ABSTRACT: Five Noteworthy 2 June 2009 City Council Agenda Items, namely a Resolution of the City Council amending the agreement with Denise Duffy & Associates to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Flanders Property in an amount not to exceed $77,572, a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to enter into an agreement with CB Richard Ellis Consulting, Inc., for completion of the final economic analysis, appraisal and Phase II of the Flanders Property in an amount of $23,000 plus expenses, a Resolution accepting a proposal from Nichols Consulting Engineers for traffic and classifications counts and an update to the Construction Truck Impact Fee Study in an amount not to exceed $11,600, an Ordinance to revise the Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance/Local Coastal Implementation Plan returning all design and land use responsibilities to the Planning Commission and Consideration of recommendations from the Green Building Committee and the Planning Commission regarding a draft Green Building Ordinance, are presented. Selected excerpts from Agenda Item Summaries and Staff Reports are provided; COMMENTS are made on selected Agenda Items. The next City Council meetings will be the Special Budget Meeting, Tuesday, June 9, 2009, at 4:30 P.M. and the Flanders Protest Hearing, Tuesday, June 16, 2009, at 4:30 P.M. in Council Chambers.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
4:30 p.m., Open Session
East side of Monte Verde Street between Ocean and Seventh Avenues
VII. Consent Calendar
These matters include routine financial and administrative actions, which are usually approved by a single majority vote. Individual items may be removed from Consent by a member of the Council or the public for discussion and action.
F. Consideration of a Resolution of the City Council amending the agreement with Denise Duffy & Associates to prepare an Environmental Impact Report for the Flanders Property in an amount not to exceed $77,572.
Description: The contract for Denise Duffy & Associates, dated July 25, 2008, outlined the preparation of an EIR using existing information on the property and from the Flanders Property Final EIR, dated August 2005. The scope of work included defining parameters for project description; preparing an administrative draft of the EIR for comment by staff; preparing a draft EIR for public circulation; preparing responses to comments on the draft EIR; and attending public hearings.
On March 6, 2009, Denise Duffy & Associates submitted a Contract Amendment that included meeting attendance, preparation of environmental documents and project management, in amount not to exceed $9,500, as outlined in Attachment “A”.
On March 12, 2009, Denise Duffy & Associates submitted a second Contract Amendment that included additional tasks associated with the Final Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Flanders Property, in an amount not to exceed
$32,000, as outlined in Attachment “B”.
Finally, on May 8, 2009, Denise Duffy & Associates requested a third Contract Amendment for further additional professional services in connection with the Final Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report on the Flanders Property, in an amount not to exceed $36,072.
City Funds: $77,572.00 (Account 01-61051-0040).
Funds to be transferred from the General Operating Reserve.
Decision Record: Adopted Resolution 2008-49, approving an agreement with Denise Duffy & Associates, to prepare an EIR in an amount not to exceed $67,000.
• Three Contract Amendments, dated March 6, March 12 and May 8, 2009 were submitted to the City by Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc. Yet the Resolution amending the agreement with Denise Duffy & Associates is only now on the 2 June 2009 City Council Agenda. Moreover, the City paid Denise Duffy & Associates $26,360.61 by April 21, 2009.
117710 4/14/09 DENISE DUFFY & ASSOCIATES $ 9,500.00 01 61051 FLANDERS PROPERTY EIR
117766 4/21/09 DENISE DUFFY & ASSOCIATES $ 16,483.15 01 61051 FLANDERS PROPERTY EIR
----Vendor Total---- $ 26,360.61
Further evidence of a familiar pattern whereby the City expends taxpayer dollars prior to a resolution being placed on a public hearing agenda. And it is reminiscent of the City’s expenditures for materials and labor for the Dolores St. speed hump which was only removed when an attorney for the Dolores St. neighbors threatened a lawsuit against the City for misappropriation of funds due to the item never being placed on a City agenda for public hearing.
G. Consideration of a Resolution authorizing the City Administrator to enter into an agreement with CB Richard Ellis Consulting, Inc., for completion of the final economic analysis, appraisal and Phase II of the Flanders Property in an amount of $23,000 plus expenses.
Description: CB Richard Ellis Consulting (CBRE) will complete the final economic analysis, appraisal and Phase II, as detailed in Attachment “A”.
City Funds: $23,000 plus expenses (Account 01-61051-0040).
These funds will be transferred from the General Operating Reserve.
Important Considerations: CBRE’s original contract, effective July 21, 2008, was for $40,000 to provide the economic analysis for the Flanders Property. On October 21, 2008, CBRE received an additional $5,000 for further professional services related to the economic analysis of the Flanders property.
Decision Record: Resolution 2008-50, approving preparation of economic analysis for the Flanders property;
• As of the City May Check Register, the City had paid CBRE Consulting Inc. $52,483.72. Moreover, on April 21, 2009, the City paid CBRE Consulting Inc. $6,882.50, presumably towards the $23,000, as follows:
117760 4/21/09 CBRE CONSULTING INC. $ 6,882.50 01 61051 FLANDERS PROPERTY ECONOMIC ANALYSIS PROJECT
Again, further evidence of the City expending taxpayer dollars prior to the resolution being placed on a City agenda for public hearing.
• Two dates on CB Richard Ellis Consulting letter to City regarding Flanders Property Economic Analysis – Supplemental Budget, namely, March 2, 2009 (page 1) and February 27, 2009 (pages 2 and 3).
H. Consideration of a Resolution accepting a proposal from Nichols Consulting Engineers for traffic and classifications counts and an update to the Construction Truck Impact Fee Study in an amount not to exceed $11,600.
Description: In February 2008, a Construction Truck Impact Fee Study prepared by Nichols Consulting Engineers (NCE) was presented to the City Council. The study included statistics from traffic counts conducted in the City of Monterey. To update the study with construction traffic activity in Carmel-by-the-Sea, the City requested that NCE submit a proposal for traffic and classifications counts.
NCE’s proposal is outlined in Exhibit “A”. The information gleaned from the traffic counts will be used to update the Construction Truck Impact Fee report. The City Council then may consider implementing a construction truck impact fee to raise monies for streets and roads affected by construction truck activity. The fee would be assessed to builders as they apply for construction building permits.
Overall Cost: City Funds: $11,600, funded from Administration Department Professional Services Account 01-64051.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Resolution.
Important Considerations: City Council directed staff to study the possibility of imposing a construction truck impact fee to help fund street and road projects. The Construction Truck Impact Fee Study previously prepared by NCE included traffic counts from the City of Monterey. By conducting a traffic count within the limits of Carmel-by-the-Sea, the City will have more accurate data to evaluate the impact of construction trucks on its streets.
• The most inopportune times to impose a construction truck impact fee are during a time of economic downturn and slow economic recovery. Moreover, any construction truck impact fee will be passed onto the property owner; hence, a hidden tax on property owners.
B. Consideration of an Ordinance to revise the Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance/Local Coastal Implementation Plan returning all design and land use responsibilities to the Planning Commission (First reading).
Description: The Design Review Board currently reviews applications for design review not requiring land use permits or those that are not otherwise reserved for the Planning Commission. This ordinance would return all responsibilities for design and land use to the Planning Commission.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Ordinance.
Important Considerations: CMC Chapter 17.52.050 establishes the responsibilities of the Design Review Board. The Board’s role has been limited to the review of design applications not involving other land use permits. Returning all design and land use responsibilities to the Planning Commission will create more consistency for applicants going through the planning process. This also will reduce pressures on staff, as it will be one fewer Board to manage.
Decision Record: This item was discussed at the April 7, 2009 meeting for action. The City Council deliberated on the draft ordinance and tabled it at that time.
At the Special February 4, 2009 City Council meeting on the mid-year budget, the City Administrator recommended returning all land use and design responsibilities to the Planning Commission. Following are some of the reasons for this recommendation:
1. Changing demographics: Carmel does not have the qualified applicant pool that it once enjoyed due to the high number of second home owners and our sizable retired community. There are three positions on both the Planning Commission and the Design Review Board that expire this October -- a total of six. One Commission member has already moved from the area and two others have indicated their desire to “retire”. Some whose terms expire may wish to be reappointed. If not, Carmel-by-the-Sea faces a virtually impossible task of finding qualified candidates who must be Carmel-by-the-Sea residents and voters. Keeping Carmel “Carmel” depends on the application and understanding of both our Design Guidelines and codes. Openings for this year’s Boards and Commissions have been posted since the first of the year.
2. Reduced staff workload: An additional benefit is a reduced workload for the four-member staff (two of whom are planners), as it will have one fewer Board to manage. The Planning staff currently is responsible for the regular and special meetings of the Planning Commission, Design Review Board, Historic Resources Board and the Forest and Beach Commission, which amounts to preparing for a minimum of one meeting per week.
3. Consistency: This ordinance will simplify the design review process by creating a single decision-making body, as existed before 2001. This also will ensure consistency for applicants in how the City interprets and applies its design guidelines and criteria. There had been talk about the need for a joint meeting of the two bodies, as there has been inconsistency on design decisions: e.g. design elements such as mass and bulk, windows and skylights, to name a few.
4. Decrease in revenue from Building Permits and Fees: Annual revenues in the past few years were in excess of $300,000. Since the decrease in construction, revenues and related fees have fallen approximately 40%. Spec projects are not being built and projects are smaller and simpler.
• When the City Council tabled the Draft Ordinance at the April 7, 2009 meeting, the City Council led the public to believe that it would only be reconsidered if and when there were too few applications for vacancies for the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission by October 2009. To wit, neither the Agenda Item Summary nor the Staff Report articulates the reason why this agenda item is now on the June 2, 2009 City Council Agenda.
XI. Orders of Council
B. Consideration of recommendations from the Green Building Committee and the Planning Commission regarding a draft Green Building Ordinance.
Description: The draft Green Building Ordinance would establish criteria that new construction projects must meet in order to receive a building permit. The goal of the ordinance is to guide development in a sustainable manner, promote energy efficiency, improve air quality, preserve natural resources and encourage architectural design that is consistent with the City's design traditions.
Staff Recommendation: Provide direction on the draft ordinance.
Important Considerations: In December 2009 a Green Building Committee was appointed to develop recommendations on a green building program for the City. The Committee was composed of local architects, builders, a City Council member, and a member of staff.
Decision Record: The Planning Commission recommended adoption of a green building ordinance on 20 May 2009.
Green Building Committee
Karen Sharp: Carmel City Council Member
John Thodos: Local Architect
Safwat Malek: Local Architect
Brendan Connolly: Local Builder
Jordan Daniels: Local Green Building Consultant
Sean Conroy: Planning & Building Services Manager
Recommendation #1: Adopt the following as the mission statement for the green building program:
"The mission of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea's green building program is to guide development in a sustainable manner, promote energy efficiency, improve air quality, preserve natural resources and encourage architectural design that is consistent with the City's diverse design traditions."
Recommendation #2: Use the Build it Green checklist for residential projects and the LEED Commercial checklist for non-residential projects as the basis of the program.
Recommendation #3: Require the following number of points for residential and nonresidential projects in order to obtain a building permit:
New Construction (i.e. demo/rebuild) 60 points
New Addition/Remodel > 750 sq. ft. 25 points
New Addition/Remodel < 750 sq. ft. 15 points
Bathroom/Kitchen Remodel only 4 points
New Construction (i.e. demo/rebuild) 24 pts.
Additions/Remodels > 1000 sq. ft. 18 pts.
Additions/Remodels < 1000 sq. ft. 16 pts.
Recommendation #3: Adopt the following incentive levels and discuss potential incentives:
Residential: 120 pts.
Non-Residential: 40 pts.
Recommendation #4: Allow for the requirements of the ordinance to be phased in and not become mandatory until 1January 2010.
Recommendation #5: Require that the City exceed the standard point requirements by 15% for all City projects that exceed 1,000 square feet.
The next meetings of the City Council, as follows:
Special Budget Meeting – 4:30 p.m.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Special Meeting—Flanders Protest Hearing – 4:30 p.m.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
(Sources: City Council Agenda June 2, 2009 and City Council Agenda Packet June 2009)