeway bridge painting, methacrylate coating and polyester concrete overlay to bridge deck; deck, bent cap, and pile concrete repairs; crack repair, bridge railing repairs, replacing fender system; and replace all anodes at Piers 26 & 27.1. Describe reason for Scope/Cost/Schedule Change Request (or attach separate pages)The current request is for increased Cost. Scope and Schedule remain the same. The Cost increase reflects the actual low bid received upon City advertisement for construction. Two bids were received. The low bid received reflects the general trend in construction costs having gone up significantly since the last project funding authorization request. Please refer to the Bid funds explanation attached document for more details.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HBP SCOPE/COST/SCHEDULE CHANGE REQUEST DOT LAPG 6-D (NEW 05/2019)Local Assistance Program GuidelinesPage 2 of 5 ADA NoticeThis document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].
NBI Bridge Number: 23C02482. If this is a request for scope change (not cost or schedule), please prepare an LAPG 6-A HBP Application/Scope Definition. Will a revised LAPG 6-A be submitted? YESNONot Applicable(If Yes, please skip to the sign off on the Local Agency Certification page of this form, and submit this form with the LAPG 6-A package) (If No, please submit attachments as shown on Local Agency Certification page of this form)3. Identify and justify “betterments” that are HBP participating but are not related to the major deficiencies of this bridge. (attach additional pages as needed)Not Applicable4. Refer to LAPG 6-B HBP Special Cost Approval Checklist. Identify and justify specific items requiring Caltrans funding approval. (attach additional pages as needed) The construction cost estimate prepared pre-COVID in 2019 to get funds for CON approved has superseded the bids that City received on 11/11/24. The CON funds LAPG 6-D was prepared and approved in July 2020. The process and procedures that were followed and items that have exceeded in price and reasoning/justification for additional funds request are explained in the attachment "Bid funds explanation". 5. Other comments (identify Non-HBP Participating work):• Repairs to concrete pedestals, bearings, beam connections, and worker access walkways that were damaged during the August 24, 2014 South Napa Earthquake • Logo painting STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HBP SCOPE/COST/SCHEDULE CHANGE REQUEST DOT LAPG 6-D (NEW 05/2019)Local Assistance Program GuidelinesPage 3 of 5 ADA NoticeThis document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].
NBI Bridge Number: 23C0248Estimated Construction Costs (Exclude contingencies, supplementary work, and Construction Engineering)HBP Participating (round to nearest $1,000)Non- HBP Participating* (round to nearest $1,000)Construct Bridge17,905,000 $116,000 Bridge Removal $0 $0 Slope Protection $0 Channel Work $0 $0 Detour - Stage Construction $0 $0 Approach Roadway $0 Utility Relocation $0 Mobilization1,850,000 $0 Total19,755,000 $116,000 Total Cost:19,871,000* Items that are Non-HBP Participating could be participating through other federal programs. See the LAPG for other eligibility requirements of other programs. Local agencies that are unsure which project costs are HBP participating should contact the DLAE for resolution. NOTE: Total of only the HBP participating costs should carry over to the Construction line (Direct Costs) on the next pageSpecify the type of other federal funds on this project:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HBP SCOPE/COST/SCHEDULE CHANGE REQUEST
DOT LAPG 6-D (NEW 05/2019)
Local Assistance Program Guidelines
ADA Notice This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].
NBI Bridge Number: 23C0248
Enter CE % Rate: 15%
Enter Contingency % Rate: 10%
Direct Costs Indirect Costs* HBP Participating $** Target Dates (month/year)
PE 1,196,000 + $0 = 1,196,000
R/W + =
CON 19,755,000
CE 2,963,250
Cont 1,975,500
CON SUM 24,693,750 + = 24,693,750 12/02/2024
Total Participating Cost 25,889,750
Enter Fed. Match Rate: 88.53% HBP Requested Cost 22,921,000 Summary of HBP Participating Costs
Please indicate the HBP total participating (eligible for reimbursement) costs for this project, rounded to the nearest $1,000. If the amounts below are approved, Caltrans may program the HBP funds needed for this project. New projects must be prioritized before programmed. Other federal funds (RSTP, ATP, etc.) needed for this project should be shown in the Exhibit 7-B Field Review form, Chapter 7 of the LAPM.
Target dates represent a commitment by the local agency when the project will need HBP funding. Failure to meet target dates may cause funds to be reprogrammed to other projects by other local agencies. The reprogramming of HBP funds is at the discretion of Caltrans. Federal Fiscal Years (FFY) are from October 1 - September 30. All programming is done by FFY.
PE = Preliminary Engineering (Not to exceed 25% of CON and consultant contract management and quality assurance not to exceed 15% of consultant costs).
R/W = Right of Way
CE = Construction Engineering (Not to exceed 15% of CON).
CON = Construction
Cont = Contingency (including supplement work) not to exceed 25% (preliminary estimate) nor 10% of CON for final design. * See Chapter 5 Invoicing , of the LAPM for approval of indirect costs. **
Participating costs exclude ineligible work items. Please review the HBP Program Guidelines for reimbursable scopes of work and program cost limits. Other federal funds will be shown in the Exhibit 7-B Field Review Form, Chapter 7 of the LAPM. 17,489,102
2,623,365
1,748,910
21,861,377
1,058,819
=88.53% (grant amount)
TOTAL PROJECT $
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HBP SCOPE/COST/SCHEDULE CHANGE REQUEST
DOT LAPG 6-D (NEW 05/2019)
Local Assistance Program Guidelines
ADA Notice This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].
Local Agency Certification
Caltrans, please notify this agency to confirm this project requested scope/cost/schedule changes for this project have been incorporated in the HBP Multi-Year Plan. I understand that reimbursable work shall not commence until a Request for Authorization (E76) has been processed by Caltrans and a notice to proceed has been received by this agency.
I certify that this project is in compliance with the Highway Bridge Program, Chapter 6 of the Local Assistance Program Guidelines.
One original of this application (with attachments) and one electronic copy will be included in the transmittal package to the DLAE.
Local Agency Project Manager (print)
Sam Kumar
Local Agency Project Manager (signature) Date
11/18/2024
Attachments: (only if question #2 is answered “No”)
1) LAPG 6-B HBP Special Cost Approval Checklist, Chapter 6 of the LAPG 2) Other:
3) Request for Authorization is included in this application package for expedited processing? YES NO
Thank you for assembling the application package. Please send this package to your DLAE for review. Please e-mail your suggestions to improve this form to [email protected] or [email protected].
For Caltrans use only:
I have reviewed this application for completeness and have forwarded copies to the Office of Bridge Bond and Safety Programs and Structures Local Assistance, as needed. (check one).
Program Management and Structures Local Assistance, as needed. (check one) I recommend approval. (attach comments as needed)
I do not recommend approval for the following reasons: See attached memo / email to the Office of Bridge, Bond and Safety Programs.
I request SLA review of this application for the following reason: (attach memo / email justifying increased Caltrans oversight).
DLAE or authorized staff (print)
DLAE or authorized staff (signature) Date
Digitally signed by Akul Kumar
DN: cn=Akul Kumar, o, ou, [email protected], c=US Date: 2024.11.18 10:11:17 -08'00'
HERMAN SEALEY
11/18/2024
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
From: Sealey, Herman@DOT
To: Sam Kumar
Cc: Nyam, Jonathan@DOT
Subject: Approval - 2024-11-18 LAPG 6-D Mare Island Causeway - BPMP-5030(060) Date: Thursday, November 21, 2024 10:27:01 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image005.png
image006.png
24-11-18 LAPG 6-D_23C0248 _Mare Island Causeway -BPMP5030(060).pdf Hello Sam
As promised in the previous email, I made representations on your behalf for the city to at least get something that would assure that it is OK to proceed with contract award, if your 6-D submittal could not be expedited.
The district’s representation had positive results. HBP managers have reviewed the LAPG 6-D dated 11/18/2024 for cost increase at award and approved it. The additional funds have been programmed in FFY 25/26. To authorize the additional CON funds, the City may request an advancement of funds after March 30 th , 2025, when EPSP/Post-Programming opens for the HBP.
You have the information needed to proceed with your construction contract.
Attached is a copy of the approved LAPG 6-D.
Herman Sealey
Senior Transportation Engineer
D4 Office of Local Assistance
North Bay and HBP
(510) 926-0556
Teleworking: Monday, Thursday, and Friday
From: Sam Kumar <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2024 4:59 PM
To: Sealey, Herman@DOT <[email protected]>
Cc: Nyam, Jonathan@DOT <[email protected]>; Jensen, Roberta B@DOT <[email protected]>; Meharena, Ephrem@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
EXTERNAL EMAIL. Links/attachments may not be safe.
Ok Sir.
Understood.
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S8, on the move
-------- Original message --------
From: "Sealey, Herman@DOT" <[email protected]
>
Date: 11/18/24 4:53 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Sam Kumar <[email protected]
>
Cc: "Nyam, Jonathan@DOT" <[email protected]>, "Jensen, Roberta B@DOT" <[email protected]>, "Meharena, Ephrem@DOT" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
Hello Sam The 6-D documents were submitted to HBP today and I will await a response from them. As mentioned in our recent meeting, it could take three months to get 6-D approval. However, I will make representations on your behalf to see if Hello Sam
The 6-D documents were submitted to HBP today and I will await a response from them. As mentioned in our recent meeting, it could take three months to get 6-D approval. However, I will make representations on your behalf to see if you can get something that would assure you that it is OK to proceed with contract award.
I think that the extensive supporting information you provided following our meeting enhances the likelihood of getting HBP’s approval. My experience is that HBP is always helpful to agencies to get their projects completed, but I cannot give a commitment on behalf on the HBP.
Herman Sealey
Senior Transportation Engineer
D4 Office of Local Assistance
North Bay and HBP
(510) 926-0556
Teleworking: Monday, Thursday, and Friday
From: Sam Kumar <[email protected]
>
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2024 10:21 AM
To: Nyam, Jonathan@DOT <[email protected]>
Cc: Sealey, Herman@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
Importance: High
EXTERNAL EMAIL. Links/attachments may not be safe.
Hi Jonathan,
Attached are the documents exhibit 6-D, 6-B, and Bid Funds explanation document.
We have only 45 days from bid opening to let the contractor know if we are going to award the contract for the project per our municipal code and public contract code unless a protest if filed.
You may have encountered this situation on other projects. Please let me know how to handle the project contract since the contractor will ask for revised bid prices if we go beyond the stipulated time mentioned above if we ask to hold the bid prices for longer period.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Sam Kumar
Senior Civil Engineer
City of Vallejo | Public Works Department Engineering Division 555 Santa Clara Street, Vallejo, CA 94590
Office: (707) 648-4432 | [email protected]
From: Nyam, Jonathan@DOT <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 9:42 AM
To: Sam Kumar <[email protected]>
Cc: Sealey, Herman@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
Good morning Sam, A couple of things needs to be fixed. LAPG 6-D document. (pg 1 of 5) Please add in the reason section. Following the red arrow. “Please refer to the Bid funds explanation document for more details. ” Bid funds explanation document.
Good morning Sam,
A couple of things needs to be fixed.
LAPG 6-D document. (pg 1 of 5)
Please add in the reason section. Following the red arrow. “Please refer to the Bid funds explanation document for more details.” Bid funds explanation document.
Please add in the Bid funds explanation document. Following the red arrow.
Please mention in your own words. “The agency staff contacted the remaining 12 planholders who did not bid. Some planholders mention they were busy.”
Once you make the changes. Please review the LAPG 6-D and LAPG 6-B. Please print name, sign, and fill in the date for both documents are return them as soon as possible.
Please let me know if you need any further clarification or have any additional questions.
Thank you,
Jonathan Nyam
Area Engineer | Solano County| Sonoma County
Office of Local Assistance
Caltrans | District 4
111 Grand Ave
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 907-1277
[email protected]
Teleworking: Monday, Thursday, and Friday
From: Sam Kumar <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2024 3:21 PM
To: Sealey, Herman@DOT <[email protected]>; Nyam, Jonathan@DOT <[email protected]> Subject: RE: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
Importance: High
EXTERNAL EMAIL. Links/attachments may not be safe.
Hi Herman, Jonathan,
Please see documents ready for sending in 6-D exhibit. Please let me know if you have any questions.
I will sign the 6-D once I receive OK from Caltrans.
Regards,
Sam Kumar
Senior Civil Engineer
City of Vallejo | Public Works Department Engineering Division 555 Santa Clara Street, Vallejo, CA 94590
Office: (707) 648-4432 | [email protected]
From: Sealey, Herman@DOT <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2024 1:14 PM
To: Sam Kumar <[email protected]>; Nyam, Jonathan@DOT <[email protected]> Subject: RE: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
Please review. We will talk Herman Sealey Senior Transportation Engineer D4 Office of Local Assistance North Bay and HBP (510) 926-0556 Teleworking: Monday, Thursday, and Friday From: Sam Kumar <Sam. Kumar@ cityofvallejo. net> Sent: Wednesday, Please review. We will talk
Herman Sealey
Senior Transportation Engineer
D4 Office of Local Assistance
North Bay and HBP
(510) 926-0556
Teleworking: Monday, Thursday, and Friday
From: Sam Kumar <[email protected]
>
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2024 12:58 PM
To: Sealey, Herman@DOT <[email protected]>; Nyam, Jonathan@DOT <[email protected]> Subject: BPMP-5030(060) DRAFT 6-D
Importance: High
EXTERNAL EMAIL. Links/attachments may not be safe.
Hi Herman,
Attached is the draft 6-D with explanations as attachment. Please review and provide your comments.
Regards,
Sam Kumar
Senior Civil Engineer
City of Vallejo | Public Works Department Engineering Division 555 Santa Clara Street, Vallejo, CA 94590
Office: (707) 648-4432 | [email protected]
PROJECT LOCATION – MARE ISLAND CAUSEWAY BRIDGE