HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 09 2/20/2001 CITY'OF.PETALUNIA,,CAIIFORNIA 9
• AGENDA BILL •
A>enda Title: 1Vleeting Date 'February 20, 2001
• McDowell Boulevard/E: Washington, Street Intersection-
Transportation 'Improvement Project Assessment•District :#20004:
01(Project No 9863; Ph3): 'Q .Public-Hearing and receiving,
;ballots, B. -Adopt resolution adopting Engineer's Report;,
confirming the assessment, ordering'the work-and acquisitions and
directing actions with respect thereto, and iC. Adept' resolution
waiving up to 25% of the traffic mitigation fees for property
owners within Assessment District'2000-01.
`Department: Director.' Contact:Person: Phone Number:
Public Facilities and Rick`Sk d ien; Mike Evert • .778-4439
Services a ? �� h
Cost;of Proposal: Account Number:
$4,116,000 (Cost estimate,as used for-Alternate 1 improvements in 213-9863
•Assessment District Feasibility Study, and Final Engineer:'s Name of Fund:
Report) PCDC
Amount Budgeted: (Amount budgeted'in 5-Year CIP for Alter, 1) Traffic Mitigation Fee
PCDC 1,300,00.0
Traffic Mitigation Fee .4387,000
• $3,687,000 • '
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item;
Exhibit A - Agenda Bill'and-Agenda-Report.
Exhibit B - Agenda for Public Hearing.
• Exhibit C - Memo from Bond Counsel discussing Public Hearing process.
Exhibit D -Final:Engineer's Report:
Exhibit E - Proposed:assessment district boundary map.
Exhibit F - Listing;of property owners, businesses,and estimated annual assessment costs,per property
per square foot.
Exhibit G Assessment district property owners-mailing list
Exhibit H Project mailing list of interested parties.
• Exhibit I - Assessment district property owner meeting notice ifor the November 8, 2000;meeting.
I
Exhibit J - Property owner meeting presentation material—update..
I Exhibit K - Summay of traffic niitigation;fee waiver for 25%;expansion:of existing-facilities.
Exhibit L Map of intersection improvements for Alternative I.
' Exhibit M - Map of project Alternatives.1, B-1, and C. .
Exhibit N:e Assessment district schedule:
Exhibit 0 -Project schedule from design engineer.
Exhibit P - Assessment district ballot and procedure.
Exhibit Q - Copy of the City Council Agenda Bill.and-Report,of October 16,2000 (w/o attachments).
Exhibit R - Design engineer's project cost estiriiate.
Exhibit•S—Recommended:Final Engineer's Cost Estimate.
Resolution adopting Engineer's Report, connfirming`the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions
and directing actions with respect thereto.
Resolution waiving traffic mitigation fees-for property owners;within'Assessment District 2000-01.
I
•
Summary•Statement:
The formation of an assessment district for the McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St: Transportation
Improvement.Project would provide one of several potential funding sources for the project: On
December 4, 2000, a public hearing is scheduled for public comment and to receive ballots from the
propertyy owners within the .proposed assessment district. If a majority of the property owners vote in
favor of the assessment district and if the City Council wishes'to proceed with the assessment process, •'
the City Council will consider adopting a resolution adopting'Final Engineer's Report, confirming the
assessments, ordering the 'work and acquisitions and directing actions', with :respect thereto. This
resolution.confirms the 'assessments as shown in the Final Engineer's Report and directs the various
recording s and filings required by the assessment. laws to •establish the assessment liens The City
Council will be considering,a recommendation by City personnel for adopt a resolution waiving future
traffic mitigation fees for any development,,expans"ion of up to 25% of existing facility square footage on
properties within',the proposed assessment district. This waiver would be for life of the bonds for
assessment disiriel,2000-01..
Council`Priority: THISAGENDA ITEM IS CONSIDERED To-BE PART'OF,i ORrNECESSARY TO, ONE OR
MORE,;OP THF,: '19992000 PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED by THE CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 30,,1999
AND MARCH 1$, 2000.
•
Priority(s): 'RegionalTransportation Plan; and the Bicycle Plan.
•
Recommended,City:Council Action/Suggested,Motion:
A. Hold a Public Hearing and receiving ballots, B. Adopt resolution adopting Engineer's Report,
confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitionsarid'directing actions with respect
thereto, and C. Adopt resolution waiving up lb 25% of the traffic mitigation fees 'for property
owners within Assessment District 2000--01. It: is also recommended that advertising for,
construction bids be contingent on the property owners approving the assessment district as
outlined in the Final Engineer's Report for Assessment District 2000-01,
Reviewed b •Finance•Director:. Reviewed.by.CityAttorney: Approved by City Manager:
Dater =-.I , Date:
II is II-r lv
7'•
Today's Date: Revision #'a i' 'sae ' •vised: File Coder
'2/9/01 # Mcdowell27/pf&s staff folder me
•
•
•
•
2
•
•
•
• CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
FEBRUARY 20,":260I •
AGENDA,REPORT
FOR
THE MCDOWELLBOULEVARD/E. WASHINGTON STREET INTERSECTION
TRANSPORTATION'IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT #2000-
01(PROJECT No. 9863; PH. #3)
•
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The formation of an assessment district for the 'McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St.
Transportation Improvement Project would provide one of 'several potential funding
sources for the project. On.December 4, 2000, a public hearing is,scheduled for public
comment•and to receive ballots from the property owners within the proposed assessment
district. If a majority of`the property owners vote,.in favor of the assessment district and
if the City Council wishes-to proceed with the assessment process, the City Council will
consider adopting a resolution adopting Final Engineer'-s Report, ,confirming the
assessments, ordering the work and acquisitions and directing actions with respect
thereto. This resolution confirms the assessments as shown in the Final Engineer's
.. Report and directs the various.recordings and fihing required by the assessment-laws to
establish the assessment liens. The City Couneil will:be considering a recommendation
by City personnel' to adopt a<resolution waiving future traffic mitigation fees for any
developments expansion of up to 25% of existing facility square footage on properties
within the proposed assessment district. This"waiver would be for the life of bonds.for
.assessment district 2000-01.
2 BACKGROUND:' '
The.McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St. Intersection Transportation Improvement Project
is composed of three alternatives that were chosen by the City Council on October 4,.
1999. Alternative 1' includes transportation improvements:in the area of the intersection
(see+`Exhibit L1),,Alternative B-1 includes bicycle and pedestrian estrian improvements over
Highway 101 from off-ram p,of Hi g hwa y
101 to Ellis Street on the west,
and,Alternatrv'e[CIs being studied for bicycle improvements from McDowell Blvd. to
Adobe•Road on the east (see Exhibit M). Theprojeet'has continued to use Alternatives 1,
B-1, and C for identifying the specific improvements because each Alternative has its
own funding, design, and construction,scheduling issues. The City Council has directed .
City,personnel to complete the contract;documents:to construct the Alternative 1
intersection improvements in:2001(see.Exhibit L). Alternative B-1 and C are scheduled
for construction'in 2002 because+these Alternatives.have Federal funds. The Federal
funds require an NEPA environmental doeffinent, which,could take approximately 18
months to complete and approve.
1
Assessment District Formation:- .
The,formation;of an assessment district to fund a portion of this project must
follow the;guidelines•of State Proposition 218. The law has specific guidelines that-must,
be met in order for an assessment;district to be Viable., Two of the most`-important-are:
1) The,properties being assessed'mustseceivetadirect "special benefit=' from the
improvements,and;2) in order�for'the district to be formed,50% of the properties based
on the dollar amount being assessed, must vote in,favor of the;assessment•district.
One the tirst,steps in_the.formation of an assessment district was the preparation,of an
assessment district•feasibility study to determine if'a district is feasible. The Assessment
District Feasibility Study, which was.presented•to the CityCouncil on October,2,;2000,
discussed which aspects.of the project result in'"special benefit' to;specific,property
owners versus the "general benefit"`to the community, outlines which`properties,receive,
the•"special benefit", provided an estimated assessment district cost and;several
ds for„spreading coststo the benefiting parcels;;,and made a .
reco amendation'for apportioning;the:costs'that works..best for the property owners and
the,City:
•
The Assess"nie`ntsDistrict,Feasibility Study recommended funding,only.a portion:of
Alternative 1 improvements•at the intersection„and,not the bicycle and pedestrian
improvements in Alternatives`B-L or C._This is for two reasons°+One, the,feasibility
study,found little,tolno"specific`benefit ' for the bicycle and pedestrian-improvements in •
Alternatives,B-1 and'C for the properties.being;considered in the assessment district;,and
Two,•the final cost of the,assessment'district,once,established, should be set following
the acceptance of c onstructionbids,wi
thin'a'reasonablctime period. Bids for Alternative
1 improvements are due in the spring of 200;1.
•
Because the,Assessment-District Feasibility• recommended that an assessment
district be-based on the costs for Alternative 1 only and:not all three alternatives of the
project, the potential funding from an assessment;district„is reduced from previous
estimates: The Feasibility Reportjrecommended.that130%6,:or$1,234#800;of the total cost
of Alternative 1 ($4;116,000), be funded by the assessment district. Of thel:30%d,
being assessed against privateparcels Within the proposed.boundary, and,6% is assessed
against:-the City's:Community .Center;property. The 30% share came from a destination
survey, which;showed that 24% of the drivers entering'the intersection during,the peak
hours•were there to&go shopping or toa restaurant. Theotheri6%o were thereto attend
City recreation'facilities. These percentages wereconfirmed by the City's traffic Model.
• The Assessment`Engineer felt that,thecommunity Center should be part'of the
assessment district because=it receivesaaaspecial benefit,.and its main'entrance,isiserved,
by thetsame signalized intersection,as the P,Iaza North Shopping Center; which is;also in
the proposed.assessment district. The properties that are recommended;to:be:included in
the Assessment District are (see proposed assessment district boundo,map, Exhibit E)::
P. The':Petaluma Community Center'
• Beat Western Petaluma Inn
2
•
p Plaza Shopping:Center
• Plaza North Shopping Center
• Washington Square Shopping Center
• Chevron Service Station
• The Wherehouse Store Shopping;Center,
A detailed listing of these properties,and the proposed assessments are shown on`pages
13 and 14 of the Final'Engineer's„Report, Exhibit D. A listing of the properties with
owner; square footage, and estimated annual cost per square foot is shown on page 3 of
Exhibit F. The boundary map for the proposed assessment:district, assessment'numbers.
and property owner addressesare,shown in the Final`=Engineer's Report (Exhibit D)'. The
report follows the recommendation*in the Assessment District-Feasibility Study, is the
formal document that approves the estimate of project,cosfs, and spreads those costs to
the benefiting properties: 'The assessments as shown in the Final Engineer's Report -
-represents.the highest assessrnent:that can be placed on a given property, without a new
notice and ballot to eacthproperty owner.
In order,to keep the property owners informed during-the'development of the'assessment
district, and allow their input on how the assessment formula`ispapplied to their specific
situation, City personnel,theAssessment Engineer, Bond Counsel,Design Engineer, and
Right-of-Way Agent met with most of the property owners or their representatives on
July 19, 2000. The.Assessment-Engineer-hasattemptedto address their-comments in the
Assessment District Feasibility Study and in the attachedFinal Engineer's Report. City
personnel hosted,additional,meetings with the property owners on September 20, and
November 8, 2000. A copy of the':November 8,;2000 meeting'notice, and assessment
district information is attached as Exhibits.I and J.
The net funding"to the project from the assessment district is the total contribution from
all assessed parcels of$1;234,800, minus„the Community Center's contribution of
$246,960, or$987,840.; In order to form andadminister the°assessment district for twenty
years, it was estimated that approximately $5115,200;,must be added to the assessment
district to.cover these costs. -the;cests include the:expense Of the Assessment Engineer,
Bond Counsel, and incidental expenses such a's"the'bond reserve, funded interest, etc.
However, by further examination by thedassessnient engineer and City personnel, it has
been determined that the City could purchase theiassessmentbonds itself This would
eliminate the financing costs (underwriter's discount ;bond reserve, printing costs, and
most,of the prepaid interest and contingency)'associated with a.market rate:bond `sale„and
save'the assessment district.approximatelyI400,000. It is reasonable;for the City to
purchase the assessment bonds because of the relatively;small'size;of the assessment
district. The City would receive;the:same interest on the as"`aprivate investor,
while.reducing.the cost of the assessmentrdistrict. A comparison of the districts
preliminaryand currentcosts is shown”on page 4 of the`Final:Engineer's Report, Exhibit
D. The"preliminary costs'column shows'the previous assessment district cost The
"confirmed costs” column,represents the proposed assessment district costs. The effect
of this cost reducing measure is the reduction ofthe annual square foot cost from $0.21 to
• $0.16,�as shown on page 3 Of Exhibit T. Thetotal Final:A'ssessment District cost was
3
further:>reduced to $1,310,270 by changing the bond•counsel's costand eliminating the' •
funded interest (see Exhibit S).
Response to•tfdperty Owner Requests::
Several of the property owners+within the•proposedassessment;district have'requested
that the City•consider waiving`futuiestraffic-mitigation fees for future development on
their properties; and,the Best.Western Petaluma Inn have requested that{the,City
reimburse the Inn for lost:revenueacaused bythe anticipated construction;(discussed
below); The waiving of a portion;of future',traffic mitigation fees can be'considered,an
assessment district issue: The Final.Engineer.'s.Report(Exhibit D)mentions on page 7,
thationeiof the special,benefit •received by the properties`in the'proposed assessment
district Fisthat the intersection improvements anticipate future,development conditions on
their,:properties, One;ofthe future development_conditions is the contribution:of traffic
mitigation fees. The property owners.have•requestedthat the City waive future traffic
mitigation fees equalrto the amounts of their assessments; however,,City personnel
recommend to the City Council:that=if the,property owners:agree'to an assessment
district, the:Citywill,waiverthe traffic mitigation fee for development expansion ofup to
25%of existing square footage, within a period of:tenyears from the establishment;of
Assessment District 2000-01. A 25% increase.in existing facilities foraTtheparcels
withindthetproposedassessment district amounts to 145;456 square feet. 'The potential
loss of traffic,mitigation fees for this:waiver is $361,894 (See Exhibit'K)if all the
properties•were,to exercise this option.
•
Property Owner Construction Impacts •
The construction of the^improvements will=-impact two properties One2ofthe properties
is the Best Western Petaluma Inn. Thelnn hastwelverooms that aresituated along
McDowell Blvd.'So., where•pavement replacement at the intersection.is°expected to
occur of nightrfor approximately one month. Thework.will involve^replacing the asphalt
with concrete in both directions ontE. Washington St:, and on McDowell Blvd. So. The
asphalt will be',removed.by grinding between? p.m::to l`0 p m:, concrete'poured between •
10 p:m. to 2 a.m., and the-road opened.at.6a.m. It.is felt that this work wouldcreate
noise levels to high to rent the rooms during the pavement;replacement work The
estimated cost to compensate the Inn for,therooms for one month is $35,280.(six;rooms
at $950er night,,and'si loom's at $101 pennight for 30T nights):
T esenond the
e construction,is•the,Beacon Service?Station'located.
P P Y � p Y
intersection It is envisioned thatithe,City's,contractorand
the utility companies would.use most of the service'station property for approximately
two months. The City's-contractor would`use•theiservice-station'property to widen both
McDowell Blvd No and E. Washington.St.,.lengthentheTbox:culvert for-`Washington
Creek, rehabilitate Washington Creek, and the utility companies could,relocate their
utilities. The advantage of this°work plan_isthat it would:provide a staging area`for,the
sa tya minimizing P othe traffc� ingthe intersection: Ci person el recommendthatthe City Coun i6authorizes'th
the
4
City,Manager to negotiate coinpensation agreement's with,the,Best Western Petaluma Inn
• and the Beacon service station owners for construction,impacts: The cost of.the Beacon -
Station package;is not known at this time.
Assessment District Process
It is estimated that the formation of an assessment district would require at least four City
Council:meetings.:The steps are outlined in the schedulefrom;the Assessment Engineer,
Exhibit-E. It is recommended that the assessment district be formed in December 2000,
so that.the City knows:whether assessment district funds are secure before authorizing the
acceptance of.construction'bidsinthe Spring of 2091. Because assessment amounts
cannot be raised once an assessment district is formed, 20% or $337,000 was added to the
design engineer's estimate for improvements, and,$500,000 was,added",to the estimated
cost for,right-of-way acquisition: These adjustments:are:reflected in the Final Engineer's
Report cost estimate in Exhibit D, table 1, page 4. Once bidsare received, and the
project's actual costs are known, the assessments may.be adjusted downward.
The adoption the resolution in-this...Council packet, adoptingthe4FinalEngineer's Report,
confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and directing
actions with respect thereto, confirms the assessments::as.shown in the Final Engineer's
Report and directs the Various recordings and filings required`by the assessment laws to
establish the assessment.liens: This resolution should be adopted only if there is a
majority approval of theassessment district and if the•Council wishes:to proceed with the
•I assessment process.
For the:assessrnent districtLto ke established, 50% of the property owners, based on the
dollar value of the assessments, must vote in favor:of the assessment district. The ballots
will be counted before the;close of the public hearing. The City Council will have the
option to close or continue the public'hearing. If the public;hearing is closed on
December 4, 2000, and assuming that the property owners,approve the assessment
district, the Council will adopt a resolution approving the Final Engineer's Report. The
Council will also be approving'the assessmentscbased on estimates: Once bids are
received in the spring of 2001, assessments will be set basedon the bids.
•
The adoptionof this resolution does not commit the Council,to issuing any bonds. Also,
the,adoption.of this resolution--does not prevent;the Council.from lowering-assessments at
a later'meeting. Please remember that assessments,cannot be increased without further
assessment notices and ballots. This resolution also directs the giving'of published notice
of assessment confirmation and of written•notice'to the.property owners of their cash
payment opportunity. Please note that;the;Finance Director isthe official designated to
collect,any cash payments. Upon,adoption of thisrresolution, the Bond Counsel will
provide the required instructions and forms:of notices needed to carry out these tasks.
The next step in the?process is scheduled to.take place,at the City Council meeting in
May 2001, when the City.Council is scheduled to adopt a resolution authorizing the
issuance of bond's and directing various actions and,possibly°a resolution of change and
5
modifications.- With.this.action.the Council will be?authonzingthe Issuance of bonds,
which may be purchased by the City. The date of this meeting°will:be finalized after
construction-bids are:received; favorable'bidswill allow the Council to reduce •
assessments•by approving the resolution'of change and modifications..
ProjectISthedule:
•
Several key project tasks,are being,tracked;simultaneously in order to meet the'City
Council's?goal of constructing the intersection transportation improvements;in
Alternative 1, in the summerof:200 The'bicycle and;pedestrian improvements in
Alternatives•B-1 and C are scheduled for2002 in order to complete the environmental
documents necessary for securing;Federal funds. The schedule for theltwo,phases of,the;
improvements is shown-on Exhibit 0. Right-of-way acquisition continues to be the'key
issue•inthe schedule: To insure;that the project.has the necessary right-of way for
construction the summer of 2001, City personnel will be requesting in:a:few months
that the City Council implement eminentidomainproceedings to•secure right-of-eritly.
This-action will follow'the:approval of the,appraisal_report by the City Council.in..
December 2000;vor January 2001.
2. ALTERNATIVES:
1. Hold a Public ;Hearing and receive ballots B. Adopt resolution adopting Final
Engineers Report, confirming the assessment, ordering the work and •acquisitions and
directing actien"scwith respect thereto, and Cr Adopt resolution waiving;traffic mitigation •,
fees"for property owners within Assessment District 2000-01.
2. Hold a Public Hearing and receive ballots; and B. Adopt, resolution adopting Final
Engineer's Re ort, confirming the assessment, ordering the was and acquisitions and
directingfactions;with°respect thereto.
3. Do not hold:a Public Hearing or-receive ballot's, or_B. Adopt resolution adopting Final
Engineer's Report, 'confirming the assessment, ordering•the work and acquisitions and
directing actions with respect thereto, or C. Adopt resolution waiving traffic mitigation
fees for property owners within.Assessment District 2000 41.
4. Postpone the City project,,and,require:of the propertiest as a-condition of approval for any
expansion or change Muse; that the properties dedicate=the:required right-of wayand =
'coristructtheir share of the-proposed improvements asiA condition of a permit. At-this
time,'three of the largest=properties have submitted plans to the City to expand their
facilities.
5. Otherreombinations or'options resulting from the discussion by;the•City Council.
3. FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
An update of the estimated costs by the design engineer for the
Alternatives'1, B-1, and C•is?shown.on Exhibit R. The-project's cost estimate in October
6'
•
1, 1999 is shown in the top block. The revised project:cost as of September 5, 2000 in
•• shown in the middle block. The project's budget,,,as shown in the•5.Year Capital
ImprovemenCPlan, is shown in-the bottom.block.
The cost of the intersection transportation improvements in Alternative 1 was increased
from,the October 1, 1999,estimate by $704,000. iPhis increase was to include the
Landscape Conceptual Design A improvements for$335,000, the special concrete paver
crosswalks for $134,000, and;to include replacing'the,approach lanes on East.Washington
St. and McDowell Blvd. So. with concrete instead of asphalt for an added cost of
$235,000. It is proposed'that these improvements be funded by the Traffic Mitigation
Fund, PCDC, and an assessment district:
The estimated cost for the,bicycle and pedestrian improvements in Alternative B-1
(bicycle and pedestrian improvements over Highway 101) has_remained.Ihe same.
The estimated'cost forthe bicycle and pedestrian improvements in Alternative C
(McDowell Blvd. to Adobe-Rd.) has increased by $671,000 because of the cost of the
improvements along'Washington Creek from McDowell.Blvd. to Sonoma Mountain:
Parkway.
Estimated costs for Alternative.himprovements;atthe intersection:
Two project cost estimates are noted below. The cost estimate shown below and on the.
left is the Design Engineer's estimate. Thecost estimate shown below and on the right is
the cost.estimate as used in the Assessment DistrictsFeasibility.Study, and in the Final
Engineer's Report: .
Estimated cost for Alternate 1
intersection'improvements, as used
in:the'Assessment District
Feasibility
Design Engineer's revised estimated g g imated cost Study, and'in the Final
for Alternate'1 intersectton'irnprovements Engineer's..Report
Admin%Iiispection $435,000' $435,000
Planning/Design 435,000 435,000
Land Acquisition, 303,000 803,000 (1)
Improvements 1,685,000, 2,022,000 (2)
Contingency 421,000 421,000
Estimated Cost $3,463;000 $4,116000
(1) It;is anticipated that,the.assessment'district will be-formed prior to receiving
construction bids. Because the amount of the bonding for an assessment district
cannot be raised after a district is formed, the estimated costs for land acquisition
.i was increased by$500;000 to insure that there is adequate funding to purchase
7
needed right-of:way., Once,the appraisals are:completed',and accepted, and.bids'
are received, the surplus funds will be returned to the properties being assessed
(2)•As'in (1), 20% or$337,000°was added°to the Design ngineer's,estimated cost:for
the"improvements.
Estimated funded sources fo(.Alternative 1, improvements atthe intersection when using.
the`estimated.cost shown in the Assessrnent District FeasibilityStudy,and Final''
Engineer's Report: .
PCDC • $1;300;000
Special Assessments 987,840 (3)
Traffic Mitigation Fund 1,828;160
Total-proposed funding $4,1'16;000
3)The estimated fundsgeneratediby.the-assessmentdistrict are based;on;a_substantial
contingency. ::The actual funding will be determined after a:property-appraisal is
completed and construction bids are received. - •
The proposal,to waive the traffictmitigation;fee to those:properties within the`proposed
assessment district for future expansion of up:to 25%7045,456.square,feet) within ten,
years the formatiouof the4ssessment district could result in the p otential loss of traffic
mitigation fees:of$361,894 (See:Exhibit K).
Total'estimatedi'cost'and proposedtfundingsources,for all:Alternatesr1,(construction in
2001),B-1,-and C;(construction in 2002)`when using the Design Engineer's cost:estimate
(see Exhibit"R)
Uses: •
Adrr in:/Inspection, - $9551,000
Planning/Design 828,000
Land Acquisition 303,0.00
Improvements 3 656;000:
• Contingency' 977;000
Total Cost. • $6,719,600:(Design Engineer's project cost:estimater-.
see Exhibit.R).
Potential.Funding Sources:•
•
;PCDC, $1,300,000 •
Speeial Assessments 987;840
Traffic Mitigation Fees 2,387,000 •
TEA-21 &'TDA;funds • 1,050,000 •
Safe Routes-to School,grant, 500,000.
8
•
Undetermined funds 494,160 (4)
Total funding $6,719;000
(4) This shortfall in funding will affect the bicycle and,pedestrian improvements in
Alternatives B-1 and C, scheduled for construction in 2002. An alternative of installing
5-foot wide bike lanes on both-sides of E. Washington St.'from McDowell Blvd. to
Sonoma Mountain Parkway (Alternate C) is to.turn Lauren.Drive into a bike boulevard.
This would reduce=the cost,of Alternate C to $2,292,000 (a-reduction in cost of
approximately$753,000).
4. CONCLUSION:
The Assessment District Feasibility Study has determined that the properties within the
proposed assessment,district receive the following;special benefits from the
improvements: Improved access for their properties, improved aesthetics at the
intersection and in front of the properties, frontage improvements that anticipate future
development conditions;Iand'the"properties continue to be provided non-conforming
access conditions:
6. OUTCOMES OR.PERFORMANCE.MEASUREMENTS':THAT.WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
Start the construction of the intersection transportation:improvements for Alternative 1 in
the summer of 2001.
7. RECOMMENDATION:
•
Hold:a Public Hearing and receiving ballots, B. Adopt resolution adopting Engineer's
Report, confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and directing
actions with:respect thereto,,and C. Adopt resolution waiving up to 25% of the traffic
mitigation fees for property owners within Assessment :District 2000-01. It is also
recommended that advertising-for construction bids be contingent on the property owners
approving the assessment district as outlined in the Engineer's Report for Assessment
District 2000-01.
Mcdowel l27/s;pf&s folder/me
•
9
26091-02 JH:SRC:sgs 2/9/01
CITY OF PETALUMA •
Assessment:District'2000-1
(McDowell fE.;Washington)
• AGENDA FOR-PUBLIC HEARING& •
Februaiy20,2001
1. MAYOR-declares public hearing open.
2. STAFF (AND CONSULTANTS) - :summary of the project and financing, how the
assessments^are.levied, and the25% waiver of traffic mitigation fees.
3. MAYOR- asit for'and colleets any remaining ballots:
4. MAYOR- asks the:Clerk•for the results of the ballots Take a brief break if necessary. Clerk
announces result of&allots. Take a brief break if necessary.
5. MAYOR:= If the Council decides to continue the hearing, it continues to another Council.
meeting and takes no further action at this meeting: If there is a majority ballof.approval,.
the hearing is formally closed and.the"Council considers and adopts:
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Petaluma,Adopting
'Engineer's Report, Confirming the Assessment.and:Orderingrthe Work
and Acquisitions, and Directing Actions with Respect Thereto
;End of Item
5/me/mcdowell/agenda order
•
•
. ONES HAIL .2 .A PROFESSIONAL LAW'.CORPORATION'
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CHARLES cc F.ADAMS. 060 CALIFORNIA STREET
STEP)ffiJ a GASALEGOIO EXG •.iFL•�.
SiT£P.N-LR FLOOR
THOMAS A DOWNEY SAN FRANCISCO.CA 94106'
DAVID T.MAMA
SCOTT H.FERGUSON' TFI SHONE
ANDREW C HALL JR. 1415)301-3960`
COURTNEY L JONES FACSIMILE
WILLIAM J.KADI
Wn IItiM E.MADISON. Thursday, November 2,2000 14131391-5784
STEPHEN G.MFR LKI. N HOMEPAGE hap://www.jhhw.com
DAVID J.osTER -
KENNET WALTON
bid E c E. Q V it
i.EENNEIH L JONES,OF anima. -�f[ U D
nl
Michael C. Evert, RE.
Engineering Manager
City of Petaluma PUBLIC FncielnES
P.O. Box 61 AND SERVICES
Petaluma, CA 94953
Via e-mail and UPStvernighf .
Re: Assessment District 2000-1 (McDowell/E. Washington)--Public Hearing and
Assessment-Ballot—Confirmation of Assessments
Dear Mike:
The public hearing and assessment;ballot is scheduled,-forDecember 4, 2000. Here are
the materials needed to conduct the:hearing and if appropriate, confirm the assessments:
1: Agendaifor'Hearing. This is the order by which the,hearing should proceed and
is for the guidance of the Council in.holding the hearing:'The Council may follow its usual
hearing practices,provided that the hearing is formally opened',i,and,'if"desired,formally closed.
2. Suggested Opening Remarks. This is for the convenience of the Mayor or Vice
May who will be presiding over the hearing,
3. Resolution Adopting ;Engineer's Report; Confirming the Assessment,
' Ordering the Work and Acquisitionss:.and Directing Actions with Respect Thereto. This •
resolution mav'be adopted only if there is a majority approval of the assessment and if the
Council wishes to proceed with the assessment process This resolution confirms the
assessments as shown;;in the Engineer's Report and directs the various recordings and filings
required by the assessment laws to establisn>theassessment liens.
The adoption of this resolution does`not coirunit the Council to issuing-any bonds., -Also,
the adoption of this resolution does not prevent,the^CounciLfrom lowering;assessments at a
later meeting: Please remember that 'assessments, cannot be increased without further
assessment notices and ballots.
This,resolution also directs the sing of published notice of assessment confirmation
and of written notice to the property owners of their cash payment opportunity. Please note
. that the Finance Director, is' the official de ignated to: ,collect any cash payments. Upon
E,XL ' ( bIY C .
•
Michael C.-.Evert;or,E,
Noverriber.2.42i100
Page 2
411
adoption of thiS'reSoltition,IWill provide the required instructions and forms of notices needed'
tcycarry-outfthese tasks.
I will attend the hearing and assist as required. Upon'adoption, please-provide to me:a.
certified copy Of the adoptedlreiolution.
Very truly yours,
Stephen12. Casaleggia,
SRC:sgs
Enclosures
ccw/enc.: Beverly Kline, City Clerk
Richard Rualriarky, City Attorney
Bill.Thotha.finaiiceDifeCtot
Mary Grace Pawson, 171ARRIS'&,ASSOCIATES
.„
. •
•
• •
•
•
•
•
•
sa . . . ..
µ !ii' 'f''
c _
a K( r ( h:.
a ( . 1: w x :,,, `F
V.
A.
r C
'Fhr� t
k? °�, ,y; , ' f 'Final Engineer's Report-91..6.,7,3-..!-F _ 4_
; , .
,z•i k r ?• •"-%,:q.",:'..-„.: - � 4 F�.p for
d a
. ,
,. r d t''y 0 `P Pn
`a(.. d. .LJ ..
„6 l.. .. .. .. ... -
t
` 3 propose d Assessment District 2000-01
"'I.'
Y r (VIc�Dowell-Washington)
b
.lk U4 { Z J �'
`M ( ' r x �
f 4'..
iN ti
1'' k > 1,w rq rA .
! Prepar"ed:fo_r:
ti .
x
s,' •+:
.. m i kit) I. n
City of Petaluma
yf n - \.
�..
K
'
p �u " l� ` Ity>
Prepared by:
r i�, Is
Ni yr Fes ; t F f
Harris: & Associates
;' ;p r '9..):,.,:c ts -
A�4 '
��& .
•q I ' 151'f, _.
:I()Vern . 3000
r� w (
h
� " <a P: pz�e
tJ. f
I
I a
t '
City Of Petaluma I 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washirigton Street)
Final Engineer's Report
TABLE O-F CONTENTS
- • W..
Assessment
Engineers Cost Estimate pg 4
MethOd elf Astesthnent •
General g. 5
5
•
•
Project Overview • :Pg. '5 •
Benefit
Considerations from Proposition 218, . Pg. 6
Sp'ecial Benefit Analysis Pa 7'
ApportiOrunentiForrnfila Pg 8
Metitodior Allocating,Costs to the Assessment District 'Pg. 8
Method for Allocating Costs within the.Assessment District Pg 9.', •
Description of Improvements P2 11 -
Boundary Map and Assessment Diagram :Pg. 12
Assessment Roll _ . Pg. 13
Names;and Addrestes of Ovvriets 15g.
• Plans and Specifications - - Pa 15' 2.
Annual AdministfativeAssessment Pg. L6 '
Certificates Wa 17
C ■W IN DOW S TE NI PT!nal TO C.doc
City,Of Petaluma, 10/31/00
Assessment District-200D-01 (McDowell Blvd:/East Washington Street)'
Final Engineer's Report. Page-1"
ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, ohOctober 16, 2000,the City Council of the Ciw:ofP,etaluma, County of Sonoma, State
of California under the Municipal Improvement Act ofi1913 (the Act) adopted its Resolution of
• Intention Na. 00-192'.N.C;S. The,.proceedings include financing;for the acquisition and/or construction
of the public improvements more particularly therein described, inland for the City's Assessment
District 2600-01 (McDowell'Blvd.fEast WashingtonStreet), (the."Assessment Distract").
WHEREAS, said Resolution'!directed the,undersigned to•make-and file a report presenting:
a) Maps and 'descriptions 011ie lands and easements to be acquired if any;
b) Plans and specifications of the.proposed improvements if the improvements are not already
installed,.including the class andaypes of improvements foreacli'zone:of'the.Assessment District, if
these zones exist;
•
c) A general description of the works'or appliances already installed and any,other property necessary
or convenient for the operation of the improvements; if the'worls, appliances or property are to be
acquired as part of the improvements;
d) An esti'mate,of the cost-,of the improvements and the cost of lands nehts-oi,way, easements and
incidental expenses in connection the improvements including any cost,of registering bonds;
is e) A diagram showing, as they existed at'ihe time of the passage;of the Resolution of Intention, all of
the following:
1 The exterior boundaries of the'assessment district
. 2 The boundaries of any zone within the district: •
3 Ttielines and dimensions of each parcel':of land`within the district;with each subdivision
given a separate number upon the diagram;
1) A proposeMassessmentof the total,amount of the cost and`expense of the proposed improvements
upon the subdivisions of land inithe district in proportion to:the estimated benefits to be received by
each subdivision respectively. The assessment shall refer to the subdivisions by their respective
numbers; -
g) A proposed maximum annual'assessment upon each of the subdivisions of land in the,district to
pay costs incurred by the City of-Petaluma and not others ise'reimbursed;which result from the
administration and collection of assessments or°from_the adniinistration or registration of any
associated bonds and reserve:or other related funds.
The particulars of which are described in the Resolution; inco,rporated,herein by reference;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned;by virtue of the powë ''vested in me under said Actsnd the
order of ihe'City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby make:the following:assessment to cover the
portion of the estimated,,cost ofsaid acquisitions:work and improvements; and the costs and expenses
op, incidental thereto which specifically benefit the Assessment District and are to be paid by the
Assessment District;
C:\WINDOWS\TE\1PTrinallengincer's report doc
City Of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment.District 2000.01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington Street)
Final Engineers Report Page 2
•
The amount to be paid'for said acquisitions, work;and improvements, and the expenses incidental
thereto, is:generallyas,follows:
SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE
(1) I - (2), I- (3)-As Preliminarily ' As Confirmed" As,Modifie i
Approved_ _ A"nd Recorded 1 After•Recordation
Rroject'Construction S4;1 16,000 . . . !$ 4,116,000 j
Contributions $2;881,200_ _. '$t2,881;200
TotaFCostforAssessment $ 1,234,800 $ 1;234,800
'District
Incidental Costs $110,47.0 $110,470
Bond Costs $ 404,730 $29,730
Balance To Assessment. $ 1,750,000 'S1,375;000
I;do-hereby assess and?apportion the Balance to Assessment`of the'Total Cost of said acquisitions; work
and Improvements upomthe several lots,pieces or;parcels or portions of lots.or"'subdivisions of land
specifically benefited thefeby<and liableitherefor, severally ,and:respectively, in accordance withahe
special benefits to be received by::such"subdivisions,,respectively, from the:acquisitions:and
improvements: Thesetpieces„parcels orportion of lots.or-.subdivisions of land ate hereinafter numbered
to correspond with the numbers upon the attached Assessment Diagram Theportions of land and
apportioned assessments are'more particularly set fort_h_in'Tablesr4+and-5,attached herein;,and
incorporated byreference;
In;addition, an annual assessnient'Tor Costs:incurred bythe Gity.of Petaluma and not otherwise
reimbursed for administration and collection of;assessment of bonds shall be levied in a'maximurn
annual amount<of two hundred!eighty dollarst($280) per:;Meth/kit-Al asSeisitierif parcel per year. Said
maximum,annual administrative assessment may increase each year by the change ui'the Consumer
Price Index (CPI),daring the preceding year endingin January,for All Urban Consumers for the;San
Francisco Bayarea
As required by;said,Act;an Assessment".Diagram.is'hereto attached`showing:the Assessment District
and also the boundaries add dimensions of the respective subdivisions of landwithiwsaid Assessment
District as the same,existed at thetime of the passage,of said Resolution. each of which subdivisions
having been given aseparate-number upon said Diagram.
Said.assessment'is made upon the several subdivisions of.land within aid:Assessment?District in
proportion to the estimated special benefits to,be received said:sundivistons, respectivelv,,fro"m said
improvement:. The:diagramiand assessment;numbers appearing herein are the diagram numbers
appearing on said diagram to which,reference is hereby,made for a more particular description of said
property.
•
Each.subdivision of land^assessed is desc tbedin the Assessment Roll bwreference to its parcel:number
as,shown on the Assessor's Maps of the County ofSonorna for the Fiscal Year 2000 2001 and includes'
all of such parcel excepting•those portions thereof within existing public roads?;or nghrofwas to'be
acquired in these proceedines for public road purposes:'For a more particularidescti tibncof said
C:\WINDOWS\TEMPVinal erigineees repor dac
City'Of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment District;2000;01 (McDowell Blvd:JEast,'WashingtonStreet)
Final Engineer's'Repori Page 3
•
property, reference is hereby made to thedeeds and maps on file andof record in the office of the
County Recorder of said'County.
Notice is hereby given thafserial andffir term improvement bonds:to>represent unpaid assessments and
bear an interest.at the rate of not to exceedtwelve percent(12%) per annum,,or such higher rate of
'interest as may bee authorized byapplicable law at the time of sale of such bonds, will be issued
hereunder in the.mannerprovided<under the:Improvement Bond Act•of 1915 and the installment of
such bonds shall mature not to exceetf twenty-five (25)years from he'second day of September next
succeeding twelve (12) months from their date.
Under the Resolution of-Intention, the requitement of Division•4 of the California Streets and Highway
Code shall be satisfied with:Part,7.5 of said Division 4, for which thefollowing is presented: •
1. The total amount, as near as can be determined, of the;total principal,amountof all unpaid special
assessment and special assessments required or proposed to be levied under any completed or
pending assessment proceedmgs, other than contemplated in the instant proceeding is
S 0
' 2. The total amount of the•principal surrrof the special assessment (the ''
moun Balance of Assessment")
proposed`to be levied in the instant+proceedings is: •
S 1,375,000
•
3 The total amount of.the principal sumac unpaid special assessment levied;against the.parcels
• proposed to be assessed, as computed pursuant to paragraph l,gabove, plus the principal amount of
the special assessment proposed to be•leviedsin the instant-proceedings'from paragraph 2, above is
S 1,375;000
4: The totalttrue value, as,near'asmaybedete7nined, of the parcel of land andimprovements which
are proposed to be assessed in the instant:proceedings, as determined by the-full,cash value of the
parcels as shown upon the last equalized assessment roll ofthe'County of Sonoma is
S 43;132,,164
Dared: . 2000
By:
•
, HARRIS & ASSOCIATES;
Engineer of-Work •
Mary Grace Pawson
RCE 044573
C:!WIN QOWS1tE\MP`finii cnginers rcpoadoc
•
•
City,Of,Petaluma
. .
Assessment:District.2000-01 (McDowell Blvd/East Washington Street) ,
Final Engineer's Report Page 4
•
•
ENGINEERS COST ESTIMATE - 1111
ThepropoSed projectcosts areset forth imTahle I below.
Taple -1
, • Cost Estimate . .
•MODOwell Blvd.PE: Washingfori Street Transportation Improvement Project #9863
Description Preliminary I Confirmed Lineltem I
Costs I_ Costs Subtotals
I I _
City Administration 8•Inspectio9 5435,000,I $435;000
PlanningLat Design $435,000 I :$435,000
Land Acquisition ' $803,000 :$803,000 II
Intersection Irriprovements
• Alternative ! at the Intersection 52022,00W1 5Z022,000 • .
Contingency, $421.000'1 S421,000
Total Construction Costs . _ , $4;116,000 I. .$4;116,000 $4,116;000 •
Contributor' for General Behefith (70%) • - ($2;881200)) ($2,881200)
Balande to ASsessment District I. '$1234,300 I $1,234,800 $1,234;800 1
• :
Incidentals . 1 . • i io,
Filing Fees, ' $1,000 I $1,000. . .
Bond.Counsel t$55,000 I $55,00C1
Assessment Engineering '$54,470 I 554,4/0 I _
Total Incidental Expenses I $110,470.1_ $110,470 $110,470
. _
Sondcbsts . t I, ' 1
Underwriter's Discount(2.5%) _ $43,75Ct • $0
Bond Reserve10%) $175,009 : ' 1 50 ]
Fundedinterest '$140,000' I $27„500**: I
Official Statement, $5,900. - ' $0 I •
Printing, Registration and Servicing '$15,000:I $0
Incidental Contingency, - $25,980 I $2230 _
Total Bond Costs: $404,730,1 329,730 1 529,730
IL L ' I
Total Assessment District Costs I 51:750,000 t 51.375.000 1 $1,375.000
*1 year at,8%,Iirterest •
'3 months ata°20 interest
. .
•
c\wINDows\rs■tP`final engineer's rcport_doc '
Ety Of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowellBlvdc/East Washington Street)
EinaCEngmeer's Report Page 5
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
•
GENERAL •
The Assessment District is formed under the authority.ofthe+Municipallmprovement Act of 1913 (the
Act) and Article XIIID of the'California State Constitution, which requir&that local agencies levy
assessments based'•on'the special benefits provided by the project In addition, Article XIIID,Section 4,
of the State Constitution requires that a parcel's assessment may notexceed>the reasonable cost of the
proportional special benefit conferred onthat parcel. Section 4 provides that only special benefits are
assessable and• local agency levying;the assessment must separate the general benefits'from the
special benefits. It also requiresthat publicly owned:property that-benefits from the improvements be
assessed. Neither the Act nor the+State Constitution specifies'the method or-formula that should be
used to apportion the costs,to properties in any special;assessment'district proceedings: The
responsibility for recommending an+apportionment of the costs.to,properties'which specially benefit
from the improvements rests with the Assessment;Engineer ,who isiappointed for the purpose of
making an analysis of the:facts and,detemvning the correct apportionment of the assessment obligation.
Therefore; costs and expenses of proposed'improvement(s) will be apportioned against the
by a formula or method which•prdportionallv!and equitably distributes.the costs in direct proportion to
the estimated special benefits these'parcels receive from the improvements.
The approval of the assessments rests'with the;City Council.The Council renders its:decision'after
hearing testimony and evidence presented,at,a public hearing•and tabulatingthe>assessment ballots
�I which are mailed to all record owners•ofsprooerty within•the Assessment District. Only ballots delivered •
to the City.prior,to the closeof the•:public hearing are tabulated. The Council's'findings must include
whether-or not the assessment spread has been made in direct.proportion,to the estimated special
benefits received by each
Assessment ballot •are weighted by•the amount of theassessrnent:The ballot tabulation is performed
after the•close of the'Public Hearing. If fifty percent or more of the weighted,assessment ballots
submitted favor the levy of the assessments,then the Council mayproceed:Ifthe majority of the
weighted ballots (more than 50%0) oppose the levy of assessment, Menthe proceedings must be
, abandoned.
•
PROJECT'OVERVIEW
The•McDowell Blvd. E. Washington Street Transportation Improvement Project 49863 is intended to
improve the flow of traffic through one of themajor cross-townlintersections in the City of Petaluma.
McDowell Blvd. traverses the City's'north-south axis.and Easf Washineton,Street traverses theCitv's
east-west-axis:,.Both McDowell Blvd: a nd East Washin toii Street are defined as "Arterials' within the
City of P.etalurna's•General:Plan.t
The McDowell Blvd:/East Washinston,Intersection also provides primary access to three regional
shopping centers, a°small shopping complex; a motelre`Staurant:complex and the City's Community
Center. These;commercial and communitysertiingfacilities takeldirect access from either :McDowell
Blvd. or East Washington•Street via,curb-cut driveways:
''City of Petaluma,General Plan 1987--2005,Section 10 2,page100.
CI\WINDOWS\TES U!-pal englnetr s reoortdoc '
City of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington5treet);
Final-Engineer'sReport Paae10 .
The City strives to maintain a functional hierarchy within its roadway network Arterial" roadways are
defined as'"either relativelythigh'speed/relatively high capacity roads that provide access to regional
transportation•facilities and serve relatively long traps„o r”medium;speed/medium capacity roads for
intra-coriuriunity travel as well asiaccess to rest-of the;county-wide_arterial highway:system :Access:to
arterials shouldbe via collector;roads and local streets I'7 Arterial hialiways are:secondonlv•to freeways
in the City's..hierarchy'and the City maintains a pohcv of reducing direct:accesS to the.arterials-frori
adjoining properties.'
The City of Petaluma measures the effectiyeness.of itsFroadwav hierarchyusing"Levels,of Service° or
LOS as defined'by the State;of'Califor is s.Hiehwav Caoacitv'Manual. Levels?of Servicefare,measured'
using the letters Kthrough F, with A being theibest(`,`free flowingtraffic") and F being the worst .
("jammed"):°',Levels'of Service are+directly!effected by friction factors along the roadway- Friction
factors can`include"presencerof on-street:parking,`frequericy or lack of traffic"signals, number'and
frequency of side streets ordriveways, pedestrian activity; lack orpresenceof left turn pockets and
ty Blvd:�East Washington.Street`intersection currently
driver familiarity,with',the azea".5 The McDowell
functions at a LOS;F during peak hour. s The rfrction"factors'present atahe intersection includear`affic
signals, driveways and pedestrian activity The'.proposed`project>will improve;the average LOS through
the;intersection' o LeVrelD durrng.peak'hour 7
The City maintains agoal of keeping intersection LOSIto'D or?better; particularly>;on the major arterials..
The proposed<projectwill bringahe McDowell Blvd 1East Washington Street intersection more closely
into conformance tvrtIttlie City's stated gdals;for its transportation-system.,
•
BENEFIT
Considerations from;Proposition 218
.
In November 1'996, the voters of California approved Proposition 21;8 which"added ArticlesXIIICand
XIIID to the California.State Constitution. Proposition1/218 added':new procedures=and requirements for
all assessments. Particularly,.Proposition�218`requires the,'following:
The assessment,proceedings;must;identify all parcels which will have Special benefit conferred
upon:them, including property ow ief bV Federal,..State or'Local government agencies.
"Special benefit"means"parncular`and:distinct.benefit over,and above;gerferal benefits
conferred on real'property'located in'the district or to the public at-large"General'enhancement
of property valueis not considered10 be a"'Special benefit."
The assessment'on a parcel may not'e?cceed;the reasonable cosrof„the proportional special benefit
conferred on the.parcel. The improvements proposethforthe:Assessrnent District must meet the:special,
`Ibid, Section 10:2,.page:99. -
Ibid, Section 10 Policy 6;page,-107
Highway Capacitv-Mandel,1:R3 Special Report 87.
5 City of Petalurna,'General Plan 1987-200a Section r^I0 2;page.100.
6 Cir bf Petaluma Ltemorandum,dated'October 13, 1999
',Ibid
ciNIN DOWSITENI Nina I engineer's repel-Lilac
•
•
'City Of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000•01 (McDowell Blvd./EastMashingtan Street)
Final Engineer!SiRepert Page 7
'benefit.test of Proposition:218 Additionally,.the assessment on eaolf parcel must not exceed the cost of
the proportional special benefit=conferred on the parcel.
Special BenefitAnalysis
A. Definition of"Benefit .
General.Benefit'Defined: Artetialhighways,'by definition, providegeneraibenefit. They
provide access:toAregional'transportationfacilities;and areahe primary,mode.of intra-
community,travel. Travelers;from within and outside oithetcommunity can use arterials.
Improvements to the intersectionrwill provide a general';benefit as the LOS:through.the
intersection and travelers will have an easier time;reaching.their destination.
Special`,Benefit.Defined`. As rioted-above;,the.McDowell Blvd,/East Washington
Intersection also provides primary, access to commercial".and community serving facilities.
These conimercial and.communityserving facilities take'drrect access from either McDowell
Blvd. or.East Washington Street via curb-cut driveways. These curb-cut driveways represent a
major ``fnction factor"in the"intersection Citypolicy discourages this type of access; but it has
been allowed in the McDowell'Blvd./East;Washington Street area to the benefit of the
commercial properties and'ifie=City Community Center.
•
Improvements to the McDowell Blvd/East Washington Street intersection will provide a
• special benefit to the properties with curb-cut access from,the arterial network near the
intersection of McDowell`Blvd. and East Washington Street The proposed-improvements will
provide the following-special benefits.
• Improved Accessibility'for the Properties. Improving the LOS through the intersection
makes it easier for patrons to reach the commercial or community serving areas.
• ImprovedAesthetics at the Intersection and in front of the Properties. Landscaping and •
sidewalk:improvements included in the project make,the intersection a more attractive
destination.
Anticipatioiiof Future Development Conditions. Many1ofile project components such
as bicycle lanes:and landscaping could"be required"by the City as a condition of
improvement-Should the owners request,to construct new facilities or remodel existing -.
facilities. Construction of these improvements as part of the project allows these
propertiesto upgrade theirfrontage to;nreet.many current standards,,which allows the
owners to avoid constmctihsthese improvements as;part of future onsite •
improvements.
Continued Allowance of non-conforming°Access'Conditions.'The City is allowing these
properties:to maintaintheir curb-cut;access from anarterial, Which is an exception to
City pelicV that is notafforded to all properties wiihirt,the City.
8: Area of Special Benefit -
The-,area of special benefit includes commercial and community,serving preterites near the
41111 intersection that.take access from:either McDowell Blvd. or East Washington Street via a curb
cut: These properties receive the special benefits describe$ above because they use the arterial
network like a collector street.
•
C:\WINDOWS\TEMITfinaieniinii4's report:doc
•
City Of Petaluma • 10/31/00
Assessment District;2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington°Street)
Final Engineers Report Page 8
•
The McDowell Blvd./East-Washington Street intersection isused by traffic,.to teach a variety'of
destinations within the City. North McDowell Blvd;; m particular, is used to access,residential,
commercial and;offce development sancrthe Petal'umaVal ley.Hospital.-However;lheseffacilities
are located somedi`stance beyond the intersection and in:general are designed be accessed
through a network,of collector streets;(as opposed,to direct curb cuts;onto the arterial streets):, •
Properties beyond:the,proposed assessment district''boundaries benefit from•the existence of,an
arterial!street network, however this benefit isconsidered- '"general'"benefit'rather than•the
special'benefitprovid'ed to properties with"direct access very near tlidintersection.
APPORTIONMENT'EORMWLA
Method'for,Allocating Costs:to the ASsessmenf District *
The McDowell Blvd;/Easf Washington Street.Transportation Itnprovement Project provides general
and special benefifs..Costa•will,be allocatedlbet ween•general'and'special benefits, based on-the trips
made for general'benefit'purposes and thetrips made for special:benefit purposes. Two'tools are used
to determine trip:generation the'City's traffic model and-a"survey"of motorists.
The City maintains an active traffic count program, and a'computerized°traffic model: The model uses
mathematical,relationships,between'land use,-trip generation„trip distance and "fnction factors"to
predict traffic.flow in,the City's roadway nettork.'..The.predictions are calibrated with actual traffic
counts and the model-cari be adjusted based on'real world'`data The totaltwo-way 24-hour volume •
(Average Daily Traffic or.ADT) through the McDowell`Blvd/East Washington Street intersection is
approximately 115 000:8The City's'trafficmodel predicts that"approximately 27,661 daily tnps are
generated by the commercial uses in atlthe intersection. 9`The ratio`of trips generated by commercial
• use.to'total trips is approzirnately 2490 (27,661/11:5;000).
In October-199.4 the City conducted an Oriein/Destination Survev10 '(the "Survey'),at,the^McDowell
Blvd./East Washington Street intersection.'This effort'included polling drivers atithe intersection
regarding;the purpose:of their trip in an attempt to identif3'the"trip generators"through,this
intersection. Tablet, b"eloW, is reproduced from the survey.
•
City of Petaluma Traffic Counts,_l998-1999.,
9 City of•Petaluma data based'in Institute Ot Transportation En'neers
°Technical Memorandum=1 OneuvDestinanon'Surtev Results Viasiuneton-SfcDowell Intersection.Srndv;Wilbur:
Smith Associates, October.20,:1994
C:`,W IN DO W S\TEMP'final engineer's repen_doc_
tity0f I,Peta lima • 10/31/00
, Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd/East Washinbton,Street)
Final Engineer's Report Page 9
Table.2-Trip }Nit ót
Washingion4N1cDowell Inteisectitin.Study
Trip Purpose Percentage of Total
Work 44%
Shopping 24%
S•hool 1%
Personal Business • 17%
Recreation 6%
Other
• 7%
No Response 1%
Total 100%
The survey results'indicate that approximately 30% of the traffic in therinterseCtion is related to the •
specially benefiting properties (24%for shopping and 6%for recreation). The.Survey-provides the best
information available on trip generation by the City's recreation complex(the traffic model'does not
provide defined information on this complex). The Survey also indicates that fourteen percent of the
'
respondents listed their destination as a specific commercial location at the intersection(ile.Longs or
K-Mart) or as the.Citv's recreation complex In other words, over one half Of the respondents who are
-shopping" have specifically lited a destination within the proposed Assessment District
ail Based on the trip generation data, 30%of the tnps through the intersection are related to the
.
commercial and community serving facilities This anecdotal evidence supports the mathematical
modeling The remaining 70% of the trips include general useofthe:aiterial network. Therefor, 30%
of the project costs will be allocateckothe proposed Assessment District and 70%of the project costs
will be funded•from other sources:-
•
Method:for Allocating Cdsts,Within the Assessment District,[
Costs are allocated tocthe benefiting propertiestased on trip generation potential of the property. This
is the method that the City uses in its,traffic:model and to calculate its impact fees. Each property is
assigned AssessmentUnits'proportional to its trip generation factor and the size of the buildings located
on the propertif. The City of Petaluma uses trip generation factors developed by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers as outlined in Table 3, below. These factors are based on square footage (SF)
of the buildings located on the propeny.
•
Table 3 - Trip Generation Rate.for Varioustand Uses
Land the Trip:Generation Rate
Commercial —over,300,000.SF I 441.18tnps/1000 SF
Commercial — over 200,000 SF 54.5 trips/ 1000 Siz
Strip Commercial — over 20,000 75010itrips/1000 SF
SF
The proposedDistrittinclucles three majorcdnimerdial destinations:Washington Square with
aPProximatelY'200;000 squarefeet adevelOPed ?reg.,(Plaza North:1.1,# approximately 200,000 square
\WINDOWS\TEMP`finl crtginces report doe
City Of Petaliirna 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd/East Washington Street )
Final Engbieer'S.Retiort Page 10
feet of developed area arid Plaza Soinh'with approximately:160;000 square feet of developed area the
City's traffic model represents the Plaza*Iortfi/Plaza Sonthicomplex as a 350,000 square foot"node"
and Washington Square as a 200;000 square foot node resulting il'ir'different lriptgeneration projections
for the two afeas. HoWever, thereatity:is that eachmf the three properties is similarly developed andithe
anecdotal evidence supports that"shoppers"are equally likely to a destination in any one of
three complexes: Therefor,jthe proposed ASses`sirient District will use muniform trjrzenerationtrateof •
50 trips/1000.Square feefto'apportionaSsessments;to all'ponunercial,properties,
The Community Center share will'becomptitedbaSedibnithe results of the'Survey:
Basis ofaehefiESpetial:benefits.provided to properties,within'the•AssessmenfDistrct
include:
1mprovedAccessibility for theProperties'as;a result of improved Level of SerVicetbrotigh
theihterSectiOn
• Improved Aesthetics at the Intersection and in front of the Properties
• Ariticipation_tif Future Development Conditions
Continued allowance non-conforming access conditions most specifically curb-cut
-aCeeSS,clifectlyoorito the arteriaLstreetnetworit.-
Quantification of Benefit; Benefit is quantified.by:the trip generation/potential Of the
.
properties The properties within the Assessment District generate 30% of the traffic in the
intersection, the District finances 30% of the project costs plus the financing costs ( the Eligible
Costs). •
AsseSSment Calculation
Community Center ASseSsment =,2.061t of the Eligible Costs
CommerciahParcel Benefit(in AssessineritIliiiisortAUs).=
0 rrrips/1060•squard-feet x Enclosed Square Footage on.theProperty)
Commercial Assessment Rate (in 3/AU)=
. (Total Eligible Cbsts-Commurniv Center Share)/(Totgl Ms in District)
Parcel Assessment=Assessment Rate x Parcel!Benefit
•
_ .
coliuntinity, Center Tript.Generatiorilis:e,i,oftlitalihtzrsectionjr5Eflo Tothl-A?sessmentipistrio:Trap:.6-eOrattotiis S
30°,/g of total intorsectiontraffic,6/1Cis:20°Avoithe,Assa-nent15isthcOSIdreiailocate4 totife'CilthrridniOt Cofitet..
WINDoWS TEXIW,Iinal'engincer's aport.doc
. City Of Petaluma • 10/31/00
Assessment District,2000-01..(McDowell Blvd:/East.Washington Street)'
Final'Engineer's;Reporf Page 11
• DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS. ,
The following;provides,adescnptionofthe:improvements proposed`to be constructed. installed or
acquired under the provmions of theAct:Within the City of Petaluma, County of Sonoma;.State'of
California, the construction or acquisition of the public•improveinents defined as:
•
:• The.McDowell Blvd./E Washington Street Transportation Improvement Project #9863
The costs include all planning, design,,construction administration;and•general administrative costs, the
acquisition of all necessary:rights-of-way,the acquisition of licenses, franchises and permits,
environmental mitigation and the.constructionn of all auxiliary.work necessary or convenient to the
• accomplishment thereof,',in accordance Withcthe plans and specifications to:$e`approved by the City of
Petaluma.
Specific improvements include: •
c. Widening McDowell Blvd South from:three'northbound lanes to,four northbound lanes for
approximately 800 feet(from•East Washington Street to McNeil'.Avenue). The widening will allow
for two dedicated left-turn lanes on`to.East Washington Street headed west,;a;dedicated through
lane, and one combined through and',nghttum lane and a bicycle lane:
Widening McDowell Blvd.North fromdhreesouthbound'lanes to four Southbound lanes for
approximately 880 feet. The widening will''allow for a dedicated nght turn lane onto East
•` Washington Street headed west, a'dedicated left tum onto East Washington Street headed east, two
through lanes onto McDowell'Blvd.-Southand a bicycle.lane.
.
c. Widening East Washington Street, west of intersection;to provide a bicycle lane and-a new
sidewalk.
•
Widening East Washington Street, cast of the intersectiontto provide a.bicycle lane.
Reconstruction of all comer;radii to conform to current highway geometric standards
Installation of decorative landscape.aighting and paving elements
•
•I
C\WINDOWS\TESTP'final engneefs reeert.doc
CRY 0f.Petaluma' 10/31/00
AssessmentiDistrict 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington Street)
Final Engineeqs Report Page 12
BOUNDARY MAP ANDASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
Full-sized coplesof the Boundary Map and'Assessment,Diagrant.are orffile•in the!OffibeUtitte City•Clerk,
of the Cityttif Petaluma:Figure 1, following, is an illustration etthe proposectboundaiiestand is provided
for,refez:ence. •••• •
Asc'fe4tared,by.the Act, thelAssessment Diagram showsithe extettoriboundaziesidt the ASSeSSMerit*DiStrint
and the numberassianecf to each parcel of land corresponding to its numberusit appears in the
Assessmentaoll contained in table,4 herein.
Reference is hereby Made tchheNASiessor's-Parcel Maps of thelcounty of Sonoma for the boundaries Arid
dimensions,of!each parcel of land. •
•
•
•
•
• •
C:WINDOWS tENiP,CLal eng tieer's reporLdue
Wo
as 7" YI I. °a. o G •
6 0 a., I- u a IyoN I o 1
Svmr �,. a cd aka fit,,. Lo = .
�j� 3I; t E z 8: 1
,,.` <I$ a� ;11.d:1 as f °4gi of
• ylJ—d =y „hp64 Q i1
7
9 3 .1 gt13 L vt o
`.,� yn gsglis' eilo13
r E
tag
!ilia
x
aajI
x.;1?
Imo mare ) t 3nN3Av lzN04:n CI 1
N s01
I ! 4aa.r
A -8 g
vs;:
U Ybe
I a
o 311N3nV'113N311,
® III A W.
N 7 0 Z
z I C
133a1s NopNINSVM 15Y3 _
_ II 133N1S NOWNIHSVM (L 1 I I, II 000
MC a ran .1 1 0
1111111111111111111s 2
gtHr 02
1r�1 3maf'Hdler SI m' 0 rc G, E-u.
� i I x .,013 I . z��
as vOr I' S — U U
Ir° III' `1 III I ii_¢ mw
III i�aaxs InosOYW, JSV31 11; _ w w'W a <
CL Cn:J--
n0 Caw M la
, I II ° ¢w U
I I l o
I II
I I
I I Ec
0
C
o
• ul
Z 1
1
o V
�, of g„.5.0,5:• 52 8 Y �:
1/, a e ;a c , $tYe z= rd € ��
ral p Elli`l I zs r Ag I ` y P 9
Y 7 %
. .. T O10 =a 63 g ',6'.2612. o 3 ill l
" a,9 1
I
J 4 ° 3 QO�3z t pH; 81 4110 e¢, i0' ¢ o �3OC ¢¢ �i7 I. _030 COI
1 •
a i
hal,1 5;11.53
3Ntl0.wpm 1 1.31IN3AV 312N35On �. i • s f ;
y▪ a.3
a X Ytl�T3 4,5a
1 .. U _ 'li g'^-
o 1 i ,: .tae: a- a
gym,
Ill I1 30N3AV 11POR (f)
MI _ W
it-
133Nis NefNINSVM;ISV3 I5.�' G
iii ;t - 1' 133e1S NOIMIHSYM Z en
O
°off .N
-- Isis 1— ----- —"i ¢UV) >o.
I' 1: _ I®!Ilui -m 1 8 �, ,�
i it v)F o
Z
3?RisINOSarrl *-131 I I ' 2W :a�a
1 I I _ _ _ - _ _ � v�m
w p
I rn'-,� x
I I ;I ¢¢w a
1
1 I I a o
I I H
W W o --
I 1 W
1 c 5 .5 -
L _.—,_ _,._.-._ J m Z o w
eco
L_— o 1
1-1
J
N o -
Q 6 _, a
I,
o I o
w
310 o I
J .I> J..
t.
iJ
a
ti ,...,1
-.I'
s
rr.ra . r r r m r rrir�rra:rar,a amr = i� . NI'
1 1 0l
��
1 1 ' o
1
1 1 -
1 a — -
1 1 , /
1 1
1 1
W I.
1 ® k 1 I
1 o e
1 sO 9,
® 1 ie 1 - 1 zl 1
1 I — —
1
1 1
1 1 J
1 '- 1
�' ® _
NORTH McDOWELL'BLVD: _ - _I ' '
r— NORTH McDOWE.
1 4.= = = le - N.w i n m a r r;r:r in r r;r r r or r
H
^
O L n W n� D- Li: O
H W
a.
� �Z M
00 o 1
o a. c C7 m 3 i -.1 o
MNZ u. .c o,O
0=U- Y,Q- S.1oa
o
, 0 Cn 8 U 35 �,
} E F- LL -.3 ,aa,
ZH< 2 a_Yvz
W Z W w Arai= .3 :;-.
I I 2 W a a, 5,c/d'" ao^.
(n 0..J ;a ® a°ri a; #--a a.as!a:r-.a.a = = =
a.o a a a ■
W co CO in m 0 3vj55 ?F-^
COCO-J > ei sa $a.YiY
0
r
U
2
v
1
Lli
Ui %
w
v•fie a ,
5i.� !�
t:.' -a
O(� y
.,-;,.101 246- cc_Cctc: :,2 ;192124 i I:Oil ;
aT 3 D_ V
t•Cig 12.x
U.Uy H CO <tp,'gi ? ds Z Q rVi ip--b3 z cow> a° •
W
a)aim c".h 0
•
0
1
1
1
I
6:.)
Om 1
°
v,
k _ii�1 1 B
n � o. Q o g
El to-on-too r O
� a o o
•
Q' Oc0-BCO-too - s90-on-too `09z=°coo 1�,
�W ° �
\ I I. a° O 'o9L-000
1
•'Els o;=' •I'® ° °mi r • H McDOWELL.BLVD..
LL.BLVD. - — - —. ` - - — - — ®I
900-OK-L ta 1 1 1 1 � r W
o
K. r_ �Z iw
W
MI-
a
0.
I
e1
If
I
1
•
sr
r
•
{ty Of Peteldma'' 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01:(McDowell Blvd./East'Washington'Street)
Final`Engineers Report' Page 13
ASSESSMENT ROLL •
•
Table 4,provides.the Assessment Roll for this District. •
Table.4.
Assessment •
Assessr`ent: Aisessoes Building Trip Assessment _ , ;Amassment. -
. Number Pa cel Square Generator Unit As FFelirnnarily", , As Confirmed As Changed
Number _ Footage _ Approved _ and Recorded ' and Modified
1 007-213-030 20000 50 -1000 $48,12460 537 812:19.
2 007-251038 7182 50 '359 317;281.54 $13,578.'_6
3 007-280-046 '13620 -50 . '.631 ,532;772.85 . 525750.10.
4 007-280-049 O. . 50. 0 _ _,30.00 50.00
5 037480-052 .2288' . 50 114 35,506.45 . :54.325:71 •
6 007-280.054. %2011 - SO 101 54,838.93 33,802.02
__ . , 6712, . 5323,017:14 5253;79918
7 007-286055 134242 50
1 8 007-286069 7196 ,50 .360. $17,315231 a 313604:82 •
9 IC07-280-070 4346 `50 217 510,457.48 58,216:59
10' 007-280071 15376 :50 769 33699819 $29,070.01
i
11 007-280-072 3903 _ 50 , 195 ' S9384.307 _ 57,373.38
•i 12. 037-280-073 0 ± -sO •0 .50.00 SOHO
13 . C07-346006` 1723[ 53 _ 86 $4,145.93. - 33.257.52
1 1
14 007-340-007 '156519.,. . 50 7826 • 5376,62072. 529591628.
_ 15 '007-340-038 3084• so 154 57,420.81 55,830.64
16 007350-008 : 26397 .50 ' ' '1320 363,517.26 $49,906.41
17 007-350408 183939 '50 9197 '5442.599.57 5347,756.79
18 136-110-218 , Note i Note 1 Note 1 '5350,000.COI $275.000.00
Note 1:Apportionment to the Connvinity Center is based on destination surrey
•
•
•!
I
•
C\Petaluma Assessment DisvicP413134'engine8s renon.doe;
City Of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington Street)
Final'Engineer's'Report Page 14
•
NAMES,AND ADDRESSES OF PROPERTY OWNERS .)
Table 5, below contains the namesand,addresses of property owners'within this district.
Table 5
Names and Addresse ,of Property°Owners
Assessment Air's, - Cower eat
Gty; State; >Lp
., Parcel. Nzrrie - _ Adtes
_
1,... 007-2I3-C30.‘ PetaWro Padoertieslnc 501,W11av Cart -Novato CA � .94945
2 007-330-038 Will`Psoaaties lP. - 526 Nissan Street Stile 210, San Frandsca CA 941(26
3 C07220C46 _ lAeshington Square Asst. 7750Cdlege Tom phiKCA: Saaarrerto CA. 958226
00744,49• Preen-en,Morton L an:IMani-Lre 7750 Callege Tovn Dike/MO' Sacrarrerto CA ''95826
5 6m 2e0c62. li ahvigton&dare Assoc 7750 Cdlege Tdon Dive,'rs50 Szaarrerto CA' 95326
6 007.40:C64'r ' Chevmn11SAInc. P.O.Box 2&5• it SCn TX 77001
7 007:230{(26 Washington'Square Assoc: 7750 allege Tcw-i Dive Saerarnerto CA' 195826
_ 8 007:280-063 Washirgten Srnare Assoc: 17750 College Tom-i Dirve I Saaarrerto CA. .:,95826
9 . 007-20-070 Nsh rgt on pare Assoc Ac 177`0 :Toi Tb d
Saaarrerto CA` _ - :95826
10 W 7-2 1 7-0 7 1 Ng .. on - age Tooti Dive 0 - - Sadanerto. CA • . ..95826
sturgt Square Asti: IT7750 CdI
_. I
11 007- 071' •Washington Squire Atom 7750 Cdlege Ta+n Crive?f 0 Sacramerto CA .'95a26 •
12', 0 t-20-073 1Akaircjlon Square Assn.• 7750 College ToAn Clcetf350 Saaamerto CA :95826
13 037-340-006 kgrttia et.al.Trill 1645 North Califorra Me:&Ate MO:: MJI-I t:treek. CA -94596
14 CW-340-007 Thorp,Iumrtte et al:Trust 1643 North Canfonia EiviSule 3031 INklrut Creek: CA '.94596
15 007-346(208, tulip;Marta et al.T n e t 1649 Nato C a G f o o d a 3d-Suite 3U,_ _ INklrnt Creek CA '9456
.16 007- rocce SS Pr ty Ir e do Wollri rgtonsnnin Ire d23 wiage ire u W Ianda . Ica 424-3
17 007.'1x0-009 Syels Property ht. do-8ua'a'Marie 3336E'33id.St Su1e 217 IT61-
sa IC< •-74136
18 136-111-022 ' City of Petaltrn P.O.-Box e1 (Petaluma G?: !94953
•
•
c'Petaluma Assessment Dist lci i na'engineer's report.dm:
City Of Petaluma 10/31/00
. Assessment;District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington Street)
'Final Engineer's Report Page 15 •
•
• PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
Reference is hereby-made to the Plans and•Specifications in and for saidassessment proceedings on file
in the office of the City Clerk ofthe City of•Petaluma, Coun •of Sonoma. The Plans and Specifications
are by reference included with this Engineer's Report:
•
•
•
•
C:\W INDO\VS'\rE\INInaI engineer's report doe
•
City Of Petaluma 10/31/00
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Blvd./East Washington Street) •
Final Engineers Report Page 16
ANNUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT •.
An annual administiative'assessment shall,be levied on each parcel of land or subdivision of land within
the.Assessment District. The administrative•assessment will pay for;necessary costs"and expenses
incurred by the City,of•Petaluma, and•nototherwise'reimbursed,,:resulting;from the;administration and
collection of assessments and/or from the:administration or registration of any bonds and reserve or•
other related funds. This maximum assessment,hereinafter set forth is authorized pursuant to.the
provisions of Section 10204(f) of the Streets and Highways Code.and the said maximum annual
assessment shall not exceed two hundred eighty dollars ($280) per individual assessment parcel per
year Said maximum annual administrative assessment shall increase each year by the change in the
Consumer Price Index(CPI), during the preceding year ending in January, for All Urban,Consumers for
the San Francisco Bay area ,
The annual administrative assessment will be collected in the same manner and in the same installments
as the assessment levied to pay for the cost of the works of improvement. •
•
•
•
•
•
•
C:\W IN DO W S\TE}I PI-vial engineer's repon.doe
Cityofi?etaluma, 10/31/00
Assessment Distrid3000=01,(McDowell Blvd./East'Washington-Street)
Final Engineer iteport Page 17
• CERTIFICATES
•
1. I, the City Cleik.of the City of Petaluma Cottrity-of Sbnoma„State•of California, hereby certify that
the Assessment'and:Assessment Roll to\this Engineer'sReport,'inthe amounts set forth m•Columns
(1) of each; with the>Assessrnent'Diagram'attached;,was filed with the on .2000.
Beverly Kline
City Clerk
City of Petaluma
2. I, have Prepared this Engineer srReport-and do hereby:certify that.theiamounts set forth in Column
(2) under Summary Cost Estimate, hereof entitled Assessment;°and the:individual amounts in .
Column (2)of the Assessment Roll, herein, have been computed by the in accordance with the
order of the City Council of theCity of Petaluma County of Sonoma, State of California, adopted
on , 2000;
Mary GracePawsonRE.
Engineer of Work
3. I, the Cit •Clerk ofthe'Citw of Petaluma, County of Sonoma,.State;of California, hereby certify that
the Assessment in this Engineer's Report, in the amounts set`forth in Column,(2) was approved and •
confirmed by the City Council of the City of Petaluma on „ 2000, by Resolution
Na. '
• Beverly Kline
City Clerk
• City of Petaluma
4 1 the Superintendent of Streets of,the City_ of Petaluma County'of Sonoma. State of California,
hereby certify that the Assessment•int is Engineer's Report.toge,•ther'with the Assessment Diagram
thereto•attached„was tecorded ii my office on. • 2000.
•
Rick Skladzien
Directorof Public Facilities and Sep ices%Superinteiid'enCoEStfeets'
City of Petaluma
.
C:WINDOWS\TEUP`1nii engineers report.doe
.... it
VI 5 , 4,,.... 1■11.....M.Srwsm cle,.n lin\---7-fit 41--W---W_ uoclini.litMicon Aw Fa I
a !lig
. 3. 6-,), itla In tirit ;La
cc nue nistr cal , Eag
ci DEM Mit 3.0 111:ar era;
® 3215 325 MN 32 at Cat .0
...= 0
® ____ ME 32 II Milt ...._-ITa 0 it
ex -XS, r-.' Ijes 32° 321! 32° la?1:3111:2 441.1 ?,
-X
97 Ala\ rt., , -,.■ Sir• as 311 3171- mmari maw —
es likti,"T;-- ' -. ":-,'" 3,3 r. i maim =tax irr A
(
c ,
" Maw 4'4;,:,.. ' ', .' ii , 3c. . - re IC Faallar Ma
p a -J. , . - zo. lc arrymil
alv v . w 0 all tlill
„ _, ______, rafrY ‘211
sity.ACAS „,„„, Afil
set tit .:: ' • - I 211Elfilitaiti 011il4
. lmm:14=2„,g
• lune en . 2. e , El,0
559
Ta-. la 1j1 X.3
4:11 2 tr.r.
aennnW Iii 1 2
EAST 1000400/1 STKET
I X.
0
- 6 ppm
2.,1" .1 al 1:1 allarilling nen IMMO/Inc; nu ' 1°5 10 121 127 141
O z
.0 0
—.„
_ e 0
+0
9 02
-'-cl° CUB .9HOOLIO: Li -_ :-:: ::'' id' 222- 222 .t ci
2 I.
U 0
i°4 =IC ,..rontin- ? :,, ..2 : 0 „, its ''
id amp ntaisata , J 0104 ammo! 4 i a 1 133 •
12016 natigliiiLIES UV SE 2
3 165 1291
Z
125 Z 02
IEBBErailirstaanllelan 'allE1 .2, la 2•12,4 _ 413111:1 161 177 173 169 CO cm
2 wi
il?
m LLI
-.7,.i nnEMEUOULIV-21OEUEU 109 Z 177
I. °I
4
i illifirriirrEg -Imnanciana - 22' 231 241
1°5 111 1.14 0
• # WI 2 la 0
EAST 100517H STREET EAST urOrSOR STREET 151 W. : IS
II an:II g'1 I= ! .?' .. ! '.. ?-2 13 rt 121:5 '212 2 il 2. = 25, IL z I w a
• j q 21, x F7 77 c. Uj 4 a a
•
I r3
i 1 aJ
261 l g x
® I
_ 03:4 i 3 301
*I
eiga 32. 49-
i. (-9
I 311 291 214 27, 45
x 1
207
33t
11 291
_.
Cl
Z '
------
iT:Ea'a
ji - il I
aVA 1
1140,
g g g
-. n CS : ■A _ g l
CITY OF PETALUMA
•
BOUNDARY MAP FOR PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
.. 7
000 - 01
E.Xq 1 orr E
(MCDOWELL BOULEVARD & EAST WASHINGTON STREET)
City of Petaluma
Assessment District 2000-01.
Engineer's Cost Estimate, *.
Description Preliminary Costs Suggested Final
• Costs *
City Adrninstration and Inspection 4435,000 3435,000
Planning(and Design $435,000 5435,000
Land Acquisition $803,000 $803,000
Intersection,Improvements
Alternative 1 at the Intersection $2,022,000 $2,022,000
Contingency $421,000 $421,000
Total Construction Costs $4,116,000 $4,116,000
Contribution for General'Eenefits $2,881,209 $2,881,200
Balance to Assessment District $1,234,800 • $1,234,800
Incidentals
Filing Fees $1,000 $1,000
Bond Counsel $55,000 555,000
Assessment Engineering 554,470 ' 554,470
Total Incidental Costs $110,470 $110,470
Bond Costs
Underwriter's Discount $43,750 $0
Bond Reserve $175,000 $0
Funded Interest* • $140,000 $27500
Official Statement $5,000 SO
Printing, Registering &,Servicing $15,000 SO
Incidental Contingency $25,950 52.230
Total Bond Costs • $404,730 $22,730
Total-Assessment District Costs $1,7t0,000 11,375,000
Assumes that the City buys its owmASsessment.Eohd,
Capitalized Interest reduced from 12 months to 3 months
•
• f-)\ T
P
. . .
' 1
mg 7,
7 c"-
0
r2 -c,
C
U '
0
a 0,
. LI:
,al co, 0 0 .- c4 VI/ r., o .... as ,0 Lc,. ea ... - o c C
.... ro ... a .1 q .... co to q C' o 'to Cl „0, „ 0
04100 orirm 01 Al..4. 0 0 C NI 10 0 si 0
I c 0 '
,.., .- n ono C
0 .:r'l
. .a. 'o. a_ 6 01 ..,,d_____ 0
. . , .
E s, E i.- in go .. m en .n a, cn P.:. 0, ,,, ,,n 4 :... ,j, ra
- el - e• •.• •• an :•-• be 04 1 4, .6.1. Cl/
a-
I NI to n n
« ' w. w r
0 a a
' 0 Q
r
,,.., ,_ , ,. 0
0
in o. 0 a ,a. '''' 'Cl '• ,- n 0 'al r-- C re la C
>. a. ..- pi o 1010 r.: '10 P.: a, 4 6 ci 0 ci r.: 6 '0 C
o w ..... 'ev 01 ..• as to 0
•- ". P.. ^ '''0 0.. n. .•.. (n. to .1. to a q 0
- a ai r... ei vi gr ,r, .-',. el w 6 .a: ■Id r-: Pi e; C In
'.- CI 6* vp .r.. ,.... .- el IA .VP r••• VW 17 V 4.0 t....
L.- 0 et 1,4 414. CI SP 'le, ' Ci tie • rl
9- a /.1 VI te r
23' .
iA
a
. . . • .
C LO co ..- 10 ..... w '- 0 '01 'CO NC 411 f.• CO
t 0 el to , r 1,- ... n ei r...
ua , - co .- 'n - Ci
r- .- 0
. CI7 •
- .- cn
e - .
a c‘i
a
<
. , •
0 0 0 0
, _
to in up III
8
= 2
1- c r-.T.
Z
a
H . ;
0
i
,0 cm 0 o o .- eL1 o o co '0 o n cn n. r- a
0 -c 01 co .... al% Cs n. I.- a Cl .... CO a IN
CI N. 4 CI n .
0 8 T.: eiri ' Cl Pi F:ir i;:. `441 2 g - w g , g,' _
.F. 2 ,T, C•1 r
• lc .
• cE in u. , , Z ,
. .
'
, u
'
. .
g 2 g o 010 a o
d ci • 0 ,0 II a
0 .00
U '-
a a • 9 a a a a 1 a /- I-' )"' •
= . < •• a < a <, a CC . .
'in - • a a 'a a a '...to a
_ - a-
6 .2 ■2 •2 2 g ,,,,.
1 • 5. •g .fr i a ..Er 5. •E- "5- r cc rn • a - - a .2'
e a to a w -‹ w tut to to ern 'co -
_
cc 63 .73c2 .3ings.—s. .
0 j• 6 1 i 1 t. & 1 ”-71
-
„ ... ° 9 a F. 'a .9 g ? 9 79 - . -. - - rt. .r.
= a '"' ..r. fa -- a ,9 c-: .= ....E r= C.:: '.t Z. =.A a. ,_ •-
0
' -t 'k* T. -3 5 ; -5 cr, 7. rn -at; 1 .5 g. g I 2 • '- 3 ,
2 - a • a 9. m a '5 C3 N.
5-- r..Et 1 ci•ail Tj '
ar r,
• -• 0
,
0 - < 0 kb, ,ca 0 r.I 4. a .0 0 .- n L n to h. m 0 0
= r--.L.
C NI 3 ' 5
n f, 'o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o ,- 6 o Lc ,I 0 .0 a
- '0 '0100 ,10110 o .. 10 '0101"
U
9 < e .N -Cl N N " " " "" Cl 0101 n n
i.-; .... d„.. .j I,... , ,. 1... p.. 0- 0- N. I, 'I... W
C = 0 LO 0 0 '0 '0 10 10 L g c c o ,c
O
C 0 i
CN C
C 0 . .
C -:1
In - .
Ca tra —
-
E c c ____ s• ..
Li"..,
0, 0 --- - Nn -r Giant° r:
•..... NI n .7 0 0 A- op 0 ._
-.I0 .7 a _ /- .- •■•
T i W 0 C A L- _.
0 vl ul
0 C.) ._
>k 0 to
0 izt < 0 b LI
-- •
•
2
•" . LL OO
N o m o m c m :-c$ c m o m •:6 o Q c m: c
w w N w N N 49 N N ✓m m .$ ro 0 to .m m
_
c c a c o Ic o
N w N N N w w
.
m
C
C `q
C O
Q c
a
O O
E ...
w• A _ •
O 0 O .O' 0 .-• :N 0 0 0 00 m 0 V o 0"
o co N CO '.V 0 V n 0 N 0 0 m,
O 0 NO N m' 0 - ^ 10 O o 0 el
O N m N •N ,V n V 0 'm 0 n :0 0
N CI
d
m
Q
R A
✓ O
0 LL .
0 "0 N 90 0 'Vl m N 0 - 0 "m .0 !I '.n
c0 0 O 'N 0 y. 0. 0 n O '0 0 to ;V O•V :VI 0 lc 0 co n to V ':N 0 •0 N O tN :
V "0 0 w N -N n 0 0 0 •m N "N 0 0 .0 V
V • N .- N m m p N w �H '
E 0 'w w w rN P '
O)
,c a ,w
N C 0
w Q a - - _
O 0 o_O - fN 0 N O 0 0 N 0 v .- "0
- n 0: n "A CO 0 0 m' O ;10 N co V -:n
0 N 0 0 'O O N 01 v 0 O'. m o ,n 0 0 o ''�
a n 0 4. N ,0 0 O n N 49 0 Cl O ;0
C• a 00 n ' - '10 n 0 N 0 m
E 0 .N 'm 0 . V rel. el 1 0 0 N tel 0 '0 0 .n
E E w w N w w N •w N N N 'w N
49 O C w • w N
U C
O 0
0- 0 v 0 0 0 !m 3. m 0 0 : 0 0 "m N - 0 .:n
•� 0 '0 0 O v '0 .- N v no 'O n 0 N 0
C V . N O 0 0 N 0 :n m V O in O o P c.,
N N •0 n "q 0 m r '0 0 co N V. N CI
_ q E - N N - 0 0. O fl V 0 m 0 v 0 0
Q r C 0 0 n N 0 : . m. n C 0 0 :V, co- n Pl N
'oN T _ m N `.W
U))'
w .w. nCl. AS mw wT
C
C. Ni
C < w N w m NwW
w r w Q
■0. m
O c
C) u •
N
0 Oo `2 o (a. O ' c 0 0 o m c
0
C 0
_
G) x
`0 ' 0 0 ,0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '•
L 4 A C ..r0 tJ ..N 'N N N 'N N :0 0 0 'C r..0 ti
r, r a m c '2 c 0 �'o '.o C C C C m m m a c:
u o o 17 - " o +o..
3 m 0. '.O C O C IC, -0 01 0 t0 0
•3 � .N r_ E c o rL..,c c .= 5 '.L d c a. a_ c.
Q -0 N 5 0 VI 5 in a N n y.
o •a 3 :LL3333 '3 33 'F cm 'v'liE
LL
m
L y
a ,� 0. O .0 01,0 N V 0: QI O N- N m 0 n1 0 '0 '0 C ,
E el .m c .0 0 IA 0 m n n ' n ;n c.. c 0 C m
a- 0 .`m 'c, c a c •c c o o' .c c 0 o .c '0 c 0 c V .
(p ra n c' 0 cc c c c c c'. c 'c c'l c c c 'c _
0 m 'N N O m m m 'm, m tO C. ' �T :N •ll.
C L. Q N N N N N N N N N .N N N N m OI m r N
N C I` n •+0 n n n. n • nr' n In` n 0 'C C C °v
O G c 0 0 0 0 i o rc 0 c o 0 c c, o -c c n
C c 0 0 c O ■0 '.C. 0 ..rc.. O .. !C'. C /O C 'C
0 0-
.
N N -O Tz
o_ U =2
N
_ 7. c ,y
C Ir
A: C, Q 'tin' .O
N `
H.
t• 0
n
r 3
•
•
•
, o a • , .
N '.0 'O 0 CO N O
1--" 0 ".O N v 0 O
C N •O V 0 N; O C
‘o U ',N .N N • N
0
` N
Q ` . •
CI: o �
O 0 'N;0 n O
C. O 0 N V V. .
O co. V. 'CO;,,N N r. N 1 •
'— c >. ao"r- O O' V,
v) 'C c tE Vi 49 63 69 - •
v, 0
O V CO. "0 'N .
1•- C'
N N .O V N OC
N m ,0 N V. 01
r-. N C) O O. O LO-
CO 91 — CO O'. 0 N.
n'01 '.N N'
;el, . C) IA
C1 -;V X69 0. '0
' f9 69 69
L, _
O
C .
CU -0
.F a)
E •
o ,
o rc .
. L 0
LO c v'c�: N 'n • ;C ..
• ,O• ui N O'A. CO '0:
O: Q) N{ CO )n.CIY CO ,,r C'. • •
_ • v' O'. .(O.
= m "V' M W'O 'OI-
�
I co S s e
0 diQ
C
0
N )
a.
0 — l
L
R. N L U Q) .-
E C1 G. t" m` -m
o
0 _
F
v 43 0_ �; c ;, c ol
a E ., a a V) •
O N' N F N' c ` c d y •
>, to C 3 ¢ o >•.
LH-
•
Dr. Charles S ers Stan.Felix/Joseph Felix Realty
Y Craig Woolmington-Smith
1646 N. Calif. Blvd:; Ste. 300
P. 0. Box 1379 120 Village Square, Ste. 100
Walnut Creek, CA 94596-300
San Mateo, CA 9440.1 Orinda,C 94563
MFriedman
Nancy J. Casale
Richard DeCazli
acr College Town Drive Cooper, White & Cooper LLP
P O.Box 377
'Sacramento, CA 95326 Petaluma CA 94953 133 N. Califomia.Blvd., Ste. 450
Walnut.Creek, CA 94596
Larry Jacobs
c/o Village Properties Richard Myers AIiSalkhi
121 Spear Street, Ste: 250 501 Willows Street 1'01 N::McDowell Blvd.
San Francisco, CA 94105 Novato,CA 94945-3325 ,Petaluma, CA 94953
Larry Fielbs Carmen Lytle
Carrows Restaurant do Eulcum Management Group Ed"D„Calii
100 S. McDowell Blvd. 7750`College Town Drive 52 6 Street
Petaluta, CA 94954 Petaluma, CA 94952
Sacramento,CA
Darlene Kehoe, CPA,Trustee of She
Co-Owner of The Joanne Novak St. Dan Lute Chevron'USA, Inc.
Clair Irrevocable Trust
Luti:Che•ron P. O. Bok_35
1301 Redwood Way 1440'E.Washington St.
Y Houston, TX 77001
Petal
Petaluma, CA 94951 uma CA94954
MAP. Novak Gary Marquez — - 1 Le. S;Z .
3 Colleen.Court
Carrows Restaurant
Novato', CA 94947 3355 Mlcfielso"ri Drive �T
Irvine,CA 92612
e vtL_A_..c:
, C-
CtTY OF FE•t L.o.cv) CA
TaINI
A&. YrE:1� I ��-.0 1' ICr
•
i1 �tL; � 6. 1—t
S .
.309;S reS27 ET lja.-"A`T •
,
Dr. Charies:SVers Craig Woomington-Sniiin Stan foxqosep:n Feibc.Realty
P 0 1646'N... lvd.ISte, 300 Allk
. . Box Is-72 • 120 Villa17.eSql4are, Ste 100 Calif.
Walnut:Creels
San Mateo, CA 94401 Orinda,CA 94563 G.,-.\ 94596-44113 imp,
Mark Friedman. Richard DeCarli I. Casale
,
7750'College Town Drive P. 0 Box 377 • Cooper White& Cooper LLP
-, :
Sacramento,,CA 95826 'Petalunia,,CA 94953 133N. Calir1 Blvd Ste 450
Walnin Creek,CA 94596
LarryJadobs
RicharchMyers
do Village Properties, _ - • AL Salkhi
121 Spear Stfeet„Ste 250 501 Willows Street 1014N.McDowell Blvd.
.
San Francisco Novato,CA.94945.13325 Petaldtna, CA 94953
11- , CA 94105
Lah-y,Fielbs Carmen Lytle
. • • . Carrows Restaurant do Fulcum Management Group Ed DeCarlir
! 1'
100?S. McDowell Blvd. 7750 College TawmDrive 52 0 $treet.
Petaluma, CA 94954 SaCiarnento, CA 95852 .Petaliima; CA94952
Darleneaehoe, CPA,Trusteerif the •
. utz.
Co-Ownerof the Joanne:NO-yak St. Dant— Ch
Cla evrOn.USA;Inc.
Lutz Chevron
ir Irrevocable Trust 0,I3oX:285
1440Washinciton.ISt„
1301 Redwood Way Houston,TX 7
rn 7001
Petahinia;CA 94954 •
Petalua,.CA94951
Marie I. Novak'
Gary John King, Sr.
3 Colleen Court Carrows Restaurant OhnsteadtRealty
Novato CA 94947 33D Michelson DriVe: 587 Lakeville Street
•,.
Irvine,CA 92612 Petaluma, CA:94952
CITY:OF'PET.ALUNIA
MCBOWELL,BLVD./E.
W:ASHNGTON
ASSESSMENT,DISTRICT • .
PROPERTY OWNERSMA1T NG. '
LIST •
mak ashecrilivia,
.;;.r, ) - Revised 9/20/00
MCDOWELL"WASHLNIGTON STREET
PROJECT MAII;NG LIST
Dr.Pharies,Syers C gW i tgtonSint[li• StanFeiix/Joseph Felix Realty
P. 0:Box 1879 120'i 1/0 Name 5atiaie,Ste:100, 2000 S.Colorado Blvd_:, Sta.2-640
San Mateo, CA 94401 Orinda,CA'94563 Denver,CO 8022'
Mark Friedman Mad leineAshe Councilinember Janice Cader-Thompson
7750 College Town Dr. 421;Yastmue 732Carlsbad Ct.
c/o Fulcum,Management Group Petalmm,CA 94954 Pe alim a CA 94954
Sacramento,CA 95826
Keith Hastings Bahia KUMgjeene Linda Seott
CSW/Stuber-Stroeh - S11 Olympic Cottt 42 Arlington Dr.
790DeLong,Avenue Petaluma,cA 94954 Petaluma; CA 94952
Novato, CA.94945
Nancy J.Casal
Bill Harrell,RE. RicazmDeCaiii 'co Cooper;Wbite.&•Cooper LLP
•
Wilbur,Smith Assoc. P. 0r2451377 •Attorneys at Law
10/F 1145 Market St. Petaham,G1'94953' -L33.N.Calif.Blvd.,Ste. 450
San Francisco,CA 94013 -Walnut Creek,CA 94596
•
lick Bit)a: Doris Popky
1680 iisty,Cotart ;1-549.Rainier Ave:
' Petaluma,CAt94954 Petaluma, CA 94954
WilliamR Stark _ Consj hT' incld Larry Jacobs,
1713•E! Madison St. 4700 AccaWay co Village Properties
Petaluma; CA 94954 Penn:tor:CA 94951-9729 121 Spear St., Ste. 250
RE: 94 N. McDowell RE:98X McDowell San Francisco,CA 94105
Richard Myers, Pres: Ali Sam " Larry Pielbs
501 Willows Ct. 101 N.McDowell Blvd'. Canows'Restaurant
Novato', CA 94945-3325' PetaiLma,CA9t953 ' 100'5.McDowell She
RE: 'Carrows Restaiirant RE: 13coon ServieeS tation, `Petaiura CA 94954
•
Samantha Doun: r2
herty: Coumetme:-Dat tc sller e Dayid Chang
co The Plaza North 1327"1-St .Ciilrans Desian No Counties
2595 N.McDowell Blvd. Petaluma CA 94952 .Box 23660
Petaluma,,CA 94954 Oakland,CA 94623.-0660 •
a Lytle .Dian 3 a Tares' David Woltering
c ulcum&10- mt- Group 1657 Z.nier Ave. 4739;Sullivan Way
'7750 College Town Drive Peta.na.CA:14954 Santa Rosa, CA 95409
:Sacramento, CA 95862 �X 14 f 1�1-1- 14
•
Bryant Moynihrua
DeCarli Darlene Kehoe, CPA
P. O.Box"C"' 52—6th St Trustes'of the Co-Owner
Petaluma, CA 04953 Petaluma, CA 94952 The JoanneNovak St.Clair
.(BestWestern) Irrevocable Trust
1301 Redwood Way
•
• Petaiuma,-CA 94951 •
Mary Allen
SteheffR.:Cataleigio,Artorriellat LaW. Mary Grace Fa*son
County Health,Services
Jones Hall barns L 8G"AEthaiates
1030 Center Dr,Ste A 656 California:St, 18th Floor 775 Bay/wood Dr„ Ste 92k
Santa Rosa, CA 95403
San'tfineisccii-CA.94108 Petaluma,CA 94954
. ,
Geoff Hornsby Andy Plaine;MAI Chevron USA,Inc
G.F.Hornsby&Associates 1855 San Miguel,Dr.,,Stth: 6 p 0 Box 285
819 Third Street Walnut Creek,,CA,94596,
Haute ,TX 77001
Santa ROsa, CA-95404•
Maria L.Novak
Dan Lutz
3 Colleen Court Gary Marques , .
• Cairovis.Restabrant;Dist. Mgr Lutz Chevron.
Novato,CA 94747
3355 Michelson Di.,.Ste..350 1440 B.Washington St
-Irvine;CA 92612 Petaluma,CA 94954
. .
Panicia.Turtle Brown Ron Kinvon,Mur.RovalCalcsNfILIP.
313 Petaluma Blvd SO 750 W66d'SOrreliDrive
Petalunia, CA 94952, Petaluma,,CA 94954
mcdewash/a
•
•
• . .
•
•
•
•
•
ti
CITY OF PETALUMA
r- POST'OFFICE Box:61
2'8;5;S PETALL't.a. C:4 94953-0061
• .
E.Clark Thompson'
Nagar
Janice Cader-Thompson November 2. 2000
Jane Hamilton
Michael Heal)
David Keller
;Matt Maguire
Pamela Torliatt
Councilmemoers
Re: McDowellBoulevafd/EastWashington,Street.Intersection
TransponatiomImprovenaent Project 9863-
Assessment:District Meeting Reminder
Dear Property Owner orRepresentative:
The City of Petaluma is hostingra third owners' meeting to discuss the
modifications to the costs of the Proposed Assessment District2000-01. We ask that
Public Facriures&Sen•ces you attend this tneetiii.and,appreciate your involvement and comments.
22 Bassett Street
Petaluma.CA 94952
Phone(707)178-4303 MEETING DATE:, Wednesday, November 8,2000
Far(707)778-::37
E- fa : nbfacserr MEETING I v : 10:00 a.m.-
to Noon
3 cpetaluma.cus
. MEETING LOCATION: :Petaluma CommunityCenter
Animal Services 320 North McDowell Blvd., Copference Room 2
8.0 Hooper Si. Ea.
Petaluma.C.-I 94952 -
Phone,(707) 775-:396 The City ofPetaluma personnel and the assessment engineerhave been considering
your comments and suggestions regarding. the costs of thetproposed assessment .
corporation tare district: To reduce the cost'of the district, the City"is-considering buying the bonds
8:0 Hopper Si Er: for the district, in lieu of sellingibonds on the open;market.. This would reduce the
Petaluma.CA 91952'
'Phone(707) 778-:3n3 district's cost by $400.600. A comparison of the revised assessment district costs
Far(707) 778-1137 (suggested final;cost).with the previous,preliminary costis shown on the first page of
exhibit A. Please note that this modification reduces;the assessment district:cost from
Petaluma ifuntcrpalt-0rport S1'7-0 000 to $1:375;000. This revision'reduces the,annual square foot costs from
601 S .•Ranch Dnrr
P anima. A 9:951' 'S0.2�1''to $0.16. as shown on pace 1. A comparison"ofthe.reducnon of your
Pone/ 0 1 7737==n-,- property's assessment is.shown on page 2. The:assessment engineer will be
Far n-071773-4:05'
discussing.these changes'at the meeting. and will be,available to answer your
questions.
.ra J:c-;ransaar:armn
, ':Bassett St.
Pzm. ma Cl ' 9t'-' The City ist also'considerina the'su_°_gestion of w
a aning,.the traffic mitigation fee for
' < < n ) ;r, ;7 future improvements on sour property. The waner.■would.apply to an expansion of
up to 20% of existing-square footage- fora period of,ti\C years from the
Trails,: establishment of. ssessment District 2000
A -01. City personnel will be discussing the
II r.'1 5 r:ct above, and,other suaaestions at the ineetina,.
0 Petaiuma.CA 94952
Plane(70 775-49:3!
Fa:4707) :73-:416
LcPIED IT I .
The City Council.is scheduled to holda Public Hearing at their December 4„2000
Council;meeting,;starting at 7:00 p.m.,to take,comments regarding assessment
district 2000-01, and receive ballots from;the!property owners. For the assessment
district;to be established, 50%,of the property owners. based on the dollar alue of,
•the assessments;must vote•in-favor of the assessment.district.
If you have any questions or would like additional information, please call meat
707-778 4439. -
Sincerely,
Mike Evert, P.E.
Engineering Manager
•
Mcdowe1123/me-f
sc: Rick Skladzient Director of Public:Facilities and Services •
Mary Grace Pawson, Harris and Associates
`Property ownersP
File
•
•
•
•
Clef of Petaluma, '
ak A ssessment District 2000-01
Engineers CostEstimate •
Description IPreliminery Costs ISuagested Final
Costs • •
City Adminstration and Inspection $435,000 $435,000
Planning and Design $435,000 $435,000
Land Acquisition $303,000 $x03,000_
Intersection Improvements
Alternative 1 at the Intersection $2,022,000 $2;022,000
Contingency $421,000 $421;000
Total•Construction Costs $4,:116,000 $4016,000
Contribution for General:Benefits $2,881,200 $2;881,200
Balance to Assessment District $1,234,800 5:1:234,800
Incidentals
Filing Feeth 31,000 S1,000
Bona Counsel 355;000 355,000
Assessment,Engineering 354,470 554,470
Total Incidental:Costs $110,470 $110,470
Band Costs
Underwriter's Discount $43,750 $0
Bond Reserve 5175,000 SO
Funded Interest,' 3140;000. $27,500
OffidiaLStatenient 35,000 30.
Printing, Registering 8,,Seriicing 515;000 SO,
Incidental Contingency, $25;9E0 32.230 •
Total Bond Costs 3404,730 529;730
Total.Assessment District.Costs+ $t,730.000. ,51;375,0001
• ?.sscrnes that the-City buys Its cwn'_: se srnent Ecnd . •
• Capitalized Interest reduced from 12`months to 3 imonths.
I'
7 7 .
0 . .
; 6
U ..i .
c ,T,
, •
i• •
a 4 '° 'S ..: ..1* °' .4 Fn' ,G 141g 4 7.',7, '41.4; 81 tc
e.. co 0o ui ... .01 ... .0 a 01 ,0 ,1-. 42 ,2 fog, 0 0
'E ,-,0 " .- r- tn ,... 24 0 CI 0 4.• P-- ,'• s c in c C
m E e3 .1 im •-• et .: 0- 12. ro Q. •n. o1. 01 43 al 2.1 C In tO N-
:1 E .- `1 "" "' it. la “21 I- 44 44 n 4. 0 •• , -2
O C ta 400 to - or:: ". . .... es .0 'et 24
o E c ... .-
• I
ce . . .
(0L0 .307m17o. 77. riot° r-: 03 .1v) c _
a-
• .. 4 L y2 4 ." V, gi 7, 5.1 4 'g !I; :-. 3,, g
C
- tm 11. C. et '7. 101 :,::: 7,. 11. ,7_ im, Jok c C
-E ? 1 t- C4 `.1 : f 1 7: 9- A '■•• 1.• .gii- Vo; 21 4 C ,;(.13
••• .17 - . el IA ••■ OA
a a by .... .0
c- <
<
' .
. . ,
2, 0, .... ,0 • .- 24 a 4. ,c, 41 ,o to to Jo air.
O 10 0 4- 0 .- 0 ,.... I 0 ,a 44 e ,4, 44
m 7 ' r-. 7 as 0
,-
'a .CNI
O --, .
a C.
_
a -
4
. I
O 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 .:0 10 0 ,0 . ,00 0 0
in 0 I 0 in n 0 n 0 0 2, in ,in .0 in ,,, „
...
---r ;- 2
Z . .
e .
' -
• .
- -
I . 0I E ....; “.9, C 1' - tr1 g 4 4 2 ° ;I ;c1 ';', raf p,
-r „,
r
in • °
‘. .
CO V1 u,
i .
a
5 -
u .i ,ti ci ti ti ti 7 . a
A 7 -
2 ,- 0 0 .0 P g C C 0
.1' ,:i , iz 4
.. 1 3 1 .1 a a . ,..
= ra :a (.2c a
' 1 2 EE '
1
-2 1- :i - 3 d 15 2 2 i ". -: • - d .i _
"I -^- : • 2, ', = 5
- c ,T, 3 4.5" - 6 en <a tn
3 '2: ,;
-2 , 7. .7, = ; g -: is Fic•. =
-3- --3 i
= a ..: c c 1 = c -..-• c.
1;• < 7; t 7 5 7 7 7. "I 5 --.7) r r ..! ....! z 3-
M z - z 2 ,.-3 2 , , IL 1 1 .1 3. El 2 ., 2.- ...."
-c.- .
,.. c
e' c
..1
z
I
I
:=- .?2,,-.1
= N- g • =: =-3 0 0 0 - c !,...c c C c 0 1 0 .0 CI I 6 E. C m
or)
C -Th- I al- E.le' F.:, 5 5 5 .5 .15 c°3 51 5 g Mi. ".;
. a ,-.. .-.. .n
212 2 2. 2 , , r:. -2. IN- r :4 nl el
= = .''. r-- . 0 C I 0 I C C 0 ' 0 C .c
2 8..9- 51 c ;c c = cI cic c
C.- .
C t O •
C-4
•
I.1
- = ,
In
= I
ri .. --
'''' '-" 0 ■,9. r ?. ,
.... _....
,1 = ,- ,,,, , -, ,f, ,,, ,- ,,, 7, c -; ' '',I 11 ,-. 01
-
'1 C
c... ..- .... EE, ., • •
I
cl ' '.
a
,
•
>•• 0 tn 5:4 1 -
I ,
0 .< C• 0 I ,I I -,-•
1,
.--
. .
2-- .
. .
{ j -1
•
• I ;'
•
•
VI C) O m-.m ,N C
r O 0 3' ,O C.
N O < O' N im C
^j+ U N' N 'N N
U -
C ❑
(0 (0 N N -CI CO
c0 .-r O, N ¢ v
C C Q N Of CO N
O -a-a �_M. M: r N •
C
'- C T. to .r C; 5r9 (0 e. •
vJ C t9 f9 i9 N; N •
• W. Q -
O co O'N ¢ .N C
N P) N C P N C...ei N ,a] O'"N C (0
v 'r M"C O (0 Lil-
co N r. as O 't0 N
C] <: M 'C O
69 69. et M C1
19 W 'N!
m
E
C -
,c
c 0
C Q Q M N•to C CO 0 <0 0) a •10 C
7J a) N m N M 'O
E N c GS q ��
in .. M 69:CO C
ta 69
Ca) b9 tr3 �+ M N
C C C
c
c _
N
U _
Q C _
a c O c m N —P E
C
C a _ � c N
r = 0 ' - C
_ cl
w C 3 m >
U < H C • •C Y 2i U' F wi ul
3
`0 0 0.'C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C ;0 0 0 ,m •0''
° ,.c c c tc c c a c c. c c c c c c cc
■ H H p :H N W '.p N H rp H p 'p p N N H ■
A m
E m
Q )
0 m
m a m
E
N o
-.0 'N 0 �'0 0 •N 0 0 ^0 C iC -'N -0 T 'n
C 0 N 0 - Q. 0 'R, ''N . C N .- 0 p "m'
0 0 N 0 "N .N ,)c • 0 N 0 .O +m
.N ,r - N �N r Q. -- t7 to a7 N m
m 0
q .m
v 1,
0 0 N 0 0 0 et cl� 0, •— ;C c) 0 ;' n
l.- O 0 0 P1 :! O
T IO O) a. .- 0 .o r. 0 .0 N ,0 O N O ri ,-
I • 4 0 O H N N -1- CO 0 0 .0': Ol cc N. 0 O 0 ''.T.
m N .. N - M p 1N .- N ''C.: CO N l0 M ''N 0_
m C
A m `N ,p p 'N p N N M :CI
E C H .N
N C to
•.0 0 0 0p " Ni CO N 0 `- 0 C N '0 V '
L raj O' N. 0 : CO 0 'O' Pl .0 Vl N 0 T n
0 N 0 C 'C N '00 0 7 0 •C m e I- 0 C •0 b..
• N 4) 49 N 0 0 C ' -N N N 0 �- 10 O Nj
'C 0 0 r ,M 0 fit` 0 •'N 'C. C) N 0 0 0 1r.
E p VI N H 'N H .Hi v.p H N N T.
O - N H N �.
CC i.0.
•.V C ".T Ol -C N I V In ,0 '0 a IC In ,N
,L 0 0 0. O T 0 1,-- N T. •.- N 0 0 fN O N IJ,
C <. N ,O Ul CO i - U) . '0 C N 1'O O A C1
O a' m N 0 I� N C I') : IO 0, 0 H T 'N N
q E - IN I. 0 0 C C) 'T. •0 N.
c 0 N N Iii: -`I 0 N -C� CO" 0 T to- N 'I oi
C N 4 CI '49 H `N ... O)
N 49 44 H T
el H .9.4 ;Y9 el q T
9.C _
m
N m
N c ,
u
N ■
N m _
O 00 c 0. '0 0 c'. 'o o a
Q ':U N C N m N N m 1N N h I- 1-
N v a m ti m m m ti m m m
J N C
g U A q m q g q m m N .0 C . U.zri C 0 C m•G m ,C { o- :C �C C '2,-. : C N_ m :0
a F C M C N C C )C.' C C ' A; ; m W
u 6 o. a r a o . ,o o m M ',- - ,I� I o'
CO 0 o c o C, ''c a'..o' c 4-o I2
3 E 'm .- E c o S 5 a ° - a• c m 0':
C .N m = 99 `m '91 0 U [7.m q O 9 C ,O m'- -
LL.° C '° f3 LL 3 8 3 3 3 31 3 3 4= HI<,y; ``
I
3 m N m
_ IC 0 'U1 0 N 0 :N 0 C N 17 0 'C C 9 C'.
N E 0 0 T. ,N N 0, 0 0 r c aC C ,di•�. O E.'C •C C 0 C 'C C C C C C C.� c
. '- C •0 0: 0 C 0 0 C 0- C IC C
C �'- n _ a 'm 0 0 m •m 'm CO 0 N m 1 n r.II
• L' Q DI N rN N I N N 1 N, N N N 1'I rI^ (9I pl pa J
Cl ,c n c C C c 'n C c +C C lC c c
C - .,'c C: c C c c t c. -c c.,c '. ° _ c :'.0 c l c t c l -„
C
C .. J.
V:• U '-
'C, ,
0' 7, 0 = ,
IC C: Q n - Cu .t0 T N I'O N 0 0 C CI n 9 .'� •Lel• -1-
C m C
C _ �t N
. ., Q:
N.
C' �. = '.
w, n
Li--
•
..
N
iii
y.
{,� Q•
fita O :o-
o
o
O E
- 'C'. cin - P.Jj
y
o
isi
'V^S ' c
V1 N
as cn
V1 N
T� y Q
. V1 cu -a
d d
Q
a`
v
0I
1
.ExN i5IT . T
ID
CA 71 0
r•-4 U)
CA • r••1
*i A .11
1/4,141.1 i el)
G
vi
Clii i) -4=) CA .cut
•••••1 :l--a ..
Ct 06
cn
4•■) S--i r1 . 9
•
/-
;-)
. . ,.
I.) o cil 0 cA
r•C C '—. CD
7ri
- ) 0 • (71
..--
a ..2.
0 ct izi .,
cin ro 0 o LE
-
il
_ .
'curl .)
waict • #-1
>.. P
'''
a
0 l24 Ci Ce) cal sp
Eill C4-I
CD (C.) CD C'E3
C ) vac Cr::' # 1/4 r '
0
1
• r•-i Al ±•e 0 1:3 a
o
0 = C.).
4-) __, -*-) C•1
Y.).
o n C it Ou y 5--I+_e. e•c j 7 t.4.\ ) 1
1. it
••
kJ..." cif
(ID (1) •in ,t) 0 0
( -1)'
..•
0 • •--.1 ;•-1 sm 1--1 0 • r•-I 0
Q•4 > 'P•si 9.-7 ' " CD C Cle).
)
0 P C
,v)
as 0
9-) Ia.+ ay E ",c w D,'
4: 0 : 11)
76 ;:t
all 0 c: C0: 0 cu 13
CL '0
;0
H 0 H i-C 0 H t a
>, 0
4... ,_
b a-
ss 0 9 •
2-
•
cn
CD • x
co
;•••.1 CD
o
• ••••■I -4--) oo
• •••iii 0 0 o
; 1 P 't lii
ct — ca.,
Cl) f:::ri,
Cl)
LI
s
up
..4..) up
77:i bn I4 CD 0 7.0
0 " tO C "ff)
• r—i -4--) —
0 • 1■1 ti ,..1 C1)
• • •—.1 -... )b . - M--q •-1-0
0 I) ci) tin ,CL) CD
7--0 a
i''
• •-1 ;1 _
—Ct
V) r•—■
t rt •4_•C re•-)
• 7-4 .4_,
0 a
cv
C.) "Ci .....
;•■1 ct t 4-I
CA
0 rl 0 0 CA
• ii . 7." r" CD a
C.) . -4.—) •-•••—■
4-i
n Pci V) • i.-1
c-Ip-- Ti -I"' cip Cri to
as cn
0 • 0 "C-: .9 ..4r2 tr...,
.
Ca)
Cl) tjj 0 71) z in
Tcs <
+.,
W -a
CD 0 • *--1 T....4 0 a cu
• o . G 0-
• .
S
' c a 0 C C C./ - .0, — ,--- — c
0
0 c N N Q. '',..; 5 1:g-r €4 4:-;, -0
•
lim ..c t C 0,4 cc o 0' -3- -r
.0 '4C • 4 . .. . .
— in -r c 0,1 =• .
- . -
fa- 0,1 /111
%gad 0 0. •-• — eel
Jig o .
be 1r/ v-, .-. NI /A r,
€01 EA •-••
C\ se) korl • er,'
.. .0
,.c re 93-1? -r:i ‘,1- . _ 0
Ct Hen% co in
• EA.
o :
VI 0:4 , c,o o
cn ,
. c .• .0. cn :
! 9H fl <
,
0: .
en - 06
4:.•'63
cm) d, cu. ...,... .
A .7, . i
o — C. 0 o 0. o
, 0 c = 0 c, .0 c
bi). 1/4.1.0 a, g •,,,, c C N N. 1/4, 0 (0 0 0 0. ..,,,
0,,0. ,.. T r,- o o a p ,c,', =. •
co '-.)“,, .ir7, 7S. rei ,4," & 44. ter'Cl•- --
'c
. - FA V) •-•
E
V) V) 69
...
.
..
CA C4 CA w . ;•••■•••.
• •• • '0 ,_.. c
ffl
rt.\ E,._ a - o
........., 0. 0
e....) ,,,. . ..cc 4.1
CI
.
-0 /•• C
O °
5 . . . .
. •
cA,
. cn
''
: LLI
Caln • '44 C
' ' •
c.
...< - i
• P•4 ': In 1 0
4.1 . 0 • . . • ›.• • _ .
0.
ci..) ,
a..).:, is ,
.
. m ci.
r. , tr...
00 0 V E. j.)' Si -/E. :09 ej
- " 0 1') •- C
5 02 0 0 5' u, U 0
. Cii' 0
0 • ?ii ;re' rn V .- V >
'- 0 •-t7 ej. .1.- .5.. • 2
._ c - -,
e 7:. .' L .t. :13 •Z 'IC C7) c.n 5.
r.
P•11 u - a — -c — ...-0 O.
'' .1,4,, .
.— = - •,:, a _ 1
17._ Lr. it d 2 0
c; , z L- 0. , 0
8 in-• '-•
U .
0
0 _
En:
--a
.--, .•.' C .
.-
..._ .
. . 0
.1■1
in
.
ij r in•
' Sai I • —
-
-
. =
romm=4 mm71 i ' • •ID
-T ■1.1 4-.. •-n
\ _J 1• 1 .11, '. 1.1
1., • - 1..1
• (fl
X 7 '
...,
.,-,
4-
c. ..
A,
t.r
LI Cm')
:..4
1=
._. A
...a'.
..n 0
ti
0- CD
0
(...)
..0
_ .
V
.... kl-• 'W
'''
,
low ?.,, ,:..:1
Cie) :US •--■
-- •-•
0/ ■
C
■ .."' a" ,7
••-
0,
. . ,
0 N 7;.n: m r 001 r P1 r: 'r N • O 0;•.0 CO 10 •
_ o u, n ,n fl O m m co an `Q. 0 0 l0 .m N r
1 ^ 0 m 0 'n r 0 1n '0 r 0 '.m f'0 CO 0 "r 0 m W'
v l - ', 'LL 0) el L0. r r 01 N 'r lr. ' 0 n 'M 01 C)
't.') @0@ ' 0 0 '.0 0 0 00 i0 0 0 ;0 0 0 r 0 N m.
11 F '.p a f)
Ct :.
® 0 00
o o
W o
p O m . JO 0 CO 0 ,0 0 r O O CO CI r 0 N
O r ,Q Q r m '•l7 r 0 '0 (pN O"n N
�+� CI O 0 'C7 n Q O. '0 N Q '0 O 0 n 0 'F es
U Q 0 i3O N N r CO 0 0 : Q. N. ,m 0 "r 0 0
Pole O Y N r r .N y C
f� t,�
C ,; F N•2 _
i-11.,m( O 0 .Q- ;O. m N m '0 m .0- 'O ,O EO ;¢ n m co '0. :
0 " o n N 0 0 Q tl1 0 n 0 Q a r n m m ^
r�l Ol '0 Q: - N Q Q o. �r. 0 M n l0 r N 0 1 C
0
0
�f••1 0 N " c0 10 0i
• oOct l 0 r CI
U� T.
C a C
th
is
N'I OI
O C N O r N 0 O P1 Q n 0 _ _
O CO 'N H 0 r Q. ,m Q 'N 0 C r 0 m .r1 N
' \ O .O r. 0 ;N' O N r (4 :f0 m N ' 0001002 01 m 0
V '1i O n'.;('1 N N A N V O N r 40 ;(0. 0 'C7 r Q7 N CO
N 0 0 0 r r 0.
0 n :P' a
t 0 P..0 ❑
CD
0
0
0
gI O
0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u j z . O
Q• '0 Q Q 'Q Q Q' < Q N
- o d :0 J 0 0 ,,0 m 0, ,0 m 0 0 o u CV I.r� �� O.
U ,'OP P ;P,P,P PP N ,0 0 T a L
v/ a 0 N i` N < P) 0 .N .N N N..9L ' C L Si
I 0 o 0 7 0 0 0 .0 '0 0 2 '2 o o ❑
I 0 9 g 1 m C 2 'Q W m m 01 fi k y
^I. � • 0 7 0 L a L L L L t 7 `7 J 0 0 C
C �, a 0 D 0 m 0 I�:N 0 0 N o L " 0 ■ °' c •
75 0 .m 0 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 > -rc
T .' ,8r3LL3 � 33 :33 33, E � � N •,m � a
CO Cf)
0 4.1
LL t- 7 N
,.
^ l CL V y
�. i�l �{` 0_ CI
o CO m ,m ry Q V) co o 'e r N l0 m N CO m Y.. y
n mn ,Q ;QmUmm °mNN NN 0000tT 4) p O
� o 0 0 0 0 ■0 0 ,0 o 0 0 0 0 , 9999. N
n r 6 '6 0 0 0 0 `$ o 0 0 0 0 0 '0 0 0 >I
c.
�� 0 0 r 0 .m im'. 'm m m :m CO 0 ''m CO 4 'Cr 7 In .0 , ,, = O
. • 0 C N N N N N N N N N N N N n C [Cr) 07 O O O U a
o n O 0 0 0 g. n 0 ;0 ,0 ,0 n n n 0 '0 0 0
m o o a a o 0 o 0 o o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0
z o o 0 0 0, 0 0 ;0 0 o f '0 0 0 lo oho o Hl—
S
•
to sto "o o :-. COI cO• N .01' v .03 0 54
•
o ,,,-, O N O ,-, co -to o co o 10 N '.W v. N0
0 RD s
--: '
13' 1, N •CO -co al' yr uo o ,oi o n O FM 6 (O '6 -
0 o — ,N. 'm 4, cm .ci m m .r. n n el to .- el co in co 0 :
E E C O N' co ,co N" 0040 0 oc at -co co ir- ,C3 CU
. . .... •
IIMIld- -= 0 r... -co 41.6
%-
c O ol ,.- .N
O CD S VI 69 .
, - n• :n ro O -QS' ca N -c-i
0 .69 Ill 1- Is N
0
63 63 CD rat) V Tr r--
cv - .69 el •N (13 I
CC 0
en 0
. 05
.. I
O Tr, .u.) ,c) in m clo o) . ,0 0 ;“,1 N e- ,t0 N., 0 r "C
tO AO :CO .0 t 'CI '.- N ■Tr, ,e-: (,) 0 ,o) N: CO -co uo ;co
ot 'Tr t7. .N 0 Ul .00 N U) ,r-, co o 6 mi 6 .6 i: 6 ;ci al
,_ N CO N- ..S 0 0 v. v 10 0) CO be) V • N 'N .,7 0) ,0
03 '0 ,- C•1 N.:' 0 'OD 0 0 V 0) co
-c c O -it= ,(4 o -tt !ft/ 1••••' 0 CO 06 i V LO "N ,CI N 0
'-' > r 63 69 N 1- 17, (.7 V) iF) N '69 'CO V in
• E
• (0, le V) 69 0 69 nt. V)
00. 4 , J 69 69e
' • ........,
,
Am. 4. '0
r.j-di '
t VI
•( . i ,
: . is
. ”4/11 ) •
r rn
C
ct • .---
O Cr 0 .1 1-. N, 0 ,N. 06 ,'.cd 00
O in ,co t- to - co fy. 0 o 1 co
0 V, _0 N.
Cg {LC) .NI CD
O CD CO v t- el i N N.. )- , CO '1v)
in) 0
)-
0 ... .
' o-
Cie) D . ••-•
..—
, ,CD
I
, .
.C1- - -
. .
O o 0 ro
0 `c ' 0 o
0 ;0 0 0 o : o o '0 0
,2 0
•
Ccrin o to .to n o, o Ln t) uo o to uo to o uo
• .
......
co
ac r
CD
Cif) I o
c • . to- 0
C3
.
;1°1 .42C1 o cv- oc o 'co t- ,N, CO 0 'CO 0 0 73
O ,C0 N CO ,-- •3,1 CO Mt ;I"- 0 'N
w ,o r_ co, N o IN, .t- SI •Vi .0)
O 0 r-- ri• , Ctl N ,.t. r:- V Y) ■n t-r co co ,n
N in o coo 0) ,
0 el .0 CO 1- ' . CNII
4...,
0
.r_.
v., 03 .11■11
Cl)
0. 0 Z
co u. . .
0
C
0 -
S
0 „:0, co, a N rcr 'LO ,a) Or -N co co Nino:row
ce) Leo ...4.' n 'o t o -.0 o fi-- -n N N C 0 ,c) o' 0 o t-
ry ,c, o o• 0 '0 0 0 co 0 o ro lo o
al .. " . -c. , :.0 ',- •- Is: ,- . , 0:
cc .00o0000 ,ociro 000
,- Er co. co, co ‘co co co rco co ;0 CC It 0000N
o co, o -o o
-a n to to y- E
0
tz Cl)
, 1'1'1/4. al : 'N N N N N N C‘I •N N ./N NI N V) . •CI CO 0 r,
.0. z ., ,, ,,
t•-.' IN. .N. N N N. N .N- N ,N 11- 1.-- r•- N N r-- r--, 0 -=, in"
O 0; 0 0 ..0 0 0 0 0, 0 0k00 0000m
O 0 0 0 .0 -0 o. Co 0 to o o o tr,o 0 o 0, .:- 05
.4-•
. .
. _ _.. -
0- CD
-
co
'
1 V 0 to r-
E — c4 crl. 'to o n -oo ac ,
c • aN 0
. , 0-: a=
.
.
1111
f,c,
1 .
. .
•
. .
•
0 .
. . . .
0 .
.o 42 '
• . al
..-
C
•
C ;
CIO cn :
cn
4 ) ' w "43 --5! < ,
TE2t cr)
co
..E. Z S 0 0 CO CO ITO cCkl
l'•-• 0 CO
NC 1- )
. . .
NO `TO N CO o
ci 05
cn
a) N CNN NI ' 1...
th
■ 2 *C rn
ta) J- •
. 4)
• ••—•)1 -, a. ma- 5
CO CO NI to co CO
-cs
C)I -C. o C*4 ci- •cr
. ., . . . .
•=1" In 1.3, CID C\I C.,
rll Tv CD •Ct. CO 0 N r-- N .......
E c E N r•'SO Cra r r C
C..— C >, en l'•••• 0 co ..4- 0
• W. c cc S ER N NI-CO .1.1
Ili ccC a.. - 0
C
01 CO CM N •;1"" r 0 .0
0 • 1.- CO 1%... 0 •CY N
NI 06 o
cri c.i. 4 ei P to
-4/...) , r--- CO 0 0 0 U)
00 L.0 N"'' 00, 0 (.0
C N.- Cr) NI-r) C114 10 N- be,
C r "Ct. CD 69 cn
69 ....
ER CO CO CO
(1)
• fa)
0
• . c
67 •
ER ER
> 0
• ' E Q)
- C•lati , •
• c ,.=
0 . • C.) C
. .
9
›1 .• •
..._ c
c" a) o CO N- Cy) • 0
0 1.0 0 Op `Cr 00 0
. . . . .
4 , o Fc0 r._ •(s) c).. cp• 0
N
E
c • N ,CO 0 CO CO r 0
r• N -t- I- 1.0 0 ■
r • E u)
,c) cti 1--: to- -cr- 06 CO-
M' r Cf) 69 CO 0
69- ER .cr, co to co
69 .
L...
—
(i)
•
• -al CO e) ER EA
s.- cn
, . 0, - _
N I cn C
• :•-•
0
I-
C-)
C
i.
al 1r) .. P. =
,._
— 0
cn
co
_
,.- E °
c-o c -=
rit co --
c -
re _„ ....0■
al
0
. 0-
0 u) ca >, 0
-c t E = u)
co <
Cr) 0.3 CI) >,
a. ,E ..0 . 7,5
n3 a
do —0) . 2 (/)
cu 4...•
CU ti
CL 0
4... ,E (c1,)' c c - o_ in
cn 4 . LA
'p
0 .._, c jia" -- co. le.
_
3 — co al o a) ›,
ia) 05 _c >, — >, n
0 •-• H o o_ 3 c.) co. C.) •Sa ••••7 -
ON- N n - 0 0 al Z ° 1..N. 0 000 s
er co n. N 0 Cr N. 0 N in /- .- .- a)
13 a a V a a N a a N. .11 0 1 0 07 .0 v sr 0.
Iii a N a .0 .- .- (9 a N 0 N - N. .- 0 V .-
b9 49 10 le 0 40 Ift 49 •9 it 0) ,I4 .- .•-.. Co
10 0 10, 0. V* 10 .- en
f, on 0
in U.
-g "
re "6 ..S-
E
a ‘0 = •
ee ;,teecefeeei-se eIR 'ezie eezge
.On 0 NOINN. 01 .I.- g Lo 0) el 8 , •
O )
_
0)
) .
C Z tra.
w 2 =
•
•
P- 8 8 8 ('',5 § 14 8 tg .c1 0 v 0 N. Q N. 0
•
8 2 § 'cc 8 74 :2
0 0 ,— 0 0 v 0 — N. V V 0 r-- 0 'ur
•a) .- en NO) 00r0, N N Cn N .-
C (C) 0
......
T.
4.,
to
G ,
7, m
•cr
2 LI ,0
i ro II .E
0 CO ,0 0 '0 a r) 0 n 0 0 0 a 10 til CI) 0
0 N- N (0 ,- 00 0 N N- 0 j‘1' Lil 0) IN
-O 0) 0 on Lf1 I CO 0 a N cal ,.- 43 03 ,Crl 0
0 CO N. IN N N. co 0 0) a <V 0 NI N 0)
N ..- to r. al al (N
N
• E
.CD..a .
.— 1)
C.)
0 M 2 0 •
11. a 0,
.72 o -6
01 a 0- 0
C
;7, 000 0Nr) ,- 10) Na 0011- 0 ,-) al 0 1.0
0 0 1 Cn 0 N. 0 ID Cr) 0 a C') r- 01 03 1.0
0) 0 0 N. a 0 0 In N. 00 0 *tr .- I••.. tr) 0 a
al
.- rti 0 ..- (0 0 10 0
X 5 0 rl cc) a
ILI ••••
_
14-
O 0
cc
C ▪ c
1)-0 cr 2
u) .0
Ca ne mai
C la a
ea ni U.r .
*.-*. X 8 IN 2 0 ra .. 4' '8 '4 IT 8 ° ":1 ' 7:0 71:. Pi" 74 Pi
0 L1J 0 — 0 NO N •-• ,r) a) al N. u, 0 cn Ch co.
0 ,.... ro N IN 0 I 1"). V 1.41 in .- al n on el
11) -....E! 17 N .- In .. 0 N 0 1-
co 0 .- ,_ Da
u) a) ,, an
n co
0 al
-C co r o
I.., :to cr o
'0 0 < CO U.
A. .... 1.-
l'' Cc CU
>
1 0.1 G •
= > 2
a 2 ci
8
,g g g 8 g 72
3 .... 0. 8 Ind 00 0 0 0 0
0 - 7
u 0
o 0 c
a m a < C .< a 0.
UL
0 0 0 _.i al 0 0 0 CO 2 2 la G CO
_, ,. . . o . m . m 0 to I; u u
-0-J 15 c c C
......
• C a 0, co cl, -- — p
a , tr to- -- 0- a- cr cr
r 01 ,0 - CO o M < CO 0 0 CO 0/ 0 - -e"
ca
II 0) •- dr ti , 2 c 0 c c c c c c .F, '11 .ru a ad. 0
c a 0, e 75 2 ,--• 2 7 2. 2. 2. 2 2- 2- 2 2 e o 0 ..-
0 C3 'E „ 2 me g 2 '2' 2 2 g . ...
g g g Et t
0 cm = r, 'm < :-c- = a - 1-E .z ., ...2 II ,2 o z a w
c ' To ,..1 '7., u, > we ;a to w rti sl .- .- .- .- ...
r ry "75- ai YroZotora to 'to ty0 ° ow ar
CO r
•
it to Ili
0 ...
= CO
- -- -.
ell C 0 “W.1
...s CU . 2
0 , >. a . _,-, 0
cs., a L.. ,o_ 0 0 co co N a 0 01 0 )- N I r) 0 Noncriaf -' -''.
An 4 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 IN- ).-- N- N. 0 0 0 Q 0 0- 0
0 0000000000 9 99 ° 00 0 0 a
o in E- o - a oa 6o66626o a o o 6006
•
O 0 0 .- )on o3 on c0 00 Da /0 )on en 03 0 0 a w M (e) "—
.o N .,;ni N ni N N ni cm I N N nt ,EN n r) e n fn in 'ai CI
° E ' . r- r- 1-L 1-.1. Z 6
•— 0 7 u, ,
(-.) c:C t n' ."t' z 8 8 S '8 8 2 8 8 8 8 '8 8 8 8 8 8 1— 1—
EX 14 1€17 K_
, ... • .:
j • ' l' -. I • - 1 - 1 _:_1: , ,, _. / ,... , . , , \/ .....r:
• ,., , ,
, ... . (....
‘..
• t
,
I - I. -1 - , : . 1
ALTERNA, _
)t c
91'' 1
.-
I al ' ' z' - ti'lli .
: c I . Le= !)* I WASHINGTON SQUARE
1', 111. 11111 ' TOPPING CENTER . I
• JEFFREY ORN V i
. er 1
— 1 1 A , .
I a ""=" : :frt.; . ' ALTERIATE 1.-
. •,. • - 1 71" •
, .. • . . . _ 1
McDOWELL BLVD. NORTHlin-a_111-an7;t2A-tai....-"atieDOWELL BLVD,. SOUTH
'S -. .I
PT--_-;eff
_
-
_._
1 a,
ki .. .
,,,,, 1
,0( 1111111 :
. 4,y , › - CORTC ORIVE
, i <
1=
11--S ' - . 1111 1111
I Z'
PLAZA •- • - a• ziP0111111111
. SHOPPING CENTER
.11. lit •,' ' ', . C..7: CORONADO DRIVE .
• C.: c[
1—
nAll in 1 HII I HI
.
. ... 0 ,
• .
. ,,
• -7-Th ' •
I A I/ , ALTENATE B-1
L.-1,
ARLINGTON! .DRIVE
IKENJILWORTH
7-7 . I 1 I je. \(
i.z-.., .
JUNIOR
1 ), 1 "H H I .1',..,..-7 --
}LIIGH SCHOOL
EURIVE.
Iii UNGTON 1 1 1 1 DR //, ..- s, , ..,, I E-K \—k \ \ -1- L I
C S iii ,
. SCALE:, 1 =300'
ECNOGNINSEUELRTING. ENGINEE-R•S ' - -,N- cy? 2-p
?:o 0
4.9E002
2 CSW/STEER—STROEH il
• r St– ING McDOWELL BLVDIt WASHINGTON
' 790 DeLong Ave., Noveto, , CA. 94c45-3246 INERSCTION IMFROVPAENT5
(41 :5) 892-4783 FAX (41* 892-480.2 . ( ;L:.:cr.E.R,N)ATE j )
C 1999. PETA.LUM ' .. SONOMA CO. CALIFORNIA .
- - ; - – 4c'ec02\ENGLEH.VoN71
A I.:a ROAD
• .
..7
•. ..• ,\SANTA .
,
P --
- -7
7. ARX
A - '
56idliA NAPA' ' 0-
, --• .7-::-:?„ - ,,PETALUMA ' - - • •
• i , 't - ' - 4.'.•
• :. . ,• . •
, ::‘.:,......,1=',';•,.z • .... NovATcy ??,._:. i 'ALLSj3 j:75;
,
7. ......) .
. -
111 " . ..K4Itrin.t . Isui , ‘,..$: ,., ..
I 1
.
.., -,f--.... .
'• 116,...-1. .1 ' 't":::::...;:,-• ,. : 'SS .
P■Hi ." .. ' .::.-:-..;,,.:: ---::•• . . .40 .
....e_. . .
., ., - FmiiC-. • -":-.\7:,., ':'
- -a,
, _
, n ma a
, _ • -
V _
, .
H a n
• ICINITY' MAP •
• ,, ,,,.
Z 4)
W a . •
_1 E
a . •
....) . . r-
soNomA, Kmv, 1' Fiy_9, vo'..I.
pARKNAy.7 c ,
•
• a
rt.. (.,1 • .
1 lik
. .
P. • .
.
.
• --=-7---:II : •,&.c"Lt__.
• flifi 7) .t_IL.-ra. 2iK\ ATI as I • 'a-4
uL
._A c__
,
, ,
sc,
.„ .
. .
. , E: ' I-4 I EAT N/1 ' •
—... .i , Me:COWELL J .BLVD: scALE:1 :17=1200'
. .„... , _ -
.4pLy 2gQ(D, .5/2.5f. . • JOB 24 4:96Q02 - ! :
NORTH - • _t"(11:'
.T. _... _ :I M4CP*1.110•COdli, : i }1 C , McDOWELL BLVDIE WASHINGTON
..,_
c
4``'' ;77- ROUTE V)II. , .e... . IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
° Luirc:
PROJECT No.
pETALIAIA • . SONOMA _CO. 'CAL!FORMA.
:‹7,-, z::•-„, 'Al :,
.
rC SlVI
' • - CSWASTIJ-BEFSTRq Tiji.
_
1.1 C:7 7'013
[ S t] 7 EN-GINEERINC, GF.-OUP; INCV ids
rill:31 0 ...I.M J 5
- . .
. ■ EWE] 411)artc.‘.
C.oNSULTi: E5ric;NES-.: ilIF
y y- IC .
790 DeLong Aci.e.., Ncvctc, ;CA. ..949 :-3246
LOCATION MA? : (415) '892-475:41. FAX' 0,1,1 6.92-4E02
— - -
-49E-itc.,\ENCL:EcVel,0:Nriii
. . . . ..
, .
•
•
CG;7 6 ^ r 1' •
;t1 -
puauc FAcumEs • -
ANO°_ERI/M.s
September 6, 2000 (revision and update)
Harris & Associates
Mr..MikeEvert Progr..m Managers
Engineering:Manager Consrrucn'on Managers
Department of En;neerin2Public Works Civd.Eneineers
City•of Petaluma
22 Basset Street
Petaluma, CA 94954
•
• Re: McDowell/E.Washing on Street4Transportation Improvement Project#9863-
Assessment District Agreetnent
•
Dear Mike,
•
This letter is in follow-unto ourmeeting on;August 29 with the City?Ianager and summarizes the
City Council Actions required;to form your;assessment.district and the:revised project The
discussion:includes a list.of majorattachments that you will need in order'to complete your City' '
Council Memo'for each action and`which of your consultants hastmajor responsibility for developing
those attachments I ye revised tfte project schedule that outlines our les.
• Assessment'District Formation'Process Summary •
'
1. First Council Meeting (October.,?,2000)
Council Adopts the Resolution of Intent,to Reimburse ancr.the Resolution appointing the
Engines,of Record and Bond Counsel: this first action bytthercity Council typically declares
their desire to begin the Assessment District-Proceedings based ompreliminary findings that a
district will be feasible:This action directs'staff, the Engineer pf Recordiand your financing team
to begin work on the formal benefit analysis and the cost spread;Thissaction does not establish
the boundaries or the cost:spread..
In your case, we will havethe benefit`of;an Assessment District;feasibility study. This study
discusses which aspects of the'project result in "special benefit?, outlines which properties
receive the benefit, provides severai,alternative methods forspreadin costs-to th'e benefiting
parcelsand.rnaxes,recommendation"s alto which method may,w,ork bestfor--the City. We are
meeting with,property owners while,preparing the Study,so we can include their input.
We have pielimiharily scheduled this';action,for the,October 2; 2000 Council Meeting.
Attachments to the-Council l limo Resolution of Intent tojReimburse (from Bond-Counsel)
Resolution.Appointing Engineer.of Record and•Bard Counsel
(from'Rend Counsel)
.Assessment Distric;,F asioility Study(from Horns)
:EX 1--11 El I
1.75 Bavwccd Drive;Suite 2024 Pet:l„ma; C3.ifcrnia 94954 707.766.5260 FAX'707.766._s2s retatumaCharrs assoc.com
September 6,,.2000
Mr. Mike:Eyert
Pg.2
2. Second:CounCiPMeethig'(ottober'16,200Q)
Council Adoptsthe'Restithiion of Intention, Approves the:Prgiirninafy Engineer's lke.port,,setS
the Protest Public Hearing for:Decentber 4,.2006 and directs various mailings and:recordings:
With this action, the City Council will approyeithe,PrefinthiatSt:Bititnate of Project costs and the
spread of those costs to the benefiting propettiesantithey will direct ifs to begin the property
owner balloting..
The prelirninary assessments:approved with.;theTteliminary Engineer's Reportrepi-esent the-
'highest assessment that can ever be placed given property, without a rieW,nofiCe,andhallot:
to ea-ch.property owner.
This Council Action.also directs usqo recordthc Assess-rfientDiStrict Boundary,-Map with he
doillity,Recorder.:ThiS first formal filing ensures that the"potential asseSSment district" shows
_
up in tideSearches,
We;will;meet;with:the propettrowners:seyetal tithes while preparing the Preliminarj;Engineer's
Report This will keep them informed on our progress'arld'allOW{them some:input on how the
assess-neat fonnulais5applied to theirspecific situation:
Wethave prellininarilyscheditiedthis Council ActiomfOrthe Oetobefill6,2000meetina the
Council Memo is due?September 15, 2000 We will provide you with the attachments as quickly
as„possiblei
Attadhrnentslo the Council Memo: Resolution of Intention (from Bond Counsel).
Preliininaiy.Erisineer's'Repdtt (from Hams)
'Boundary Mapr(from Hams)
Assessment Thagram(from Harris)
lthiCe,andBallotf(from Bond Counsel/Harju),
'PtCperty:OWriet Information Latter(from Hams)
-Plans and5neriifications-(friiih CSW/Stuber,Stroehji
3. Third,Couricii Meeting(beteniberv4,.;b109)
Council holds:aBublicliearing, Receives the Ballots,andAdopt-s:a Resolution Approving the
•
• Final Engineer's Report,levying assess-nents and directingyanous mailings and recordings r '
,
After the protest heatids, and assuming that properry'owner approval is received. the Council
willtapprove:the apifirtice thetassessmentsfinsed on
estimates;,if favorable bid .arerecdVèd at a Iter'date, assessments maybe reduced:
With Council approval, we are able to,record the Assessment,Diagramand Notice'of:Assessment
(which'sets•theftiropernoliens),We will also plaCe:theilial:Enganeer's Report On file;with:
several City ofnees.'WeinaV also wish to ask thelCotincii,for authority to mail cash paVitie'nt.
notices in the fUtute:-Wertio not want to mail the'notie es until you have received,bids.(because:;we,
mayteduce,the assessmemS)..1-lowever,,ifwe have Council:nigh-PM:2, we can mail the
thejapprepriatetime,and not delay the.prOieOt sc'nedule:
We will not know theirest-fits Of theproperty owner'oallaiirm-uptil the elose or the pcctesthel'ir ,
so 'Ye will nee&to20:yejcareill'attention to iheCoithcilyMenO. We can provide information on
what the Council ikable:to no if the assessment distfitt..:i approved and looth BendtCounseiand I 11)
IPS
;313•
Wefrritii::C:IperdiurnalMasles Scheauic Leuendec Harris & Associat'es.
Seutember 6,2000 .
Mr.Mike Evert
Pg:-3 ,
wiii beat the,public hearing andlable to answer dtre_t questions from the:Council. This process is
, somewhat like the certification anti Environmetital Impact•Report=the Council's actions may
lebe-dramatically!effected by testimony oifeted,at•the public hearing!
Attachmet srto the Council Memo: Resolutionof;Approving F.inal;Engineer's Report etc.
(from Bond•Counsel)
Final Engineei,'sReport(from Harris)
4. Fourth Council Meeting:(April 30,.2001) -
Council Adoptsithe Resolution Authorizing't$e Issuance,of Bonds and directing various actions.
and possibly a Resolution of Change and Modifications. With this action the'Council will be
authorizing the Issuance of Bonds:We do`not want to hold this meeting-until.you have received
bids; favorable bids.willallow the,Council to reduce assessments•by approving the Resolution of •
Change and Modifications: -
There will be resolutions and attachments for this Council Meeting,;howeverit will be more '
appropriate to discuss thosein'detail once- he City has received construction bids. .
Please feel free.to me at(701);766 16260:if you haveYapy additional'questions or requests.
Sincerely,,
HARRIS &ASSOCIATES' •
, •
Mary Grace Pawson RE.
Engineerdof Record
•
•
0
29
Refer to:C.`re:zIu am\\Inter,Schedule T-hendec Harris & Associates
September 6,2000
Mr. Mike Even
Pg.4
City of Eetalurna
Mc Dowell/E. Was/n/2;ton Street Transportation Improvement Project 49363
41
Summary Schedule for Asse.sSthent District Formation Activities
September.2000 (update)
Activity, I-Begin Date I Einitate
Feasibility Study I Jiiiie-15,2000 I JtifV;21,,2000
Prelimin. Bound— 'Mari - 15,2000 ',hill/242000
Property Owner Meeting I RAY 19,2000 I July 19,2000
Council Memo for First September,5,2000
Council Meeting (DUE DATE)
Pro.e '0-VitierMeetina Se stember,20, 2000 I Se itember20,2000
First Council Meeting [ October 2,2000 October 2,2000
Eimineer'S Report I Se.tember 6,2000 September 12;2000
Assessmerit.Dineram. Seritember-,6,2000 I September 123,,2000
,Council Menio,f6r,Second September 154000
Council Meeting (DUE DATE-)
Second Council Meeting I October 16, 2000 October 16,2000
Ballot Period I October 17;2000 I December 4,2000
Council Memo for Third November 4,2000
Council Meeting (includes (DUE DATE) , ,
Public,Hearing)
Third'Council Meeting Decetnber 42000 December 4,2000,
(including:Public Bearing)
Council Memo for Fourth March 26, 2000 March 30,2001
Council Meeting (DUE-DATE)
Fourth Council Meetin: April 30, 2000 I April 30,2001
•
•
•
13.9
-3U
•
Refer hp C.\pC:alumalNlaszer Schedule Leacr dee l'HSITiS a Associates
Schedule 'E-2
McDowell. Blvd../`E.'Washington St. Intersection Improvements
11999 2000 2001 12002
Notes Task Name I [Duration Start Finish 104101 ['02103104 Ii01 1,02103`104:1 01 1 02 1 031'04 1 Cl 1[02 I 03,1 04
PHASE 1,INTERSECTION,WIDENING '7826ays • Thu 12/3/98' Fri 11/30/01 "
I PLANNING/CONCEPTUAL DESIGN- [0 days Fri 2/5/99 fn 215/99 ' i. y5
I
1.1 Agreement 47 days Thu 12/3/98 Fri 2/5/99
1.2 Traffic Counts 13 days Thu 12/3/96 Mon 12/21/98 i, j -
. _ ._..._
1 3 Kick-od Meeting .2 days -.'
_Wed 2/3/99 Thu 2/4/99 .... ., _I...::.. -.. I. ... ...
1A Research :21 days :Mon 2/1/99 Mon 3/1/99 l
1.5 Feasibility Studies 41.days Tue 3/2/99 Tee 4/27/99
1.6 Aerial Topo&Schematic Plans 82 days Mon 2/1l99 Mon 5/31/99 I
1.7 Alternatives Analysis 21:days Mon 4/26/99 Mon 5/24/99 9
1.8 Rough Cost Estimate .21[days Mon 4/26/99 Mon 5/24/99 i,i
1.9 City Staff Review a Comment 24 days Tue 6/1/99 Fri 7/2/99 .
110 Property Owner.Meetings. 21.days Mon 7/5/99 Man 8/2/99 •111 City.Council Status Report ,0 days Mon 10/4/99 Mon 10/4/99 I 10/�
It DESIGN PHASE' 0 days. Mon 1111199 Mon 11/1/99 4 11/1
21 Prelim/Final Plans.Specs.&Eslm. '263 Oays .Mon tt/159 Wedl1/1/W
2.2 Mitigated Negative Declaration 476 days :Mon 1/3/00 Fri 2/2/01 .
2.3 Assessment Oistnct Study 65 days Mon 6/5/00 Fri 9/1/00
' • 2.4 ProPMY Owners Meetings :i.e.days Wed 711950 Wed 9/20/00 '; -
2.5 City Council Status Report 0 days Mon 1012/00 Mon 10/2/00 0 10/2 •
2.6 90%Rev ewd'Commenl 23daya 'Wed 11/1/00 Fri 1211100
•
2.7 RLW Acquisition - 196 days wed 3/1/00 Fri 12/1/00 P
18 Assessmertt Dise Estab:(See Exhibit A) 46 days Mon 10/2/00 Mon 12/4/00
2.9 Bid Process, 24 days Mon 1/8101 Thu 2/851 •' '
I •
2.10 City Council Memo Due 0 days'.. Mon 2/19101 Mon 2/19/01 ® 2119
•
2.11 City Council Award of Contract 0 days Mon 3/19/01 Mon 3/19/01' ®_SIi
2.12 Assessment District Bonds Issued 0 days Mon 4/30/01 Mon 4/30/01. ® 4/30
113 Notice to Proceed O days Mon 5/7/01 Mon 5/7/01 ♦ 5/1
III CONSTRUCTION 132 days Fn6/1/01 Mon 1213/01 € _3
• PHASE 2 BIKEWAY 793 days' Fn 10/1199 Tue 10/15/02
• I PLANNING 284 days, Fn 10/1/99 ' Wed 11/1/00 - f
• 1.1 Concept/Alternative Planning', 221 days Fn 10/1/99, Wed 11/1/00 f I ,::.1
1 2 Environmental 175 days Mon 10/2100 Fri 5/1101 :_;[
II DESIGN 130 days Mon 4/2/01 Fri 9/20/01 f 1 :!l:it
[ CONSTRUCTION 97 days. Mon 6/3/021 Tue 10/15/02 I; I. 'l
Task .. .. Summary[ Rolled Up Progress
Project McDowell Improvements split Rolled Up Task ,, External Tasks 1S ,
05001St2Na 4.960.02
1110 ' City roj cl/0¢
90100 Progress o Rolled Up Split Project Summary
Milestone o Rolled UpMlestone n,
Paged '
EXPI21T CD
NOTICE OF
• PROPOSED NEW ASSESSMENTS
City Clerk and
City of Petaluma ASSESSMENT BALLOT
11 English Street for the •
Petaluma, California 94952 CITY'OF PETALUMA
Assessment District 2000-1 (McD)well/E. Washington:
ASSESSMENT BALLOT:
The Property Owner shown opposite selects; one
Property Owner Name of the following:
Street (P.O. Box) Address
City £> Zip ❑ IN FAVOR OF ASSESSMENT
Assessor Parcel.No. ❑ OPPOSE ASSESSMENT
Proposed Total,Assessment this Parcel is:
Signature of Property Owner
Detach Here and Mail or Deliver to City Clerk at the Above Address-See Thin.4 Below
THE,CITY OFPPETALUMA GIVES'NOTIChthat:
1. Purpose of Assessments The City of Petaluma is proposing to levy new assessments in the above
Assessment District that includes your property; The purpose of the assessment is to fund the estimated costs of
improvements the intersection of McDowell Boulevard and East Washington Street; including widening and
conforming improvements an''dall.related admihistrative•andincidental costs, including the.costs of forming the
Assessment District.
2. The Assessments. The total of the proposed assessments for the whole Assessment ,District is
51,750,000. The proposed'total assessment on your property'identified abnve•is as shown above,The basis upon
which the!assessments•are calculated; including any proposed increases,is shown on the back of or included with
this Notice. Please read it carefully. Tht proposed assessment cannot be increased without another ballot
process. •
If the assessments are'confirmed, you will be given a separate notice that you;have the option to pay all
or part of the assessment:in-cash for at least 30 days. This will allow you to save certain bond costs and clear the
property of the assessment without.any interest or penalty. If left unpaid, the assessments w ill continue to be
collected against the properties in the Assessment District m the property tax bill as long as needed to pay
installments of principal and interest on the proposed assessment bonds,but not to exceed 25 years from-;the date
of such bonds.
3. Public Hearing. Before taking final action on the proposed Assessment District and the assessments,
the City Council will wilt hold a Public Hearing at City Council Chambers, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma
California on^Monday,December 4, 2000 at"7:00 p.m. to take final public testimony; hear protests,tabulate the
Assessment Ballots and the take final action on the levy the assessments.
4. Assessment Ballot.Ator.before the end of the Public Hearing,_any property owner in the.Assessment
District may submit the Assessment Ballot, which is the upper part ofthis Notice, to the City Clerk. To do so,
the owner must cut off the Ballot portion above; mark the either "In Favor of Assessment" or "Oppose
Assessment;' and sign:it: Any Ballots returned and not marked or signed will be-rejected and not counted. The
Ballots may be hand delivered or mailed to the.City Clerk at the City's address shown above. To be counted, a
Ballot must'be received by the City Clerk,not later than the end of the Public Hearing specified above. The
assessment shall not be imposed'if the ballots submitted in'opposition to the assessment exceed the,`ballots
submitted in favor of the assessments, with ballots weighted according to the proportional financial obligation
of the-proposed assessments the affected property.
5. More Information. To get additional information about the assessments or the Assessment District,
contact: Michael C. Evert, Engineering Manager, Department of Public Facilities and Services, City of Petaluma,
22 Basset Street, Petaluma, California, 94952-2610, Telephoner (707) 7784304. The Engineer's Report and other
written material about the Assessment District may be reviewed,at this address and at the office of the City '
Clerk at the above,address during:regular business hours. The City will hold another property owner workshop
as'shown:onthe enclosed notice. Please plan to,attendto'ask questions about the Assessment District.
Dated as of October 17,2000 City Clerk, City of Petaluma
EXPINIT Q
•
CITY OFFETALUNIA, C•ALIFOnThnia
AGENDA BILL
Agenda Title ' Meeting Date October.16, 2000
McDowell Boulevard/E. Washington Street Intersection",
=
Transportation Improvement; Project Assessment District #2000-,
01(Project No 9863,P113),: A. Adoprresolution.declaring intention •
to make acquisitions and improvements, and-B. Adopt resolution,'
preliminarily approving Engineer's Report and: directing actions
with respect thereto, and:setting,a public hearing for December 4,
2000.
Department:. Director Contact Person: .PhoneNuraber:
Public Facilities and ,RicleS dgien Mike Evert 77814439
Services - 0-)-2
.
Cost of Proposal: Account Number
$4;1,16,000 (Cost estimate as used for Alternate.,1 improvements in 213-9863
Assessment District Feasibility Study, and Preliminary Engineer s Name of Fund:
Report) • PCDC
Amount Budgeted: (Amount budgeted in 5-War Cilzfor Alter. 1) Special Assessments
PCDC 1;300;000 Traffic Mitigation:Fee
Traffic Mitigation Fee 2.387.000
S3,687,000
Attachments to AaendaTackefIteth: •
Exhibit A -Agenda Billand Agenda Report
Exhibit 1 -Memo regarding:assessmentdistrict meeting with property.oWrierstrepreseniatives
Exhibit 2,-Assessment district meeting notice
Exhibit13, Assessmentdistrictmeering"agenda •
Exhibit_4.-..-Assessment district meetingisimi4irt sheet
Exhibit 5:-Assessment district mailing list
Exhibit 6-Listing of property owners, businesses and estimated annual assessment costs per property
per square fait
Exhibit 7-PrOpOsed,assessment district boundary man
Exhibit B - Map of intersection improvement for Adternative
Exhibit C - Map of project Alternatives 1,-131, and C
Exhibit D -Preliminary Engineer's Report for Proposed Assessment District 2000-.01 (McDowell
Blvd./E. Washington St.)
Exhibit E Assessment district,schedule
Exhibit F -Project schedule from design engineer
Exhibit G-Projeci cost estimate updme
Exhibit H - Project mailing list
Exhibit I-Example of the:notice:of'proposed.neWaSsessmentS and assessment bailor
Exhibit J -Actions for October 16, 2000 Council:meetii -r
Exhibit K- Copy of the City Council Ag.ehda.Billand.RepOrt:6f October 2, 2000 (wio attachments)
Resolution Declaring Intention to Make Acquisitions and ImprOVementS.
Resolution Preliminarily APPrb,iing-En-gineer's Repon,and hirecting. Action with Respect Thereto.
.nnumary atarement
The formation of an assessment district for the McDowell, Blvd./E. Washington St. Transportation
Improvement Project'would provide one of several potential funding. sources for the project. To initiate
the process, the.City Council needs to adopt a,resolution declaring intention to make acquisitions and
improvements: This Council action formally begins the assessment district proceedings, and formally
refers the preparation of the Engineer's Report to the destana ed Engineer of Work (Assessment
Engineer) The adoption of the resolution,preliminarilTapproving the:Engineer's'Report and.directingt
action with respect thereto gives tentative approval to the Preliminary Engineer's Report and ;sets the
public hearing for December 4, 2000 to receive the ballot,from the property owners. This action •
approves the ,preliminary estimate of project costs and the spread, of those costs to the benefiting
properties, and directs the Assessment Engineerwto;record the:assessmentdistrict boundary'rnap with the,
county recorder:
Council Priority:, THIS AGENDAITENtasiCONSIDERED TO BE PART OF, ORNECESSaRY TO;,ONE*OR'
MoRE OF°THE'1999=200.0 •PRIORI-fits'EsTABLISHEn'BY'THE CIT.Y.COUNCit ON JANUARY 30;,1999',
• AND MARCH 13, 2000.
Priority(s)i Regional`Transportation Plan, and the Bicycle)Plam
•
Recommended City CouncihAction%Sugzested Motion;
Adopt_resolution declaring intention'to make acqutsttionsiandimprovements: and B. Adopt:resolution,
preliminarily approving Engineer's Report, directing actions with respect thereto, and setting a public
hearing for December 4,2000,.at 7,p:m. to receive ballots.from property owners.
Reviewed:bv Finance Director:' Revised by City Attorney: Approved by Cit3=ManaQer:
Dated Date: Dater
Today's Date: Revision 4 and Date Revised:. File Code:
•
9/29/00 n Mcdowel121/pf&s staff folder•me;
•
•
7
I CrTY'OFPETALI VIA,;CAL-IFORNL ;
OCTOBER 16,2000`
AGENDA REPORT
FOR .
TIIE MCDOWELL BOULEVA12DIE. WASH NGTON:STREET INTERSECTION
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT"PROJECT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT#2000-
01(PROJECT No. 9863, PH. #3)
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: •
The formation of an assessment district for the ,McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St.
Transportation Improvement Project would provide one of several potential funding
sources for the project. To initiate the process, the City Council needs to adopt a
resolution declaring intention to -make acquisitions and improvements. This Council
action formally begins the assessment district proceedings, and formally refers the
preparation of the Engineer's Report to the designated"Engineer!of Work (Assessment
Engineer). The adoption of the resolution:preliminarily approving the Engineer's Report
and directing action with respect thereto gives'tentative approval to the Preliminary
Engineers Report and sets: he public-hearing;for-Deceinbert4, 2000 to receive the ballots
from the property, owners This action approves the preliminary estimate;of project costs
and the spread of those costs to the benefiting properties, and directs the Assessment
Engineer-to record the assessment'district boundary;map with the county recorder.
2. BACKGROUND:
The McDowell Blvdi/E. Washington St. Intersection,.Transportation Improvement Project
is composed of three-alternatives that were chosen by the City Council!.'on October 4;
1999. Alternative-1 includesttransportation improvements in the area of,the intersection
(see Exhibit B),Alternative-13-1 includes bicycle and?pedestrian improvements over
Highway'101 fromthe northbound off-ramp•of Highway'101 to Ellis Street on the west.
and Alternative:C ts;being studied:for bicycle;improvements from McDowell Blvd. to
Adobe Road on theeast(see Exhibit,C). The.project'has continued to use..Altematives I.
B-l; and C for:identifving the specific imorovements`because each,Alternative has its
own funding, design: and construction scheduling issues. The City Council has directed
City personnel to complete the contract documents to donstruct the Alternative 1
intersectiomimnrovements in 2001(see Exhibit`B). Alternative B-I and C are scheduled
for construction in 2002 because these Alternatives have Federal funds. The:Federal
funds require anNEP:A environmental dacument,;which could.take approximately 13
months to eonlol'ete and`appro' e.
•
1
•
Assessment District Formation:
The formation of an assessment diStritt to'fund'aportion of this project'must 4
follow the guidelines_of:State•Proposition.218. The law;has specific guidelines'that must •
be metrin order for anassessment•district,to be viable: Two of the most important'are:'.
1) The properties being assessed must receive:a direct"specialbenefit''from the
improvements, and 2) in order for the district to,beformed, 50%of the properties based
on"the dollar aniount.being assessed, must vote:in favor of the assessment:district.
• Oneofthe"first"steps in the formation:'of an°assessment%district was the,preparationof an
assessment district feasibility study to determine if a district is feasible The Assessment
District FeasibilitytStudy,whichwas_presented?to the,City Council on October;2, 2000,.
discussed which aspects,of he;project result`in"special,benefit"to specific,property
owners versus the"general benefit"to•thecoinnitmity;;outlines which.properties receive
the "special benefit",,providedan estimated assessment district cost andseveral
alternative methods'for spreading:costs to tliebenefiting parcels,and•made a
recommendation for apportioning the'costsetfiat works`best for the property owners and
the City:
The Assessment Distnct Feasibility Study;recommended finding only a portion of
Alternative•I improvemenisat the+intersection,and not4the bicycle and pedestrian
improvements inAltematives B-1 or C. This:is;for two reasons: One, the feasibility
study:foundlittle to no "specific::benefit" for the bicvcleand pedestrian improvements in
Alternatives 13;-1 and C for:the properties being•considered m theassessment district,and
two, the-•final,cost of the assessment district, once established should be set the
acceptance•of construction`bids within a reasonable timeperiod Bids for Alternative 1
improyenients,are due in-the springsof,2001.
Because;the;AssessmentDistrict FeaSibilit y•Study:iecommended'thatan assessment
•district_be'based:on'the costs for Altemative1 only and not all three alternatives of the
project, the,potential funding from,am assessment;district is reduced from;previous
estimates. The':Feasibility Report'recommended that 30%, or$1,234,800 of the total cost.
of Alternative 1'(54,116,000), be funded by;theassessment district;. Of.the,30%u. 24% is
being-assessed against private parcels within the'proposed.boundary,;and:6%cis assessed
against• City's;Community Center-property. "The 30%o share came froma destination
survey, which showed that 24% of the drivers entering the:intersection during the peak
hours were there •shopping or to;a restaurant. The other 6%were thereto?attend
City°recreation facilities: T'nesepercentages wereconfirined.bythe'City'straffic models
The.Assessment Engineer felt;thatthe Communitv`Centershould be part ofthe
assessment district because it receives a•spectal hetefit.and its main entrance isservea
by thepsame signalized intersection;as'the Plaza NorthShopping Center, which is also in
the proposed assessment district: T he propertiesthat,are recommended to be included in
the;Assessment District are: •
TheiPetaluina Community'Center
• Best:Western Petaluma Inn
• Plaza Shopping Center
� .
-• Plaza.North':Shopping Center;
• -WashrnQtonSquare Shoppmg:Ceater
• `Chevron Service Station
• The Wherehouse Store Shoppiiig-Center
A detailed listing:of'these properties.and the proposed:assessments are:shown on pages
13 and.14 of the,Prelirninary Engineer's Report, Exhibit D. A listing of the properties
with owner;„business namesand•square footage, and estimated annual'cost per square
foot is shown on Exhibit.:07.The boundary map for the proposed assessment district:.
assessment numbers and busmess addresses is showniontxhibit 77 The Preliminary
Engineer's Report,whrch,follows�the recommendation'inthe Assessment,District
Feasibility Study,is theformal document that.approves:the preliminary estimate of
project.costs and spreads] ose costs to the;benefiting ptoperties: The preliminary
• assessments approved with the Preliminary Engineer's Report-repiesents the highest,
assessment that can be placed on a"oven property,without a new;notice and ballot to
each property owner.
In order to keep the property owners informed dunng the development,of the assessment
' district, and allow their'input;on how the assessmentformulauis applied to their specific
situation, City personnel,;the Assessment Engineer,Bond:Counsel,.Design Engineer, and
Right-of-Way Agent met with most of the property owners or their representatives on
July 19, 2000. The Assessment Engineer has attemptedto address:their comments in the
Assessment District'Feasibility'Study and in.;the attached-Preliminary Engineer's Report.
• City personnel hosted a second meeting with,the property,owners on September 20,2000.
A copy of the:September 20,2000 meetmg.s agenda, comments/concerns of the property
owners;and assessment dist iet information'iS attached,asB.Tthibits 'through 7.
The net funding to the,projecttfiom the assessment:district is the'total 'contribution from
all assessed parcels of$l,234,800,,minus'the Community,Center,'sicontribution of
$246;960, or$987,840. In ordet'to:form and administer the assessment district-for twenty
years, approximately$51'5',300 must be added to the;assessment district to cover these
a
costs'(see Exhibit D,,table',1',page 4). The costs include the expense-ofthe Assessment
Engineer, Bond Counsel, and incidental expenses such as the bond reserve, funded
interest, etc. --
Iris estimated that the,formation of an'assessment.districrwould require at least four City
Council meetings The stebs are,outlined in thetschedule from the Assessment Engineer,
Exhibit E. It is recommended that the assessment districtibe formed in December 2000,
so that:the City k nows whether assessment district hinds are secure before authorizing the
acceptance of construction'bids in the:Spring of 20,0-1. Because assessment amounts
cannot,be raised an;assessment.district'is formed, 26•A or 8337;000 was added to the
design engineer's:estimate;for imoroverrients, and $500000"was added to the estimated
cost for right-of-wav'acquisition.. These;adjustments are reflected=imthe Preliminary
Engineer's Reporttcost estimate in Exhibit D, table' Once bids are:received.
and the projects actual.costs are :known. the assessments niav'be,adjusted downward.
0j
3 •
The:adoptiomof:theresolution in this Council,packeL declating;intention to;make
acquisitions and improvements,,formally beQins,.the assessment district proceedings, The
adoption of the-resolutionpreltminarily approving the Engine r s Report,and,directing 4;
actions wiihtrespect;thereto; gives',tentativeapprovalto the Engine rs?Reportandlsets'the;
required-public hearing(tentatively set for December 4,..2000 at 7 p.m:). This resolution
also requires-the noticing of the public hearing on-December!1,2000 and'assessment
ballots';by mail—see`Exhibit I for an•example of the Notice of-Proposed'New
Assessments'and Assessment Ballot The notice provides,the property owner with the
dollar amount theiproposed assessment and explains the voting"procedure:.
The next step'in;the.process is scheduled,to'take place at the City Council meeting on
December.4,2000,when the City Council isischeduled to hold'apublic hearing, and
receive ballots: For,the assesstnentdistrict to be,established; 50%prof the;propertyowners,
based,onthe dollar value of the assessments,.must vote in favor Of the assessmentidistrict:
The ballots are counted imrriediately after the close of the,public hearing. After the
public hearing, and assuming that;ihe'propertyowners approve the assessment'district;.
the"Council'will,adopCa resolution;approving the Final;Engineer's Report. The Council
will also be approving theassessments based on estirnates, if favorable bids,are;received
in:the'spting of 2001, assessments may beireduced.
..Project schedule:. • •
Severalkey project•tasks'are.being tracked simultaneously iri order to meet City
Councils goal of constructing the iniersecttoh;transportation improvements iii
Alternative.l, in the summer.of 2001. The bicycle and pedestrian improvements'in
Alternatives B-land.0 arescheduled,for,2002'in order to complete the environmental
documents necessary for securingtF.ederal funds: The schedule for the,two;phases of the
improvements'is.showmon Exhibit F. Right-of-way acquisitioncontinues to be thekey
issue inrthe schedule. To insure that the projecthas the,:necessaryrigl right—of—way y'for
construction the slimier of 2001, City personnel will be requesting in afew months
'that'the City Council implement eminent domain proceedings to secure right-of-entry'
This action will-fdllow the approval ofsthe appraisal report by the Citv'Council„and
. offers to the property owners in December?2000, or January 2001.
3. ALTERNATIVES:
I. Adopt the resolution ,declaring intention 'to ;make acquisitions<:aria improvements.. and.
adopt the resolution preliminarily.approvtng,Engineer's.Report anatdirecting actions with .
p p _ December4, 1000';at'7:00 p:m. to receive
res ect`thereto, and setting a. ublicheann� for'
ballots from property owners. This Council action formally ,begins the assessment -
district;proceedings and formally refers the preparation of the engineer's.report to the
designated Engineer of Work. The action also approves the preliminary estimate of
projectscosts and spread of ithOse costs±to the'benefiting properties. The potential funding
that could begenerated bv:this,assessrnent_district is$937:310..,
•
4
" 2. Do notadopt,the;resolution;declaring imtentiontotmake acquisitions,and improvements,
and do notadopt;the resolution'preliminarily approving;Engineers Report and directing
•' actions°with respect thereto ,or set a public:hearmg'for December 4, 2000. Not adopting
these resolutions would,delay the formation of an assessment,district and create
uncertainty about the funding. •
3. Other combinations or options;resulting from the di`scussionbythe:City Council.
4. FINANCIAL IMP.ACTS:•
An.update:of theProject's estimated,costs bythe;desi ,engiheerforthe three
Alternatives I, B=1, and,C is shawn.on'ExhibitG: Theproject'sicost estimate=in October
1, 1999 is shown in the:top:block. The revised project;costas of:September5, 2000 in
shown in"the noddle block., The project's budget,as;shown in the.5-Year Capital
Improvement-Plan, is shown in the bottom'blocic::
The,cost of the;tntersection transportation improvements in Alternative ',Was increased
from the October-1,1999-estimate by $704,000. This increase was to include the
Landscape Conceptual Design A improvements;for 3335,000, the;special concrete paver
crosswalks for$134,000, and to include replacing the approach lanes;onEast Washington
St:'and?McDowell Blvd. So.with,concrete instead of asphalt for an added cost of .
3235,000. It is proposeddiat.these improvements be`funded by the Traffic Mitigation
Fund. PCDC, and anassessment district.
•,, The estimated cost for the bicycle,and;;pedestrian irnprovements,inAltetnative B-1
(bicycle and pedestrian improvements over Highway l0l)^has-remained'the same.
The estimated cost=for the bicycle and pedestrian improvements in:Alternative C
(McDoweliBlvd..-to AdobesRd.),has increased by$67.1;000,because of the cost of the
improvements along. Washington Creek from McDowell Blvd. to Sonoma Mountain
Parkway.
•
Si
•
Estimated:costs for Alternativeil improvernents•at theintersection:- •
Two project cost.estimates,are noted beloW. Thecost•estimate shown belo w and on the
left is the-DidCEncineer'S estirriate. Thercostestimate'showmbelow and on the right is
the;p6St eStimate as used in the,ASsessnietit District Feasibility StticlYi.arid in•the
PrelithinaryEngineer'S Report..
Estimated cost for Alternate I
intersection improvernents, ãTüèd
in:the Assessineti(DiStfiet .
Feasibiliv
Design Engineer's:revised'estimatednost • Study,and in the Prelimixiicry
for Alternatet intersection improvements, EnSeee&Renort.
•.
Adrniaspection 14'35;000 " 1435,000
Planning/Desimi 435;000 435,000
Land Acquisition 303;000 103,000.(1)
Improvements 1,685;000 2,022,000 (2):
Contingelidy" 421.000 421.000 •
Estimated Cost 33,463,000 ' $4:140,000
(1),It:is'anticipated thatithenssessmericolistriciwillbe formed'ipriOr'toreeeiVi'ncr-
•construetiOn bids. Because the amount of the bonding for an assessment district
'canndtbeinised aftern district is formed,:the estimated costs for land acquisition
was increased by$500;0011to'insure;:that:there is adequate funding to purchase
neededriaht-of-way. Once the appraisals are completed andIacceptecL and bids
are received, the surplus funds Will be returned to the propertiesbeingiassessed.
(2)',As m (1),205-ior 3337,000 was added to the besimr,Engineer's estiMatedtosifor
the improvements.
Estimated funded sources for Alternative 4 iinprovements•at:the intersection When usiria,
the:estimated coSt shown in'the'Assessment DistrietFeasibilikv Sfudvi,and'Preliininarv.
Engineer's Report:
PCDC 11,300,000
Special AssessMents, 987:840 (3)
Traffic tiliildatiOn,Fiaid 1:828:160
Total proposed funding 34,116.000
3) The estimated funds igenerated:Pyithe assessment district are.basec1,orpa,snbstantial!
contingency: The actual funding will cc determined after,a,property:appraisal,is
complete&ancl construction bidsnre received.
6 •
Total estimated cost:and.Dronosed funding.sourcesforall Altematesr I (construction in
20011. B-l.and C,(construction in 2002)whenusingtthe Design Engineer's cost estimate
• (see Exhibit G)
•
Uses:
Adminilnspection - -$955,000
• PlanninaIDesig i :823,000
Land Acquisition 303,000
Improventents • 3;656,000
Contingency 977.000
TotalCost $6,719,000 (see engineers estimate, Exhibit G)
Potential FundinaiSources:
PCDC . $1,300,000
Special Assessments . 987,840 '
Traffic;Mitigation;Fees 2387,000
1 h A-21 &TDA funds 1,050,000
Safe Routes,to;Sdhool grant' 500,000
Undetermined funds 494.160'(41
•
• Total funding `$6,719;000
(4) This,shortfall.iri+funding•will,affect the bicycle and pedestrian improvements in
Alternatives 13-1,and C, scheduled;forconstruction-in 2002:
Other Sources:
City Personnel submitted an(applicationinra 5500,000 Safe_Route-to Schools grant for
Alternative 134,and C,improvements. The State has made-a determination that this
project scored high in the program,and'approved'the:funding for this project.
5. CONCLUSION:
The Assessment District;Feasibilit .Study has determinehthat the properties within the
proposed.assessment district receive,the following special`benefits from the
improvement:° Improved access for;theu properties, improved aesthetics at the
intersection and in,front of the properties, frontage improvements that future
development conditions. and the properties continue to'be'provided non-conforming
access conditions.
6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE'MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
Start the construction of the intersection transportattont improvements for Alternative l in
the summer of 2001.
7. RECOMMENDATION:
A. Adopt resolution declaring intention to make acquisitions and;impro,vements, and B.
Adopt resolution preliminarily approving Engineer's Report and directing action's with
respect thereto, and setting a public hearing for December 4, 2000, at 7'p.m. to receive
ballots from property owners:
Mcdowel12l/s:pf&s folder/me'
•
•
•
is,
. ,
. .
Date: Sept. 5,9000 Page I
File: 4.960.967 •
0
(COMPARISON')
.. .
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE'
McDOWELL BOULthiiARD/E..WASilINCTON STREET
INTERSECTION,IMPROVEMENTS;-PROJECT No 9363
AllitRNATTS'"1",`9311:1W47.7
Oct 1.
107 A 9
1999'ESTIMATE SUMMARY TO CM COUNCIL ..
ITEM ALT..1 ALT. B-I ALT..0 .TOTAL...ESTIMATED
COSTS
AdminJlnspection I 385 ' 63 352 305
Planning/Design 335 54 764 703
_ .
Land Acquisition 265 - 265 ,
Improvements 1,134 ' : 209 13742 / 760
-,
Contingency
I 356 I 63 335 304
Totals
I 2,575 I 394 ....iia 5,344
, .
Serit..5.2000ESTIMATE SUMMARY4REVISED)
ITEM ALT. 1 ALT.-13--1 A:LT,t TOTAL ESTIMATED 9 °a
• % (Revised) COSTS
Admin./Inspection I 435 63 452 955 •
Planninates im 435 54 339 - 328
- _
Land AcqUisition . 303. - • - 3031
Improvements 1;635 • 299 1;761 3,656
1
•
• Contineencv j 421 63 493, ' 977
Totals 3,279 394 34461 6,719
. •
ITEM FY3000,2006 .
, 5-YR,CIP.
Admin/InSpection 330
Planninztesien . 921 j
Land Acquisition 303'
Improvements
, aontimzenCy 700 I
Total •
City of Petaluma, California
Proposed Assessment District2000-01 (MHCDowell Wathington
Recommerided'finalEfigineer'S.Cost EStiniate
Description . Preliminary Costs Suggeste&Final
Costr
City•AdrninstratiOn.and Inspection $435,000, 1435;000
Planning and Design $435,006 $435,000 ,
Land Acquisition $803,000 . $803,000 •
... •
Intersection Improvements
Alternative 1 at the Intersection $2,022,000 $Z022,000
Contingency • $421,000 $421,000
Total Construction Costs $4,116,000 $4,11,6,000 •
Contribution for General Benefits $2,881,200 $2,1381;200
Balance-to-ASsessrnent'District $1,234,800 $1,234,800,
Incidentals
•
Filing:Fees sj,bbo
Bond Counsel $55,000 .$20,000
Assessment Engineering $54,470 $54,470
Total Incidental Costs $110,470 $75,470
•
Bond..0 o sts
Underwriter's Discount $43,750 •$0
.Bond Resenie $175,000 $0 •
Funded Interest.* $140 000 !$0,
Official Statement $5,000 '$0
Printing, Registering,& Servicing $15,000 $0
Incidental Contingency $25,980 $0
Total Bond Costs $404,730 ;$0
Total Assessment District Costs ' $1;750;000 $1,310,270
• •
* Assumes that the,City buys its own'Assessment Bond
•
c .if
-r- .s.
_ .
Resolution No. N.C.S.
of the City of Petaluma' California
A RESOLUTION OF'THEsCITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PETALUMAADOPTING ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONFIRMING.
THE ASSESSMENT, ORDERING THE'WORK AND ACQUISITIONS AND
DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT'THERETO
Assessment:District2000-1:(McDowell/E. Washington)
RESOLVED, by theCity'Council (the "Council");ofthe City of Petaluma (the "City"),
County of Sonoma, (the "County") California:
1. Resolution of Intention. On October 16; 2000, this Council adopted its
Resolution of Intention to Make Acquisitions and Improvements, (the "Resolution of
Intention') under the Municipal Improvement.Act of 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and
Highways Code of California, (the "Act") to initiate proceedings under the Act in and for the
City's Assessment District 2000-1 (McDowell/E f.Washingfon) (the "Assessment District").
WHEREAS, the report`was made`.:and filed, and considered by this Council and found,
to be sufficient in every particular, whereupon it was determined that the report should stand
, as the Engineer's Report for all''subsequent proceedings under and pursuant to the Resolution
• of Intention, City Council Chambers, City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California on,
Monday, December 4; 2000, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. California, were appointed, as the time and
place for a public hearing to take testimony andifor hearing:protests in relation to the proposed
acquisitions and improvements, for tabulation on assessment ballots and final action upon the
Engineer's Report, notices of which hearing, including assessment ballots, were mailed as
required by law; and
WHEREAS, the hearing`was held„and all persons interested desiring to be heard were
' given an opportunity to be.heard,and all matters and things;pertaining to the=acquisitions and
improvements werefully heard and considered by this Council,:and any protests, both written
and oral, were duly'heard, considered; and all assessment ballots submitted by property
owners were received and-tabulated;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT"IS■ORDERED as follows:
1. No Majority Protest;Protests Overruled ltis'hereby determined that upon the
conclusion,of the public hearing, and:after tabulation of the assessment ballots submitted, no
majority protest against the assessment existed because they assessment ballots submitted in
opposition.to;the assessment did:not exceed the ballots,submitted in favor.of the,assessment. In
tabulating the,ballots, they were weighted according•to the;proportional financial obligation of
the affected properties. Any protests,`in,whole pr in part.against the-proposed acquisitions and
improvements, the grades at whichr the work is proposed to':be done, the assessment district or
• the extent thereof to be assessed for the costs and expenses of the acquisitions and
improvements; the.engineer's" estrrriate of costs and expenses, the maps and descriptions or
•
I
against the diagram'or the assessment'to pay for the costs and expenses,thereof, written and.
oral, are hereby overruled'. •
2. Public 'Interest: The public interest, convenience and necessity, require,that the
acquisitions andimprovements be made,:and thatthe Assessment District be formed.
3. . Assessment District Described. The Assessment- District benefited by the.
,acquisitions and improvements and to;be asses'sed,to pay the costs and,eipenses�thereof, and.
the exterior boundaries thereof are:as'shown by a map thereof filed in the,office of the City
Clerk, which:map is made a part hereof by reference thereto.
4, Engineers Report Approved The Engineer's Report,:in the form onsfile in the
office of the City Clerkand tolwhich reference is hereby made for further particulars, including
the-estimates of costs and expenses, the apportionment of assessments and the assessment
diagram contained in the,EngineerscReport, is hereby'approved and confirmed;and shall stand
asathe Engineer's Report for these and;all futures!proceedings,for the Assessment District. It is,
hereby specifically provided that the total amount of assessment finally approved shall be;
reduced from the preliminarily approved amount of;$1;750,000 to the;approved amount of
$1,310;270,„allc as shown"in the Engineer's Report on file in the office of the City Clerk,: Final
approval Of'the Engineer's Report is:intended to and shall refer and applyIo'the Engineers
Report,'or any portion'thereof, as amended, modified, revised or corrected by or pursuant to
and:in accord_ance'with, any resolution or order, any, heretofore duly adopted or made by
this Council.
5: Benefits,Determined, Based on the oral and documentary evidence, including:
•
the Engineer's Report, offered,and received at-the public hearing, this Council expressly,finds
and:determines that:.
(a) each of the several parcels or subdivisions;of land in the Assessment
District will be specially`benefited'by the acquisitions and improvements at least`in the
amount, if not-more than the amount, of the assessment, apportioned' against the
- subdivisions of land,respectively;and
(b) there is substantial'evidence to support, and the weight of=the evidence
preponderates in favor of, the°finding,and determination as to special benefits. '
6, Improvernents Ordered, Assessr'ient District Formed and Assessments
Confirmed This Council.hereby orders',that the acquisitions,and improvements described in
the Resolution of Intention:be made;the-Assessment District,be formed and that the;assessment
to pay the costs' and expenses thereof be, confirmed and are hereby levied. For further
particulars pursuant;to the,provisions;of the Act,reference is hereby made to the.Resolution of
Intention and;the Engineer.s`Report;
7. Recording,Ordered. TheiCity Clerk-shall forthwith:
(a) deliver to the ,official of the City who is the Superintendent,of Streets.
under,'the Act the assessment as:contained'in the.Engineer's;Report together with the
assessment diagram, as approved and confirmed by this Council,, with a certificate of
2_.
such confirmation and of the date;thereof,;executed 83R-the City Clerk, attached thereto.
The Superintendent of,Streets'shall record the assessment and diagram inga suitable
book to be kept for.that purpose, and,append thereto a certificate of the date of such
recording, and such-recordation shall-be,and constitute the assessment roll herein; and
(b) cause.a, copy of the assessment diagram and a notice of assessment,
substantially the form provided in Section:3114 of.the Streets::and Highways Code of
California, executed by the City Clerk, to be filed and recorded, respectively, in the
office of the County"Recorder ofthe County of Sonoma.
From the date of recording of the notice of assessment, all persons shall be deemed to
have notice of the contents of such assessment,and each,of such assessments shall thereupon
be a lien upon the property,against which it is made, and unless'sooner discharged such liens
shall so continue for the period of ten (10)years from the date of the recordation,or in the event
bonds are'issued to represent the assessments, then such liens shall continue until the
expiration of four (4) years after:the due date of the last installment upon the bonds or of the
last installment of principal of the bonds. The appropriate officer or officers of the City are
hereby authorized to take all actions and to pay any and all.fees,required by law in connection
with the above.
S. Cash Payment Ordered.
(a) Cash Payment: Under the Act, this Council hereby directs that the
• owners of property within,the.Assessment District shall be given written notice of the
confirmation of the assessments and of the recording thereof in the office of the City
Superintendent of Streets and:of'.the opportunity of such owners to Pay all or a portion
Of the assessments in cash for a.period of not less than:thirty (30) days.
(b) Collection Officer. The Finance Director of the City is appointed
Collection'Officer (the 'Collection Officer ) for the assessments and the person to whom
paymentof the assessments shall be made,and that;the office'of the Collection Officer,
at.City Hall, 11 English Street, Petaluma, California; 94952 is designated as the place at
which any payments will be made, and The City Engineer is hereby relieved of all
responsibility for collecting assessments.
(c) Mailed Notices. The' Collection Officer shall cause notices to pay
assessments to be mailed under Section 10404 of the Act; which notice shall state that
bonds will be issued under the Improvement Bond Act of'1915; to represent any unpaid
assessment's. The:rnailed notice:shall be mailed to each owner of real property within
the.Assessment,District at his or her last known address.as;the same appears;on the tax
rolls of the City, or on file in the office of or as known to the City Clerk,-or to both
addresses i£the address is not the same, or'.to thegeneral delivery when no address so
appears.
(d) Published Notice. The Collection Officer shall also cause the notice to be
published once a week for two successive_ weeks (with at least five days intervening
between the respective publication dates, not counting such dates) in a newspaper
published and circulated in the City.
-3- -
•
(e) Proceeds of Collections. The Collection Offitei shall 'establish a fund, •'' .
'separate and distinct from other funds of the City and designated'"City of Petaluma,
Assessment District 2000-1 (McDowell/E"/:Washington), Cash Payment Fund" (the
"Cash Payment;Fund`) into.wh'W shall be deposited all sums:received from:the cash
,payments. The-Cash Payment Fund may he invested by the Collection Officer lawful
investments for the,City; provided; however, that the Collection Officer shalla?e under
no obligation to invest any or all ofthe amounts>in the Cash=Payment'F.und. In the'event
that this Council issues bonds for the .Assessment Distriet, the moneys in the Cash
Payment Fund shall be applied to the acquisitions and improvement's for the
Assessment.District and,the Fund shall be closed..If the Council determines not to'issue •
bonds to finance the acquisitions land improvements, the Collection Officer shall return
the amounts of cash payments (with any interest thereon) to the persons'.responsible for
paying such cash payments and the. Fund shall be closed. The tuning of such
determinations shall be at the discretion of the Council.
9. Effective Date. This resolutionshall.be•effective upon the date of;its adoptien.
Under the power and authority conferred':upon this Council by the Charter;ofsaid City., •
REFERENCE: Phereby:certify the foregoing Resolution°was•introduced.and adopted bythe
Council of the City of Petaluma.at a Regular meeting on February 20,•20,01;
by the following vote:
• Approve as to
forth: •
CityAttorney, ,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: .
City.Clerk Mayor,
Resolution.No. '.NCS
•
S/pf&s/m%resol.-Adptg Eng Rpt
Nor
-4-
•
Resolution No. N.C.S.
of the City of ft- etaluma; California
A RESOLUTION-OF THECITY COUNCIL OF T HE
CITYOPPETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
WAIVING A PORTION:OF FUTURE TRAFFIC"MITIGATION FEES FOR
PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-01
.Assessment Distric11000-0'1 (McDowelUE.,Washington)
WHEREAS, the City Council:of'Petaladia adopted a resolution:adopting,the Engineer's Report
confirming the assessments, orderingithe work and acquisitions and directing actions with respect
thereto for Assessment District 2000:-01;and
WHEREAS, the Final Engineers Report states that:one=:of the special benefits received by the properties
from the Assessment District is'that the intersection improvements anticipate future development
conditions on their properties; and
WHEREAS, one of the future development conditions is the.contribution of traffic mitigation fees; and
WHEREAS, the traffic mitigation fee will be waived for future development.expansion of up to a total
of 25% of the existing facility square footage, within'a period dfthe 25-year life of the Assessment
District 2000-01 bonds; and
• WHEREAS, the following properfies,shall.receive a waiver for future traffic mitigation fees up to the
maximum value of the traffic mitigationfee.credit shown as`follows 'for'a portion of future development:
Year 2000
Assessed 25% Maximum Value
Assessor's' Facillity Square of Traffic
Parcel . Owner Square Footage Mitigation Fee
Number Footage Expansion Credit
007-213-030 Petaluma Properties 20000 5000 $12,440
Inc.
007-280-038 Ann Morrissey 7182 1796 $4,467
0071280-046 Washington Square 13620.. - 3405 $8,472
Assoc.
007-280-049 Friedman; Morton L. 0 0
and'Marcine
007-280-052 Washington Square 2288 572 $1,423
Assoc.
007-280-054 Chevron USA Inc. 2011 503 $1,251
007-280-055 Washington Square 134242. 33561 $83;499
Assoc.
007-280-069. Washington Square 7196' 1799 $4;476
Assoc.
007-280-070 Washington Square 4346 1087 $2,703
Assoc. •
007-280-071 Washington Square 1,5376 3844 $9,564
i
•
Assoc.
007-280-072 Washington Square, 3900 975 $2,426
Assoc.
007-280=073 Washington Square, 0 0 •
Assoc. •
007-340.006 Thorup, Martha et. 1723 431 $.1,072
•al. Trust
007-340-007 Thorup, Martha et_, '156519 39130 $97,355
al. Trust
007-340-008 Thorup, Martha et. 3084 771 $1,918
al. Trust
007-350-008 Syers'Property Inc. 26397 6599' $16,419
007.350=009 Syers.Property Inc. 183939 45985
Square.Footage - - -
Totals 581,823 145,456
Potential Credit
Total $361;894.
WHEREAS, three of the:property owners than one parcel; and
WHEREAS„thetraffic'mitigation fee credit'May be aggregated by an owner and applied wholly or
partially to any`of the'parcelswithin the development;and
WHEREAS„if a property is sold, the unused-credit remains-with=the property;and •
WHEREAS, if a property owner within Assessment:Distract 2000-01 purchases another property
contiguous to,hisor her property, whether withinor:out of Assessment District'2000-01, the remaining
traffic mitigation:fewcreditsmaybe transferredtwthe purchased.property;'land
WHEREAS,the,lownersof'APN`007-213-030,Petaluma Properties, Inc, (Best/Western Petaluma'Inn)
can apply the traffic mitigation,fee"waiver to an expansion of theirbusiness into the residential parcel
that they own-at corner of McDowell Blvd!?So (228:McDowell Blvd.,sb.),and
WHEREAS,the adoption of this resolution does notiimply City approval of any City:permits,of an
expansion; and
NOW BE IT RESOLVED bythe City Council of the,Cityof Petaluma;that'ifa rnajonty,of the property
owners, based:onthe dollar amount being assessed, vote in,favor"of Assessment District 2000.01, the
traffic mitigation fee will be waived.for the property owners'within the Assessment,District 2000-01 for
future development-expansion of up to a.total:of 25f0.of the existing facility square footage, within the
25-year life of AssessnientDistrict 2000-01 Bonds.
•
Under the power and Jauthonty conferred upon thisCouncil by the Charter ofsaid City:
REFERENCE: I hereby-certify the'foregoing'Resolution was-introducedand adopted'by the Council
of the City'of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on February 20, 200F,by-the Approved,as to .
following vote: • form:.
AYES: City,Attornev
'-NOES:
ABSENT:
0 ,ATTEST:
City Clerk Mayor
Resolution No. -00_- NCS
Mcdowel128/G/city clerk/reso'
•
•
•
•
•
•
•