Loading...
2006-10-03 PacketCITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY - - - OCTOBER 3, 2006 - - - 6:00 P.M. Time: Tuesday, October 3, 2006, 6:00 p.m. Place: City Council Chambers Conference Room, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street Agenda: 1. Roll Call - City Council 2. Public Comment on Agenda Items Only Anyone wishing to speak on agenda items only, may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per item 3. Adjournment to Closed Session to consider: 3 -A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Agency negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director Employee organizations: Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Executive Management Group, Management and Confidential Employees Association, and Police Association Non -Sworn 3 -B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION Name of case: VanderHeiden v. City of Alameda 4. Announcement of Action Taken in Closed Session, if any 5. Adjournment - City Council CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC), AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) TUESDAY - - - OCTOBER 3, 2006 - - - 7:25 P.M. Location: City Council Chambers, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street. Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Council /Commission /Board on agenda items or business introduced by the Council /Commission /Board may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before the Council /Commission /Board. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to speak. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL - City Council, CIC, HABOC 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be approved or accepted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Board or a member of the public 2 -A. Minutes of the Special Board of Commissioner meeting held August 15, 2006. Acceptance is recommended. [ HABOC] (Housing Authority) 2 -B. Minutes of the Special Board of Commissioner meeting held September 5, 2006. Acceptance is recommended. [HABOC] (Housing Authority) 2 -C. Budget Review. Staff recommends the Board of Commissioners: 1. Approve the proposed budget revision; and 2. Adopt the proposed resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza). [HABOC] (Housing Authority) 3. AGENDA 3 -A. Recommendation to authorize conveyance by Quitclaim Deed of 2.51 acres at the former Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC) site for construction of 39 units of affordable rental housing to the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda. [CIC]; Recommendation to accept a 2.51 -acre site at the former FISC Site for 39 units of affordable rental housing via a Quitclaim Deed from the Community Improvement Commission. [HABOC]; • Recommendation to authorize the Chief Executive Officer to execute a 75 -Year Ground Lease with Resources for Community Development (RCD) for construction and management of 39 units of affordable rental housing on 2.51 acres at the former FISC site and negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents between the Housing Authority, CIC and RCD. [HABOC]; • Recommendation to authorize the Executive Director to negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents with Resources for Community Development and the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda. [CIC]; • Recommendation to approve the use of up to $1.41 million of City HOME Funds and $100,000 of Affordable Housing Unit Fees (AHUF) to pay a portion of the costs of development of 39 units of Affordable Rental Housing within the former FISC site and authorize the City Manager to executed related documents. [City Council]; and • Adoption of Resolution Approving the Use of Housing Funds to Pay a Portion of the Costs of Development of a 39 Unit Affordable Rental Project within the FISC /East Housing Area. [CIC] (Development Services) 4. ADJOURNMENT - City Council, CIC, HABOC Beverly Joh Chair, CofnYty Improvement Commission and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION TUESDAY - - - OCTOBER 3, 2006 - - - 7:27 P.M. Location: City Council Chambers, City Hall, corner of Santa Clara Avenue and Oak Street. Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Commission on agenda items or business introduced by the Commission may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before the Commission. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to speak. 1. ROLL CALL - Community Improvement Commission 2. CONSENT 2 -A. Minutes of the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), Community Improvement Commission (CIC), and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners (HABOC) Meetings, and Special Joint City Council, ARRA, and CIC Meeting held on September 19, 2006. (City Clerk) 2 -B. Recommendation to enter into a Contract with Construction Testing Services, Inc. in the amount of $84,260 to provide Special Inspection and Testing Services for the Civic Center Parking Garage and Alameda Theater Project. (Development Services) 3. AGENDA 3 -A. Adoption of Resolution Referring the Proposed Sixth Amendment to the Community Improvement Plan for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Plan to the Planning Board of the City of Alameda for Its Report and Recommendation and Authorizing Transmittal of Said Sixth Amendment to the Affected Taxing Entities and Other Interested Persons and Organizations. (Development Services) [In conjunction with City Council Item 4 -C] 4. ADJOURNMENT - Community Improv t Commission Beverly John on Community Beve tjh a r Comm y p e e n Commission CITY OF ALAMEDA • CALIFORNIA IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL: 1. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk and upon recognition by the Mayor, approach the podium and state your name; speakers are limited to three (3) minutes per item. 2. Lengthy testimony should be submitted in writing and only a summary of pertinent points presented verbally. 3. Applause and demonstration are prohibited during Council meetings. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY - - - - OCTOBER 3, 2006 - - - - 7:30 P.M. [Note: Regular Council Meeting convenes at 7:30 p.m., City Hall, Council Chambers, corner of Santa Clara Ave and Oak St] The Order of Business for City Council Meeting is as follows: 1. Roll Call 2. Agenda Changes 3. Proclamations, Special Orders of the Day and Announcements 4. Consent Calendar 5. Agenda Items 6. Oral Communications, Non - Agenda (Public Comment) 7. Council Communications (Communications from Council) 8. Adjournment Public Participation Anyone wishing to address the Council on agenda items or business introduced by Councilmembers may speak for a maximum of 3 minutes per agenda item when the subject is before Council. Please file a speaker's slip with the Deputy City Clerk if you wish to address the City Council. SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CONFERENCE ROOM Separate Agenda (Closed Session) SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, 7:25 P.M. COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION, AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Separate Agenda SPECIAL MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT 7:27 P.M. COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, Separate Agenda 1. ROLL CALL - City Council 2. AGENDA CHANGES 3. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 3 -A. Proclamation declaring October as Disability Awareness Month. (Public Works) 3 -B. Proclamation declaring October as National Arts and Humanities Month. 3 -C. Proclamation declaring October 4, 2006 as Walk & Roll to School Day. 3 -D. Proclamation declaring October 15 -21, 2006 as National Business Women's Week. 3 -E. Library project update. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be enacted, approved or adopted by one motion unless a request for removal for discussion or explanation is received from the Council or a member of the public 4 -A. Minutes of the Special Joint City Council and Public Utilities Board Meeting held on September 14, 2006; the Special Joint City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority (ARRA), Community Improvement Commission (CIC), and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Meetings, the Special Joint City Council, ARRA and CIC Meeting and the Regular City Council Meeting held on September 19, 2006; and the Special City Council Meeting held on September 26, 2006. (City Clerk) 4 -B. Bills for ratification. (Finance) 4 -C. Adoption of Resolution Finding and Determining That a Project Area Committee Need Not be Formed in Relation to the Proposed Sixth Amendment to the Community Improvement Plan for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project Area. (Development Services) [In conjunction with CIC Agenda Item 3 -A] 4 -D. Final Passage of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 30- 4.9A.g.8 (Off- Street Parking and Loading Space) of the C -C Community Commercial Zone of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations), to Add a Process for Parking Exceptions. (Planning and Building) 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 5 -A. Adoption of Resolution Appointing Robert A. Bonta as a Member of the Economic Development Commission (Banking /Finance Seat); and • Adoption of Resolutions Appointing Cathy Nielsen and Henry B. Villareal as Members of the Social Service Human Relations Board. 5 -B. Adoption of Resolutions Appointing David J. Burton, Stanely M. Schiffman, Ron Silberstein, and Lizette Weiss as Members of the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force; and • Recommendation to accept report on the membership of the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. (Planning and Building) 5 -C. Recommendation to allocate funding for the purchase of the Beltline property and the park design and development process. (Recreation and Parks) 5 -D. Public Hearing to consider Adoption of Resolution Amending Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Revise and Streamline the Planning and Building, Public Works and Fire Departments Fee Schedules. [Continued from September 5, 2006] (Planning and Building) 6. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON- AGENDA (Public Comment) Any person may address the Council in regard to any matter over which the Council has jurisdiction or of which it may take cognizance, that is not on the agenda 7. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (Communications from Council) Councilmembers can address any matter, including reporting on any Conferences or meetings attended 7 -A. Consideration of Mayor's appointment to the Rent Review Advisory Committee. 8. ADJOURNMENT - City Council • For use in preparing the Official Record, speakers reading a written statement are invited to submit a copy to the City Clerk at the meeting or e -mail to: lweisige @ci.alameda.ca.us • Sign language interpreters will be available on request. Please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 at least 72 hours prior to the Meeting to request an interpreter • Equipment for the hearing impaired is available for public use. For assistance, please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 either prior to, or at, the Council Meeting • Accessible seating for persons with disabilities, including those using wheelchairs, is available • Minutes of the meeting available in enlarged print • Audio Tapes of the meeting are available upon request • Please contact the City Clerk at 747 -4800 or TDD number 522 -7538 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to request agenda materials in an alternative format, or any other reasonable accommodation that may be necessary to participate in and enjoy the benefits of the meeting Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - TEL: (510) 747 -4300 - FAX: (510) 522 -7848 - TDD: (510) 522 -8467 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 2006 The Board of Commissioners was called to order at 7:42 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Torrey and Chair Johnson. Absent: Commissioner Daysog. 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner Matarrese moved acceptance of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner deHaan seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Items accepted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. *2 -A. Minutes of the Regular Board of Commissioner meeting held April 4, 2006. Minutes accepted. *2 -B. Minutes of the Special Board of Commissioners meeting held May 2, 2006. Minutes accepted. *2 -C. Approving Award of Contract for Window Replacement at Eagle Village in an Amount not to Exceed $142,450 and Authorize the Executive Director to Execute Contract. The Board of Commissioners: 1. Awarded a contract to Quality Plus Construction for $129,500 plus up to an additional 10 percent for change orders for a not to exceed amount of $142,450, to replace the windows at Eagle Village; and 2. Authorized the Executive Director to execute the contract. *2 -D. Approving Award of Contract in the Amount of $162,500 for Flooring Replacement at All Properties; and Authorizing the Executive Director to Execute Contract. The Board of Commissioners: Agenda Item #2 -A CC 10 -3 -06 CC /CIC /HABOC Minutes of August 15, 2006 Special Board of Commissioners Meeting Page 2 1. Awarded a contract to Design Flooring Systems for an amount not to exceed $162,500 to replace floor coverings in units at all properties and with the Authority's option to renew the contract for up to two additional one year terms; and 2. Authorized the Executive Director to execute the contract. 3. AGENDA 3 -A. None. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 5. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS Commissioner Torrey brought a packet from the NAHRO meeting held at the Los Angeles Biltmore in April. 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:43 p.m. Attest: Beverly Johnson, Chair Michael T. Pucci Executive Director / Secretary Housing Authority of the City of Alameda 701 Atlantic Avenue - Alameda, California 94501 -2161 - TEL: (510) 747 -4300 - FAX: (510) 522 -7848 - TDD: (510) 522 -8467 MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA HELD TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2006 The Board of Commissioners was called to order at 7:43 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 1. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioner Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Torrey and Chair Johnson Absent: None 2. CONSENT CALENDAR Commissioner DeHaan moved acceptance of the Consent Calendar. Commissioner Daysog seconded. Motion carried unanimously. Items accepted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk. *2 -A. Approving Award of Contract for Siding Replacement at Eagle Village in an Amount Not to Exceed $167,200 and Authorize the Executive Director to Execute Contract. The Board of Commissioners: 1. Awarded a contract to Bay Cities Construction for $152,000 plus up to an additional 10 percent for change orders in an amount not to exceed amount of $167,200, to replace siding at Eagle Village; 2. Authorized the Executive Director to execute the contract; and 3. Increased the budget by $167,200 to cover the siding project. 3. AGENDA 3 -A. None. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 5. COMMISSIONER COMMUNICATIONS Agenda Item #2 -B CC 10 -3 -06 CC /CIC /HABOC Minutes of the September 5, 2006 Special Board of Commissioners Meeting Page 2 Commissioner Matarrese requested a report on the Housing Authority's tree trimming policy. 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Chair Johnson adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Attest: Beverly Johnson, Chair Michael T. Pucci Executive Director / Secretary October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners From: Debra Kurita Chief Executive Officer RE: Recommendation to Approve Proposed Budget Revision and Adopt Resolution Revising the Budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza) BACKGROUND On April 4, 2006, the Board of Commissioners passed and approved a two -year operating budget for all programs covering the fiscal years July 1, 2006, June 30, 2007, and July 1, 2007, to June 30, 2008. A budget revision is now proposed to amend and add Extraordinary Maintenance Projects (EMPs) items that are necessary and planned for completion during the new budget year. This proposal was reviewed by the Housing Commission at a special meeting on October 2, 2006. DISCUSSION Last fiscal year, the Housing Authority had an extensive list of Extraordinary Maintenance Projects (EMPs) to accomplish. Most of these projects were for Eagle Village and Parrot Village and were possible because of the funding available from the 2005 bond refinancing of these two complexes. Several projects were not completed by the end of last fiscal year: This report recommends revising the budget to carry over these projects and the funding to the current fiscal year. These projects include completing the playground rehabilitation at Eagle Village and Parrot Village, completing the project to replace closet doors at Parrot Village, and completing the replacement of kitchen and bath cabinets and countertops at Esperanza. Other EMP changes are recommended. This budget revision would increase the funding available to replace the fencing along the Main Street border of Esperanza. It would provide funding to paint the exterior of the buildings at Esperanza. One EMP is proposed to be revised to include an emergency repair (ESP4 -07) of the underground wiring for the exterior lights at Esperanza. Building 711 at Independence Plaza still has the original carpeting in the common areas; this budget revision would provide for replacement as well as carry over funding for completion of the flooring replacement in Building 703 from last fiscal year. The Independence Plaza ponds have been inoperable for about two months due to deteriorated strainer housings and lack of fans to cool the pump motors. It also has been recommended that the electrical controls be moved out of the boxes housing the pump motors to eliminate the hazard that results from the mixing of water and electricity. All proposed changes to the EMP Schedule are outlined on the chart below: Agenda Item #2 -C CC 10 -3 -06 CC /CIC /HABOC Honorable Chair and Members of the Board of Commissioners October 3, 2006 Page 2 of 4 HOUSING AUTHORITY GF2-07 1Repair GENERAL FUND damage to office lobby due to auto accident $ 45,000 GENERAL FUND TOTAL CHANGES - $ 45,000 ESPERANZA APPROVED PROPOSED ESP1-07 Install gate valves (to shut off water) and sewer cleanouts Replace dumpster enclosures $ 40,000 140,000 5,000 - $ 10,000 ESP2-07 ESP3-07 Replace 200 ft. of fencing along Main Street ESP4-07 Replace approximately half of the exterior light fixtures and replace underground wiring where necessary 20,000 36,500 ESP5-07 Complete replacement of kitchen/bath cabinets/countertops project in 15 units - 109,110 ESP6-07 Paint all buildings, repair dry rot as needed Add security system (video cameras) - - 472,000 10,000 ESP6-08 ESPERANZA TOTAL CHANGES $ 432,610 EAGLE VILLAGE AND PARROT VILLAGE APPROVED PROPOSED EV1-07 Replace windows $ 129,150 $ 142,450 EV3-07 Complete playground rehab project, including new equipment - 35,000 PV2-07 Complete playground rehab project, including replacing equipment - 117,000 PV3-07 Complete closet door replacement project - 75,150 EAGLE VILLAGE AND PARROT VILLAGE TOTAL CHANGES $ 240,450 INDEPENDENCE PLAZA APPROVED PROPOSED IP4-07 - Replace common area floor covering (Bldg. 711) and complete common area floor covering project (Bldg. 703)_ - - $ 25,822 IP5-07 Replace pond strainer housings, add cooling fans for pumps, and move electrical controls to Bldg. 705. 6,500 INDEPENDENCE PLAZA TOTAL CHANGES $ 32,322 TOTAL ADDITIONAL FOR EMP SCHEDULE $ 750,382 In addition to EMP changes, the Shelter Plus Care program HAP/Subsidy income was added to the Housing Authority's General Fund as well as its associated HAP expense of $175,200. Since Shelter Plus Care is a flow-through program, there is no bottom line impact as a result of this change. Honorable Chair and Members October 3, 2006 of the Board of Commissioners Page 3 of 4 Esperanza is the Housing Authority's only Federally established public housing complex. For the last several years, HUD has underfunded public housing. In June, HUD told housing authorities that, due to higher utility costs, they would be funded at 85.5 percent of need. The San Francisco Chronicle front page article published September 19th as described in Exhibit A provides additional information on this topic. The administration's proposal for funding HUD in the 2007 federal fiscal year starting October 1 would reduce that level to 78 percent. In addition, HUD has continued to make substantial cutbacks in Capital Fund dollars, which are intended to be used to make building improvements. Since operating funds have been so significantly cutback, housing authorities have had to use Capital Funds to supplement operating funds so needed building improvements have fallen behind. The Housing Authority's operating costs are comparable with the cost to operate very low non - profit housing in Alameda County, demonstrating that the Housing Authority's operating cost are as low as reasonably possible. What is lacking is adequate income from the Federal government. At current federal subsidy levels, public housing is no longer sustainable. FISCAL IMPACT With the lack of adequate federal funding, all Esperanza EMP projects will be covered by a $165,610 loan from the Housing Authority's General Fund for the projects that are classified as capitalized building improvements. This loan is expected to be paid back should Esperanza's operating income improve in future years. A transfer of $472,000 from the Housing Authority's General Fund operating reserve to Esperanza will cover the painting project, which cannot be capitalized. These funds must be donated so that Esperanza can maintain a sufficient operating reserve as required for HUD's Public Housing Assessment Standards (PHAS). If this were a loan, Esperanza would need to expense the painting cost, thus reducing the operating reserve into a deficit situation. Under the PHAS rating system, the Housing Authority would lose valuable points and further jeopardize its funding situation. Two previously approved EMP projects at Esperanza totaling $180,000 are proposed for removal to reduce the overall expense. Because of the continuing funding issues at Esperanza, staff will be meeting with the Housing Commission and residents to develop options for the future of this complex. The results of these meetings will be brought back to the Board of Commissioners at a later date. The repairs to the Housing Authority's office from the automobile accident that occurred in July are covered by the Authority's insurance. Projects carried over to the new fiscal year also have funding available from the 2005 Bond issuance to refinance Parrot Village and Eagle Village. The increase for the Eagle Village windows project is primarily a contingency in case dry rot is found and is covered by bond proceeds. Independence Plaza's replacement reserves will cover EMP projects ($401,528). The proposed budget revision is attached as Exhibit B. Budget revisions for Esperanza are accomplished with a resolution as shown in Exhibit C. Honorable Chair and Members October 3, 2006 of the Board of Commissioners Page 4 of 4 RECOMMENDATION Approve the proposed budget revision and adopt the proposed resolution revising the budget for the Conventional Low -Rent Housing Program No. CA -062 (Esperanza). Respectfully submitted, Micliael Pucci Executive Director MTP:AO /ED Attachments: Exhibit A: San Francisco Chronicle Article Exhibit B: Proposed Budget Revision Exhibit C: PHA/IHA Board Resolution Exhibit A SFGate.com Return to regular view ( Print This Article Budget fears for public housing Officials, residents say programs alread sorely underfunded - Heather Knight Chronicle Staff Writer Tuesday, September 19, 2006 Jeannie Riggs lines her balcony South of Market with cactus to deter vandals from climbing up and breaking into her apartment. Leslie Clark, who uses a wheelchair and lives on the eighth floor of a Tenderloin building, says he gets stranded when the elevators break down. Stephanie Hughes sees sewage floating down her street in the run -down Alice Griffith projects of Bayview- Hunters Point, and toilet water seeps through the ceilings of some of her neighbors and onto their kitchen stoves, she says. A car drove into the laundry facility at her complex in May, and the building is still boarded up and unusable, she adds. This is life for residents in some of San Francisco's public housing projects. And with a projected cut of $4 million in operating expenses for the city's federally funded housing authority under President Bush's proposed budget for next year, these residents say they expect maintenance and security to get worse before it improves. In June, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development told the country's 3,200 housing authorities that, due to higher utility costs, they'd be funded at 85.5 percent of their need. Bush's proposal for funding the department in the 2007 fiscal year, starting Oct. 1, would reduce that level to 78 percent, though the final budget is still being ironed out in Congress. "It's a normal sort of up and down," said Donna White, spokeswoman for the federal housing agency in Washington. "What we hope is that housing authorities will find ways to still provide quality affordable housing." Housing authorities around the country are bracing for the cuts, and some anticipate having to lay off staff or close public housing projects altogether. The Richmond Housing Authority anticipates it will lose $2.3 million in operating expenses, while the Oakland Housing Authority expects to lose $2 million. "We're running on a shoestring," said David Lipsetz, spokesman for the Oakland Housing Authority, noting that the toll of deferred maintenance becomes more apparent every year. "It means fewer roofs, more patches and lots of short-term fixes. We stretch our staff to the limit and shoot for the basic standards of decent safe and sanitary conditions." In San Francisco, housing authority chief Gregg Fortner said it's the worst budget he has seen in his five -year tenure. "We have expenses that continually go up and funding that continually goes down," he said. "We basically have to change the way we do business." Those changes could mean cuts in maintenance and security staff, more time to complete repairs on residents' homes, and vacant apartments left unfilled longer, Fortner said. With aging properties that require more upkeep and union contracts that expire Sept. 30, it's a particularly tough time to be losing more money, Fortner said. In addition, a San Francisco Superior Court judge has threatened to jail Fortner unless he pays by the end of the month a sexual harassment lawsuit judgment against his agency dating back to 2000, before his arrival. But San Francisco's troubles aren't solely due to poor funding from the federal government. The city's housing authority is one of 200 nationwide considered by the federal housing agency to be "troubled." It has sat on the agency's list for two years due to its financial problems, including a low level of cash reserves and outstanding legal bills. This means the housing authority doesn't qualify for competitive grants, including the $20 million grants that are disbursed by Housing and Urban Development to several housing authorities each year through its Hope VI program to rebuild decrepit housing projects. (Bush has proposed eliminating the $100 million Hope VI program, but Congress may restore it as it has in past years.) The precarious position of public housing residents in San Francisco took center stage at City Hall on Monday as a few dozen residents rallied on the building's front steps, waving signs reading "Save Public Housing!" Supervisors Tom Ammiano, Sophie Maxwell and Ross Mirkarimi joined them and decried the pending loss of funds. "Everyone is our responsibility -- not just a certain class of people," Ammiano said. Afterward, the Board of Supervisors' government audit and oversight committee held a hearing on how the city could fight the cuts. Mayor Gavin Newsom also expressed concern last week about the continued cuts in public housing. "Clearly there is a concerted agenda -- they want to get out of the housing business," he said, blaming the Bush administration for the plight of the housing authority, though the local agency is governed by a commission appointed by the mayor. "There's just a callousness and an inexcusable ignorance about what's needed in big and medium -size cities." Peter Ragone, Newsom's spokesperson, said the mayor has directed his federal lobbyists to fight public housing cuts and has made the point himself with senators directly. He said the mayor also is working to find private investment to finish the redevelopment of housing projects since Hope VI money dried up. "Essentially, we are going to finish the job that the federal government abandoned," Ragone said. When it comes to the world of housing, the Bush administration has focused on boosting home ownership programs. In 2004, Bush started the American Dream program with $87 million to help individuals to make down payments on homes. For the coming fiscal year, he has requested $100 million for the program. Housing advocates in San Francisco, however, say that doesn't help local low- income residents a bit due to the sky -high real estate costs. "Millionaires can hardly afford it in this town," said Sara Shorn of the nonprofit Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco. "This administration is sending the message that it really does not believe that the federal government has a responsibility to house poor people." Larry Bush, a local spokesman for the federal agency, said public housing residents continue to be important to the department. "Certainly HUD is promoting home ownership, but it's not abandoning its commitment to public housing," he said. He pointed out that the San Francisco Housing Authority has received well over $100 million in recent years to rebuild high - quality public housing in neighborhoods including the Mission, Bernal Heights and North Beach. But some residents of other public housing projects say they're not getting a fair shake. Riggs has lived in Clementina Towers, a South of Market housing project for seniors and disabled people, for 20 years. The 78- year -old zips around the complex on her motorized scooter with a copy of the National Enquirer tucked inside the front basket. Despite a guard stationed at the complex, Riggs said vandals scale the chain -link fences out of view of the guard station, hoist themselves onto residents' balconies and break into apartments. Nobody has disturbed Riggs' balcony, though, thanks to the prickly plants she's set up to make climbing onto it a painful prospect. "They go in there and rob you," she said. "But the thing of it is, I'm wise to them, so I put the cactus in." Her neighbors hang signs on their doors reading "I'm OK" to let each other know they're alive and well behind their closed doors. Somebody used to be paid to check on each resident daily, but there's no money for that anymore. "And I'm in one of the better housing authority places -- there's some that's in a lot worse shape than this," Riggs said. Clark, 60, suffered a stroke four years ago and has been in a wheelchair since then. He lives in a facility for seniors and the disabled on Turk Street in the heart of the Tenderloin. It is supposed to have a guard stationed out front in the evening and overnight, but sometimes he doesn't show up. It's easy for anybody to enter the facility -- which Clark said worries him deeply. "It's all because of cutbacks. We can't afford more cutbacks -- we just can't," he said. "We're not Bushes. We're not people with multimillion - dollar businesses. We're just poor people trying to make it." San Francisco Housing Authority Size: 53 developments with 6,360 public housing units and 12,000 public housing residents Budget: $221 million Employees: About 400 Source: San Francisco Housing Authority Chronicle staff writer Christopher Heredia contributed to this report. E -mail Heather Knight at hknight@sfchronicle.com. Page A - 1 URL: http:/ /sfgate.com/cgi- bin/article.cgi? file= /c /a/2006/09/19/MNG19L82C 11.DTL ©2006 San Francisco Chronicle c G W L 0 V. a e� y �,Oy Proposed 2007 22,264,284 3,042,576 1,415,183 454,250 20,930 303.476 1 O • b , 0 t,„: 1,551,407 41,520 ‘139 1611 >N ^0 : p N NO 00V NN 301,925 119,439 60 100 • 810,743 189,240 007 Rd7 210,000 149,423 15,450 802,263 2R Ann • to M 10 0 H OC N Ifs 19,362,996 1,122,517 14,000 01 7.16 �N L 00 IO. 0 N 000 000 NOB H. 0 I°n 0 .-I In M H. to N N y t` N CO 00 0l. ON $to y0 aN . N tel 0-00 «4 00) b e e'i,? ON 1- 0h ON co N0 0OI tn.4 M NNN. -I l C 1.4 .1 O N 1,531,031 41,520 384.050 r...i �° b rto r0 of C O\ V .SI If 1-M 301,925 115,960 50AR9 813,266 153,960 1.005.174 0 O 1 iN �q Iri O 700000- 00In 000 0 In 0 b R. p0p6�b100s000 .d .�_I ..I0- N.N b M If, 4 N - I -I b .. N 19,361,724 1,142,630 14,000 153.189 I et I 10 .y` I1- N 00 O O y.. 1,454,049 50.000 ■ ON ■ ∎ O , '0^ ti 00 CO .•,� 0 CO N. N y N . M N 1 Section 8 Voucher Proposed 2007 CO 0.000 CO eei. to R 0 N ON tn ...1 06 .d O, •-I t; M O N 872,331 11,030 139.075 0 M et `N 0 000 0 . 0 . 00 MM an et 0- M b e t` b M CO 000. -10. . b O. 0060„. N • 0 b 40 ~ 0ON0 000 O V) O 0 0 - t` O N CO .p N - b N M , - 18,946,848 0 0 0 ,O0 y b a OD w 000 000 b 0 0 M 0 N M 0, b N •E e0 �• 0 a 18,945,576 0 1,473,191 4,700 0 7.520 n co M N 865,184 11,030 124.789 M 0 0 ooe N0 O oo0 V).t1) en en, 0- O .•1 00 1-o Ob n NO. oo N, N N? .-N o 0\0000 OIn - 0 0 O. .--IN b N 00 b b O. O. ON. N N e.„ .4 000001- t` In R 0 00 .-I t` to ? 0\ CO .1 000 0 0 Nti. 0 O et 0 0 0 20,274,544 156,443 1 Independence Plaza Proposed 2007 0 of 0 0 0. et an 0 V) 00 00 R N 0. < .- N ry .'1 M b 0 .- 0 N N o b en bb is of tY ONI n b N 19,305 100 V) O et• .-d 0 b M 0001- ee3.? O vim) a .. 225,054 42,500 222,015 T b In • 0 0 7 0 en 0 In M NO CS .0 O v e i '0 et b - 209,307 1,098,589 Ij 0 680,460 5,000 49,020 734,480 0 0 550,000 0 550,000 (p' 0 b en E 20 G N a° Nb0000 0. 0Oe1I en„ 0 00RM 00 N N ~N e-I 1,743,968 172,678 7,460 58,577 19 ,305 100 57,380 40,200 17,330 180,426 39,600 202,218 if e} N 00001-0 040 N et Nb .•,1 .-1 178,344 973,618 0 680,460 5,000 49,020 734,480 OIne 00 t` l\ 189,300 0 189,300 G) M to b ..■ HA Owned Proposed 2007 N 10 ° 00 1- q 00 V) con t` 0. V) rl ! Ifl 0. M •-4 • 0 IN 1,814,056 193,231 12,770 136,715 .. h 0 0 00 .-1 .d 76,450 41,231 32,857 211,862 56,415 264,139 - m o- o et N b 0- 0)b .1N N N .1 235,378 1,279,039 o 00 00 o 00 en b co, to Ij N M 0 0 0 35,100 0 35,100 1,357,039 457,017 .0 aN a° b N 0 0 0 0 NN 400 CO ON M.,-10 - 1,836,658 191,755 12,770 105,780 20,214 100 76,450 40,030 29,870 233,409 40,140 310,416 b 000 N 0 CO 0 0 an.1-.1 en 211,502 1,272,436 o O. O M an bb 0 3,795 36,000 0 36,000 N 0 M Parrot & Eagle Village Proposed 2007 N O o 000 . ,..1 N 4IM N O en - N .-1 N b 000 O b O0 Ibp N In 2,470 100 O N In 000 I0 00 t` . 181,816 47,800 247,247 M b 00 r R 01n0 e}0 NN 40 - O. N b et et 7 O .0 - 819`846 , 8SI`ZOZ 0 404,757 0 32,196 436,953 000 000 .11 H n N .• I - N 0~0 N N b CO N N Approved 2006 00 O N M000 M b O Vl Y t` O� .Oa 2,581,059 145,701 4,080 46,047 00 N N N0 Iin tr ~ 71,595 14,280 489 256,745 37,210 226,905 O b 0 0 I 0OIO N 00 er 0 . NI. N M vO .NiN 212,850 225,056 1,052,516 1,033,728 0 0 0 404,531 2,200 0 0 32,196 e)I N 0 0 0 0 O 205,000 1,028,367 0 0 205,000 1,028,367 to to et�y. 00 b 00 N coot' O) t` b Esperanza Proposed 2007 04 ° 0tr et .4- t- 0 M 10n N N N N 1,192,433 140,724 6,180 50,396 a .•I Inc .1-a M 96,150 14,554 2,607 186,352 37,900 255,549 0 r O�O 0tn t` .1-i ..- - •0 Approved 2006 .+0000.0 CO et CO CNI. 00 .-7.,-, VIM ON .Nit ~ N 971,041 123,987 6,180 48,857 O T N In0 N.1-d `O el °'■ M 96,150 14,130 2,370 136,229 32,750 249,915 00 00 .•d 0O0et 0 01- O.t- .d Vl . .., r .••1 00 .•y 183,482 942,355 0 0 2,200 0 N. N 000 N0N Oe�O 000 O 0 0 0 N N n G. OM. 0O0^ 0, M T r .-1 H .-I .,,. General Fund Proposed 2007 000 e4 -00000 .eJ 00001- b b VI <! Vj 7 M M b et O 0e} 0) b r N Tv M 0O M 000 0000 I00b R1- ai M 0 of 0 M 000 M In0 N 1n - .y .y 29,683 65,312 416,148 0 1,200 10,000 CO n 00' 35,000 50,000 85,000 0 b b 0 t` O N oo >.b nN a° 00 0 0 0 0 .•1 O O .1-,1 M et. 469,302 31,726 0 0 N t` ..�1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b M b M 0 00 0 N 0 et e! 00 NN 0- .•d ,0 28,784 64,151 416,148 0 1,200 10,000 0 n N� 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 00 In Vl ON R 7 .-•1 - N y to OPERATING INCOME: HAP /Operating Subsidy Rents Administrative Fees PV & EV Bond Funds Interest Other Income TOTAL INCOME OPERATING EXPENSES: ADMINISTRATIVE: Total Admin. Salaries Legal Sundry Salaries .a•,a<Vxx exs Tenant Activities l-, ALAI arv: Water & Sewer Electricity Gas Salaries Materials Contract Costs Police Services Insurance Claims Account Employee Benefits Collection Losses TOTAL TOTAL OPER. EXPENSES MORTGAGE/HAP/RESERVES HAP Mortgage Replacement Reserve(Equip.) Replacement Reserve(Bld.) Replacement Equipment Additions Extraordinary Maint Pre - development / Admin costs TOTAL TOTAL EXPENSES TRANSFERS (IN)/OUT PHA /IHA Board Resolution Approving Operating Budget or Calculation of Performance Funding System Operating Subsidy U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Public and Indian Housing OMB Approval No. 2577 -0026 (Exp. 6/30/2001) Exhibit C Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 15 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. This agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless that collecton displays a valid OMB control number. This information is required by Section 6(c)(4) of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. The information is the operating budget for the low- income housing program and provides a summary of proposed /budgeted receipts and expenditures, approval of budgeted receipts and expenditures, and justification of certain specified amounts. HUD reviews the information to determine if the operating plan adopted by the PHA and the amounts are reasonable and that the PHA is in compliance with procedures prescribed by HUD. Responses are required to obtain benefits. This information does not lend itself to confidentiality. Acting on behalf of the Board of Commissioners of the below -named Public Housing Agency (PHA) /Indian Housing Authority (IHA), as its Chairman, I make the following certifications and agreements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regarding the Board's approval of (check one or more as applicable): n Operating Budget Submitted on: Operating Budget Revision Submitted on: Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: Revised Calculation of Performance Funding System Submitted on: (date) 10/03/2006 I certify on behalf of the: (PHA /IHA Name) Housing Authority of the City of Alameda that: 1. All regulatory and statutory requirements have been met; 2. The PHA has sufficient operating reserves to meet the working capital needs of its developments; 3. Proposed budget expenditures are necessary in the efficient and economical operation of the housing for the purpose of serving low - income residents; 4. The budget indicates a source of funds adequate to cover all proposed expenditures; 5. The calculation of eligibility for Federal funding is in accordance with the provisions of the regulations; 6. All proposed rental charges and expenditures will be consistent with provisions of law; 7. The PHA /IHA will comply with the wage rate requirements under 24 CFR 968.110(e) and (f) or 24 CFR 905.120(c) and (d); 8. The PHA /IHA will comply with the requirements for access to records and audits under 24 CFR 968.110(i) or 24 CFR 905.120(g); and 9. The PHA /IHA will comply with the requirements for the reexamination of family income and composition under 24 CFR 960.209, 990.115 and 905.315. I hereby certify that all the information stated within, as well as any information provided in the accompaniment herewith, is true and accurate. Warning: HUD will prosecute false claims and statements. Conviction may result in criminal and /or civil penalties. (18 U.S.C. 1001, 1010, 1012; 31 U.S.C. 3729, 3802) Board Chairman's Name (type) Beverly Johnson, Chair Signature Date Previous edition is obsolete form HUD -52574 (10/95) ref. Handbook 7575.1 City of Alameda Community Improvement Commission October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Community Improvement Commission (CIC), Housing Authority Board of Commissioners and City Council From: Debra Kurita Executive Director /Chief Executive Officer /City Manager Re: CIC Authorization of Conveyance by Quitclaim Deed of 2.51 Acres at the Former FISC Site for Construction of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing to the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Acceptance of a 2.51 -acre site at the Former FISC Site for 39 units of Affordable Rental Housing via a Quitclaim Deed from the Community Improvement Commission Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Authorization of the Chief Executive Officer to Execute a 75 -Year Ground Lease with Resources for Community Development for Construction and Management of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing on 2.51 acres at the Former FISC site and to Negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents between the Housing Authority, CIC and Resources for Community Development CIC Authorization of Executive Director to Negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents with Resources for Community Development and the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda City Approval of the Use of up to $1.41 million of City HOME funds and $100,000 of AHUF to Pay a Portion of the Costs of Development of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing within the Former FISC Site and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Related Documents CIC Resolution Approving the Use of Housing Funds to Pay a Portion of the Costs of Development of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing within the Former FISC /East Housing Area Agenda Item #3 -A 10 -3 -06 CC /CIC /HABOC Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and City Council BACKGROUND October 3, 2006 Pg. 2 of 6 On October 6, 1999, the ARRA, CIC, Board of Commissioners and City Council (collectively "the City ") approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Alameda Point Collaborative (APC) regarding the Standards of Reasonableness for Homeless Users at Alameda Naval Air Station. The MOU was fully executed on February 22, 2000. Several sections of the MOU address provision of a new 39 -unit affordable rental housing project on a portion of the former Fleet Industrial Supply Center (FISC). Operation Dignity (OD), a provider of transitional housing for Veterans at Alameda Point, is the third party beneficiary of the 39 -unit project (i.e., when the units are built, OD is entitled to operate the project from year 15 to 59 years). Pursuant to the MOU, in June 2002, the City, through a Request for Proposals process, selected Resources for Community Development (RCD) a non- profit development corporation, as its development partner to construct the 39 -unit project. Since that time, RCD and the City developed a project design and pro forma and identified a financing structure for the project. Because of OD's leasehold interest in the project as set forth in the MOU, OD's cooperation in seeking funding to construct the 39 -unit project, in particular the use of affordable housing tax credits, was necessary. In 2005, OD sued the City for lack of progress on the 39 -unit project. A Settlement Agreement to dismiss the lawsuit was approved on September 19, 2006. As part of the Settlement Agreement, the City approved an Implementation Agreement clarifying the terms and conditions of the MOU with respect to the 39 -unit project. The Implementation Agreement provides a structure for funding the 39 -unit project that permits the City to pursue tax credit financing and other outside financial assistance to leverage its own funds. The first step in receiving 4% tax credit financing is an award of funds from the State Multifamily Housing Program (MHP). The MHP Notice of Funding Availability was issued in August 2006 and applications are due on October 10, 2006. In order for RCD to submit an application for the final round of MHP funding by October 10, 2006, the actions discussed below must be completed. If the project is awarded MHP funds, tax credit and other financing could be in place in time to start construction in Fall 2007. Currently, total development costs are estimated at $14.4 million. DISCUSSION In addition to the City's September 19, 2006 approval of the Settlement and Implementation Agreements with Operation Dignity, the Planning Board approved the Development Plan and Major Design Review and related CEQA actions for the 39 -unit project on September 25, 2006. The project will include a mix of one, two, three and four bedroom units ranging in size from approximately 678 to 1,383 square feet in size. The project site is connected to the Bayport community and other parts of Alameda via Coral Sea Street and Willie Stargell Avenue. The project is comprised of three separate two -story buildings arranged to create a large courtyard with a variety of spaces to promote use by and interaction of residents, including a children's Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and City Council October 3, 2006 Pg. 3 of 6 play area. The funding source requires a community room, computer classroom and on -site property management office. The proposed site plan, building architecture and landscaping continue the high quality design of the adjacent Bayport project. Conveyance and Acceptance of Quitclaim Deed for 2.51 acre site The City Charter allows the Housing Authority to replace up to 325 low- income, multi - family attached housing units that were lost when the former Buena Vista Apartments were converted to the market rent Bridgeport Apartments, later called Harbor Island Apartments (now Summer House Apartments). The City agreed that 325 units of multi - family housing can be built at densities allowed as of January 1, 1990, even if Zoning and General Plan changes were subsequently adopted that reduce allowable densities. To satisfy the Charter provision, the Housing Authority must own the 39 -unit site. CIC currently owns the property upon which this project will be built; therefore the CIC must transfer ownership of the 2.51 -acre site to the Housing Authority. The attached quitclaim deed has been prepared to assign all of the legal or equitable rights the CIC has in the property to the Housing Authority. Following CIC approval to convey the parcel, the Board of Commissioners must consider acceptance of the deed. The 2.51 -acre site is being quitclaimed from the CIC to Housing Authority for $1.00. Approval of Ground Lease To complete the MHP application, RCD must be able to demonstrate site control. The proposed ground lease (signed by RCD and on file in the Office of the City Clerk) will be for a term of 75 years. With a 75 -year term, lenders will not require the Housing Authority to subordinate its interest in the property, thus ensuring compliance with Article 26 of the City Charter. Additionally, the State Housing and Community Development Department requires a minimum 65 -year lease to demonstrate site control. The lease rate will be $1.00 per year. As a condition of receiving affordable housing tax credits, the building improvements will be owned by the tax credit partnership for a minimum of 15 years to comply with tax credit regulations. At the end of 15 years, the Housing Authority has the option to purchase the improvements or the tax credit partnership interest will be assigned to the Housing Authority by RCD, at which time the Housing Authority will enter into a Legally Binding Agreement (LBA) with Operation Dignity to manage the project for no more than the remaining 44 years of their 59 year beneficiary term. When the LBA expires, title to the improvements shall revert to and vest in the Housing Authority without cost to the Housing Authority. The rental project shall also be subject to a Marketing, Leasing and Management Plan developed by RCD. The Plan will be consistent with pertinent Housing Authority rules, policies and procedures and will be subject to the approval of the Executive Director. RCD, and later Operation Dignity, will indemnify the Housing Authority against all claims and will fully insure the development. RCD will also be required to submit financial and occupancy reports and annual audit information to the City of Alameda and Housing Authority. Once the CIC has quitclaimed the site to the Housing Authority, the Housing Authority will execute the 75 -year lease with RCD. Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and City Council October 3, 2006 Pg. 4 of 6 Authorization to negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) and related documents An OPA will define the roles and responsibilities of the Housing Authority, CIC and RCD for project funding, entitlement processing, construction, marketing and long -term property management. The CIC shall provide project funding equity and approvals while RCD shall secure the MHP and tax credit financing, develop the project according to a schedule and a development program approved by the City, and shall lease and manage the complex in a manner consistent with Housing Authority- approved policies outlined in the OPA and the Implementation Agreement with OD. The Housing Authority shall enforce its obligations pursuant to. the Ground Lease with RCD, as well as endeavor to make project -based Section 8 vouchers available for the development, pursuant to annual Federal appropriations. Project milestones and related compensation for RCD and the Housing Authority shall be made explicit in the OPA and/or other related documents. The Implementation Agreement reserves the rights of RCD and the Housing Authority to enter into a separate Development Services Agreement regarding the Housing Authority's role in the development of the 39 -unit project. The Housing Authority is interested in gaining additional tax credit development experience, having input throughout the design process, exploring a possible role in bond issuance for the development and receiving appropriate compensation. These issues will be addressed in the OPA. The OPA is not a requirement of the MHP funding application, however, it must be approved prior to commencing construction. Therefore, the parties will begin negotiations with the next 90 days and anticipate completing the OPA within six months. Commitment of Housing Funds The funding structure contemplated in the Implementation Agreement allows the City to pursue a variety of funds, including State funds through the State MHP and equity raised through the sale of Federal tax credits, to finance the project. The current development budget estimates that the project will be eligible for a minimum of $10.4 million in tax credit and other outside funding sources if the applications are successful. The pro forma anticipates that approximately $6 million will be contributed to the project from the sale of Federal tax credits, $3.5 million from the State MHP, $700,000 in equity and deferred fees from RCD, and $195,000 in Federal Home Loan Bank Board funds. In order for RCD to submit a complete application for MHP funding, the CIC must approve the attached resolution committing up to $4 million in dedicated housing funds for the 39 -unit project. As other funds are committed to the project such as City HOME funds, Affordable Housing Unit Fees (AHUF) and County HOME funds, the CIC's $4 million commitment will be reduced accordingly. The CIC resolution approves up to $4 million in 20% and in lieu funds. It is also recommended that the City approve use of up to $1.41 million of City HOME funds and $100,000 of AHUF to back -fill the $4 million CIC commitment. This City commitment of funds leverages CIC funds by replacing a portion of the $4 million commitment with Federal HOME funds and AHUF funds that are restricted to use on projects that serve households earning less than 80% of median income. Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and City Council FISCAL IMPACT October 3, 2006 Pg. 5 of 6 Staff has evaluated the City's financial resources available to fund development of affordable housing units and has identified $4 million that can be provided for development of the 39 units by Fall 2007. As of October 1, 2006, unencumbered cash on hand in dedicated affordable housing funds totals $3.04 million. Affordable housing in lieu payments and 20% tax increment of $960,000 will be received by June 30, 2007, providing the total commitment of $4 million by July 1, 2007. These City sources may include: WECIP Housing Funds, BWIP Housing Funds, City HOME Funds, Affordable Housing Unit Fees, BWIP Housing Bond proceeds, and BWIP In -lieu Funds. These CIC /City funds will be provided in the form of a non - recourse deferred loan secured by a deed of trust on the 39 -unit project site for a period of 55 years at 0% interest but will not be encumbered until the Fall of 2007, at which time, construction is expected to begin. Other funding that is received for the project, including County HOME funds or other grant funds will diminish the City's funding obligation for the 39 -unit project accordingly. There is no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund. RECOMMENDATION 1) CIC Authorize Conveyance by Quitclaim Deed of 2.51 Acres at the Former FISC Site for Construction of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing to the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda; 2) Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Accept the 2.51 -acre Site at the Former FISC Site for 39 units of Affordable Rental Housing via a Quitclaim Deed from the Community Improvement Commission; 3) Housing Authority Board of Commissioners Authorize the Chief Executive Officer to Execute a 75 -Year Ground Lease with Resources for Community Development (RCD) for Construction and Management of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing on 2.5 acres at the Former FISC site and to Negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other related documents between the Housing Authority, CIC and RCD; 4) CIC authorize the Executive Director to Negotiate an Owner Participation Agreement and other Related Documents with Resources for Community Development and the Housing Authority of the City of Alameda; 5) City Approve Use of up to $1.41 million of City HOME funds and $100,000 of AHUF to Pay a Portion of the Costs of Development of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing within the Former FISC Site and Authorize the City Manager to Execute Related Documents; and 6) CIC Approve the Attached Resolution for Use of Housing Funds to Pay a Portion of the Costs of Development of 39 Units of Affordable Rental Housing within the Former FISC Site and Authorize the Executive Director to Execute Related Documents. Honorable Chair and Members of the CIC, Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, and City Council Respectful y submitted, October 3, 2006 Pg. 6 of 6 she ittle Development Services Director chael T. Pu ci Housing Authority - Executive Director 1%P By: t e . bie Potter Base Reuse and Community Development Manager Attachments: A. Quitclaim Ground Lease is on File in the Office of the City Clerk RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Alameda 2263 Santa Clara Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 Attention: City Attorney SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE ONLY A.P.N.: QUITCLAIM DEED FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, as of , 2006 (the "Effective Date ") the COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA, a public body, corporate and politic, exercising governmental functions and powers, and organized and existing, under the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) (the "CIC "), does hereby remise, release, and forever quitclaim to the HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA, a public body, corporate and politic ( "Housing Authority "), all of its right, title and interest in and to that certain real property situated in the City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California more particularly described in Exhibit A hereto. CIC: Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda By: Name: By: Ak4_ Its: Name: -eS a 4, /jITh/l Its: c)Avai7 �N Ma( Approved as to form: 1 Attachment to Agenda Item #3A 10 -3 -06 CC /CIC /HABOC This is to certify that the real property conveyed by this Quitclaim Deed to the Housing Authority, a governmental agency, is hereby accepted herein by order of the Housing Commission of the Housing Authority by the undersigned officer or agent on behalf of the Housing Commission pursuant to authority conferred by resolution of said Housing Commission adopted on , 2006, and the Housing Authority hereby consents to the recordation thereof by its duly authorized officer. Dated: , 2006 HOUSING AUTHORITY: Housing Authority of the City of Alameda By: Name: Its: 2 Approved as to form: By: Name: �l/� �J� L 3 Arun J& Its: Caw-et [Attach Acknowledgements and Notarize concurrent with Execution] 3 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION 39 UNIT PARCEL All that certain real property situate in the City of Alameda, County of Alameda, State of California, described as follows: A portion of the REMAINDER PARCEL, as said parcel is shown on that certain map entitled "TRACT 7511 — BAYPORT ", filed for record on July 9, 2004 in Book 277 of Maps at Pages 1 through 19 inclusive, Alameda County Records, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the intersection of northerly right -of way line of Tinker Avenue, a varying width right -of -way, and the westerly line of said REMAINDER PARCEL, as shown on said map; Thence along said westerly line, North 02 °47' 17" East 367.75 feet to the northerly line of said parcel; Thence leaving said westerly line and along said northerly line, South 87 °12'43" East 319.50 feet; Thence leaving said northerly line, South 02 °47' 17" 313.77 feet to the northerly right -of -way line of said Tinker Avenue as shown on said map; Thence along said northerly right -of -way the following eleven (11) courses: 1. South 78 °16'48" West 15.83 feet; 2. South 89 °35'24" West 50.99 feet; 3. South 78 °16'48" West 50.00 feet; 4. South 68 °12'46" West 45.86 feet to the beginning of a curve to the right, having a radius of 23.00 feet; 5. Along said curve, through central angle of 103 °36'07 ", an arc length of 41.59 feet; 6. North 87 °55'20" West 10.37 feet; 7. South 72 °47'56" West 29.66 feet; 8. North 87 °55'20" West 10.46 feet to the beginning of a non - tangent curve to the left, having a radius of 25.00 feet, to which point a radial line bears South 76 °51'22" East; Page 1 of 2 9. Along said curve, through a central angle of 76 °47'02 ", an arc length of 33.50 feet to a point of compound curvature, said curve having a radius of 690.00 feet; 10. Along said curve, through a central angle of 2 °06'52 ", an arc length of 25.46 feet; 11. North 87 °57'28" West 33.50 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Containing an area of 109,163 square feet or 2.51 Acres, more or less. A plat showing the above - described parcel is attached herein and made a part hereof as Exhibit «B„ This description was prepared by me or under my direction in conformance with the Professional Land Surveyors Act. Randall L. Heiken, P.L.S. 5756 License Expires: 6 -30 -2006 K: \Main\ 1998 \980221 \Legals\39unitDOC Page 2 of 2 (o ' 30 .OS Dated: PARCEL 1 7567 O.R. 117 APN: 074 -0905 -012 -2 S 87'12'43" E 319.50' N f0 L.1 N rn I rn 0 �. 0 ro ") in 0 .0 z 00 co ,t. Ts N o z 0_ LEGEND APN — ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER M — MAP O.R. — OFFICIAL RECORDS P.O.B. — POINT OF BEGINNING — PARCEL LINE LOT LINE REFERENCES 10 277 M 1 -19 S 76 01'22" E (R) P.O.B / i N 87'57'58" L6 C3 1, C2 N 02'02'32" E h— 34.50'1) LA -MAGI 751 - 'EiAYPOHJ' 277 J \ii 1-19 REMAINDER PARCEL 39 UNIT PARCEL 109,163 sq.ft.± 2.51 acres± APN: 074 - 0905 -042 -1 LINE TABLE LINE BEARING LENGTH L1 S 7816'48" W 15.83' L2 S 68'12'46" W 45.86' L3 N 87'55'20" W 10.37' L4 S 72'47'56" W 29.66' L5 N 87'55'20" W 10.46' L6 N 87'57'28" W 33.50' CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS DELTA LENGTH C1 23.00' 103'36'07" 41.59' C2 25.00' 76'47'02" 33.50' C3 690.00' 2'06'52" 25.46' R N /.A.2)15-S./ / S 7 5o 00g W 3 C1 \,2 89'35'24" W 50.99' N 0 to L1 0 M 1 595.00' (M —M) TINKER AVENUE LOT A (o: E 0 LL 0 N 2 L a COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING THE USE OF HOUSING FUNDS TO PAY A PORTION OF THE COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT OF A 39 -UNIT AFFORDABLE RENTAL PROJECT WITHIN THE FISC /EAST HOUSING AREA WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2141 on July 5, 1983, approving and adopting the Community Improvement Plan, as subsequently amended on January 2, 1985, by Ordinance No. 2222, on December 6, 1994, by Ordinance No. 2682 and on November 20, 2002 by Ordinance No. 2889, for the West End Community Improvement Project (the "WECIP "); and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2559 on June 18, 1991, approving and adopting the Community Improvement Plan, as subsequently amended on December 6, 1994, by Ordinance No. 2691, on July 6, 2000, by Ordinance No. 2835, on September 5, 2000, by Ordinance No. 2844 and on April 3, 2001, by Ordinance No. 2857, for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project (the "BWIP "); and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(a) of the Community Redevelopment Law requires that not less than 20% of all taxes allocated to a redevelopment agency from a redevelopment project ( "Housing Funds ") be used for the purpose of increasing, improving, and preserving the community's supply of low- and moderate - income housing at affordable costs; and WHEREAS, Section 33334.2(g) of the Health and Safety Code provides that the Commission may use Housing Funds outside a project area if a finding is made by resolution of the Commission and the City Council that such use will be of benefit to the project; and WHEREAS, the Commission and the Council have found that the use of BWIP and WECIP Housing funds outside the BWIP and WECIP Project Areas will be of benefit to the BWIP and WECIP, pursuant to Commission Resolution 03 -106 and Council Resolutions 13562, 13567 and 13578 and; WHEREAS, the Commission has been designated as the official redevelopment agency to carry out in the City of Alameda the functions and requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) and to implement the Community Improvement Plans for the BWIP and WECIP; and Resolution #3 -A 10 -3 -06 (Joint Meeting) WHEREAS, Section 33071 of the Community Redevelopment Law declares that a fundamental purpose of redevelopment is to expand the supply of low- and moderate - income housing; and WHEREAS, the Commission desires to provide for the construction of a 39 -unit affordable rental project with the East Housing /FISC area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Community Improvement Commission that: Section 1: Pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law, the Commission hereby authorizes use of WECIP and BWIP Housing Funds, BWIP Housing Bond proceeds and BWIP In -lieu Funds in an amount not to exceed $4,000,000 that will be provided to Resources for Community Development (RCD), a non - profit affordable housing developer. These funds will be used solely for the 39 -unit affordable housing rental project within the East Housing /FISC area. Other funding that is committed to the project, including City HOME funds, County HOME funds or other grant funds, will diminish the CIC's funding obligation for the 39 -unit project accordingly. The Commission further authorizes the Executive Director or his or her designee to execute the necessary documents related to this loan transaction. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda in a Special Community Improvement Commission meeting assembled on the day of , 2006 by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said Commission this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, Secretary Community Improvement Commission Beverly Johnson, Chair Community Improvement Commission UNAPPROVED MINUTES SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC), AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:00 P.M. Mayor /Chair convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:07 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/ Commissioners/ Authority Members / Board Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor /Chair Johnson - 6. Absent: None. The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06- CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: Alameda Landing; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda Community Improvement Commission and Catellus; Under negotiation: Price and terms. (06- CC /06- CIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case: Operation Dignity v. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, City of Alameda, Community Improvement Commission and Housing Authority. Alex McElree, Operation Dignity Executive Director, stated Operation Dignity looks forward to working with Resources for Community Development (RCD) and the City to put money together to build the units; the units are vital to Operation Dignity and housing providers; transitional people should be allowed to move into permanent spaces; urged approval of the Settlement Agreement. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor /Chair Johnson announced that regarding Real Property, Commissioners received a briefing from Real Property Negotiator and no action was taken; regarding Existing Litigation, Council /Commissioners /Authority Members /Board Members met with Legal Counsel to discuss the Operation Dignity Lawsuit and agreed to a final settlement of the lawsuit; stated the Settlement Agreement would be available in the City Clerk's office. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 1 Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 2 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC), AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:25 P.M. Mayor /Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:46 p.m. Vice Mayor /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Gilmore led the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call - AGENDA ITEM Present: Councilmembers / Authority Members / Commissioners / Board Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor /Chair Johnson- 6. Absent: None. (06- CC /06- CIC) Recommendation to approve an Implementation Agreement with Operation Dignity and Resources for Community Development for the construction of 39 Affordable Rental Units on a Portion of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Matarrese stated the Implementation Agreement is a big step in moving forward with affordable housing; inquired what would be tradeoff if litigation were to continue. The City Attorney responded the Settlement Agreement would pave the way for the City to apply for grant funding and special State funds to help build 39 affordable housing units; stated qualifying for funds and specifically tax credit financing would have been difficult for the City without the Settlement Agreement; Operation Dignity is willing to set aside current interest in the property to allow the City to receive financing through a tax credit program; Operation Dignity would defer leasehold interest for approximately seven years, would receive money to compensate for the wait, and would use the money 'to further enhance affordable housing in the community; the City would be relieved of millions of dollars in obligations to build the 39 affordable housing units. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Matarrese stated millions of dollars would be saved, the City would have access to funds for affordable housing, and precious resources Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authority, Community Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 would be saved on legal activities. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Torrey seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, Community Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 2 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:27 P.M. Mayor /Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:50 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers / Board Members / Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor /Chair Johnson - 5. Absent: None. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor /Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve the amended contract with Architectural Resources Group [paragraph no. 06- CIC], and the recommendation to approve the amended contract with Komorous -Towey Architects [paragraph no. 06- CIC] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *06- CIC) Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Community Improvement Commission held on September 5, 2006. Approved. (06- CIC) Recommendation to approve the amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount by $19,860 to provide additional Construction Administration Services for the rehabilitation of the Alameda Theater. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated additional money should not be spent on the theater project until there is a final outcome on the lawsuit; commented other agenda items. Commissioner Matarrese requested clarification that the $19,860 Alameda Theater rehabilitation increase and the $5,000 Civic Center Parking Garage increase were within the theater budget, not part of the contingency. The Redevelopment Manager responded additional soft costs were expected; $277,000 was included in the July 26, 2006 budget for said costs; the contingency would not be used to fund the amended Contracts. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission September 19, 2006 1 Commissioner Matarrese requested that the budget portion of staff reports identify whether or not costs are included in the theater and garage project budgets in the future. The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation; provided a handout on the budget. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether other increases are anticipated, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the negative. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether a milestone chart would be available, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded a milestone charge would be available within a week or two. Commissioner deHaan stated the Council should be provided with any information given to the public ahead of time. Chair Johnson stated the public should know that parking would not be available at the old Video Maniacs site after October 28. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of staff recommendations to approve the amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group [paragraph no. 06- CIC] and to approve the amended Contract with Komorous -Towey Architects [paragraph no. 06- CIC]. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner deHaan inquired where the developer stands within the process. The Redevelopment Manager responded the developer is a little bit behind the garage process; stated the developer is finalizing construction drawings and would be submitting the drawings for plan check and to other contractors for pricing. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the developer has met all financial requirements. The Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the City is working closely with the Bank of Alameda to finalize the developer's financing. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Commissioners Daysog, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 4. Noes: Commissioner deHaan - 1. (06- CIC) Recommendation to approve the amended Contract with Komorous -Towey Architects, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount by $5,000 to provide additional Architectural and Construction Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission September 19, 2006 2 Administration Services for the Civic Center Parking Garage. [For discussion and motion, refer to the recommendation to approve the amended Contract with "Architectural Resources Group paragraph no. 06- CIC.] ( *06- CC /06- CIC) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2006 Fourth Quarter. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (06- CC /06- CIC) Public Hearing to consider certification of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, approval of a General Plan Amendment, a Master Plan Amendment, a Development Agreement Amendment, two new Development Agreements, a Disposition and Development Agreement to replace 1,300,000 square feet of approved but not yet constructed office and research and development uses with 400,000 square feet of office use, 300,000 square feet of retail use, 20,000 square feet of health club, and up to 300 residential units in the Catellus Mixed Use Development; and adoption /introduction of related resolutions /ordinances. The project area if located south of the Oakland Alameda Estuary, north of the College of Alameda and the Bayport Residential Project, east of Coast Guard Housing and west of Webster Street. The site is in the MX (Mixed Use) Zoning District. Continued to October 17, 2006. (06- CIC) Commissioner deHaan stated the Farmer's Market parking site is for sale; a top priority should be to obtain Webster Street parking; requested that the matter be discussed at a future date. Chair Johnson requested an Off Agenda Report on the matter; stated staff has been working with the owner to buy the property. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission September 19, 2006 3 CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM Date: October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Community Improvement Commission From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Re: Recommendation to Enter into a Contract with Construction Testing Services, Inc. in the Amount of $84,260 to Provide Special Inspection and Testing Services for Civic Center Parking Garage and Alameda Theater Project BACKGROUND The Community Improvement Commission (CIC) approved construction contracts with Overaa Construction for the Civic Center Parking Garage and restoration and rehabilitation of the historic Alameda Theater on July 26, 2006. The overall project will consist of an eight- screen movie theater, including a 484 -seat, single- screen theater in the historic Alameda Theater and seven screens in the new cineplex, 6,100 square feet of retail, and an approximately 342 -space parking garage. The construction phase of the project requires special inspection and testing for both components of the project. As a result, CIC staff issued a Request for Proposals for special inspection and testing firms in August 2006, and received eight complete proposals. Based on CIC staff review of firm qualifications and proposed fee, Construction Testing Services (CTS) presented the best value to the CIC and was selected as the preferred consultant. CTS received favorable references from a number of previous and existing clients and has relevant experience working on a number of parking structures, public facilities, and historic restoration projects. The proposed contract amount is $84,260. (The contract is on file with the City Clerk.) DISCUSSION As special inspectors for the CIC, CTS will observe the construction work for conformance with the Permit Center Office approved design drawings and specifications, and report all nonconforming items immediately. Specifically, CTS will provide special inspection and testing for concrete, masonry, structural steel, expansion anchors, non - shrinking grout, and fireproofing for both projects. CTS will also furnish daily and weekly reports, as well as a final summary report for both projects. All reports Agenda Item #2 -B CC 10 -3 -06 CIC Honorable Chair and October 3, 2006 Members of the Community Improvement Commission Page 2 of 2 BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FISCAL IMPACT This project will be funded by the 2003 Merged Area Bonds and will not impact the General Fund. This contract was an expected expenditure for the project and will be not impact the contingency budget for the project. The contract amount will be withdrawn from the $277,000 in the budget line item for additional soft costs for the project as described in "Attachment 3" from the July 26, 2006 CIC meeting. RECOMMENDATION Approve the contract with Construction Testing Services, Inc. for the amount of $84,260 to provide special inspection and testing services for the Civic Center Parking Garage and Alameda Theater projects. Res • -ctf y ubmitted, Lesli: A. Little Deve (�i pme t Services Director By: enni evel D K/LAUJO: ry r Ott pment Manager Attachment: 1. "Attachment 3" from July 26, 2006 CIC Meeting cc: Construction Testing Services, Inc., c/o James Doyle Attachment 3 Proposed Budget for Downtown Theater Project Item Budget 3/21/2006 Budget 6/7/2006 Proposed Budget 7/26/2006 Difference between 6/7- 7/26 I. SOURCE OF FUNDS(') Sources of Funds Add'I Redevelopment Bond Proceeds (Library) Add'I Redevelopment Bond Proceeds TOTAL SOURCES OF FUNDS II. USE OF FUNDS Parking Garage Land Acquisition Construction Costs Other Costs Construction Contingence) Subtotal Cineplex Public Contribution /Loan Hazardous Materials Clean -up(3) Theater Connections Subtotal Alameda Theater Rehabilitation Property Acquisition /Relocation Rehabilitation Costs Other Costs Additional Soft Costs(4) Construction Contingence) Subtotal TOTAL USE OF FUNDS III. NET BALANCE/ REVENUE SURPLUS $29,003,000 $0 $29,003,000 $811,000 $8,300,000 $1,410,000 $786,000 $11,307,000 $2,800,000 $200,000 $675,000 $3,675,000 $2,500,000 $7,373,600 $1,870,000 $0 $1,106,000 $12,849,600 $27,832,000 $1,171,000 $29,003,000 $0 $29,003,000 $811,000 $8,300,000 $1,410,000 $786,000 $11,307,000 $2,800,000 $200,000 $675,000 $3,675,000 $2,500,000 $8,500,000 $1,870,000 $45,000 $1,106,000 $14,021,000 $29,003,000 $29,003,000 $1,000,000 $200,000 $30,203,000 $811,000 $8,371,000 $1,410,000 $415,000 $11,007,000 $2,800,000 $250,000 $675,000 $3,725,000 $3,418,000 $8,800,000 $1,870,000 $277,000 $1,106,000 $15,471,000 $30,203,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $200,000 $1,200,000 $0 $71,000 $0 ($371,000) ($300,000) $0 $50,000 $50,000 $918,000 $300,000 $0 $232,000 $1,450,000 $1,200,000 (1) Assumes $1 million in library redevelopment bond funds and $200,000 in uncommitted bond funds no longer required for cash reserves are committed to the Theater project under the 7/26/2006 budget. (2) The contingency for the theater under the 7/26/2006 budget is approximately 13% instead of 15% with the increase in construction budget; and the garage was reduced to 5% still exceeding industry standards. (3) This contingency was incorrectly stated as a $200,000 in previous budgets. The DDA states it is a $250,000 contingency. (4) As part of the value- engineering process for the theater, these funds are likely to be required for additional soft costs. Attachment 1 Agenda Item #2 -B CC 10 -3 -06 CIC 9/25/2006 CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum Date: October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Chair and Members of the Community Improvement Commission From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Re: Resolution Referring Draft BWIP Plan Amendment to Planning Board and Authorizing Transmittal for Review BACKGROUND The Business and Waterfront Improvement Project (BWIP) Community Improvement Plan (CIP) was adopted in 1991. The CIP has been amended previously a total of five times. On September 21, 2006, the Economic Development Commission endorsed a proposed sixth amendment to the BWIP CIP that would update the Plan's land use designations to conform to the City's General Plan as it currently exists and as it may be amended from time to time. The proposed resolution referring the proposed amendment to the Planning Board and authorizing transmittal to the affected taxing entities and other interested parties is the first step in the amendment process. DISCUSSION The BWIP CIP was adopted in 1991. At that time, the BWIP land use designations were found to be consistent with General Plan land use designations. Currently, there are seven areas within the BWIP with land use designations that are different from the General Plan land use designations. In all cases, the BWIP land use designations are broader than the General Plan designations, with the result that the General Plan designations take precedence. Amending the CIP will make the land use designations for those areas identical to the General Plan land use designations and will not impact the current allowable uses for those areas. The proposed plan amendment will change the land use designations of the BWIP only, and does not affect the City's two other redevelopment project areas. There is no need to amend the CIP for the West End Community Improvement Project (WECIP), since the WECIP CIP land use designations already conform to the City's General Plan as it currently exists and as it may be amended from time to time. The Alameda Point Improvement Project (APIP) CIP is substantially flexible as currently drafted and allows all uses for the majority of the project area; however, an APIP plan amendment may be required at some future time if a General Plan amendment is ever approved for the area currently designated as open space (i.e., the wildlife preserve areal. Agenda Item #3 -A 10 -3 -06 CIC Honorable Chair and October 3, 2006 Members of the Community Improvement Commission Page 2 of 3 The proposed sixth amendment brings all BWIP land uses into conformance with the existing General Plan. The amendment deletes the current specific land use references in the BWIP CIP and instead states that the CIP land uses will be those identified in the General Plan as it currently exists and as they may be amended from time to time. The amendment serves two purposes: 1) eliminating discrepancies that exist between CIP and General Plan land uses; and 2) streamlining future development projects by eliminating the need to process a separate BWIP plan amendment for each development project that requires a General Plan amendment. The process of amending a redevelopment plan is both costly and time consuming, taking a minimum of five months and costing approximately $50,000 exclusive of staff time. Section 33346 of the California Community Redevelopment Law provides that, prior to submitting a proposed redevelopment plan amendment to the legislative body, the redevelopment agency shall submit the proposed changes to the planning commission for its report and recommendation. In addition, Section 33328.3 requires that taxing entities be notified of the proposed adoption of a redevelopment plan or an amendment to a plan that would change the boundaries of a project area. Although the proposed sixth amendment does not require noticing of taxing entities, it is customary to send a courtesy notice to the affected taxing entities of any redevelopment plan amendment. The taxing entities will also be notified of the joint public hearing of the CIC and City Council on the adoption of the sixth amendment. The non -major plan amendment process consists of: (Dates are tentative) • Resolution of CIC referring amendment to the Planning Board and authorizing transmittal to affected taxing entities — October 3, 2006; • Resolution finding and determining that a Project Area Committee need not be formed in connection with the proposed Sixth Amendment — October 3, 2006; • Planning Board review of amendment — October 9, 2006 • CIC adoption of Report to Council and request for joint hearing — October 17, 2006; • City Council acceptance of Report to Council and call for joint hearing — October 17, 2006; • Planning Board review and submission of recommendation — October 23, 2006; • Community Information Meeting— October 30, 2006; • Public Hearing is noticed: o Four successive weeks of advertising — October 24 and 31, November 7 and 14 o Notices mailed to all property owners, residents and businesses by first class mail, and governing bodies of taxing entities by certified mail — October 19, 2006 Honorable Chair and October 3, 2006 Members of the Community Improvement Commission Page 3 of 3 • Public Hearing and introduction of Ordinance adopting proposed Amendment for first reading — November 21, 2006; • Second reading and approval of Ordinance adopting Amendment — December 5, 2006 • Ordinance effective date — January 4, 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed amendment does not qualify as a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FISCAL IMPACT Tax increment funds were approved in the FY 2006 -07 budget for the CIP amendment. There is no impact on the General Fund. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This amendment will change the BWIP CIP so that BWIP land use designations are always consistent with the General Plan, as it currently exists and as it may be amended in the future. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution referring the draft BWIP plan amendment to the Planning Board and authorizing its transmittal for review. Respe tfully, L Development Services Director By: Rachel Silver Development Manager, Housing LAL/RS:ry Approved as to Form COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. REFERRING THE PROPOSED SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR THE BUSINESS AND WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PLAN TO THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA FOR ITS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND AUTHORIZING THE - TRANSMITTAL OF SAID SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE AFFECTED TAXING ENTITIES AND OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS WHEREAS, on June 18, 1991, by Ordinance No. 2559, the City Council of the City of Alameda ( "City Council ") approved and adopted the Community Improvement Plan ( "Plan ") for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project Area ( "BWIP" or "Project Area "); and WHEREAS, the Plan has been amended a total of five (5) times (as amended, the "Existing Plan "), the First Amendment established time limits in compliance with Assembly Bill 1290 (Stats. 1993, Chap. 942), the Second, Third and Fourth Amendments amended certain land uses, and the Fifth Amendment merged the BWIP with West End Community Improvement Plan (WECIP), extended eminent domain except over residential uses and added territory; and WHEREAS, the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda ( "Commission ") is vested with the responsibility to carry out the Existing Plan; and WHEREAS, the Commission desires to amend the Existing Plan ("Amendment" or "Sixth Amendment ") to update the land use provisions to conform to the City's General Plan as it currently exists and as it may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, Section 33346 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) provides that, prior to submitting a proposed redevelopment plan amendment to the legislative body, the redevelopment agency shall submit the proposed changes to the planning commission for its report and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Commission has prepared the proposed Sixth Amendment to the Existing Plan which is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. Resolution #3 -A 10 -3 -06 (CIC Meeting) NOW, THEREFORE, THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Director of Development Services is hereby authorized and directed to transmit a copy of the proposed Sixth Amendment to the Existing Plan, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to the Planning Board of the City of Alameda for its report and recommendation. Section 2. The Director of Development Services is hereby authorized and directed to transmit a copy of the proposed Sixth Amendment to each of the affected taxing entities and to other interested persons and organizations. 2 SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR THE BUSINESS AND WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT BACKGROUND The Community Improvement Plan ( "Plan ") for the Business and Waterfront Improvement Project ( "Project" or "Project Area ") was adopted by the City C ouncil of the. City of Alameda ( "City Council ") on June 18, 1991, by Ordinance No. 2559. The Project Area is comprised of one contiguous area containing approximately 900 acres and includes the Park Street and Webster Street business districts, two neighborhood com mercial districts along Lincoln Avenue, most of the estuary waterfront from Tilden Way to the former Alameda Naval Air Station (now Alameda Point), the Civic Center, and the primary entrances to the City of Alameda. The Plan has been am ended previously a total of five (5) times. The City Council adopted the first amendment to the Plan on December 7, 1994, by Ordinance No. 2681, establishing certain time limits in compliance with Assembly Bill 1290. The second amendment to the Plan was adopted on June 7, 2000, by Ordinance No. 2835, which made site specific land use changes to conform with amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code. The third amendment to the Plan, adopted on September 20, 2000, by Ordinance No. 2844, and the fourth amendment, adopted on April 3, 2001, by Ordinance No, 2857, also made site specific land use changes to conform with amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Code. The fifth amendment was adopted by the City Council on March 18, 2003, by Ordinance No. 2896, and merged the Project with the West End Community Improvement Plan, extended eminent domain except over residential uses, and added territory (approximately 123 acres) to the Project Area that was previously included within the Alameda Point Improvement Project. PROPOSED SIXTH AMENDMENT The Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda ( "Commission ") is proposing a sixth amendment ( "Sixth Amendment ") to the existing Plan, the purpose of which is to amend the existing Plan land use references to refer to the City of Alameda's General Plan, as it currently exists and as it may be amended from time to time. No amendment is proposed to the boundaries of the Project Area or the fiscal or time limits. The fiscal and time limits stated in the existing Plan, as amended, for the Project Area shall remain in force as adopted. The Community Improvement Plan, as amended by the first amendment, second amendment, third amendment, fourth amendment, and the fifth amendment, is hereby further amended to delete certain text and to add certain text to Section IV (A. — B., §401 through 411), Uses 1 PA0609008.ALA:CK:gbd 10004.601.001/09/19/06 Permitted in the Project Area, and to amend and replace Attachment No. 3 (Redevelopment Land Use Map) in its entirety, as follows: IV. [ §400] USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA Deleted text: B. [ §102] Designated Land Uses 1. [ §103] Rcsidential Usos PA0609008.ALA:CK:gbd 10004.601.001/09 /19/08 2. [ §101] Commercial Usos 3. [ §105j Commercial /Residontial Uses 1. [ §106] General Industrial Usos 2 5. [ §107] Mixed Usos amerdedi- 6. ( §108) Commercial Rocroation Uscs 7. [ §109] Parks and Public 0 o Spaco Uscs 8. [ §110] Public Institutional Uscs 9. [ §111] Federal Facilities Uscs Added text: A. [ §401] Permitted Land Uses The "Redevelopment Land Use M ap", attached hereto as Attachment No. 3 and incorporated herein by reference, illustrates the location of the Project Area boundaries, 3 PA0609008.ALA:CK:gbd 10004.501.001/09/19/09 major streets within the Project Area, and the land uses authori zed within the Project Area by the City's current General Plan. The City will from time to time update and revise the City's General Plan. It is the intention of this Plan that the land uses and overall street layout to be permitted within the Project Area shall be as provided within the City's General Plan, as it currently exists or as it may from time to time be amended, and as implemented and applied by City ordinances, specific plans, resolutions and other laws. Uses other than those designated in the City 's General Plan and its land use map may be authorized by the City from time to time by amendments to the City's General Plan as authorized by law. B. [ §402] Reserved 1. [ §403] Reserved 2. [ §404] Reserved 3. [ §405] Reserved 4. [ §406] Reserved 5. [ §407] Reserved 6. [ §408] Reserved 7. [ §409] Reserved 8. [ §410] Reserved 9. [§411] Reserved 4 PA0609008.ALA:CK:gbd 10004.601.001/09/19/06 ATTACHMENT NO. 3 REDEVELOPMENT LAND USE MAP I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda in a Special Community Improvement Commission meeting assembled on the day of , 2006 by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said Commission this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, Secretary Community Improvement Commission Beverly Johnson, Chair Community Improvement Commission [7a Proclamation Nwrii Whereas, the month of October has been designated National Disability Awareness Month; and Whereas, Disability Awareness Month was first recognized on August 11, 1945, by a joint resolution of the United States Congress as the National Employment of the Physically Handicapped Week; and Whereas, Disability Awareness Month was supported with the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) by President George H.W. Bush; and Whereas, Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals with disabilities to live independently, enjoy self - determination, make choices, contribute to society and experience fully in the economic, political, social, cultural and educational mainstream of American society; and Whereas, Disability Awareness Month highlights the progress the City of Alameda has made in improving employment opportunities, government services, public accommodations, transportation, and telecommunications for those with disabilities; and Whereas, Disability Awareness Month also recognizes that there is still work to be done to remove barriers, whether physical or social, that unreasonably prevent the full participation of Americans with disabilities; and Whereas, on August 17, 2004, the City Council of the City of Alameda established a Commission on Disability Issues to provide an enhanced public forum to address local disability issues. NOW, THEREFORE, 1, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby proclaim the Month of October 2006 as DISABILITY AWARENESS MONTH in the City of Alameda. A .V Beverly J. Johnson Mayor Agenda Item #3 -A 10 -3 -06 r .T Proclamation Whereas, the month of October has been recognized as National Arts and Humanities Month by thousands of arts and cultural organizations, communities, and states across the country, as well as by the White House and Congress for more than two decades; and Whereas, the arts and humanities embody much of the accumulated wisdom, intellect, and imagination of humankind; and Whereas, the arts and humanities enhance and enrich the lives of every American; and Whereas, the arts and humanities play a unique role in the lives of our families, our communities, and our country; and Whereas, the nonprofit arts industry also strengthens our economy by generating $134 billion in economic activity annually and by supporting the full - time equivalent of 4.85 million jobs; and Whereas, the City of Alameda expresses its warmest gratitude to the many individuals, businesses and organizations for their generous contributions to the cultural arts we enjoy; and Whereas, Frank Bette Center for the Arts, located in the city of Alameda, focuses on the arts as the vehicle for community outreach, activities, events and collaborations supporting an environment of abundance and generosity between artists and the community. NOW THEREFORE, 1, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby declare the month of October as National Arts and Humanities Month in the City of Alameda and call upon our citizens to celebrate and promote the arts and culture in our nation and to participate in taking action for the arts and humanities in our city. Beverly J. Johnson Mayor Agenda Item #3 -B 10 -3 -06 ril=r Proclamation C 1n Whereas, the Alameda Unified School District Board of Education and the Alameda PTA Council joins with Pedestrian Friendly Alameda in promoting the Annual Alameda Walk & Roll Your Child to School Day event at various schools; and Whereas, this event will focus on the benefits of walking or bicycling rather than driving to school, creating cleaner, safer and environmentally healthier schools for children; and Whereas, this day affords parents, grandparents, friends, and neighbors to spend more time with children, reduce car use and traffic hazards, promote physical activity and contribute to a safer community; and Whereas, this day gives children in the U.S. a chance to be a part of a global event; and Whereas, by instilling good safety skills in our children now — not only will they become better pedestrians, but they'll learn to become better motorists when they get behind the wheel of a car — the best way to learn is by doing; and Whereas, Walk & Roll Your Child to School Day is an opportunity to find ways to make our neighborhoods and our school district safer; and Whereas, walking is one of the few forms of transportation that gets us to where we are going and contributes to the daily physical activity that we all need. NOW THEREFORE, 1, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby declare October 4, 2006 as Walk & Roll to School Day in the City of Alameda and urge all citizens to support and participate in its observance. Beverly J. Johnson Mayor Agenda Item #3 -C 10 -3 -06 AM= Noil Proclamation Whereas, working women constitute 66 million of the nation's work force and strive to serve their communities, their states and their nation in professional, civic and cultural capacities; and Whereas, women -owned businesses account for 28 percent of all U.S. businesses, generating $1.15 trillion in sales; and Whereas, the major goals of Business and Professional Women are to promote equality for all women and to help create better working conditions for women through the study of social, educational, economic and political problems; and Whereas, for 78 years Business and Professional Women has been spotlighting the achievements and contributions of working women during National Business Women's Week, the third week of October; and Whereas, Isle City of Alameda, the local organization of BPW, will recognize local Women of Achievement during its annual National Business Women's Week Awards Ceremony on Saturday, October 21, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., at the Harbor Bay Community Center. NOW THEREFORE, 1, Beverly J. Johnson, Mayor of the City of Alameda, do hereby declare October 15 through October 21, 2006, as National Business Women's Week in the City of Alameda and urge all citizens to join this salute to working women and to encourage and promote the celebration of the achievements of all business and professional women in our community. Beverly J. Johnson Mayor Agenda Item #3 -D 10 -3 -06 1 Adiummi LAI CITY OF ALAMEDA MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Date: October 3, 2006 Re: New Main Library Project Update Attached to this memorandum is the October 1, 2006 Library Construction Report. Respectfully submitted, e Chisaki Library Director Attachment / e7.47- Agenda Item #3 -E 10 -3 -06 o Construction R October 1, 2006 Construction b • a) 0 b a) 0 O zczt $" O a.)- o A' o .5u) 0 5 ttO • 0 oo a) 0 715, g .5 -9 a) bA.� O U cC ct a,• 0 •� 0 �'. •.. cn O • 5 goo a a a • • • • ment Procurement d 0 0 r 0 y N cn N vJ a) U o E 0 0 up O to z 0 -0 a) E, 0 to o 4 U z w P-4 Q. Q � z tO ^ a C7 - °HH H 4.e ' a) • s • • Dedicated to Excellence, Committed to Service 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O N 0 0 0 0 0 'd M O O N N n A O Lf) 0 0 C 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 CO N 'Cr) O fl d 0) O O 1— N 0 0 0 0 0 ti O O LC7 L() O O O L6 O 0 h CO O) 0 N CO O O N N h cci 12 Q„ G a) coo '- F-':J0Oti�N 00 '-r- co cococo O �N -a �O M1-OOCO M W) 0 ti v _ N ++ lf) CO — — ti r U) O) N m N N C L z 3 0 _co J Q w C t co a) 2 o 3 t o 4) C o Z o 2 -' -o E c >, p 8 co C 7 N O C N U N E o, E-o D i O C C CD J= 2 O O-0 co om o c i N � c� N C 7 LL o 7 o E cv 6 2 c _5 p o ` ca c 'a .4+ C O 7 7 0 >, m a) y O +� LL LL 7 C 0 CD N a) c E 'd 7 'O O C C co C U— N co Lo N .0 co 3 LL C 7 N N 0 7 0 C *k *k *k *k O Q C LL c° c`v 0 a n 0 U a) a) a) a) a) C 0 �. 0 a C p o c w m o o o o -o y c o a O d c0 :-• 0 -O N N C O O +' c 0 0 0 0 0 U Q. y E�E�o��om� o mmmmm� ti7 E lC U CA CA O) O) 0) N d v a a�i a�i aUi p camas o m m m > a C C 0 0 7— cn rI r Q Q N — d 0 L L L L L a) Un fn = 7 Q a c m p d a) C co 0 )as u So Exp B G: \Library\New Main Library FS 05- 06.xls Status as of • E ■ O 0 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC UTILITIES BOARD (PUB) MEETING THURSDAY- - SEPTEMBER 14, 2006- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 6:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers deHaan Matarrese and Mayor Johnson; and Board Members Bangert, Holmes, Kurita, McCahan, and McCormick - 8 Absent: Councilmembers Daysog and Gilmore - 2. (06- ) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: 1041 W. Midway and various easements in Alameda, California; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda and Alameda Power and Telecom; Under negotiation: Price and terms. (06- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Human Resources Director and Craig Jory; Employee organizations: International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Management and Confidential Employees Association, and Alameda City Employees Association. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that regarding Property, the Council and PUB received a briefing from real property negotiator; no action was taken; and regarding Labor, the Council and PUB discussed labor negotiations regarding the relevant bargaining units; no action was taken. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council and Public Utilities Board September 14, 2006 UNAPPROVED MINUTES SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC), AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:00 P.M. Mayor /Chair convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:07 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers/ Commissioners/ Authority Members / Board Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor /Chair Johnson - 6. Absent: None. The Special Joint Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06- CIC) Conference with Real Property Negotiators; Property: Alameda Landing; Negotiating parties: City of Alameda Community Improvement Commission and Catellus; Under negotiation: Price and terms. (06- CC /06- CIC) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation; Name of case: Operation Dignity v. Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, City of Alameda, Community Improvement Commission and Housing Authority. Alex McElree, Operation Dignity Executive Director, stated Operation Dignity looks forward to working with Resources for Community Development (RCD) and the City to put money together to build the units; the units are vital to Operation Dignity and housing providers; transitional people should be allowed to move into permanent spaces; urged approval of the Settlement Agreement. Following the Closed Session, the Special Joint Meeting was reconvened and Mayor /Chair Johnson announced that regarding Real Property, Commissioners received a briefing from Real Property Negotiator and no action was taken; regarding Existing Litigation, Council /Commissioners /Authority Members /Board Members met with Legal Counsel to discuss the Operation Dignity Lawsuit and agreed to a final settlement of the lawsuit; stated the Settlement Agreement would be available in the City Clerk's office. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 1 Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Community Improvement Commission, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 2 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC), AND HOUSING AUTHORITY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS (HABOC) MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:25 P.M. Mayor /Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:46 p.m. Vice Mayor /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Gilmore led the Pledge of Allegiance. Roll Call - AGENDA ITEM Present: Councilmembers / Authority Members / Commissioners / Board Members Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Commissioner Torrey, and Mayor /Chair Johnson- 6. Absent: None. (06- CC /06- CIC) Recommendation to approve an Implementation Agreement with Operation Dignity and Resources for Community Development for the construction of 39 Affordable Rental Units on a Portion of the Fleet Industrial Supply Center. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Matarrese stated the Implementation Agreement is a big step in moving forward with affordable housing; inquired what would be tradeoff if litigation were to continue. The City Attorney responded the Settlement Agreement would pave the way for the City to apply for grant funding and special State funds to help build 39 affordable housing units; stated qualifying for funds and specifically tax credit financing would have been difficult for the City without the Settlement Agreement; Operation Dignity is willing to set aside current interest in the property to allow the City to receive financing through a tax credit program; Operation Dignity would defer leasehold interest for approximately seven years, would receive money to compensate for the wait, and would use the money to further enhance affordable housing in the community; the City would be relieved of millions of dollars in obligations to build the 39 affordable housing units. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Matarrese stated millions of dollars would be saved, the City would have access to funds for affordable housing, and precious resources Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse 1 and Redevelopment Authority, Community Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 would be saved on legal activities. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner /Board Member Matarrese moved approval of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Torrey seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 7:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority, Community Improvement Commission, and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners September 19, 2006 2 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL JOINT CITY COUNCIL, ALAMEDA REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ARRA), AND COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT COMMISSION (CIC) MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:27 P.M. Mayor /Chair Johnson convened the Special Joint Meeting at 7:50 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers / Board Members Commissioners Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor /Chair Johnson - 5. Absent: None. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor /Chair Johnson announced that the recommendation to approve the amended contract with Architectural Resources Group [paragraph no. 06- CIC], and the recommendation to approve the amended contract with Komorous -Towey Architects [paragraph no. 06- CIC] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Councilmember /Authority Member /Commissioner deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] ( *06- CIC) Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Community Improvement Commission held on September 5, 2006. Approved. (06- CIC) Recommendation to approve the amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount by $19,860 to provide additional Construction Administration Services for the rehabilitation of the Alameda Theater. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated additional money should not be spent on the theater project until there is a final outcome on the lawsuit; commented other agenda items. Commissioner Matarrese requested clarification that the $19,860 Alameda Theater rehabilitation increase and the $5,000 Civic Center Parking Garage increase were within the theater budget, not part of the contingency. The Redevelopment Manager responded additional soft costs were expected; $277,000 was included in the July 26, 2006 budget for said costs; the contingency would not be used to fund the amended Contracts. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission September 19, 2006 1 Commissioner Matarrese requested that the budget portion of staff reports identify whether or not costs are included in the theater and garage project budgets in the future. The Redevelopment Manager gave a brief presentation; provided a handout on the budget. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether other increases are anticipated, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded in the negative. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether a milestone chart would be available, to which the Redevelopment Manager responded a milestone charge would be available within a week or two. Commissioner deHaan stated the Council should be provided with any information given to the public ahead of time. Chair Johnson stated the public should know that parking would not be available at the old Video Maniacs site after October 28. Commissioner Matarrese moved approval of staff recommendations to approve the amended Contract with Architectural Resources Group [paragraph no. 06- CIC] and to approve the amended Contract with Komorous -Towey Architects [paragraph no. 06- CIC]. Commissioner Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Commissioner deHaan inquired where the developer stands within the process. The Redevelopment Manager responded the developer is a little bit behind the garage process; stated the developer is finalizing construction drawings and would be submitting the drawings for plan check and to other contractors for pricing. Commissioner deHaan inquired whether the developer has met all financial requirements. The Redevelopment Manager responded in the affirmative; stated the City is working closely with the Bank of Alameda to finalize the developer's financing. On the call for the question, the motion carried by the following voice vote: Commissioners Daysog, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Chair Johnson - 4. Noes: Commissioner deHaan - 1. (06- CIC) Recommendation to approve the amended Contract with Komorous -Towey Architects, Inc. by increasing the Contract amount by $5,000 to provide additional Architectural and Construction Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission September 19, 2006 2 Administration Services for the Civic Center Parking Garage. [For discussion and motion, refer to the recommendation to approve the amended Contract with'Architectural Resources Group paragraph no. 06- CIC.] ( *06- CC /06- CIC) Recommendation to accept the Quarterly Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2006 Fourth Quarter. Accepted. AGENDA ITEMS (06- CC /06- CIC) Public Hearing to consider certification of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, approval of a General Plan Amendment, a Master Plan Amendment, a Development Agreement Amendment, two new Development Agreements, a Disposition and Development Agreement to replace 1,300,000 square feet of approved but not yet constructed office and research and development uses with 400,000 square feet of office use, 300,000 square feet of retail use, 20,000 square feet of health club, and up to 300 residential units in the Catellus Mixed Use Development; and adoption /introduction of related resolutions /ordinances. The project area if located south of the Oakland Alameda Estuary, north of the College of Alameda and the Bayport Residential Project, east of Coast Guard Housing and west of Webster Street. The site is in the MX (Mixed Use) Zoning District. Continued to October 17, 2006. (06- CIC) Commissioner deHaan stated the Farmer's Market parking site is for sale; a top priority should be to obtain Webster Street parking; requested that the matter be discussed at a future date. Chair Johnson requested an Off Agenda Report on the matter; stated staff has been working with the owner to buy the property. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor /Chair Johnson adjourned the Special Joint Meeting at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger, City Clerk Secretary, Community Improvement Commission The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Joint Meeting Alameda City Council, Alameda Reuse and Redevelopment Authority and Community Improvement Commission September 19, 2006 3 UNAPPROVED MINUTES MINUTES OF THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 19, 2006- -7:30 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Regular Meeting at 8:07 p.m. ROLL CALL - Present: Councilmembers Daysog, deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, and Mayor Johnson - 5. Absent: None. AGENDA CHANGES None. PROCLAMATIONS, SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY AND ANNOUNCEMENTS (06- ) Proclamation declaring the week of September 17 -23, 2006 as National Pollution Prevention Week. Mayor Johnson read and presented the proclamation to Ed Clark with Webster Street Pharmacy, and Phillip Jaber with Versailles Pharmacy. Mr. Jaber stated the Bay -safe Mercury Thermometer Exchange Program has been well received. Mayor Johnson stated that people should know that mercury thermometers can be exchanged for a new mercury -free, digital thermometer. Mr. Clark urged the public to bring expired prescription medications to Webster Street Pharmacy or Versailles Pharmacy for disposal. Councilmember deHaan stated mercury thermometers have been collected for more than fifteen years; he is surprised mercury thermometers still exist. CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Johnson announced that the Resolution Approving Amendment No. 2 [paragraph no. 06- ] and Resolution Establishing Guidelines [paragraph no. 06- ] were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion. Vice Mayor Gilmore moved approval of the remainder of the Consent Calendar. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 1 Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. [Items so enacted or adopted are indicated by an asterisk preceding the paragraph number.] Following the discussion of the items pulled from the Consent Calendar, speaker David Kirwin requested to speak on the Recommendation to adopt Specification No. MSP9 -01 -1 [paragraph no. *06- ] and the recommendation to accept and authorize to record a Notice of Completion [paragraph no. *06- ( *06- ) Minutes of the Special and Regular City Council Meetings held on September 5, 2006. Approved. ( *06- ) Ratified bills in the amount of $10,732,440.43. ( *06- ) Recommendation to adopt Specification No. MSP9 -01 -1 and authorize request for bids for a Vehicle Tow Contract for the Police Department. Accepted. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated the Buy Alameda campaign could be improved through the bidding process. ( *06- ) Recommendation to accept and authorize to record a Notice of Completion for Bayport Residential Phase 2 Trunk Line Demolition and Grading Improvements. Accepted. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated Public Works staff should be responsible for final inspection before a Notice of Completion is signed. Mayor Johnson requested staff to explain whether Public Works signs off on the work. The Public Works Director responded in the affirmative; stated Development Services works with the Public Works Department; Public Works approves the projects. Councilmember Daysog stated the staff report indicates that the original engineer's estimate was $1.68 million; the total project cost was $1.40 million; $270,000 was saved. Councilmember Daysog moved approval of the staff recommendations to adopt Specification No. MSP9 -01 -1 [paragraph no. *06- ] and to accept and authorize to record a Notice of Completion [paragraph no. *06- 1. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 2 Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06- ) Resolution No. 14012, "Approving Amendment No. 2 to the 1986 Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan." Adopted. Councilmember Daysog stated the issue has been controversial in the City of Hayward; the City is being asked to join other Alameda County cities in voting for a change to the Measure B funding program; some people do not want to widen Mission Boulevard; stated he would abstain on the matter. Mayor Johnson inquired whether any other projects were remaining, to which the Public Works Director responded two projects remain. James O'Brien, Alameda County Transportation Authority (ACTA) Project Control Team, stated the Hayward Bypass project was more controversial; ten capital projects were listed in the Expenditure Plan; Amendment 1 addressed the first segment of the Route 238 and Route 84 project and was replaced with a set of improvements to address the congestion problems within the corridor; Amendment 2 addresses the connection between Mission Boulevard and Interstate 880; Union City and Fremont originally opposed the connection; the Expenditure Plan Amendment is needed because of the significant variance from the plan description. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Board of Supervisors voted on the amendment. Mr. O'Brien responded the ACTA Board voted four to one; stated Supervisor Haggerty voted noe. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the Mayor of Hayward voted. Mr. O'Brien responded the Mayor of Hayward voted in favor of the amendment; stated the matter needs to go to cities representing the majority of the population in incorporated Alameda County; the matter has been approved by ten of the fourteen cities; Alameda's vote would push the vote over the 50% line. Mayor Johnson inquired whether Fremont and Union City approved the amendment, to which Mr. O'Brien responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 3 (06- ) Resolution No. 14013, "Establishing Guidelines for Reimbursement of Per Diem Allowance for City of Alameda Business Travel." Adopted. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated the $64 per diem rate only should apply when in San Francisco. The Finance Director stated the rate has not been updated since 1996; San Francisco was used because the area is the closest geographical area reported in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 1542 Publication; the $64 per day rate is the maximum amount; further stated the proposed resolution would change the processes to automatically refer to the IRS publication for per diem reimbursement, the same as mileage reimbursement. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether reimbursement would be less than $64 per day if expenses were less, to which the Finance Director responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Daysog stated the $64 rate represents a 4% inflation from 1996. Councilmember deHaan stated he did not see where the resolution language included "up to ". The City Manager read the language in the proclamation addressing the issue. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry regarding reimbursement, the Finance Director responded receipts would need to be submitted. The Finance Director responded in the negative; stated receipts would need to be submitted. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS (06- ) Resolution No. 14014, "Reappointing Jessica Lindsey to the Economic Development Commission." Adopted; (06- A) Resolution No. 14015, "Appointing Alan J. Ryan to the Economic Development Commission." Adopted; (06- B) Resolution No. 14016, "Reappointing Betsy E. Gammell to Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 4 the Golf Commission." Adopted; and (06- C) Resolution No. 14017, "Reappointing Jo Kahuanui to the Recreation and Park Commission." Adopted. Councilmember Matarrese moved adoption of the resolutions. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion, which passed by unanimous voice vote - 5. The City Clerk administered the oath and presented certificates of appointment. (06- ) Resolution No. 14018, "Endorsing and Supporting the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement." Mayor Johnson stated the United States Conference of Mayors was requesting a commitment for support at the local level. The Supervising Planner stated the proposed resolution follows and supports the resolution to join the International Council for Local Environment Initiatives which was adopted in July 2006. Mayor Johnson stated the matter was placed on the agenda to ensure that there was follow through with the commitment. Councilmember Daysog moved adoption of the resolution. Councilmember deHaan seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06- ) Public Hearing to consider ZA06 -0001, Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment City -wide; and (06- A) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 30- 4.9A.g.8 (Off- Street Parking and Loading Space) of the C -C Community Commercial Zone of Chapter XXX (Development Regulations), to Add a Process for Parking Exceptions. Introduced. The Supervising Planner provided a brief presentation. Mayor Johnson stated downtown parking needs to be provided; she understands the City wants to de- emphasize the automobile in the General Plan; however, people still need places to park; Webster Street parking needs to be addressed immediately; she agrees with changing the requirements; a structured parking lot should be considered. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 5 Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the use runs with the owner or building, to which the Supervising Planner responded the use runs with the land. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether a new building owner would get the previous owner's reduced parking if the use would be different, to which the Supervising Planner responded in the affirmative. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired what would happen if a ground floor office was replaced by a retail store with more foot traffic. The Supervising Planner responded ground floor office is not allowed in the Community Commercial (CC) District. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired about parking in lieu fees. The Supervising Planner stated that parking in lieu fees are triggered when a building or use cannot meet the parking standards; a fee is paid to assist the City with payment for off - street parking or a parking structure; parking waivers can be requested; parking in lieu requests are considered by the Planning Board. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired whether the parking in lieu fees has a range or a set amount per parking space. The Supervising Planner responded the parking in lieu fees are based on the assessed value times 250 square feet. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired what a parking study would cost, to which the Supervising Planner responded she did not think a parking study would cost as much as the cost of parking. Councilmember deHaan stated parking in lieu fees are approximately $6,000 and are predicated on the property use; a lot of retail tenants do not stay very long. The City Attorney stated the ordinance specifies that control would be for the use as well as the structure. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a use permit continues unless the use is discontinued for a year; further inquired whether the permit could run with the use of the land. The City Attorney responded the permit does not run with the land; a new parking exception would be needed if there are structure and use alterations. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 6 Councilmember deHaan inquired whether the ordinance language was patterned after other cities. The Supervising Planner responded San Leandro's ordinance language was used; additional research was done on how Albany, South San Francisco, and San Carlos administer exception ordinances. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether said cities were satisfied with the outcome. The Supervising Planner responded no problems have occurred with San Leandro's implementation. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the hearing. Kathy Moehring, West Alameda Business Association (WABA), stated one of WABA's goals is to encourage new and existing businesses to flourish; WABA is in support of the proposed ordinance. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember deHaan inquired what is the present ordinance. The Supervising Planner responded the present ordinance does not have a parking exception provision. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there could be a change for restaurants. The Supervising Planner responded possibly; stated a change in hours of operation would not qualify for an exception because there would not be a long -term change to the structure. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether there was tiering and whether only offices would be affected. The Supervising Planner responded some restaurants could request an exception if a large cooking area took up a lot of space. In response to Councilmember deHaan's statement regarding a study, the Supervising Planner stated a study needs to be approved by the Public Works Director. Councilmember deHaan stated other cities must have set up some type of standards; inquired whether playbooks were used. The Supervising Planner responded in the negative; stated review is Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 7 September 19, 2006 made on a case -by -case basis. Councilmember Daysog stated the proposed ordinance provides a process so that a transit -first policy can be brought to life; the Webster Street bus stop bulb outs protrude out into the lane closest to the sidewalk; the idea is to begin to build changes that encourage mass transit and discourage automobile use; he likes the philosophy behind the proposed ordinance; the City is moving in the right direction. Mayor Johnson concurred with Councilmember Daysog; stated off - street parking opportunities still need to be reviewed. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Councilmember Daysog; stated the ordinance is proposed for introduction tonight. Mayor Johnson requested that staff provide Council with an update in six months; stated the ordinance can be refined as needed. Councilmember Daysog moved introduction of the ordinance. Councilmember Matarrese seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated the matter should be brought back to see how things are working to determine whether modifications are needed; the proposed ordinance provides an opportunity for interested retailers to come to the downtown areas. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06- ) Introduction of Ordinance Amending the Alameda Municipal Code by Amending Subsection 13- 2.2(e) (Modifications, Amendments and Deletions to the California Building Code) of Section 13 -2 (Alameda Building Code) of Chapter XIII (Building and Housing), to Incorporate Specific Requirements for the Installation of Fire Extinguishing Systems. Not introduced. The Fire Marshal provided a Power Point presentation. Mayor Johnson requested an explanation of the current calculation. The Fire Marshal responded the building's assessed value is reviewed; stated currently a sprinkler system retrofit is triggered if the permitted work exceeds 50% of the assessed value. Mayor Johnson inquired how the new calculation would work. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 8 The Fire Marshal responded the new calculation would be based upon the International Code Council Building Evaluation Table; stated the Table is broken down by occupancy group and by construction type and provides a cost per square foot to determine what the construction costs would be for the building; the factor is multiplied by the building square footage which gives the current building value; the retrofit trigger point would be 25% of the current building value. Mayor Johnson inquired whether current value would be market value, to which the Fire Marshal responded the value of the building would be based on replacement construction costs. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the calculation was typical for the type of ordinance. The Fire Marshal responded not all jurisdictions use the method. Mayor Johnson stated construction costs are not reflective of current value; inquired whether calculations would be based on the entire square footage of an apartment building if work was done on a portion of the building, to which the Fire Marshal responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson opened the public portion of the Hearing. Proponent (In favor of ordinance): Kathy Moehring, WABA. Opponents (Not in favor of ordinance): Barbara Kerr, Alameda; Steve Edringon, Rental Housing Owners of Northern Alameda County; David Kirwin, Alameda. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Following Mr. Edrington's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired whether the intent is to bring more properties into the requirement by changing the calculation from assessed value to square footage. The Fire Marshal responded the intent is to create an even playing field for the community by having a standard threshold for retrofitting. Mayor Johnson stated a kitchen remodel could qualify. Councilmember deHaan stated the assessed value could be in the millions for recently bought properties; inquired how long the current ordinance has been in place, to which the Fire Marshal Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 9 September 19, 2006 responded seven or eight years. Mayor Johnson inquired how the value of the work is calculated, to which the Fire Marshal responded the value is calculated on the same data evaluation table used by the Building Department. Following Mr. Kirwin's comments, Mayor Johnson inquired whether feedback has been received on new construction; stated the concerns seem to be with remodels. The Fire Marshal responded that he met with Alameda Point Community Partners, Catellus, Doric Development, Warmington, Peter Wong, Resources for Community Development, Park Street Business Association, WABA, Alameda Association of Realtors, Chamber of Commerce, and Harbor Bay Homeownership Association. Mayor Johnson inquired whether anyone had concerns, to which the Fire Marshal responded in the negative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether any of the speakers have concerns with new construction. Mr. Kirwin stated costs would be higher for new occupants. Councilmember Matarrese inquired how the 25% threshold was selected. The Fire Marshall responded 25% to 50% is the range other cities use. Councilmember Matarrese stated he does not understand the rational for using the lowest range. The Fire Marshal stated he felt 25% was a reasonable percentage based upon building values and remodeling. Mayor Johnson inquired whether all cities use the same value calculation, to which the Fire Marshal responded in the negative. Mayor Johnson inquired what other methods are used, to which the Fire Marshal responded assessed valuation and current building value. Mayor Johnson inquired whether some cities use fair market value, to which the Fire Marshal responded that he would provide the information. Councilmember Matarrese stated the 25% threshold precludes people Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 10 September 19, 2006 from investing in earthquake retrofitting and multiple upgrades that may spread across a number of units; he would like to review the 25% threshold and take a deeper look at the data for replacing the whole building as the valuation to see where the range of other comparables sit and what people are doing within the range; using the assessed value is not fair. Mayor Johnson stated an owner could spend less than 25% and still fall within the requirement because of the assessed value or square footage of the entire structure. The Fire Marshal stated the value of the work being done is calculated using the same table to determine the building value. Vice Mayor Gilmore stated she is in favor of ordinances that save lives; however, the proposed ordinance would pass on a serious cost to property owners; most of the Fire Department's calls are medical and not fire related. Councilmember Matarrese stated two buildings in town were damaged by fire; inquired whether the damage would have occurred if sprinkler systems were installed; stated that he is looking for a cost benefit; questioned whether fire sprinklers provide an insurance break. The Fire Marshal responded damage would not have occurred. Councilmember deHaan stated fire carries up Victorian walls without a problem; older homes are prone to extensive fires; sprinklers would not have suppressed the referenced fires. The Fire Marshall stated fire sprinklers are designed to help occupants get out of the building; fires are extinguished with one sprinkler head activation 95% of the time; smoke alarms are important, but sprinklers allow time for the occupants to exit the building. Vice Mayor Gilmore inquired how many structure fires occur in Alameda. The Fire Marshall responded fifty -five structure fires, two fatalities, eight injuries and over $11 million in damage occurred in 2003; twenty -two of the fifty -five were in single and two family dwellings; twenty -three structure fires were in multi - family dwellings and ten were in commercial buildings; forty -two fires, one fatality, two injuries and $1.5 million in damage occurred in 2004; eighteen of the structure fires were in single or two family dwellings, nineteen were in multi - family dwellings, and five were Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 11 September 19, 2006 in commercial buildings; nationally 3,900 people die in structure fires; 75% of structure fires are in one and two family dwellings. Mayor Johnson inquired what would be the extra cost for new construction. The Fire Marshal responded the proposed ordinance has language that allows fire sprinkler systems to be combined with the domestic water service, which eliminates the dedicated fire main system; the East Bay Municipal Utility District allows the use of dual service meters which supplies the fire sprinkler system and the domestic water system for the house and reduces the cost. Councilmember Daysog stated a range of questions have been presented which could be addressed at a workshop with affected stakeholders; workshops help in the rule making process; inquired how information was obtained from the stakeholders. The Fire Marshal responded groups meetings were held. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Councilmember Daysog; stated the current code is unfair because the threshold is based on assessed value; another valuation is needed; the threshold needs to be tested; jurisdictions that use the replacement value should be reviewed to see were the range of threshold sits. Councilmember deHaan stated the concerning factors are with retrofitting of older homes; 25% of construction cost seems to be very low; concurred with Councilmember Matarrese regarding reviewing other jurisdictions. Councilmember Matarrese stated a four unit apartment bathroom remodel could trigger quite an expense; the issue seems to be rectifying the disparity between using assessed value as the valuation upon which the threshold percentage is based and reviewing what the appropriate threshold should be once the threshold is leveled. Councilmember deHaan stated termite and foundation damage could trigger the threshold. Mayor Johnson stated she is concerned with how the work is calculated. Councilmember Daysog requesting different scenarios showing how the proposed ordinance was better than what is currently in place; stated workshops provide an opportunity to have a range of issues discussed. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 12 Former Councilmember Barbara Kerr stated workshops are a good idea; workshops should include a wide range of individuals and should be noticed and open. Councilmember Matarrese moved approval of directing the Fire Marshal and other Department Heads, including the City Manager and Planning and Building Director, as needed, to take the matter back to a workshop open to the public and publicly noticed to resolve issues raised and bring other issues to the forefront, particularly to look at the equity and value, the threshold amount, and the way that the worth is calculated and projected across the project as well as looking at the on -going operating costs versus the benefit of the revised code. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember Daysog stated that stakeholder comments should be noted and compared to what staff thinks is needed. Councilmember deHaan stated the cost of follow up needs to be placed in the equations. The Fire Marshal stated one and two family dwellings do not have on -going maintenance costs; inspections are performed by the homeowners. Mayor Johnson stated examples should include costs for different types of structures. Councilmember deHaan requested clarification on whether garages are part of the square foot determination. Mayor Johnson inquired whether garages are exempted for single - family homes and duplexes. The Fire Marshal responded garages would be required to have a sprinkler if attached to the dwelling. Mayor Johnson inquired whether a detached garage would need to have a sprinkler, to which the Fire Marshal responded only if the garage is more than 300 square feet. On the call for the question, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote - 5. (06- ) Ordinance No. 2952, "Reclassifying and Rezoning Certain Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 13 September 19, 2006 Property Within the City of Alameda from Open Space (0) to Community Manufacturing Planned Development (CM -PD) by Amending Zoning Ordinance No. 1277, N.S. for that Property Located at 500 Maitland Drive." Finally passed. David Kirwin, Alameda, stated the Chuck Corica Golf Course chain link fence was moved back to make room for moving Maitland Drive; the RV Storage was a harsh way to think about a neighborhood. Councilmember deHaan stated he was not present when the decision o sell the property was made; five acres of the gun range were contaminated and the best use was an RV Storage area; the property was sold for $1 million; the green portion and roadway were sold for approximately $45,000; 1.2 acres was given away for $45,000 and should remain open space. Councilmember Daysog stated that he would vote against rezoning for reasons relating to consistencies regarding RV issues on Webster Street. Mayor Johnson stated the facility is a requirement that the City placed on the developer in the 1970's. The Planner III stated the developer was required to set aside 3 acres for future expansion of the RV Storage facility when triggered by market demand. Councilmember Matarrese stated he would support the proposed ordinance as long as appropriate screening is required to provide a green shield to soften the commercial property and as long as the requirement is binding; the City has benefited and should do something for the neighborhood. The Planner III stated the Planning Board included the landscape requirement; the final development plan and design review have a condition that specific landscaping requirements would screen the RV's; clarified that the gateway into Harbor Bay would not be disturbed. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether an additional review could be added to make sure that the specific landscape requirement happens. The City Attorney responded the additional review would not be included in a zoning ordinance typically; stated the requested condition is already a condition of the projct. The Planner III read the following portion of the condition... "The Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 14 September 19, 2006 developer shall submit a final landscaping plan. Perimeter landscaping shall be consistent with existing landscaping already established along the Harbor Bay Parkway and Maitland Drive frontages. Landscaping shall provide well - designed transition zone and buffer between the project and surrounding land uses. Perimeter landscaping along the eight -foot high vinyl clad chain link fence shall be of a density and appropriate height (typically two feet above fence) to screen the tops of recreational vehicles from public viewing areas. The landscaping plan is subject to final approval by the Planning and Building Director..." Mayor Johnson stated the condition is good. Councilmember Matarrese stated the final decision on the actual green screen is approved by the Planning and Building Director; requested a report back from the Planning and Building Director on the matter. Vice Mayor Gilmore seconded the motion. Under discussion, Councilmember deHaan stated Parcel 109 -4 and 109- 2 total 1.2 acres; inquired whether the property is clean. The Planner III responded in the affirmative; stated one portion is under Maitland Drive; the other part is the corporate yard for the Golf Course and was not part of the Gun Club; a Phase 1 and Phase 2 assessment was performed on the original 5 acre facility; a cleanup plan was implemented by the County Health Department; the site has been remediated. Councilmember deHaan stated the City only received $45,000 for the property; more of a set back would have been prudent. On the call for the question, the motioned carried by the following voice vote: Councilmembers Gilmore, Matarrese, Mayor Johnson - 3 Ayes. Noes: Councilmembers Daysog and deHaan - 2. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS, NON - AGENDA (Public Comment) (06- ) David Kirwin, Alameda, discussed Article 25 of the City Charter. Mayor Johnson requested the City Attorney to provide Mr. Kirwin with additional information on the specific program addressed in Article 25. (06- ) Pat Colburn, Alameda, provided handout; discussed banning gas blowers. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 15 September 19, 2006 Mayor Johnson inquired whether Ms. Colburn is suggesting banning electric blowers; to which Ms. Colburn responded all leaf blowers would be included. Mayor Johnson inquired whether other cities have adopted ordinances banning leaf blowers. Ms. Colburn responded between twenty and forty California cities have banned leaf blowers. Mayor Johnson inquired which Bay Area cities have banned leaf blowers, to which Ms. Colburn responded Palo Alto and Berkeley. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the City of Berkeley received complaints from gardeners. Ms. Colburn responded gardening may take a little longer and gardeners may charge the homeowner more, but the matter has not become a big issue. Mayor Johnson suggested that staff review what other cities have done. The City Manager responded that staff would provide an Off Agenda Report. Councilmember deHaan stated leaf blowers often blow debris into the roadway or a neighbor's yard; the City is impacted because of additional clean up. (06- ) Deborah James, Alameda, discussed traffic, speeding and parking at bus stops. Mayor Johnson stated the City Manager would pass concerns onto the Police Chief. Councilmember deHaan stated recent emails were received regarding speeding cars. The City Manager stated the Police Chief met with the people in the neighborhood. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (06- ) Consideration of Mayor's nominations for the Economic Development Commission, Social Service Human Relations Board and Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 16 September 19, 2006 Mayor Johnson nominated Robert A. Bonta for appointment to the Economic Development Commission; Cathy Nielsen and Henry B. Villareal for appointment to the Social Service Human Relations Board; and David J. Burton, Stanley M. Schiffman, Ron Silberstein, and Lizette Weiss for appointment to the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. (06- ) Councilmember deHaan stated that over half of the Tube lights are out; the situation is dangerous; requested Cal Trans be pushed to replace the lights with the new lighting system that was promised two to three years ago. (06- ) Councilmember Daysog suggested formalizing the use of workshops; stated workshops allow people an opportunity to provide non - confrontational input. (06- ) Vice Mayor Gilmore thanked staff and the contractor for the smooth road paving process. (06- ) Mayor Johnson stated some streets have three foot by three foot patches from some type of utility cut; inquired whether the responsible party could be required to do a slurry seal over the patches; there is a large patch on Buena Vista Avenue and Regent Street. The City Manager responded ordinances would be reviewed. Mayor Johnson stated that the suggested requirement should be added if not already included in the ordinance. (06- ) Councilmember deHaan requested information on the paving funding stream; stated he is impressed with the current street paving activity. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Regular Meeting at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council September 19, 2006 17 UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY- - SEPTEMBER 26, 2006- -6:00 P.M. Mayor Johnson convened the Special Meeting at 6:10 p.m. Roll Call - Present: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese and Mayor Johnson - 4. Absent: Councilmember Daysog - 1. The Special Meeting was adjourned to Closed Session to consider: (06- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: Alameda City Employees Association, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Management and Confidential Employees Association, Executive Management Group, and Police Association Non -Sworn At 6:50 p.m. following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that Council received a briefing from its Labor Negotiator; no action was taken. (06- ) Hearing regarding Impasse on labor negotiations with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) (requested by IBEW) Mayor Johnson made a brief announcement regarding the Hearing. Tom Dalzell, IBEW Local 1245, gave a brief presentation. Craig Jory, City's negotiator, gave a brief presentation and provided a handout. Mr. Dalzell responded to Mr. Jory's comments. Mr. Jory did not make any comments in response. Mayor Johnson opened the Hearing. The following speakers addressed the Council: Larry Rodriguez, IBEW Local 1245 and AP &T Employee; Al Fortier, IBEW Local 1245 and AP &T Employee; Lonnie Hasty, Local 1245 and AP &T Employee; Alex Gonzalez, IBEW 1245 and AP &T Employee; Eddie Courtney, IBEW 1245 and AP &T Employee; and Brian Darnell, IBEW 1245 and AP &T Employee. There being no further Speakers Mayor Johnson closed Hearing and Special Meeting Alameda City Council September 26, 2006 1 adjourned the Special Meeting to Closed Session at 7:45 p.m. to consider: (06- ) Conference with Labor Negotiators; Agency negotiators: Craig Jory and Human Resources Director; Employee organizations: IBEW Following the Closed Session, the Special Meeting was reconvened and Mayor Johnson announced that the Council directed its Labor Negotiator to resume negotiations with use of a State mediator. Adjournment There being no further business, Mayor Johnson adjourned the Special Meeting at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lara Weisiger City Clerk The agenda for this meeting was posted in accordance with the Brown Act. Special Meeting Alameda City Council September 26, 2006 2 September 28, 2006 Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers: This is to certify that the claims listed on the check register and shown below have been approved by the proper officials and, in my opinion, represent fair and just charges against the City in accordance with their respective amounts as indicated thereon. Check Numbers 1 52417 - 152868 EFT 254 EFT 255 EFT 256 EFT 257 EFT 258 Void Checks: Amount $2,731,270.52 $1,247,360.00 $35,194.90 $3,982,012.37 $33,625.09 $12,943.50 152006 ($653.50) 152502 ($39.40) 152514 ($24.00) 152527 ($570.12) 152564 ($700.00) 152570 ($24.00) 152590 ($288.15) 152592 ($24.00) 152596 ($120.00) 001 ($160.00) GRAND TOTAL Respectfully submitted, Council Warrants 10/03/06 $8,039,803.21 BILLS #4 -B 10/3/2006 CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum Date: October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council From: Debra Kurita Executive Director Re: Resolution Finding that BWIP Plan Amendment Does Not Require Formation of a Project Area Committee and Recommending CIC Follow Alternative Procedures for Community Review and Recommendation BACKGROUND The Business and Waterfront Improvement Project (BWIP) Community Improvement Plan (CIP) was adopted in 1991. The CIP has been amended previously a total of five times. On September 21, 2006, the Economic Development Commission endorsed a proposed sixth amendment to the BWIP CIP that would update the Plan's land use designations to conform to the City's General Plan as it currently exists and as it may be amended from time to time. The proposed resolution finding that the Community Improvement Commission (CIC) does not need to form a Project Area Committee (PAC) in conjunction with the CIP amendment is part of the amendment process. DISCUSSION There is no existing PAC for the BWIP. Section 33385.3 of the California Community Redevelopment Law requires that a PAC be formed in conjunction with a redevelopment plan amendment if the proposed amendment would grant additional eminent domain authority or add territory to the project area. The proposed sixth amendment does neither. The CIC plans to hold a community meeting on October 30, 2006, in order to discuss the proposed sixth amendment with members of the community prior to the joint public hearing on the adoption of the amendment. Notice of the community meeting and of the joint public hearing will be mailed to all of the occupants (both residential and commercial) and property owners within the project area. The non -major plan amendment process consists of: (Dates are tentative) • Resolution of CIC referring amendment to the Planning Board and authorizing transmittal to affected taxing entities — October 3, 2006; • Resolution finding and determining that a Project Area Committee need not be formed in connection with the proposed Sixth Amendment — October 3. 2006: Agenda Item #4-C CC 10 -3 -06 Honorable Chair and October 3, 2006 Members of the City Council Page 2 of 3 • Planning Board review of amendment — October 9, 2006 • CIC adoption of Report to Council and request for joint hearing — October 17, 2006; • City Council acceptance of Report to Council and call for joint hearing — October 17, 2006; • Planning Board review and submission of recommendation — October 23, 2006; • Community Information Meeting— October 30, 2006; • Public Hearing is noticed: o Four successive weeks of advertising — October 24 and 31, November 7 and 14 o Notices mailed to all property owners, residents and businesses by first class mail, and governing bodies of taxing entities by certified mail — October 19, 2006 • Public Hearing and introduction of Ordinance adopting proposed Amendment for first reading — November 21, 2006; • Second reading and approval of Ordinance adopting Amendment — December 5, 2006 • Ordinance effective date — January 4, 2007 BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FISCAL IMPACT There is no impact on the General Fund. Tax increment funds were approved in the FY 2006 -07 budget for the CIP amendment. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This resolution will facilitate an amendment that changes the BWIP CIP so that BWIP land use designations are always consistent with the General Plan, as it currently exists and as it may be amended in the future. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution finding that the proposed BWIP Plan Amendment does not require formation of a Project Area Committee and recommending that the CIC follow alternative procedures for community review and recommendation. �•ec� -� she A. Little Development Services Director d, Honorable Chair and October 3, 2006 Members of the City Council Page 3 of 3 By: Rachel Silver Development Manager, Housing LAL/RS:ry G: \econdev \BWIP\2006 plan amendment \CC -No PAC Reso.doc F: \Business and Waterfront Improvement Project (BWIP) \Community Improvement Plan Amendment - 2006 Land Use CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. FINDING AND DETERMINING THAT A PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE NEED NOT BE FORMED IN RELATION TO THE PROPOSED SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR THE BUSINESS AND WATERFRONT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, on June 18, 1991, by Ordinance No. 2559, the City Council of the City of Alameda ( "City Council ") approved and adopted the Community Improvement Plan ( "Plan ") for the. Business and Waterfront Improvement Project Area ( "BWIP" or "Project Area "); and WHEREAS, the Plan has been amended a total of five (5) times (as amended, the "Existing Plan "), the First Amendment established time limits in compliance with Assembly Bill 1290 (Stats. 1993, Chap. 942), the Second, Third and Fourth Amendments amended certain land uses, and the Fifth Amendment merged the BWIP with West End Community Improvement Plan (WECIP), extended eminent domain except over residential uses and added territory; and WHEREAS, the Community Improvement Commission of the City of Alameda ( "Commission ") is vested with the responsibility to carry out the Existing Plan; and WHEREAS, the Commission desires to amend the Existing Plan ( "Amendment" or "Sixth Amendment ") to: update the land use provisions to conform to the City's General Plan as it currently exists and as it may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, Section 33385.3 of the California Community Redevelopment Law requires that a Project Area Committee ( "PAC ") be formed in connection with a redevelopment plan amendment if the proposed amendment would do either of the following: (1) Grant the authority to the agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low and moderate income persons reside; or (2) Add territory in which a substantial number of low and moderate income persons reside and grant the authority to the agency to acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in the added territory. Resolution #4 -C CC 10 -3 -06 WHEREAS, the proposed Sixth Amendment would not grant the Commission additional eminent domain authority or add territory. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that, because the proposed Sixth Amendment does not alter, extend or expand the Commission's existing authority to use eminent domain and the Commission's existing authority does not include the authority to acquire residential properties, a Project Area Committee need not be formed in connection with the proposed Sixth Amendment. Section 2. The City Council hereby directs that the proposed Sixth Amendment be made available to residents, property owners, business owners, and existing civic and business organizations and that Development Services staff consult with and obtain the advice of such persons and organizations concerning policy matters affecting the residents of the Project Area. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA ORDINANCE NO. New Series AMENDING THE ALAMEDA MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 30- 4.9A.g.8 (OFF- STREET PARKING AND LOADING SPACE) OF THE C -C COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONE OF CHAPTER XXX (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS), TO ADD A PROCESS FOR PARKING EXCEPTIONS WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Text Amendment implements one of the General Themes of the General Plan by de- emphasizing the automobile; and WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Text Amendment will have a positive effect on the general welfare of the community as it will assist in the implementation of the Downtown Vision Plan, the Webster Street Specific Plan and the Retail Strategy Report; and WHEREAS, the project is equitable because it will apply to the entire C -C (Community Commercial) Zoning District, which encompasses both core commercial areas along Park and Webster Streets. BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Alameda that: Section 1. The Alameda Municipal Code is hereby amended by amending Subsection 30- 4.9A.g.8. Off - Street Parking And Loading Space of the C -C Community Commercial Zone as follows: 30- 4.9A.g.8 Off - Street Parking And Loading Space: As regulated by Section 30 -7 unless a parking exception is granted. (a) A parking exception may be approved for new construction or existing buildings converted to new uses reducing the number of parking spaces to less than the number specified in the parking schedule in Section 30 -7.6 provided the following findings are made by the Planning Board: (i) The parking demand will be less than the requirements in Section 30 -7.6, and (ii) The probable long -term occupancy of the building or structure based on its design, will not generate additional parking demand. Final Passage of Ordinance # 4 -D CC 10 -2 -06 (b) A parking exception granted by the Planning Board shall be limited to the specific structure and use. Any future alterations to the building or changes in the use shall require a new parking exception or shall be required to meet the parking supply requirements of the parking schedule in Section 30 -7.6. Section 2. Severability Clause. It is the declared intent of the City Council of Alameda that if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or provision of this ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not be so construed as to render invalid or unconstitutional the remaining provisions of this ordinance. Section 3. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of its final passage. Attest: Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Presiding Officer of the Council I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly adopted and passed by Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING ROBERT A. BONTA AS A MEMBER OF THE CITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (BANKING /FINANCE SEAT) BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to Section 2 -14.2 of the Alameda Municipal Code and Resolution No. 12149, and upon nomination of the Mayor, ROBERT A. BONTA is hereby appointed to the office of Banking /Finance Seat Member of the Economic Development Commission of the City of Alameda, for a term commencing October 3, 2006, and expiring on August 31, 2010 and to serve until his successor is appointed and qualified. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Resolutions #5 -A 10 -3 -06 Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING CATHY NIELSEN AS A MEMBER OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE HUMAN RELATIONS BOARD BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to the provisions of Article X of the Charter of the City of Alameda, and upon nomination by the Mayor, CATHY NIELSEN is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Social Service Human Relations Board of the City of Alameda, to fill the unexpired term of Amanda Flores -Witte, commencing October 3, 2006, and expiring on June 30, 2007, and to serve until her successor is appointed and qualified. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in adjourned regular meeting assembled on the 3rd day of October, 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this 3rd day of October, 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING HENRY B. VILLAREAL AS A MEMBER OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE HUMAN RELATIONS BOARD BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that pursuant to the provisions of Article X of the Charter of the City of Alameda, and upon nomination by the Mayor, HENRY B. VILLAREAL is hereby appointed to the office of member of the Social Service Human .Relations Board of the City of Alameda, to fill the unexpired term of Dennis Hanna, commencing October 3, 2006 and expiring on June 30, 2007, and to serve until his successor is appointed and qualified. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in adjourned regular meeting assembled on the 3rd day of October, 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 'and affixed the official seal of said City this 3rd day of October, 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum DATE: October 3, 2006 TO: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Debra Kurita City Manager RE: Final Consideration of Mayor's Appointments and Confirmation of Membership on the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force BACKGROUND On July 18, 2006 the City adopted a resolution to participate in the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Cities for Climate Protection Campaign. The scope of the program will include implementing ICLEI's "5 Milestone" methodology to assess emissions, set targets to reduce air pollution emissions and greenhouse gas emissions, adopt a Local Action Plan, and monitor progress in coming years. Part of that resolution included the creation of a task force to guide the development of the City's Local Action Plan. At the City Council meeting of September 19, 2006, the Mayor nominated four individuals to serve on the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. This memorandum provides final consideration of those four Mayoral appointments and confirms the representatives from the Boards and Commissions to the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. DISCUSSION Staff proposed the creation of a Task Force to provide input from various areas of expertise within the Boards and Commissions as well as interested citizens who can assist in guiding the creation of the Local Action Plan. • Committee Size: The Task Force will consist of nine members. This is a workable sized group large enough to represent diverse interests, yet small enough to explore issues efficiently and reach consensus. • Representation: To ensure adequate representation from a variety of interest groups and stakeholders, there will be one member each from the Planning Board, Economic Development Commission, Transportation Commission, Public Utilities Board, and Alameda County Industries, as well as four citizens at large on the task force. Agenda Item #5 -B 10 -3 -06 Honorable Mayor and Page 2 Councilmembers October 3, 2006 • Duties: The ad -hoc task force will: 1) publicize and engage the community at large, 2) evaluate and provide prioritized recommendations to Council on actions that can be taken on the output of the assessment, 3) provide recommendations for monitoring of activities, and 4) provide recommendations on how to proceed with implementation, including but not limited to, establishing a standing commission or committee. • Meetings: The task force will meet on an as- needed basis. The meetings will be open to the public and interested parties will be encouraged to participate. The task force will meet over approximately six to eight months to meet the objectives of its duties. Because this task force is being approved by the City Council as an advisory committee (as opposed to appointment by Staff or the City Manager), it will be subject to the Brown Act. This means that all meetings will have a published agenda and minutes will be prepared. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL IMPACT Staff will provide assistance and guidance to the task force. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action will not affect the Municipal Code. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, creation of a task force is not considered a project under CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Consider the Mayor's citizen appointments and the membership of all members on the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force. By: Attachment: Committee Members Respectfully submitted, Cathy Planni odbury g and Building irector C y nthla Eliason Supervising Planner Attachment 1 Committee Members Planning Board Representative: Economic Development Commission Representative: Transportation Commission Representative: Public Utilities Board Representative: Alameda County Industries Representative: Citizen Representative: Citizen Representative: Citizen Representative: Citizen Representative: Andrew Cunningham Art Autorino Michael Krueger Ann McCormick Louie Pellegrini Nominee David Burton Nominee Stanley Schiffman Nominee Ron Silberstein Nominee Lizette Weiss Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING DAVID J. BURTON AS A MEMBER OF THE CLIMATE PROTECTION CAMPAIGN TASK FORCE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that upon nomination of the Mayor, DAVID J. BURTON is hereby appointed as a member of the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force of the City of Alameda commencing October 3, 2006 and will continue to serve until either he resigns or Council determines that the project has been completed. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Resolutions #5 -B 10 -3 -06 Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING STANLEY M. SCHIFFMAN AS A MEMBER OF THE CLIMATE PROTECTION CAMPAIGN TASK FORCE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that upon nomination of the Mayor, STANLEY M. SCHIFFMAN is hereby appointed as a member of the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force of the City of Alameda commencing October 3, 2006 and will continue to serve until either he resigns or Council determines that the project has been completed. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING RON SILBERSTEIN AS A MEMBER OF THE CLIMATE PROTECTION CAMPAIGN TASK FORCE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that upon nomination of the Mayor, RON SILBERSTEIN is hereby appointed as a member of the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force of the City of Alameda for a term commencing October A 3, 2006 and will continue to serve until either he resigns or Council determines that the project has been completed. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly . adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. APPOINTING LIZETTE WEISS AS A MEMBER OF THE CLIMATE PROTECTION CAMPAIGN TASK FORCE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Alameda that upon nomination of the Mayor, LIZETTE WEISS is hereby appointed as a member of the Climate Protection Campaign Task Force of the City of Alameda for a term commencing October 3, 2006 and will continue to serve until either she resigns or Council determines that the project has been completed. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda CITY OF ALAMEDA Memorandum October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Recommendation to Allocate Funding for the Purchase of the Alameda Beltline Property and the Park Design and Development Process BACKGROUND The Beltline Yard Property is a 22 -acre parcel, generally bordered by Atlantic Avenue, Constitution Way, Sherman Street and Eagle Avenue, formerly used as a railroad switchyard. The site is an extension of the original Beltline Railroad created by the City and two private railroad companies in 1924 and was the subject of a recent court action. In August 2006, the Alameda County Superior Court Judge upheld the City's right to repurchase all of the Beltline property from the Railroad for the sum of $966,027. DISCUSSION The potential funding sources for the purchase of the property includes a combination of the Open Space and Dwelling Unit Tax Funds. The Open Space Fund currently has a balance of $917,558, which would then be supplemented with $48,469 from the Dwelling Unit Tax to achieve the total purchase price of $966,027. Once funding for the purchase of the property has been identified, it will be necessary to develop a process for planning the park on the Beltline Yard Property. Given the complexity of the project and the transportation and land use issues, a project team would be formed consisting of representatives from the Planning and Building and Public Works Departments, with leadership provided by the Recreation and Park Department. The first phase of the park planning process would involve the development of a master plan that will serve as the guiding vision that directs the development of potential recreational facilities for this location, while considering the need for a potential transportation corridor. Qualified consultants would be invited to submit proposals to assist staff in conducting the substantial public input process, building community consensus and providing master planning services. The estimated cost to complete the Master Plan is approximately $98,000. Funding for this portion of the park planning process is currently available in the Dwelling Unit Tax Fund. Agenda Item #5 -C 10 -3 -06 Honorable Mayor and October 3, 2006 Councilmembers Page 2 Approval of the Master Plan would require environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. The extent and cost of that review is based on the actions and development proposed in the Master Plan and is therefore unknown at this time. The final phase of the park planning process would include design development of specific facilities identified in the Master Plan, and preparation of construction plans, specifications and cost estimates. The timeline and consultant cost for this phase would be determined at the completion of the Master Plan. An estimated timeline for the first phase of the park planning process is outlined below: • Request for Qualifications /Proposals & Consultant Selection • Community Participation & Master Plan Process ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE December — March 2007 April — October 2007 Acquisition of the Beltline property for park purposes will not have a significant effect on the environment and is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Sections 15316 and 15325 of the CEQA Guidelines as follows: • Section 15316 exempts acquisition of land in order to establish a park where the land is in a natural condition or contains historical or archaeological resources and the management plan for the park has not been prepared. • Section 15325 exempts transfers of ownership or interests in land in order to preserve open space lands for park purposes. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Funding is established in the Open Space Fund ($917,558) and the Dwelling Unit Tax Fund ($146,469) for the acquisition of the property as determined by the Court and the cost of the needs assessment and community outreach studies. It is recommended that these amounts be appropriated and transferred to the Alameda Beltline project in the Capital Improvement Fund. MUNICIPAL CODE /POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE This action does not affect the Municipal Code. Honorable Mayor and October 3, 2006 Councilmembers Page 2 RECOMMENDATION Establish the Alameda Beltline Project in the Capital Improvement Fund and appropriate $917,558 in the Open Space Fund and $146,469 in the Dwelling Unit Tax Fund, transferring these amounts to the Alameda Beltline project in the Capital Improvement Fund. By: DK:DL:bf Respectfully submitted, Debra Kurita City Manager ,,,,e0 /I/LAO Dale Lillard, Director Alameda Recreation & Parks City of Alameda Memorandum Date: October 3, 2006 To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers From: Debra Kurita City Manager Re: Resolution to Amend the Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to Revise and Streamline the Planning & Building Department, Public Works Department and Fire Department Fee Schedules BACKGROUND The City of Alameda has engaged MAXIMUS, Inc. to conduct a detailed cost of services study of user fee activities in the Planning and Building, Public Works and Fire Departments. User fee activities are those services and functions the City provides to individuals who receive a direct or personal material benefit from the services, for which the City generally charges specific fees. This study identified the full cost of services for which user fees are currently being charged or could be charged. This "full cost" calculation, which was based on cost of services at 2004 rates, includes all legitimate direct and indirect costs associated with providing each service, including direct support costs from other divisions plus departmental and Citywide overhead. The last comprehensive fee study was conducted in 1999. The primary goals and objectives of the study include: • Structure the fees to accurately reflect the processes and organization of the divisions. • Simplify the fee schedules to make them easier to implement and understand. • Ensure a connection between fees and the cost of services provided. • Ensure the fees are logical and defensible. • Provide a revenue projection based on the full recovery of City costs. Agenda Item #5 -D 10 -3 -06 Honorable Mayor and October 3, 2006 Councilmembers Page 2 DISCUSSION Planning and Engineering Divisions Fee Methodology Maximus used a standard methodology they have employed in hundreds of similar studies to determine the appropriate Planning and Engineering Division fees. Initially, Maximus worked with City personnel to develop time estimates for each fee -based service. Based on these estimates the direct cost attributed to each fee was calculated. With this information the cost of services and supplies, as well as related expenses were allocated. Additionally, the appropriate amount of Citywide and departmental overhead was distributed. Included in these overhead costs for Planning was one half the cost of establishing a One —Stop Permit Center with the other half included in the calculation of the Building Division overhead costs. The end result of this analysis is a list of full actual costs for individual services. Building and Fire Prevention Divisions Fee Methodology For the Building and Fire Prevention Divisions, Maximus used a specific costing methodology called NEXUS. The objective is to transition operations away from the historically accepted method of establishing fees based on valuation of the project. Using valuation based models to determine user fees is no longer the recommended industry standard as it is difficult to create the connection or nexus between the actual cost of a service and the price charged for that same service. BUDGET CONSIDERATION /FISCAL IMPACT Planning The analysis of Planning activities indicates an excellent opportunity to provide a fee structure that sets appropriate costs for routine project entitlements by establishing a flat fee. The Customer Service Improvement Team and staff discussed the methodology used by Maximus to establish flat fees and the Committee recommended that the City continue to charge time and materials in cases where there is a significant fluctuation in staff time spent. This approach ensures that all customers pay their fair share and small projects are not overburdened with excessive fees. Staff recommends establishing a flat fee only for the more routine project entitlements that show very little variation in cost such as, use permits, variances and design review, which would provide the customer with a predictable and reliable cost estimate for Planning services. The Customer Service Improvement Team suggested that staff monitor the time spent on these routine projects over the next year and determine whether the proposed fee is adequate to recover the average cost of service. The actual cost of planning services for the more complex Planning activities such as, General Plan amendments, changes in zoning and planned developments, is quite variable and depends on the nature of the project. Therefore, staff recommends maintaining a base rate plus time and materials charges for the more complex projects, which would provide for cost recovery while ensuring that each applicant pays the appropriate amount for Planning services. In addition, reductions in several fees are proposed: Honorable Mayor and October 3, 2006 Councilmembers Page 3 • Home Occupation Permits — reduce from $150 to $100. • Over - the - counter Design Review for items such as exterior stairs, change of sign copy or face, and replacement in -kind for windows or siding — reduce from $150 to $30. Building The fee tables and cost analysis of the Building Division's fee - related services were established using time estimates for each phase of project intake, processing, plan check and inspection and for each build's type of construction, occupancy and size. The result for new construction permits is a unit cost per square foot, and in the case of miscellaneous permits and sub -trade items, a unit cost per unit. Below is a chart outlining some of the common Building activities and how the recommended fee structure would impact the applicant. Permit Type Annual Quantity Average Current Fee Proposed Fee Kitchen and Bathroom Remodel • 776 $ 979.00 $ 826.00 Re -roof 175 $ 253.00 $ 229.00 Residential Room Addition 73 $ 1,894.00 $ 1,261.00 Office Tenant Improvement (5,000 sq ft) 10 $ 1,500.00 $ 2,751.00 Replace Existing Furnace 92 $ 94.00 $ 96.00 Seismic Retrofit (Over the Counter) 52 $ 650.00 $ 150.00* Seismic Retrofit 25 $ 1,100.00 $ 300.00* • The Seismic Retrofit fees have been set below 100% cost recovery rate as an incentive to property owners to upgrade their buildings. Public Works /Engineering The analysis of Public Works /Engineering services indicates that there are several fee categories where the established fee is at a rate below the full cost to perform the service. The analysis also indicated several fee categories currently being charged as time and materials, which could be converted to a flat rate fee. Where fees are proposed to change from time and materials to a flat rate, the proposed fee was established using time estimates for each phase of the project including processing, plan check and /or inspection. Incorporating flat fees benefits the applicant by establishing the total cost of the project at the time of permit submittal. Fees associated with property development are recommended to be established at 100% cost recovery. Not all of the Public Works fees are proposed at 100% cost recovery. In evaluating the fee schedule it was determined that in some cases it is appropriate to set the fees at less than full cost when the activity is considered of general public benefit. Fees that would fall into Honorable Mayor and October 3, 2006 Councilmembers Page 4 this category are concrete permits for homeowner sidewalk repair or special event permits, such as for parades. The Public Works fees associated with concrete permits are for inspection of the work. Viewing sidewalk repairs as a public benefit, Public Works has proposed that sidewalk concrete work up to 20 linear feet would be at no cost. This length is roughly equal to one half of a parcel frontage. For repairs of 21 to 50 linear feet a permit fee of $25 is recommended and for 51 to 200 linear feet a permit fee of $75 is recommended. For concrete permits greater than 200 linear feet, which is usually associated with a subdivision or commercial project, the recommended fee reverts to 100% cost recovery, or $300. Excavation permits, for multiple locations, which are generally obtained by utility companies and developers, are currently priced below full cost recovery and receive a General Fund subsidy of $463 per permit. Staff proposes that permits associated with public utilities for gas, water and electric services, be increased to 100% recovery, but that increase be phased over three years. In addition, Public Works /Engineering staff also recommend that all public benefit activities be adjusted as indicated on the attached proposed Master Fee shetts and that all private benefit activities be increased to the 100% cost recovery rate. Fire Prevention The analysis of Fire Prevention services indicates fees currently charged are not adequate to capture the actual costs of the services provided. The recommended fees were established using time estimates for each fee. Revisions to Fire Inspection and False Alarm fees are being reviewed and will be brought forward at a future date. Fire Prevention fee changes being proposed are for development related services. Permit Center The Permit Center processes and issues permits for Planning and Building, Public Works and Fire Prevention. To cover the cost of processing these permits a filing fee of $38 is charged. The proposed fee schedule identifies several no -cost, public benefit permits for which a filing fee will not be charged. Additionally, all appeals processed through the Permit Center will be a flat $100 charge. Comprehensive public handouts outlining permit costs across all divisions will be produced and made available to the public. Cumulative Impact The Maximus User Fee Study documents the full cost of providing each of the fee - related services provided by Planning and Building, Public Works and Fire Prevention. By annualizing and combining the results for each fee, Maximus identified the City's potential revenue for fees set at full cost covering. Based on the results of the User Fee Study, staff is recommending that fees be divided into two fee methodologies. Staff recommends establishing flat fees for the more routine project entitlements and permits thereby, providing the day -to -day customer with a predictable and reliable cost estimate for services. Staff also recommends maintaining a base rate plus time and materials charges for the more complex entitlements and permits Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers October 3, 2006 Page 5 thereby, providing for cost recovery while ensuring that all customers pay their fair share and small projects are not overburdened with excessive fees. Staff further recommends that not all fees be adopted on a full cost - covering basis. Those entitlements and permits that are primarily a public benefit were reduced below full cost recovery level. The following table details revenue projections for current, full cost recovery and recommended fee schedules. Division Current: Projected Annual Revenue at Current Fees Full Cost: Estimated Annual Revenue at Full Cost Recovery Recommended: Estimated Annual Revenue at Recommended Fees Planning $ 289,000 $ 601,000 $ 434,000 Public Works $ 318,000 $ 655,000 $ 568,000 Building $ 2,297,000 $ 2,084,000 $ 2,084,000 Fire Prevention $ 66,000 $ 76,000 $ 76,000 Totals: $ 2,970,000 $ 3,416,000 $ 3,162,000 MUNICIPAL CODE CROSS REFERENCE Alameda Municipal Code Section 30 -26 is affected by this staff report. The Master Fee Resolution No. 12191, referenced in Section 30 -26 would be amended. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project is statutorily exempt per CEQA Section 15273 — Rates, Tolls, Fares, and Charges. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the Resolutions to Amend the Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 to revise and streamline the Planning & Building Department, Public Works Department and Fire Department Fee Schedules. Res•ectfully Submitted, pot/ Cathy :•dbury Planni • and Building 'rector Matt Naclerio Public Works Director Honorable Mayor and October 3, 2006 Councilmembers Page 6 Jim Christiansen Fire Chief By: . Greg % 4cFann Building •f' ial Attachments: 1. Fee Comparisons Current and Recommended 2. Current Master Fee Sheets 3. Proposed Master Fee Sheets On file in City Clerk's Office: City of Alameda User Fee Study Final Report City of ALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Fee or Service Name / Description Current Fee Proposed Fee PLAN CHECKING / PERMITS Prebuild Conferences $ 125 $144/hr Flre Alarm $ 125 $ 147 Fire Sprinkler - New < 20 heads $ 188 $ 216 Fire Sprinkler - New 20-200 heads $ 250 $ 288 Fire Sprinkler - New 20 -200 heads (each head) $ 1 $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - New >200 heads $ 375 $ 432 Fire Sprinkler- New >200 heads (each head) $ 1 $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - TI < 20 heads $ 125 $ 144 Fire Sprinkler - TI 20-200 heads $ 188 $ 216 Fire Sprinkler - TI 20-200 heads (each head) $ - $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - TI >200 heads $ 250 $ 288 Fire Underground $ 250 $ 288 Fire Hydrants $ 25 $ 128 Each Additional Fire Hydrant $ 25 $ 25 Standpipes $ 250 $ 288 Standpipes Each Additional Outlet $ 10 $ 12 Suppression System - Hood $ 188 $ 216 Suppression System - Agents $ 250 $ 288 TANKS Install AGST <= 2K gals $ 125 $ 144 TANKS Install AGST > 2K gals $ 250 $ 288 TANKS Install UGST $ 375 $ 432 TANKS Install Piping only $ 125 $ 144 TANKS Remove Residential $ 188 $ 216 TANKS Remove Commercial $ 375 $ 432 TENT PERMITS 201 to 400 square feet (in total) $ 250 $ 48 401 to 1500 square feet (in total) $ 375 $ 72 1501 to 15,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 144 15,001 to 30,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 288 Over 30,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 432 SPECIAL PERMITS Burn & Weld (routine welding operation) $ 125 $ 144 Film Permit $ 63 $ 279 Fireworks - Display $ 125 $ 415 Fireworks - Theatrical $ 125 $ 415 Fireworks - Special Effects $ 125 $ 415 Fumigation and storage $ 125 $ 144 Camivals, Fairs & Special Events $ - $ 415 STANDBY FIRE PERSONNEL AND /OR EQUIPMENT (AT HOURLY RATE) Equipment without staff $ 72 $80/hr Standard Fire Engine without staff $ 150 $165/hr Staff Vehicle without staff $ 35 $39/hr Quint/Ladder Truck without staff $ 200 $221/hr Technical Rescue without staff $ - $110/hr Fire Boat without staff $ • - $110/hr Ambulance $ - $83/hr Support Materials (variable) At cost per type and amount required At cost per type and amount required Personnel Per current contract salary including benefits Per current contract salary including benefits MISC FEES Copies of Fire Reports $ 1 $ 1 Attachment 1 Agenda Item #5 -D 10 -3 -06 City 'ofALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Fee or Service Name / Description Current Fee Proposed Fee General Plan Amendments (Diagram or Text) $ 600 plus T &M $ 1,000 plus T &M Amendments to the Alameda Municipal Code $ 600 plus T &M $ 1,000 plus T &M Zone Change $ 600 plus T &M $ 1,000 plus T &M Master Plan or Amendment for Mixed Use Planned Development $ 600 plus T &M $ 1,000 plus T &M Planned Development or Amendment to Planned Development $ 300 plus T &M $ 500 plus T &M Development Agreement $ 600 plus T &M $ 1,000 plus T &M Periodic Review of Development Agreement $ 300 plus T &M $ .300 plus T &M Variance $ 300 plus T &M $ 1,000 flat fee Exception (administrative) $ 100 plus T &M $ 200 flat fee Use Permit $ 300 plus T &M $ 1,500 flat fee Design Review - Major (New Commercial, residential additions over 800) $ 300 plus T &M $ 1,700 flat fee Design Review - Minor-Routed (e.g. garages, additions under 80 sf, and all other signs) $ 150 plus T &M $ 200 fiat fee Design Review - Minor Over - the - Counter (e.g. windows, replacement in -kind, change of sign face or copy) $ 150 flat fee $ 30 flat fee Extension of Time (Use Permit, Variance, Design Review, MX Development Plan Parcel /.Tentative Map Extension) $ 100 plus T &M $ 200 plus T &M Parcel / Tentative Map Amendment $ 300 plus T &M $ 600 flat fee Parcel Map (up to 4 lots) - $ 600 plus T &M $ 2,040 flat fee Subdivision Map 5-25 Iots $ 600 plus T &M _ $ 5,500 flat fee Subdivision Map >25 lots (Incl. Condo conversions) $ 600 plus T &M $ 1,000 plus T &M Lot Line Adjustment $ 150 plus T &M $ 400 flat fee Environmental Review- Categorical Exemptions (does not Include County Clerk fee) $ 148 plus T &M Included in cost of entitlement Environmental Review- .initial Study, Negative Declaration, EIR (does not Include County Clerk & Fish & Game fees) $ 600 plus T &M $ 600 plus T &M and consultant cost +10% Mitigation Monitoring $ - deposit $ - T &M Appeal to Planning Board $ 100 flat fee $ 100 flat fee Appeal to the City Council $ 100 flat fee $ 100 flat fee Home Occupation $ 150 flat fee $ 100 flat fee Request for payment of parking in lieu fee $ 300 plus T &M $ 300 plus T &M Zoning Compliance Detenrilnation $ 100 plus T &M _ $ 100 flat fee Deed Restriction $ 50 flat fee $ 200 flat fee Performance Agreement $ 100 plus T &M $ 450 flat fee Certificate of Compliance $ 150 plus T &M $ 150 plus T &M Demolition Certificate of Approval by HAB (Principal and accessory structures; removal of protected trees) $ 150 plus T &M $ 200 plus T &M Demolition Certiicate of Approval by Staff (accessory structures;) $ 150 plus T &M $ 400 flat fee Designation'of Historical Sign or Monument . $ 150 plus T &M $ 200 plus T &M Changes in Historical Building Study List Classification $ 150 plus T &M $ 200 plus T &M Alteration to Historical Monuments $ 150 plus T &M $ 200 plus T &M Traffic Study/Review 1 &M & Consultant 1 &M City of ALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Fee or Service Name / Description Current Fee Proposed Fee Deposit Property Development (11 Engineering review Is necessary) Apportionment Processing/ Review T & M T & M Assessment District Formation Fee T & M T & M Planned Development Agreement T & M T & M Planned Development Agreement Amendment T & M T & M Development Plan T & M T & M Parking In -lieu Fee Determination T & M T & M Review of Master Plans/Development Plans: T & M T & M Master Plan/Amendment T & M T & M Development Plan/Amendment T & M T & M Development Agreement/Amendment T & M T & M General Plan Amendment T & M T & M Environmental Review (including Traffic Studies) T & M T & M RIgt t of Way Permits costs inctude permit review & 2 inspections Concrete - Sidewalk Repalr/InstalVRepl., 0 to 20 L.F.. 54 - Concrete - Sidewalk Repair /InstalVRepl., 21 -50 L.F.. - 54 25 Concrete-Sidewalk Repair/Install/Repl., 51-200 L.F.. 54 50 Concrete-Sidewalk Repair/Replacement >200LF. 54 300 Curb Cut/Driveway - New (each) 54 200 Encroachment Permit - Construction T & M 520 Encroachment Permit - Permanent T & M 390 Encroachment Permit - Temporary (Inc. debris box) 15 65 Excavation Permit - Single location 54 54 Excavation Permit - Each Signalized Street Intersection 54 195 Excavation Permit Insp. & Processing - Per Block 54 290 AddtlIonal Inspections T & M • These rates reflect let year of a 3year phase In to achieve 100% cost recovery Map Review / Engineering Applications includes two review cycles Lot Line Adjustment T & M 1,500 Parcel Map (1-4 lots) . T & M 9,585 Tentative Map ReviewSubdivlslon (5-25 lots) T & M 12,966 Final Map ReviewSubdivlslon 6 to 25 lots T & M 7,323 Tentative Map Review-Subdivision >25 Iots T & M T & M * Final Map Review - Subdivision >25 lots T & M T & M Easement Application T & M T & M Additional Reviews T & M Plan Review of On/Off Site Public Improvements Includes two review cycles Commercial < 1Ac T & M 2,335 Commercial 1 to 5 Ac T & M 8,170 Commercial 6 to 20 Ac T & M 8,490 Commercial >20 Ac T & M T & M Residential 1 to 4lots T & M 4,630 15,000 Residential 6 to 251ota T & M 8,605 10,000 Resldentlal >25lots T & M T & M 1,000 Additional Reviews T & M 5,000 Inspection On/Off Site Public Improvements Includes Grading and SWPPP Inspections Commercial < 1Ac T & M 1,337 Commercial 1 to 6 Ac T & M 2,450 City of ALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Fee or Service Name / Description Current Fee Proposed Fee Deposit Property Development Commercial 6 to 20 Ac T & M 4,810 Commercial >20 Ac T & M T & M Residential 1 to 4 lots T & M 1,705 Residential 5 to 25 lots T & M 2,540 10,000 Residential >25 lots T & M T & M 5,000 Permit Review - Plan Review - Residential RemodeVAddltlon T & M 260 Plan Review - Residential RemodeVAddition - mulit family T & M 395 Plan Review - Commercial - multi building T & M 395 Plan Review - Commercial - one building T & M 260 _ Storm Water Pollution Control Design Review & Inspection SWPPP -< 1 ac. 1,910 These fees are now SWPPP 1 -5 ac. 2,540 luded In the Inspection SWPPP >20 ec. 3,810 and plan review SWPPP 5 -20ac 3,175 rates Special Events/Filming Permits: (If PW involvement is required) Fees Waived for non profitor public benefit events Banner Permit - per banner /per location install remove of banner 200 200 Block Party Permit 20 20 Boat Show Permit T & M T & M Rim Permit (General) T & M T & M Street closure T & M T & M Bridge closure T & M T & M Rental of City Property T & M T & M Race, Walk -a -thon, parade permit 100 100 Relocation Permit (housing moving) T & M T & M Street Fair Permit T & M T & M Tent Permit . Under 4,500 sq. ft. T & M T & M 4,500 sq. R or Greeter T & M T & M Street Tree Installation 15 gal. Tree, root box, fertilizer, stakes and labor 201 238 w /concrete removal 240 330 Street Tree Removal at property owner request - varies by slze T & M • these prices are 50% of the full cost of service. General Services Appeals to CounclVCommisslons 100 (Consistent with Planning & Building Department Fees) T &M - Time and Materials (Engineering time charges per most current Cost Allocation Plan.) per estimate CITY OF ALAMEDA MASTER FEES 2006 - 2007 DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT A Page CITY CLERK 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 3 -7 POLICE DEPARTMENT Police Services Animal Control 8 -9 10 -11 FINANCE DEPARTMENT 12 RECREATION & PARKS DEPARTMENT 13 -15 GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND 16 -17 PUBLIC WORKS 18-- 21 PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT Planning Permit Center Affordable Housing 22 -24 25 - 29 29 - 30 Administratively revised for 3.2% CPI effective 7/1/06 Adjustments greater than the CPI and new fees are scheduled for approval by the City Council. Proposed fee changes that are subject to Council approval are noted herein. Attachment 2 Agenda Item #5 -D 10 -3 -06 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7 /06 1 $221 CITY CLERK Subscription: 2006-07 FEES City Council Agenda $22 City Council Minutes City Charter $5 Alameda Municipal Code $215 Annual Supplement - Municipal Code $72 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT Group A Occupancies Group B Occupancies Group E Occupancies Group F Occupancies Group H Occupancies Group I Occupancies Group M Occupancies Hourly (1 hour minimum) Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) Hourly (1 hour minimum) Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) Hourly (1 hour minimum) Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) R -1 3 -10 Units R -1 11 -20 units R -1 21 -30 units R -1 31 -60 units R -1 61 - 90 units R -1> 90 units Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) 1 hour minimum 1.5 hours minimum 2 hours minimum 3 hours minimum 4 hours minimum State License Required Inspections Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) Group S Occupancies Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) Marinas Hourly (1/2 hour minimum) Each additional callback Inspection after one re- inspection Rebuild Conferences Plan Check Hourly (1 hour minimum) Hourly (1 hour minimum) 5% of building permit fee or 1 hour, whichever is greater Fire Alarm Fire Sprinkler - New < 20 heads Fire Sprinkler - New 20 -200 heads Fire Sprinkler - New >200 heads Fire Sprinkler - TI <20 heads Fire Sprinkler - TI 20 -200 heads Fire Sprinkler - TI >200 heads Fire Underground Hydrants Standpipes Hourly +$2 per device 1.5 hours 2 hours + $1 per head 3 Hours 41 per head 1 hour 1.5 hours + $1 per head 2 hours + $1 per head 2 hours Underground + $26 each 2 hours + $10 each outlet Suppression System - Hood Suppression System - Agents 1.5 hours 2 hours Reinspections Hourly Investigative Fee (See Permit Center Fee Schedule) Burn.& Weld Explosive - to possess, store, sell, dispose, transport or use Hourly (1 hr minimum) Hourly Fireworks - Display Fireworks - Theatrical Fireworks - Special Effects Hourly (1 hr minimum) Hourly (1 hr minimum) Hourly(1 hr minimum) Fumigation Hourly (1 hr minimum) Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 3 FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTINUED Tanks Install AGST < =2K gals Tanks Install AGST >2K gals Tanks Install UGST Tanks Install Piping only Tanks Remove Residential Tanks Remove Commercial Tents <300 Occ Load Tents > =300 Occ Load Tents Additional <300 Occ Load Hourly (1 hr minimum) Hourly (2 hrs minimum) Hourly (3 hr minimum) Hourly (1 hr minimum) Hourly (1.5 hr minimum) Hourly (3 hr minimum) Hourly (2 hr minimum) Hourly (3 hr minimum) .5 hour each additional Film Permit .5 hour minimum FPB Personnel Services & Cost Recovery Per current contract salary, including benefits /overhead Copies of Fire Reports .94 per page Fire report research by incident/type or address or addresses, etc. Hourly (1.5 hr minimum) Equipment without staff $80 per hour Standard Fire Engine without staff $165 per hour Staff Vehicle without staff $39 per hour Technical Rescue without staff $165 per hour Quint/Ladder Truck without staff $221 per hour Ambulance $83 per hour Fire Boat/Rescue Boat without staff $110 per hour Support Materials (variable) At cost per type and amount required Personnel Per current contract salary including benefits 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 4 FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTINUED Ambulance Charges:* 12 Lead EKG Activated Charcoal (25 grams) Adenosine (Adenocard) (6 mg) Airway /Nasal Airway /Oral Albuterol (3 ml vial) ALS Emergency with ALS Service Amiodarone (300 mg) Armboard -Long Armboard -Short Asherman Chest Seal Aspirin, Children's Chewable (ASA -162 mg.) Atropine sulfate (1 mg) Atrovent BAG Valve Mask Bandages triangular Bedpan Benadryl Diphenydramine HCI (50 mg) Blood draw tube /needle Blood Set BLS Emergency Response charge Bum Sheet Calcium Chloride Preload (1 gm) Cannula (Nasal) Cervical Collar Combi -Tube (adult & adult small) Cold /Hot pack CPAP Mask & Tube (includes generator) Defibrillation BLS /ALS (Supplies) Dextrose 25% PEDI (12.5 gm) Dextrose 50% (D50) (25 mg) Disposable Blanket Dopamine Hydroxide (400 mg /5 % d5w) Dressing Major Dry Run ALS (plus supplies) Dry Run BLS (plus supplies) EKG Electrodes ALS EKG Monitor Elastic Bandage End Tidal CO2 Detector Epinephrine 1:1,000 (1 mg /30cc) Epinephrine 1:10,000 (1 mg) Extra Attendant Glucagon Hydrochloride (1 mg) Clucometer Test Supplies Glucose (31 gm) Head Bed $28.75 $35.00 $78.82 $6.98 $6.98 $35.00 $930.40 $60.00 $4.00 $4.00 $15.25 $5.00 $15.23 $16.00 $52.00 $7.00 $7.00 $13.00 $23.70 $18.80 $599.00 $23.00 $16.08 $13.00 $47.00 $82.00 $13.00 $95.00 $92.00 $21.14 $21.14 $29.00 $30.00 $7.00 $465.00 $299.00 $28.75 $78.82 $6.13 $32.85 $19.00 $20.00 $49.91 $124.89 $5.00 $12.91 $18.00 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 5 FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTINUED I.V. Catheter $19.00 I.V. Start Kit $19.00 Infection Control $15.33 Injection supplies $14.00 Intraosseous Needle $44.00 Intubation Supplies ALS $51.17 1pratroprium Bromide (Atrovent) (500 mcg /2.5 cc) $13.29 Lasix, Furosemide (40 mg) $20.00 Lidocaine 200 2% $20.00 Limb Restraints $39.00 Mask Pocket $17.61 Meconium Aspirator (Baby) $10.22 Midazolam HCI (versed) (2 mg) $20.00 Mileage (charge per mile) $20.00 Morphine Sulfate (AstramorphPF) (10 mg) $14.60 Multi -drip IV Tubing $18.80 Naloxone Hcl, (Narcan) (4 mg /10cc) $23.00 Nebulizer (Hand held) $22.50 Nebulizer (Mask) $22.50 Nitroglycerin Spray (Nitrolingual) $21.63 Non - rebreather Mask $13.00 Normal Saline IV Solution 1L $27.00 Normal Saline Solution I.V. Sol. 1L $12.00 OB Pack $59.41 Oxygen $68.00 Pleural Decompression Kit $32.85 PTV Kit $69.00 Pulse Oximeter (Probe) ALS $35.00 Sodium Bicarbonate $20.00 Spinal Immobilization $50.00 Splint Arm (disposable) $12.00 Splint Leg (disposable) $12.00 Sterile Water $12.00 Suction Tube /tip sup $20.00 Synchronized Cardioversion (Supplies) $92.00 Syringe Sterile, 20cc/Greater $5.00 Transcutaneous Pacing (Supplies) $92.00 Universal Precautions $13.49 Urinal $2.88 Valium, Diazepan (10 mg) $15.87 Wait Time $53.00 D5W IV Solution 1,000 cc $17.61 *NOTE: Ambulance rates are established by contract with Alameda County EMS and are adjusted each calendar year by the cost of living index formula. Rates are set to recover Insurance and medical premiums and are similar to ambulance rates throughout Alameda County. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8 8/16/2006 POLICE DEPARTMENT Taxi Cab Annual Franchise fees $968 per cab False alarm fees 3 -5 6+ Special officer permit - new $64 per incident $129 per incident $64 Special officer permit - renewal $52 Carry concealed weapon permit - new $96 Carry concealed weapon permit - renewal $47 Photographs 3 x 5 Massage tech permit Massage parlor permit Fingerprint 1st card each additional card $5 each $65 $65 $22 $5 Fingerprint - noncertified school employees $22 Livescan Resident $22 Non - Resident $54 Clearance letter $12 Lost permit $12 Police Report 1st five pages each additional page Verification letter 30 cents per page 10 cents each $12 Solicitor permit $65 Scofflaw"*" $64 Firearm dealer license $288 Reinspection compliance fee $53 per hour Appeal fee $129 Administrative tow fee $109 Renewal fee $129 Crime Status Report $16 ***Required that the scofflaw charge be paid in addition to payment in full of all fines outstanding Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 7 ANIMAL CONTROL Adoption Fees: Cat and dogs $27 Other (small animals such as bunnies /hamsters /rats) $5.00 - $10.00 Redemption fees with licenses: Cats - 1st incident $16 Dogs - 1st Incident $43 Dogs - 2nd incident $88 Dogs - 3rd incident $160 Redemption fees without licenses: Cats - 1st incident $22 Dogs - 1st incident $65 Dogs - 2nd incident $87 Dogs - 3rd incident $143 Quarantine Fees (based on 10 days) $98 Euthanasia Fees: Cats $22 Dogs $32 Disposal Fee $10 Pick Up Service (home) $33 Vet Pick Up $155 per month Trap Rental: Deposit $38 Per Day - up to 14 days $2 Per Day - after 14 days $2 Board: Cats $9 Dogs $9 License Fee for Dogs and Cats: - Three Years $38 Two Years $30 One Year $22 Nine Months $11 Six Months $7 Three Months $4 An additional fee of ten ($10.00) dollars shall be charged if the above mentioned license is not obtained within forty -five (45) days after the date requiring the license. Senior Citizen Fee - one -half of fees indicated above. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 8 ANIMAL CONTROL CONTINUED Spay Neutered (Dogs): One Year $10 Two Years $15 Three Years $20 Late Charge $10 Duplicate $5 Spay /Neuter Fees: Cats $43 Dogs $86 Spay /Neuter Deposit: Cats Dogs No Deposit Required No Deposit Required Shot Clinic: Rabies $0 DHL (Dog) $0 FVRCP (Cat) $0 Rabies /Senior. Citizen $0 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 9 FINANCE DEPARTMENT Retumed Check Charge $25 Annual Budget Report $28 Annual Audit Report $28 Attachment of Wages: Set Up Fee $7 Transaction Fee $1 Business License Listing Update $78 $32 Business License: Separate License for each place of Business $26 Minimum license for less than a full period: $25 or not less than 1/4 of the annual minimum fee for such category, whichever is greater Assignment or Transfer Fee Lost License Special Assessment Listing $26 $26 $78 per year per district Master Fees - Revised 7/06 10 8/16/2006 RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT Adult Sports Softball: $640 - residential team fee $690 - non - resident team fee Basketball: Flag Football: $610 resident team fee $660 - non - resident team fee $598 - resident team fee $615 - non - resident team fee Aquatics: Swim Lessons - Resident Swim Lessons - Non - resident $6.00 each 1/2 hour session $60 - 2 week session $7.00 each 1/2 hour session $70 - 2 week session Public Swim: Youth Resident $1 Youth Nonresident $2 Adult Resident $2 Adult Nonresident $3.50 Classes: Basic Water Safety , Emergency Water Safety, Lifeguarding; Water Safety Instruction, Aquatic Course fees are set by Certification. the Red Cross. Various special interest adult classes (aqua exercise, water polo, etc.) Fees are arranged on a contractual basis Rentals *: $75 per hr. - 2 hr 1 pool - resident minimum $105 per hr. - 2 hr. 1 pool - non - resident minimum Each additional hour $55 per hour * $25 per hour non- resident fee Swim Teams Use Fee: Hourly Rate Facility Rentals (2 hour minimum) Recreation Centers - $11 per hour - youth $12 per hour - adult $12 per hour - youth (beginning January 2007) $13 per hour - adult (Beginning January 2007) $35 hour Alameda nonprofit meetings $45 hour Alameda nonprofit activities $85 hour private rentals /resident $110 hour private rentals /non - resident $125 hour commercial fundraising $300 cleaning & security deposit 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revlsed 7/06 11 RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT CONTINUED Facility Rentals (2 hour minimum) Cont.: Mastick Social Hall 115 per hour (2 hr. Min.) (Resident) 140 per hour (2 hr. Min.) (Non- resident) $300 - cleaning and security deposit Grounds: Picnics Fields with picnic rental - resident with picnic rental - non - resident when staff not normally on duty - resident when staff not normally on duty - non - resident With Lights Private Rental/Tournament Lining fields (non - profit organizations and schools $40 per hour when staff is not normally on duty $35 per hour - 3 hour minimum (Resident) $55 per hour - 3 hour minimum (non- resident) $50 hour -large groups requiring extra svcs. $30 per hour $55 per hour $40 per hour $65 per hour $55 per hour $75 per hour $23 flat fee Hardball Field (College of Alameda) $75 per hour - Resident (3 hour minimum) $100 per hour - Non- resident (3 hour minimum) $75 per hour - Private rental/Tournament (3 hour minimum plus $250 flat fee) Tournaments: Normal field charges plus flat toumament fee of $200. Fee for charity events - $50 Field Preparation (fee based on maintenance worker's overtime salary) Once a day (private rental) Twice a day (private rental) $65 per field $90 per field Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 12 RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT CONTINUED Courts: Local youth & schools $28 per day per court $6 per hour per court Non- Profit $44 per day per court $8 per hour per court Adult Resident $54 per day per court Others $84 per day per court Run for the Parks Entry Fee - Set by Race Committee - fee shall be one that will realize a profit. Tennis: Adult group lessons Junior group lessons Private lessons $11 per hour $11 per hour $42 per hour City Tennis Tournament - Set by Toumament Committee - fee shall be one that will realize a profit. Youth: $125 Week- Hidden Day Camp Cove $140 Week - Trails End $65 Week - Hidden Cove Extended Care $55 Week - Trails End Extended Care Preschool $4.25 per hour Youth Sports: Fall, winter, spring - Football $75 Season - Basketball $75 Season - Soccer $60 Season Additional non - resident fee for all youth sports $10 Other: Fun Faire Booth Filming & Photography Commercial & Personal Photography $75 non - profit participant $125 profit participant $100 still photography $400 filming/taping Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 • 13 GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND Alameda Resident Preferential (annually) $25 Jack Clark & Earl Fry Courses (18 -hole) Twilight (2 pm ST /3 pm DST) Late Twilight (4 pm ST /6 pm DST)* 9 -holes (1st 2 hrs of the day back 9 only) Juniors Mif Albright Seniors Juniors M - TH Resident $23 M - TH Non -res. $30 M- TH Sr. Res. $18 M- TH Senior Nonresident $23 F, SSH Resident $27 F, SSH Nonresident $35 M -TH Resident $18 M -TH Nonresident $23 F,SSH Resident $19 F,SSH Nonresident $25 M -TH Resident $13 M -TH Non -res $16 F,SSH Resident $14 F,SSH Non -res $18 M - TH Resident $16 M - TH Nonresident $20 F, SSH Resident $18 F, SSH Nonresident $23 M - TH Resident $1 F,SSH of M - TH Nonresident F (after twilight) $8 M - F Res and Nonres $9 S,S, H $11 Second 9 Replay $7 M - TH Second 9 Replay $7 $6 Resident $1 Nonresident $4 Second 9 Replay - Nonresident $5 Monthly Tickets (Monday - Thursday After 4:00 p.m.: Residents - Senior $85 Resident under 62 years of age $100 Nonresident (plus $3 surcharge per round) $130 Golf Carts Monday - Friday 18 Or 9 holes $28 Saturday, Sunday, Holiday $28 Monday - Thursday (Seniors) $22 Single, Monday - Sunday $18 Twilight $18. 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 14 GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND CONTINUED Driving Range Small Bucket $4 Medium Bucket $6 Large Bucket $8 Golf Tournaments Monday - Thursday $30 + $6 = $36 + $14 = $50 $50 Fri, Sat, Sun, Holiday $35 + $6 - $41 + $14 = $55 $55 Shotgun (Clark Course only) $5.00 ($750) per player set up fee Mon - Fri only (based on a 150 player minimun, 18 hole only) GOLF CART MANDATORY ON FRIDAY, SATURDAY, SUNDAY AND HOLIDAYS FOR GOLF TOURNAMENTS Fees are set by City Council approval based on Golf Commission Recommendation. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 15 PUBLIC WORKS Fees noted in red or highlighted in red boxes are subject to Council Review. Maps & Prints: 500 scale - Alameda (color - 36" x 84 ") $22 500 scale - Alameda black and white $11 1000 scale - Alameda (color - 18" x 44 ") $15 1000 scale - Alameda (black and white) $11 500 scale - BFI 22x30 $11 Aerials $11 plus $10 mailing Truck route, bike route $2 Traffic volume data sheets, radar speed data sheets $5 Assessor's parcel maps (whole page available at Alameda County Assessor's Office) $1.00 per portion Sanitary Sewer Plan (18 x 22) $16 Storm Drain Plans (18 x 22) $16 Other Prints (22 x 30) $22 Plans and Specifications: Standard Plans $30 Bike Plans $30 Standard Subdivision Improvement Specs $30 General Services: Research of Records (no charge for first 15 minutes) Transportation Operational Requests - nonsafety related Transportation Technical Team/Transportation Committee— Request for or appeal of actions* *Fee is refundable if enacted /approved Recycling/Trash Exception Application* $86 per hour Time and Materials $60 $86 * The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule. Time & Materials - Engineering time charged per cost allocation plan, approximately $99.82 /hour DEPOSIT * 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 16 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED DEPOSIT Permit Center Applications: : 'Building Permit - Combination Building Permit (Non - Development) j ▪ Plan Check - Residential Remodel /Addition single family $260 + T &M ** Plan Check - Residential Remodel /Addition multi- family $400 + T &M ** j Plan Check - Commercial - mufti building $400 + T &M j Plan Check - Commercial - one building $260 + T &M ▪ Supplemental Plan Check TAM. Development Applications Planned Development T &M Planned Development Amendment T &M Final Development Plan T &M Parking in -lieu Fee Determination T &M :Review of Master Plans /Development Plans: (Engineering services for review of developer applications will be at time and materials) j Master Plan T &M ** Master Plan Amendment T &M ** I Development Plan (Also see Property Development category) T &M ** j Development Plan Amendments . T &M ** j Development Agreement/Amendment (Also see Property Development Category) T &M ** I General Plan Amendment T &M ** 1 : Environmental Review T &M ** Traffic Review T &M :Concrete Permits t Sidewalk repair /replace install 0 to 20 linear feet $0 Sidewalk repair /replace install 21 to 50 linear feet $25 Sidewalk repair /replace install 51 to 200 linear feet $75 I Sidewalk repair /replace install > 200 linear feet $300 ▪ Curb Cut/Driveway _New (each • $200 Sidewalk Repair - concrete permit $56 '▪ Right -of- -Way Permits • Encroachment Permits - Construction >1 week $520 1 Encroachment Permits - Temporary <1 week $65 Encroachment Permits - Permanent $390 1 Excavation Permit - Includes inspection $290 Per Block j Excavation Permit - Point Repair $54 : Each signalized intersection - additional charge $195 ! 100% recovery to be phased in over three years: FY 07/08 390 /block 290 /sig. Intersection • FY 08/09 520 /block 390 /sig. Intersection ** The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule T&M = Time & Materials - Engineering time charged per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82/hour Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 17 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED Property Development - Applications may be reviewed by City staff or by consultant hired by the City at cost plus 10% Deposit is $10,000 . unless otherwise specified Lot Line Adjustment $1,500 Parcel Map (1 to 4 lots) $2,500 T &M (or Consultant Tentative /Final Map review Costs + 10 %) $4,000 T &M (or Consultant Assessment District Formation Costs + 10 %) $2,500 DEPOSIT On/Off (or Consultant site Public Improvement plan review - Commercial > 5 acres Costs + 10 %) On /Off site Public Improvement plan review - Commercial < 5 acres $6,900 On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Commercial > 5 acres $1,725 On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Commercial < 5 acres $1,100 On/Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential >25 Lots T &M On /Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential 5 to 25 Lots T &M On /Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential < 5 Lots $3,675 On/Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Residential >26 Lots T&M On /Off site Improvement Inspection - Residential 1 to 25 Lots $700 Grading Permit Inspection Grading Permit Inspection - Grading Permit inspection - Grading Permit Inspection - Grading Permit Inspection - Grading Permit Inspection - - Commercial < 1 Acre Commercial 1 to 10 Acres Commercial > 10 Acres Residential 1-4 Lots Residential 5 to 25 Lots Residential 26 to 50 Lots $325 $575 T &M $450 $575 $700 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Applies to all development sites SWPPP <1 acre SWPPP 1 -5 acres SWPPP 5 - 20 Acres SWPPP > 25 Acres $1,900 $2,550 $3,200 -- •-- •------ •-- •-------- • - - - - -- $3:800• —• ---- --•-- --- •— •-- •-- • - - - - -� Special Event Permits Not all special events will require review by Public Works. Review determination will be made at time of application. Fees will be waived for nonprofit or public benefit events. Banner Permit - per banner /per location for install removal of banner Block Party Permit - Requiring Engineering Review Boat Show Permit - requiring Engineering Review Film Permit Non- profit/Still Photography - street closure All others - street closure All Bridge closures Rental of City Property (to be determined) Race, Walk -a -thon, parade permit Relocation Permit (housing moving) Street Fair Permit Tent Permit Under 4,500 sq. ft. Over 4,500 sq. ft. $200 $20 T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M Permits --SCAR Waste & Recycling - Hauler Fees (C &D Fees) Basic fee Reporting fees ($100 per hour) Program Fee Impact Mitigation Fee Performance Security Bond $600 $100 minimum due at filing $8.67 per ton hauled $2.86 per ton hauled $95 T &M - Time and Materials (Engineering time charges per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82/hr. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 18 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED DEPOSIT Citywide Development Fee Program: Application to Public Works Director for Fee Adjustment Appeal of Public works Director's Decision T &M T &M CDF Fee Schedule By prior Council action, the CDF Fees are automatically updated in July based on CIP LAND USE CATEGORY CITY DISTRICT West End Northern Waterfront Central/ East End Bay Farm Infill F.�Y: :.: " - fYT` . ":f ".:. �'i`V:'Y'. 'iljlE; { =:z.� �' �, r r«- Y M s wF mar rF'. 30 4 :7�S 3 -{{ r1'Za(y 1- .'�.i" T- - _'93:,. SF Low $3,740 $3,486 $3,482 $2,370 SF Med $3,271 $3,066 $3,062 $2,174 Duplex $3,158 $2,929 $2,923 $1,923 MF $2,908 $2,679 $2,675 $1,675 ��.�r.,� is 1!h;. .,,r �y �, :, . �� _, �c2:.y '7Ii... _tl �Ei�i ;vA �a�' 1 !�`��.' 1 9. S.. C �_ !C a �d � r 4 �`i e„ ». .,- Work/Live � $2,771 $2,579 s.• $2,576 li u': $1,742 ,,,r;;.s..;sm>ck; .:; fr„, epe - fi - sidti± ?fra ar' n {at General Industrial $3.21 $2.73 $2.73 $0.67 Retail $4.85 $4.13 $4.12 $1.02 Commercial/Office $4.65 $3.98 $3.97 $1.08 Warehouse $1.86 $1.58 $1.58 $0.39 A 1. Non- transportation Fee $0.75 $0.75 $0.75 $0.75 2. Transportation Fee (Cost per vehicle trip generated) $1,330 $1,088 $1,083 $33 T &M - Time and Materials - Engineering time charged per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82 /hour Master Fees - Revised 7/06 $1,500 $2,500 8/16/2008 19 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED DEPOSIT Maintenance Activities: Street tree installations (includes trees, root box, fertilizer, stake and labor) 15 gallon size trees $210 15 gallon size trees including concrete removal for tree opening $250 Street tree removal upon property owner's request (varies depending upon size of tree) T &M Parking Meter Rate on- street (by Council action) No Parking signs for construction /events One sign required for each parking space or 18 feet of curb $1.00 per hour $2.00 each $55 set up, plus $10 per Curb painting liner food Painting Park Crosses (nonbusiness areas) one space (including two crosses) $100 per space each additional cross installed at the same time $30 Sign Installation (non- specialty) Sign Installation (specialty) Lower Sewer Lateral Installation/Placement House Number Painting Permit T &M (per cost estimate) T &M (per cost estimate) T &M T &M *` The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule T &M = Time & Materials Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 20 PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT Fees shown are from the 2005 -2006 fee schedule (with the exception of prices for copies, flags, and fees for special event permits.) All other fees are subject to change pending Council review. Staff time charged per Cost Allocation Plan for all departments Public Works Inspection Fees Deposit for Staff time to be determined by Public Works Director GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING APPLICATIONS Amendments: Amendment to the General Plan Diagram or Text Amendments to text of Chapter 30 "Development Regulations" of the Alameda Municipal Code PERMIT CENTER $600 + T &M DEPOSIT $2,500 $600 + T &M $2,500 Rezoning: Rezoning to add a PD overlay $600 + T &M $2,500 All other rezonings $600 + T &M $2,500 Master Plan/Development Plan: Master Plan $600 + T &M $2,500 Master Plan Amendment $600 + T &M $2,500 Development Plan $600 + T &M $2,500 Development Plan Amendment $300 + T &M $1,500 Extension of Development Plan not yet vested $300 + T &M $1,500 Planned Development: Planned Development $300 +T &M $1,500 Planned Development Amendment $300 + T &M $1,500 Final Development Plan $300 + T &M $1,500 Development Agreement: Development Agreement $600 + T &M $2,500 'Periodic Review of Development Agreement $300 + T&M $1,500 Variance: Variance $300 + T &M $500 Charge for each additional variance after the first one within the same application $150 + T &M $250 Extension of variance which has not been vested $300 + T &M $500 Use Permit Use Permit $300 +T &M $1,500 Renewal of a Use Permit $150 + T &M $250 Charge for each additional use permit after the first one within the same application. $150 + T &M $250 Extension of use permit that has not been vested $150 + T &M $250 Design Review Design Review - Major $300 + T &M Design Review - Minor $150 + T &M Sign $150 + T &M $500 T & M = TIME AND MATERIALS The Planning & Building Director shall set a deposit schedule INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 21 PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED DEPOSIT Special Services Project with PD overlay - flat fee only Finding pursuant to 30 - 5.7 (k) or (I) Final Design Review Extension of Design Review not yet vested $100 + T &M $100 + T &M $100 + T &M $100 + T &M SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS: PRELIMINARY PLAN $300 + T &M $500 PARCEL MAP $600 + T &M $4,000 Parcel Map Waiver $300 + T &M $500 Extension $150 + T &M $250 TENTATIVE MAP $600 + T &M $2,500 Amendment $300 + T &M $500 Extension $150 + T &M $250 CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION $600 + T &M $750 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE $150 + T &M LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $150 + T &M $2,500 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Categorical Exemption (included $25 Alameda County Clerk fee) $147.50 + T &M Initial Study $600 + T &M $750 Administrative Charge on outside preparation of Initial 25% of Study, Negative Declaration or EIR contract cost The Planning & Building Director shall set a deposit schedule State Fish and Game Fee (collected by Alameda County Clerk from the City for the State) a. Deminimus finding $25 Set by County b. Negative Declaration $1,275 Set by County c. EIR $875 Set by County Mitigation Monitoring T &M $1500 APPEALS Appeal to Planning Board Appeal to the City Council $100 + T &M $100 + T &M $500 $500 Home Occupation $150 Inspection for Occupancy Permits $100 + T &M Additional inspections: There will be a T & M charge for additional inspections required because work is incomplete when the inspection is requested, with a minimum charge of one hour Request for payment of parking in lieu fee $300 + T &M $1,500 Zoning Compliance determination $100 + T &M Rebuild Letter $100 + T &M Deed Restriction T &M $100 Performance Agreement to allow occupancy before all requirements are completed $100 + T &M $500 0.03% of Activity Community Planning Fee Valuation T & M = TIME AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 22 PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED DEPOSIT PERMIT CENTER Demolition Certificate of Approval a. Principal structure $150 + T &M $250 b. Detached accessory structure such as a garage $150 + T &M $250 Historical Sign Designation $150 + T &M $250 Changes in Historical Building Study List Classification $150 + T &M $250 Alteration to City Monuments $150 + T &M $250 Activity Filing Fee Appeal Hearing (Building, Plumbing, Mechanical. and Electrical Permits Only) $40 each $40 per activity Dwelling Unit Tax $1,342 per unit Sewer Connections Addresses (Per each address): New Change existing $8.66 minimum each plumbing fixture unit $191.00 $360.00 Improvement Tax -1 % of valuation over $5,000 Records management fee per page Property Per unit History Permit History & Unit Determination Research of Records (after 15 mins.) Filling on City Owned Controlled Property (Note: For intemal use - has not changed in 3 yrs) Dredging $3.50 $13.00 $21.00 $50.00 $1.30 per cubic yard $1.30 per cubic yard Technology Fee (Permit Tracking Fee) 5% of permit cost Copies (each): 8 1/2" x 11" copier prints 8 1/2" x 11" microfiche copies (special machines) 11" x 17" microfiche copies (special machines) 18 "'x 22" Plans or Special Plans Other Documents City Flags: 3'x5' $0.10 $1.00 $2.00 $15.00 actual cost $65.00 5' x 8 $90.00 Desk Flag (small) $5.00 Temporary Parking Restrictions: Signs $2.00 per sign Use of Parking Metered Space $4.50 per day Use of Parking Unmetered Space $4.00 per day Film Permit Fees: Plan Check Fee (to be charged at department's hourly plan check rate) T &M One Day $67.00 per day Day two to day fifteen $31.00 day Day sixteen onward $14.00 day Appeal Fee of denial of Film Permit $100 Rental of City property to be determined T & M = TIME AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee $1,500 $1500 8/16/2006 Master Fees - Revised 7/06 23 PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT /PERMIT CENTER CONTINUED Special Event Permits Bingo Permits: New applications (each) Renewals (each) Tent Permits Race, Walk -a- thons, Parades Block Party Permits Banner Permits (set by Public Works Dept. Street Fair Boat Show Charitable Solicitation Permit (set by Police Dept.) Relocation Permits Film Permits: Plan check time from other departments also apply Non - Profit/Still Photography (no street closure) Non - Profit/Still Photography (no street closure) All Others (no street closure) All Others (street closure) All Bridge Closures Daily rates: Day 1 (per day) Day 2 to Day Fifteen (per day) Day 16 onward (per day) Rental on City property to be determined Building Permit Fee Total Valuation $1 - 500 $500 - 2,000 $50 mandated by state $50 mandated by state T &M T &M $70 T &M T &M $2,001 - 25,000 $25,001 - 50,000 $50,001 - 100,000 $100,001 - 500,000 $500,001 - 1,000,000 $1,000,000 and up Building Plan Review $1500 $1500 $250 $1500 $1500 T &M $7,500 T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M $250 $250 $500 $1,500 $2,500 $25.50 $25.50 for first $500 Plus $3.30 for each additional $100 or fraction thereof $75.00 for first $2,000 Plus $14.80 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof $415.40 for first $25,000 Plus $10.45 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof $676.65 for first $50,000 Plus $7.65 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof $1,059.15 for first $100,000 Plus $6.40 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof $3,619.50 for first $500,000 Plus $5.35 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof $6,294.15 for first $1,000,000 Pius $3.30 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof 100% of activity permit fee - $100 minimum Over the Counter Plan Review Fee Concurrent Plan Check $50 minimum 100% f building permit fee - $100 minimum Overtime Plan Review Fees BOARDED AND /OR VACANT PARCELS Monitoring Fee + ordinance fees Plumbing Permlfs Permit Fee: Plan Check Fee: $200/hour $500 each building or vacant parcel 1% of Plumbing Valuation based on the plumbing contract 50% of Plumbing Permit Fee* T & M = TIME AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee Master Fees - Revlsed 7/06 *Charged when plumbing plans are not a part of the building 8/16/2006 24 PERMIT CENTER CONTINUED DEPOSIT Mechanical Permits Pernilt Fee: Plan Check Fee: Electrical Permits Permit Fee: Plan Check Fee: 1% of Mechanical Valuation based on the mechanical contract price or engineer's estimate, or 15% of the building permit fee (minimum permit fee shall be $25.50) 50% of Mechanical Permit Fee* *Charged when mechanical plans are not a part of the building plan check package 2% of Electrical Valuation based on the electrical contract price or engineer's estimate, or; 15% of the building permit fee (minimum permit fee shall be $25.50) 50% of Electrical Permit Fee *Charged when electrical plans are not a part of the building plan check package Survey or advisory inspection on site prior to issuance of permit $100 per hour Extra inspection made necessary by reason of deficit work, or otherwise through fault or error on the part of the permitee or permitee's employees, after notice has been given in writing by the Inspector, setting forth the violations $100 per hour Extra time required for inspection through fault or error on the part of permitee or pemiitee's employees, per quarter hour (15 minutes) or fraction thereof $25 per 15 minutes Excavation and Grading Permit Fees including marsh crust permits; 50 cubic yards or less 51 to 100 cubic yards $26.50 $40 101 to 1,000 cubic yards $40 for first 100 cubic yards Plus $11.50 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof 1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards $143.50 for first 1000 cubic yards Plus $16.30 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards $290.20 for first 10,000 cubic yards Plus $78.60 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards 100,001 cubic yards or more $977.60 for first 100,000 cubic yards Plus $47 for each additional10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof Plan Check Fee T &M $100 minimum The City Manager may approve the following: a. Payment of the development fees on an installment basis, subject to the applicant entering into an agreement for payment schedules, interest, and security. b. Allow the payment of the fees to be deferred, subject to interest and adequate security, such as records against the property c. A fee reduction where the application is a resubmission and a finding is made that the staff work Involved more than other comparable applications and warrants reduced fees because there Is Tess staff work involved. T & M = TIME AND MATERIALS INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee The Planning and Building. Director shall set the deposit schedule for fees. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 25 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT /FEE # Housing Use Tvoe Units Per Retail 9 100,000 s/f $1.99 square foot Office 20 100,000 s/f $3.92 square foot Warehouse 4 100,000 s/f $0.68 square foot Manufacturing 4 100,000 s/f $0.68 square foot Hotel /Hotel 5 100 rooms /suites $1,007 room /suite Other Fees BWIP/WECIP Inclusionary Fee In -Lieu of Construction (per each residential building permit in the development) Citywide Inclusionary Fee In -Lieu of Construction (per each residential building permit in the development) $28,933.22 $15,982.01 Affordable Housing Unit Fee Program: Application to Development Services Director for Fee Adjustment T &M $750 deposit Appeal of Development Services Director's Decision T &M $1,000 deposit Per City of Alameda Resolution 11899, Alameda Municipal Code Chapter 27 T &M = Time and Materials Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 26 'PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT W 111 o o O EFT o o CO CO Ef3 0 o r O EA- 0 O (p Ea 0 o do 1 $500.00 0 o Lfi co 0 o O 0 o Ln 0 r O ER 0 o U-?EA 0 o LV $15.00 Actual Costl 0 M E!) 0 M $100.00 0.3% of Permit Valuation 1 0 o N COY) _ 1% of Permit Valuation 1 0 Lo c Ea 0 o co CO EFJ 5% of Applicable Permit Fees HI Z D 1 per activity each permit each permit each each each each per cubic yard 1 per cubic yard 1 per Appeal 1 E Q) a a a) 0 _U c 0 a c L6 a 0 ) LL a m 0 0 •0 co a c as 0) c c c as 0 per unit per page C per connection esigner (Actual charge for copies as below) Retrieval of plans from offsite storage for copying after City obtaining required signatures of property owner and Copies of Plans from Microfiche after City obtaining required signatures of property owner and architect/d (See Development Services Fee Schedule) (See Public Works Department Fee Schedule) Permits with a Valuation of $5,000 and over 1 DMINISTRATIVI QI 'Permit Issuance (Charged on applicable Permit Center Activities) Monitoring Fee + ordinance Fees es (special machines) 11" x 17" microfiche copies (special machines) 18' x 22" Plans or Special Plans 'Filling on City -owned or controlled property ' 'Housing and Building Board of Appeal ' 'Impact Fees charged on Applicable Permits ' 'Addresses Assignment Existing New 'Archive Retrivals architect/designer 'Boarded/Vacant Building Fee 3' x 5' 5' x 8' Desk Flag (small) 8 1/2" x 11' copier prints 8 1/2" x 11" microfiche copi Other Documents Affordable Housing Fee City Development Fee Community Planning Fee Dwelling Unit Tax Improvement Tax Records Management Fee Sewer Connection Fee Technology Fee 'City Flags Copies: 'Dredging ' rn as 'PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED (/) I w W oo N EH $13.00 O 0 EA OOO 0 N Efl 10 d3 N Ell $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials oo (0 69. $250 deposit + Time and Materials $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials $250 deposit + Time and Materialsl $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials 0 2 C Cd a) E i= + o a) a) a 0 o 10 N EH to be determined! 0 o r EH $7,500 deposit + Time and Materials $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials .N 2 CO c CCS a) E F- + 0 o_ a) •o 0 u) te- $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials' LOLL Efl EA- I 69 Efl each structure per address per hour each each each CJ 0 c) a) each per day per day required per each metered parking space or 20 If.f. non - metered rper day per day per day 1 DMINISTRATIVI (regulated by State Law) Charges are determined by each Department's Plan Check time plus daily rates of: 0 O Cn (o ce 0 O O CO ER 0 O r 69 al 'Special Event Permits (Fees waived for Non - profit/Public benefit events) Permit History and Unit Determination 'Research of Records (over 15 minutes) Charitable Solicitation Permit E ■ EL E Non- Profit/Still Photography - no street closure Non - Profit/Still Photography - street closure All Others - no street closure All Others - street closure All Bridge closures Day One Day Two to Day Fifteen Day Sixteen onward Rental of City Property Race, Walk -a -thon, Parade Permit Use of Metered Parking Space Use of Non - Metered Space (per each 20 I.f.) 'INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee ' 'Permit History I(Public Records Request) Banner Permit Bingo Permit Block Party Permit Boat Show Permit Relocation Permit 1 Street Fair Permit Tent Permit Under 4,500 s.f. Over 4,500 s.f. 'Temporary Parking Restrictions ' Signs PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: Z > Z > Z - Z EACH ADD'L. 100 SQ. FT. I 4 EA $24.871 CO CO O r Eft 1f) N n Eft N t0 00 Eft 0) CO O r Eit N N N Eft 1 $15.231 N L CO ER ' Eft $5.23_1 1- M CO Eft N CO V Eft 1 $25.851 1-- 0 .- r EA v L0 r Eft (o CO aD Eft O CO O r Eft $14.241 O (- Oi I-- ER $34.151 $23.251 $27.331 O Co M co (o Eft 4 CO ( Eft 1 $37.141 $15.931 $10.831 $12.741 $15.521 tri Eft $28.841 $12.361 I' C Eft O 0) of ER co 0 N r Eft BASE COST o Co 0) N ft $3,2851 $5,7721 O 0) 1� E9 $12,254 1- N. • O N ta $1,7951 $2,013 CO co (o M <R $4,840 h O (0 1� Et $12,734 $1,523 co 0 1` 609- r 0 0 aM Eft a0 0 r d- El.) 0 1- Co CO EA $10,801 0) O • Et O 00 LC)_ Eft $2,775 O O 0) C7 ER $5,892 O) 0) 0) Eft- $547 V r co o0 I-- O r ER co �t r Eft $2,288 0 co 00 M Et $850 $953 V N. (O_ $2,292 $3,554 co N O ai Eft CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 2 2 > 2 2 r E. CE 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. 1 (0 (O (!) fA co 0 co ff} $13.321 Co 0 0 Eft $10.651 $12.981 0 Eo EA- V O . 0) r Eft (o r Eft E co Lo (o Eft co Lo EA 69 CO 0) ER EA h r- (0 Eft $32.321 $13.841 N (A Eft 1. O r r Eft 0 (0 (0 E Eft 0 CO 1� r EA N CO O) E Eft 0) CO N Eft ER (O 0 o N Eft $34.16 $41.631 0) N . O Eft N (O V EA O) D) r Eft 1 $13.531 $19.40 CO (fl (0 O (O CO Eft $15.45 $10.52 $12.37 h 0 (o EA BASE COST co CO (O Co ER r 0 r Eft 1 $7,2151 O 00 CO o Eft (o r Co Cn -,- co (O 0) (o $2,2441 co r (O N Edo O N 'V' Eft O L() 0 (O Eft $9,383 (0 r 0) Cn rEft 0 0) r Eft $2,135 $3,751 $5,135 N CO 0) r EA 0) 0) V C0 Eft CO t` r EA $1,975 0) CO V C0 EA 0 (o 1- Eft $7,365 1 $12,489 V CO CO (- CO I"- $1,347 $1,845 0 (O CO N ER $4,850 N CO 0 Eft 0) r r Eft CO 0) 0 N Eft $2,865 $4,443 $7,535, CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 LL CE EACH ADD'L 1 100 SQ. FT. CO CO cc; Efl 0 Co h: co ff} 0) 0) (Ci r ff} $10.871 $12.781 $15.581 CO 0 4 EA $22.851 CO h 0) ER- n CD o EA Co - (it LO (O 0i ER Co 0) (O EA $38.781 (O (O Eft (0 r Eft $13.291 $16.20 $21.35 $119.54 $51.23 $34.87 0) 0) O Eft CD 0) 0) d' Eft (C) 0) 0) ER $55.70 $23.89 $16.24 0 0) EA $ 23.28 CO 1. r 64 $43.26 $18.54 $12.62 $14.84 $18.08 BASE COST in o (0 'd' Eft $4,928 $8,658 co (f) CO _ Eft $18,3801 O CO _ (o Eft $2,693 0) O (o Eft 4 0 CO (O (ft 0 CO N r ER 0 CO N r r Eft 0 0 r 0) Eft $2,285 $2,562 O (O 4 (ft N CO r o (f3 (o (o (O of Eft $16,200 $2,113 O Co N Eft $4,163 O O 1- (o Eft $8,838 n 0) 0) V Eft $821 $920 N- (O Eft $2,214 $3,432 0 N CO (n Edo 1 $1,275 0 Co V Efl $2,511 $3,438 $5,331 $9,042 SQ. FT. 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O N 40,0001 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 o 0 N 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 r 1 20,0001 40,000 100,000 200,0001 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (C 10,0001 0 0 0 O N 50,000 100,01 300 0 0 (o r 3,0001 000'9 15,000 30,000 250 0 (o N r 0 0 ( N 0 0 O (o 12,500 0 0 0 (o N 1 500 0 0 (o N 0 0 0 (C) 10,000 1 25,000 50,000 OCCUPANCY 1 TYPE Theater Church Auditorium 1 Restaurant 1 'Restaurant T. I. 1 'Small Assembly 1 'Buildings 1 IBC /ICC CO (/) CJ r Q N Q N Q N Q Co Q PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z Z Z — Z EACH ADD'L. 100 SQ. FT. - I LC) T (n to $28.841 $12.36 CO toe..- O 000 O co N O to ,- $83.981 $35.981 $24.49 $28.791 O) O (n 0) O) (C) O) CO (n CJ 0 O r .- 0) N: to N CO CC) ffy $10.741 T i O O ,- CA L) V try N r M (B h co M t n to CA N to •t N h t/3 r r M E9 N r N E9 CO V N E9 CO O M H9 CO n N EA $15.621 CO CO (O to (0 (C) 4 w- CO (!) to N an (O te BASE COST 1 O M 00 taw- co M n $1,6741 $2,2921 $3,5541 00 N O O O O) O O r r +f3 O) O r R O) CO 0 N $4,138 co 0 ER 1 LS L$ O) 00,4-01- r 0) r E9 r N (i Nr (0 5 8. 1 $5,3681 r CO O LOL$ $1,242,1 r 0 N Efl N. CO (0 R N $4,4741 $427 O) N. V fl $8411 N LC) r E3 $1,7871 r N 0 05 ! O N A r 0),- O r EA N 00 O 00 V N EJ $3,8481 0 N n (O (> _ CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > if 2 = cE 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. 4 . CO tam (C) O CO $15.451 $10.521 $12.371 h 0 (C) f $18.751 N. 0) V O to $44.981 r (OM O mm O) (C) $43.86 ,t1- N. (f) (ii r N (B $13.75 CO M CA Efl N O r try $13.42 O) CO N ER $13.37 4 I. (n 69 O CO M E!? O) M tn E!1 n) 0 (f) E!> N CO r Efl (C) O (A Efl CA CO (M Ef3 t CO N ffl 0 r M Efl CO 1. M ff3 CO '1 M E!4 $19.52 $8.35 0 n (C) W3 CO (O (O ffi (n r CC) Efl BASE COST N O0 O - Ef} r CA r r Ef3 CO CA 0 N Efl $2,8651 $4,4431 $7,5351 $1,2371 $1,3871 $2,437 $3,3361 $5,1731 $8,772 CO 0) 69 r CO O r Efi 't CO ao r f!3 $2,551 $3,955 0 h Cp 99. CO CO N. to V CO CO to $1,552 $2,127 $3,296 r CO (0 L) ce V CO (n (A $5981 to O - Z; 0 •ct - Z; $2,2331 CO CO N.1- a) to 0 (n r EA CO CO N_ H9 $2,265 Ioo vc$ $4,8101 0 (n co- H3 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: I FR, II FR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. co I- h Efi $43.261 $18.54 $12.62 $14.84 $18.081 1 $22.50 $125.96 $53.98 $36.731 $43.19 $52.63 00 co (n (A $38.53 0 an (O Ef) $11.23 $13.22 0 r (O r Ef} CO CO N (A $16.05 CA co (0 try COI- CO V E!? (C) (n Ef3 r N- O (B •t O) r (A (0 co O r EFT N. (O V Ef3 h r M (A $3.72 $4.54 CO V to $23.42 $10.02 .7' CO (0 try $8.02 CO I. 0) (A BASE COST $1,2751 0 CO 4 K3 $2,5111 $3,4381 $5,3311 N O 69 $1,485 (n (0 co E9 $2,9241 d' 00 0 69 CO N O 64 $10,5261 (t) CO r_ (A CO N. N (A $2,2361 r CO 0 C7 69 (D V h Cf3 $8,052 CO CA r CO O r Efl CO CO 00 69 $2,552 $3,9951 00 r r- CO cry '4' CO $718 r CO N Efl $1,728 0 00 CO N Ff3 $4,540 0 CO M EA $1,547 $2,718 0 N h M (�-1 $5,772 0 CO N. CA (�9 SQ. FT. 1 000 000 0 0 N 0 (n 10,0001 25,0001 50,0001 O O N O O O r- O O O N,f O O O 10,0001 0000 0000 0000 O N C\116 10,000 0 0 0 100.— N 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 5,0001 0 0 0 6 r 20,000 50,0001 000 0 0 6,-6' 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 20,0001 50,000 0 0000000 0000000 6,-6-6666 0 0 0 0 r 0 N 0 (n 0 O OCCUPANCY 1 TYPE Banks Laundromat Medical Office - - (n (U _U E 0 [ffice T. I. 1 Preschool /School IBC /ICC 1 1 CLASS CO CO CO CO m 1E -1/E -2 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > Z — — Z 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 1 100 SQ. FT. 4 d' ERNf0EFT O Q) . d' N. CO O CO N E co ID CD R O 'Cr O 3EREREREIiEREREIiE?H9EliEliERb9 CO O 6) N O CO CO d• d• r M O N M LO d' M O N O d' d' O O M CO LO M 0 CO d' 6) O d' $22.891 c0 O ER CO (O EO ER LO CO ER E N. LO O ER (O d' r ER $64.221 1 $27.521 $18.731 $22.021 $26.831 d' d• ER $24.691 N E ER CO d' . EO ER $10.321 BASE COST d' CO 64 N N M ER $1,4451 CO N. O M CO O C7 ER O O N Cn f,H r N N 1 $1,4251 d' O N ER O CO d' (7 ER $5,3141 d• O (A fR CO r N_ ER O (O M_ ER 0) CO M N ER 1 $3,2721 d' N. O Ln ER O O co 00 fR $1,349 N LO ER $2,657 $3,6381 0 d' CO Lr) ER N. O L() 0j ER M N. CO ER d• N d' to LC) d' f� ER r N 0 r ER $1,582 $2,683 $1,4551 CO O CO N ER $3,9251 CO CO 0 CO ER $10,3201 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. (O LO Ln ER $31.12 $13.341 M 0 0) ER (O (0 O $13.00 d' N ER $13.48 CO N- Ln ER N O) c6 ER N CO d' ER CO (O LC) ER $2.301 $12.871 1 $5.52 1 $3.75 dr d' ER $5.37 _ 6 ER $28.61 $12.26 $8.34 N CO 0) ER CO O r ER $14.331 (0 N O c0 1 $34.401 $23.41 $27.52 $33.54 $5.52 co M O CO $13.23 0 6) ER $10.58 $12.90 —_ 2 BASE COST I. r 0) to. c0 N O r ER (O 0 (0 ER $2,4731 1 $3,835 0 0 (L7 CO ER 1 $1,589 $1,7821 0 CO Ch ER $4,286 d' (O CO ER CO CO N r rER CO r (n ER 0 0 N. ER L $2,987 0 0) 0 d- ER $6,341 0 ID n O ,- (0 00 (0 r ER 0 6) C0 ER $3,321 (.0 d' LLB ER 0 LO 0 ER CO LC) 0) r ER $473 $530 N CO 0) $1,276 $1,978 $3,354 0) r N r FR 0 0 N ER $3,583 CO 0 Cr) d' ER 0 .- O N- ER 0 0 Q) N v- ER CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC L.L. CE - EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. (O CO ER $37.34 r 0 co E4 0 O O 64 L $12.79 0 (O LC) 64 0) CO . N CO r (4 rEa d" 0) EO ER r N. d' ER Lo LO LO ER CO N. EO EFT CO N. N EFT $15.44 N CO CO fR 0 L() d' ER 0) N Ln fR LO d' (O ER d' r EO ER $34.33, L- .- 64 $10.01 00 h 64 $14.35 0 N .- 64 N M 0) 69 $41.28 6) 0 CO 69 $33.03 $40.251 N (0 . Efl ER $37.03 $15.88 $10.82 $12.70 $15.481 BASE COST 001:1.$ $1,234 N. CO r N ER 00 (O 0) N ER N 0 CO d' ER 0 0 CO N ER N. 0 0) r fR $2,1381 $3,756 d' d' r 10 ER 0 h 0) � ER 0 N L(0O 0) ,- ER 0) 0 r EFT 0 d' N EFT $3,584 CO 0 0) d ER 0 ,- CO ( N- ER $12,900 CO 0 N ER 0) O N N ER LO M 0) M ER CO L( d' n ER 0 CO d- co ER $14,350 $568 CO M CO CO r r ER $1,5311 $2,374 LO N 0 V ER $2,1831 0 0 0) v ER n 00 (0 LC) ER N CO r 6) ER 15,480 Li_ 0 500 009`3 0 O O - CO 0 0 0 O r 25,000 50,000 000'3 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 N 1 40,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O r 20,000 40,000 100,000 0 0 0 6. 0 N 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O 50,0001 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 r 0 0 Ln 1,0001 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 1. 10,000 0 0 0 r(0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 N 50,000 0 0 0 O r OCCUPANCY 1 TYPE Daycare Moderate Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Low Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Moderate Explosion Hazard Repair Garage Semiconductor Fabrication IBC /ICC 1 CLASS () W LL N LL N 2 1H -4 (O 2 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IIN,IIIN,IVN,VN 1 EACH ADD'L. 100 SQ. FT. O �f (fl $27.461 � r rT O 00 64 CA H3 $11.481 CO _ 63 CO N 69 1L0'8$ O CV U3 N 64 O CM V3 CO n O V3 N 4 64 O N 69 43 CO M 69 O N 64 rs N V3 $15.211 C0 CO 69 CO �F (i3 N in 64 COO CO V3 CCO O N to $15.021 CO 64 CO 64 Cn 69 N CO 69 EA n 00 EA C7 Eft co N H3 00 N H) V C7 64 1 BASE COST CO CO E3 In c0 63 $3,1881 $4,3651 CO CO n (p A 0 CO v r r CA CO N EA CO N V' r ER O O N A $3,4221 1 $5,3041 000`6$ CD CO r 3 d �h 00 N fA 2 O CD 07 63 O 7 O CO EA $10,240 1- 0) CO LO O O r Eft CO (O I- r ER $2,418 $3,7481 0 CO CO (p (13 N 17 CD O) v V/ N N. CO Et V 0) r r Eft 0 LO CO r Eft CO CO r CO 64 $1,4441 0) CO Eft $2,844 $3,893 CO CO 0 V3 $10,248 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. r (O fR $34.33 $14.71 0 O V3 CO r $14.35 CO Ef 00) CD f3 $3.84 CO . N Et CO M ft I M ft 0 V3 CO CO Et co N f3 � A r0 N Et CO !)) N Et M A O 0) V3 r CD E) to C() Ei CMn co Et 00) n EA (0 M Et CD 3 co 0 (f3 V to ft (O ffl 0O0 I4 i3 ONO N O ER M 613 00) . N 64 Ln M e9- N 64 r - d 2 BASE COST - CO N O N 64 O CO N N EA $3,9851 1 $5,4561 0 CO 'd' (D Et $14,350 CO CO O 64 0) n I- r Eft- (0 N r ch Et $4,2781 0 co CO CO ft 0 (() N r 1- to O CO 64 $2,0231 $3,555 0 I- CO 64 0 in Cn t` Et 0 O CO N 1- N r ,- ft $1,257 $2,2071 N N 0 E9 $4,6851 0 Cn 0) Et CO O Cn 0 N CO 0 0) 0 N 0) Eft $2,3131 0 N 0) 69 0 0 r 0 ft $2,0241 $3,555 $4,866 1_ $7,5451 0 00 N r F} CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC LI_ EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. I"- M V3 0 N r V Eft $17.65 N O N 69 $14.14 $17.22 CO m ER $10.781 CO V Eft V r M Eft $3.701 $4.50 CO r V3 CO CO I— V3 CO r M Eft N Eft $2.52 I"- 0 (0 Eft n 0 V' V3 $22.81 CD n O) 64 O CO (O Efl V CO N- 64 1.0 0) ER $4.021 $22.54 CO CO 0) Ef3 (0 Cn (O 69 N n n Eft ccF 0) ER 0) r N 69 $12.25 V N O E& I-- O CO 69 $4.21 N Cf) Eft BASE COST $2,428 $2,722 $4,782 $6,547 $10,152 $17,220 O 0) (79. $2,135 $3,7511 $5,134 co to 0) n Eft $13,500 CC7 co N Eft $2,4271 $4,266 $5,844 O co O O Eft $15,360 $1,345 0 O in Eft $2,648 $3,6261 $5,622 $9,540 CO co ER V n ER N- O co r Eft O 0) n Eft $2,775 O n Eft $2,166 $2,428 $4,2661 0) M 0 O 69 C0 O M Eft 1 $15,3721 SQ. FT. 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 a5 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O N 0 0 0 O (n 1 100,000 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 O CO 60,000 150,000 300,000 O 0 0 Ln 25,000 50,000 100,000 250,000 500, 0001 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r 20,000 0 0 0 O CC) 100,000 0 0 (n 0 0 to N 0 0 0 to 0 0 0 O r 25,000 0 0 0 O to 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 CC) 300,000 OCCUPANCY TYPE Health Hazard Materials Nursing Horne/ Health Care Stores (Retail) Market 4) 1 Apartment Building 1 IBC /ICC (f) (n U n _ N \ _ N — 2 2 2 ,- OC PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 II N, III N, IV N, V N EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 1-- N 69 r r EA Cp 0 M 69 t-- 0 N 69 to N 69 co CA N 69 CO CO N 69 co r r- $22.941 to N. (() 64 CO r I: 69 N CO NN 0 0 O 69 0 0 O 69 0 0 O E9 0 0 6 E9 0 0 O 69 0 0 O 69 0 ct N 69 $13.431 r- n W 64 $3.921 CO 69 N CO (A 64 Ch O N 69 u) C'7 r r� CO CO 4 EA r M Ch E9 0) CO c7 69 N. 4 E9 O CA r EA r- r r ,- 00 I. 4 EA CO N co 69 N co co 64 O Cp ��}} 69 BASE COST CO N 6463 O $2,4771 $3,3941 O (A (Ni 63 CO N O) VIEAEA69. CO N 0 0) N't (f) 0 $1,63 N 0) (D 69 $1,8351 O N E9 1 $2011 O N d3 O N EA O N EA O N 64 N 0) r- ER CO CO O E9 0) (f) (C) EA 1 $2,1361 CO CO 64EA63EAEAEA O) M CO N 0 co r- 07 O Co O O 0 O $9,4881 (p M ( $1,4751 $2,592 O) 'V' (n 6M4� 0 (C) $9,3281 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > 2 2 _ 2 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. O) (0 E9 O) co aD 69 $3.82 (A L1) N 64 CO O C`0 63 $3.72 (0 C (0 C 0) C n/al 1 n/a (0 C 00 c L _ n/a N C (0 c (0 c (0 c O O c0 63 O h (C) r 69 N N: 69 O CA 4 69 O N. CA 69 N O 69 d' (f) N E9 (A r V r 63 O_ CO EA ' r d' 64 CO c0 4 69 M (A CA 69 O v CV 64 CO Cn C7 r 69 c0 (A (fi E9 I� O 4 63 co f-- 4 f9 co (n Cfi 69 1- BASE COST N f- (p 64 C'7 CO N. 69 O 0) 0 64 1 $4,242 O f- (A 64 O CO r r69 (0 C n/a cd C CO C (0 C (0 C n/a (0 C (0 C (0 c N C (0 ca),-,4- O O O r r 69 O) CA r 63 O I-- CO 64 O ' r 64 O N 0 63 n CO 63 f� n CO 64 (O 0) N EA $4,5161 O 0 0 69 O CO 00 r69 (!) V O 63 $1,8441 O ' N 69 CO CO 69 O CO 00 69 O CO CO ,- CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IFR,IIFR 1 EACH ADD'L l~L 0 (n O O ,- EFi N. CO O 00 (c) V' EA O r CO 69 I. CO C'M 64 CO d' EA 63 (0 C CO C (0 C CO C (0 c (0 c R) c (0 C N C (0 C (0 C (0 C (n (n CR 69 CA r O NEA LO co 00 E9 CO 00 (n 69 a) C9 69 N 00 63 (E) O C'�) EA $17.031 co CO E 64 N. CA 63 E Co 00 (n 64 N r 63 63 0) O C0 EA Cn CO 00 r n 63 $4.89 I. Cn E9 $7.001 BASE COST $1,886 (n 63 $3,715 O EA $7,884 $13,392 n/a as c n/a as C at C n/a ((00 C (0 c (0 c (0 c (0 c as C O 0 EA Cm7 69 $2,3391 N EA 00 63 $8,4241 a) O Ea $2,252 $3,9551 6) tt 64 O ? 64 $14,2321 1 W 64 $2,2131 $3,8881 1 $5,3231 $8,2561 N 0 CO 63 'SQ. FT. O O 0 Ch 1 15,000 1 30,000 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O r LO 0 0 0 O o CY) 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 (0 0 0 0 '- 0 0 0 v7 1 7,000 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O N 50,0001 100,000 O O 0 CV 10,0001 O O 0 O N 40,0001 0 O 0 O 0 200,0001 co 0 0 N 10,000 O 0 0 O N 40,0001 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O N 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE Hotels & Motels 'Dwellings - Custom O a O 2 1 Master Plan (Dwellings - Production Phase of Master Plan (Repeats) Residential Care O EU 7U LL Moderate Hazard Storage 1 'Low Hazard Storage 1 IBC /ICC 1 CLASS 2 0) 2 c`) 2 1R -2 (n N (n PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z- > Z — Z _ EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. CD O co 1 $21.931 . O) EA CO O EA CO EA r CA EA O Ni EA $22.731 O) EA COO O EA C` EA (LO O 64 CO O FA N CO r EA CO ER E N Ni 69 CO Cn EA O ER (A d4 00 fA CD O EA N fA m N EA (1) O EA N N 69 1 $12.351 CO Cn fA COO O fA $4.231 1- (O (>3 (0 EA (0 O( (A (ft N b9 CO N EA (MO . O EA BASE COST N O) N FA 0) EA $2,5461 CO CO O 3 $5,4041 CO (O r � O) CO O EA r O L() EA 1 $2,6381 r CO 0 O CO (O C7) 't � O) 0) O) � r N r FA 0) (O O) fA (f) 0) (O � 0 CO r N CO O ^ 64 $1,2521 CO 0 d' EA $2,4651 $3,3771 $5,234 $8,884 CO (n EA $1,632 $2,8671 (O N O 69 CO CO O 69 � 0 N co ci (A $512 V N.- LO (A 0) O O fA $1,3821 $2,144 $3,632 — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > 2 2 = C 2 1 EACH ADD'L 1 100 SQ. FT. O CA ta EA 1 $27.41 co N. r r E!i O) O) C` (A ' O) EP) co r r 69 $5.071 $28.41 $12.17 CA N 0D EA 4 n O ER $11.87 (A r co EA O N N ER n O E EA CA r O EA N. N C` EA co CO 0D EA O 0) EA $10.62 CO LO ce EA O) O co EA C0 CO O EA 4 EA (O n N EA $15.44 N co CO EA O up ER EA O) N LO EA Lf) d- CO EA V 0) EA CO CO O EA E - O cP EA h r C9 Cf} N f-- O EA U) 69 E BASE COST (O O N 0Cr 0 r EA N CO 7 EA $4,358 $6,7551 0 CO 4_ $1,674 $1,877 N. 0) N M EA $4,514 0 0 0 : EA 0 N- CO r 3— 64 $1,2491 0 r EA (O N EA CO CO CO c0 EA $5,2251 $8,858 CO CO 10 EA $1,754 CO 0 C7 EA $4,221 LO (O EA 0 r r 1- O) CO. 0 , EA 0 0 N EA $3,584 OD 0) V' EA 0 O ( h EA 0 O O) N EA 3- 0 CO CO - N (O N ,- EA CO N n r EA 0 CO (fl N $4,540. CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 LL CE Li- — 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $5.88 1 $32.89 r r V O) LO . O) EA O) N r CO $13.75 CO 0 co EA 0) 0 (0 $14.60 (A O EA O) co r EE R $14.24 10 (n fl $25.44 $10.89 CO d' n EA N h O EA CO (O O 6EA 63 CO N N $12.74 N- V C EA N- O EA CO CO E A CO CO Cf) EA CO O EA $18.53 d- CD N.: EA O LC) EA (n CO O EA d' !- n EA CO CO N EA O O O EA O O CO EA CO O EA (O 4 EA LO 69 BASE COST o) co °_ EA 1 - $2,174 $3,818 $5,230 (0 O CD EA $13,752 00 O 0 N EA $2,252 co C[) 0) (6 EA $5,417 O O CO EA V N r EA (A CA r EA 00 CO EA $2,953 $4,0421 0 N- N O Uf 0 co CO O r fA $1,878 CO O r N EA (b O CO O EA CC) CO O 10 EA O to CO C- EA $13,325 $2,183 $2,448 O CO 4. EA O m 0) C( EA $9,132 1 $15,480 00 co I- EA N (O co EA co LC) r EA $2,074 co N 0) EA $5,4461 'SQ. FT. 1 0 0 S r 000`5 1 10,000 0 0 O O N 0 0 O O 10 100,000 0 0 O r 0 0 O Cn 10,0001 0 0 0 O N 50,0001 0 0 O r 0 0 O CA 10,000 20,0001 50,0001 0 0 O O O 0 0 LC) N 12,5001 25,0001 0 0 0 O (n 125, 000 250,0001 0 0 O N 0 0 O O r 20,0001 40,0001 0 0 0 O O 200, 000 0 0 O r 0 0 O t() 0 0 O O r 20,0001 50,0001 0 0 0 O O OCCUPANCY TYPE a) C>) T. C7 .(0 a a) Er (Not H -4) Motor Vehicle Fuel Dispensing Parking Garage (Not S -4) Open Parking Garage Lab/ R & D Other T. Is (Not Office or Retail) IBC/ICC 1 CLASS O (1) O C/) O (1) `it (1) PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > Z Z EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 00 .- . ER N CO (O ER $2.831 d- O) r ER 1- N CV ER N. N. CV ER N h Ui 69 CO CO C6 69. CO CO 00 ER O 00 N ER N 0 N ER CO d' d' ER N N. Ui ER CO CO Ci ER COON CO 00 ER CO CV 69 0 N ER C9 d' Ni ER CO CO 00 ER 1_ $5.23-1 CO CO 4 ER CO r oi ER (O 00 (ti ER 0 0 ,- CO $18.341 $45.211 r- N Ui ER CO 0) O ER $24.051 1 BASE COST 0 co E` Ea d' n 00 ER $1,536 N O _ CV ER $3,2641 CO co U) (n ER $2,703 co M ER $3,499 CO (0 r (n 69 N d' CO (0 ER E` 0 00 00 ER M,- O n CV ER O r C7 (fl 0) 0) 4 M ER CO CO - (n ER h d' CO CO ER 1 $8,8671 0) 00 0 CV ER $2,442 co O N. N ER r O) 0) C'J ER O 0) N U) (R $6,8541 O) 0) r N ER r 1- U) (V ER $2,846 $4,202 O n U) (C) ER $7,214 — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC 2 — > 1 2 r — 1 2 1 EACH ADD'L • d (1) 0 o 6 N CO ER dr LO CO ER I" N ER CO Cdr N . ER CO ER . h ER N d ER $10.42 ( LO CO ER I N N ER dr LO () ER r h ER N d ER $10.42 LO CO ER ( N N ER LO (C ER O r EA O O Cfl 69. d' U A (O ER CO to $38.75 $22.93 $56.51 0 A $13.70 O O BASE COST (C) N- cm (fl co (A o r 69 0 N 0) r ER $2,628] 0 CO O ER 0 N 6) CO ER INSPECTION ONLY 0) N. 0) M ER U) O) M ER $4,373 co U) d• (O ER $8,558 co 00 O ,- '- 0) r- Co M 69 U) (A C7 ER $4,373 CO U) 4 (O ER $8,558 CO 00 O ,- ER 0 r CO N ER $3,052 CO r (o () ER $4,988 N co (0 ER $8,5661 $2,7481 CO N C) 69. $3,557 $5,252 CO (O co (O ER CO r o Oi ER - CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 I FR, II FR EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. N. 1� Ea N CA CA . ER U) N E R 0 CO N ER d' CO ER U) r d ER CO U) EO ER N. 0 U) ER 0 (f N E ER $4.20 $3.03 U) (O (O ER CO CO O ER N- 0 U ER $12.501 0 N d ER $3.03 U) O ca ER $13.25 $7.85 CO (A 6 ER 0 (0 (O ER O) CO d ER $10.281 O (0 O 69 ER $27.52 $67.81 $22.81 $16.44 h 0 (O CO ER BASE COST 0 I- r E{} N (0 ER $2,304 d' L) 01 ER $4,896 d' 0 CO 00 ER U) U) 0 d' ER $4,7411 $5,248 $7,748 0 I- N O ER 0 0 (o C7 r ER LO U) O d' ER r - N- d' ER $5,248 $7,748 $10,270 0 0 (o CO r ER CO CO r CO ER CO CO (0 M ER $4,055 CD CO co U) ER U) CO O) r Ea $10,280 $3,298 CD U) CO C7 ER Cr) CO N d' ER CO 0 CO (O ER $8,356 $10,822 E- 0 (n O 0 0 N 10,000 20, 000 40,0001 100,000 200,0001 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N 40,000 100,000 200,000 0 0 O N 0 0 O O 20,000 40,000 0 0 0 O — 200,000 0 0 0 ,- 000'9 0 0 0 O 20,000] 50,000 0 0 O 0 r 0 0 CO 0 0 U) r 1000'£ 0 0 0 (p 15,000 30,000 OCCUPANCY TYPE LDINGS All Shell Buildings Theater Church Auditorium Restaurant IBC /ICC 1 CLASS 1 SHELL BUI Q N Q N Q N Q PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY — 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z Z Z = – Z 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 $25.281 CO 0) .- E T CO OD CO . co 69 1 $12.401 d' 0) M E9 N CO M EfT O N E EfT $10.171 CO d M ea N. 0 O ER 1 $13.341 O N 1- EfT N. r O Efl $25.081 co d' CO to h 0 (O ET M ea N 0 ( O EfT 0 N O CO EfT $74.411 $25.03 d• 0 M EfT CO (n M CO EfT d' 0 CO ffl CO 0 O EfT $26.311 (n CO H E/9 N. CM O E/9 0) M M EfT CO O) E T 0 N. d EA $11.571 M co M EJ C O N . fT () r co ET 1 BASE COST $1,495 $1,7481 in co 0) El" $2,857 r co N. M4NN(NT EA d' O 0) E, co co O EA! N. h CO EA! eo CO EfT 1 $3,8851 O (n r (n EfT co CD (D CD EA $2,033' $2,377 $2,6311 O (p r (n EA co CO CD CO EA $2,4131 1 $2,8211 co N r Md'CflNN EA r CO EA co .T- EAT N. O) EA! co CO r EA! $2,4931 O CO N. Nd'(nCD EA CD N. 0 Ea d' 0 d' ER co 0) co EA $1,8751 $2,1921 1 $2,4271 $3,5841 O (n h Ea $6,1541 — 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > 2 2 E iY 2 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. co C co EA $18.721 r(nr CO 4 EA O (n CO T■ r Ea 1_ $24.521 O Inn N Ea N r 69 $31.35 1 $10.54 M (O N.: EFT N. CO Cfl Ell O LI) N E. $12.711 $31.35 $10.541 M LO ER h CON. CD E9 N M CD EfT $37.75 O M 0) CO $31.291 $22.551 $49.48 $22.55 $13.35 1 $32.89 N- OM r 69 co I: EA M d' KT 0) M Ea N CO (n Ea 1 $14.46 co CD( d' Ea O M Ea M CD f� E9 1 BASE COST OD O M ea $2,1851 0) _ N E3 $3,5711 1 $4,734 0 CO CD fg 1 $2,5411 N. M N Ea $3,289 1 $4,856 CO CO d- o Ea $8,335 $2,541 $2,971 1 $3,289 $4,8561 $6,438 $8,335 CO O M EA $3,5261 CO 0 co M 69 $5,764 $7,641 CO 0) co M EfT CO (D co CV 69 $3,117 $3,451 A 0) O (n Ea LO (O N. (O ER $8,7451 $2,3441 0 d' N. N ER $3,034 0 CO d' 69 $5,9371 M CO !� Ea 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 LL EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $37.93 $22.461 $55.32 $18.60 $13.40 $29.42 0) N. M N ET (n N M . r ET N CO CO CO ET 1 $12.65 r r M E} O 0 O N ET 0) N. (n N ET $15.25 $37.62 (n D N . E fl r r M E3 0 0 O N 64 $76.521 CO ( EfT $37.551 O 0 N ET $59.381 CO O N T N O co E T N. d' M CO EfT $13.281 (O (n M Efl M M O N 69 0) CO T .- ffT (O O . E } $17.351 M CO M FR r N d 63 CO N M E3 BASE COST $2,242 N CO N Ea N 0 M N EfT 1 $4,285 CO CD (C1 EfT CO () CO r Ea 0) d 0 C7 Ea $3,5651 CO V 0) c6 Ea 1 $5,827 M N � h Ea- N 0 O O 1- 0) d' O C7 EA (!7 CO (f Ori 69 $3,946 $5,827 $7,725 N 0 0 O 1- M C O C7 Ea $4,231 $4,684 CO O(D ) (O 64 M r Cn ea (n Is CO r . M 0) .- Ch EA 0 d' N. C7 EfT $4,1411 1 d' r (O co CO 0 00 Ea $10,4941 $2,8131 $3,2891 d' CO CO ea CD N- M (C) ea (n N r N: E» 0 CO N Oi EA SQ. FT. 250 O in N(nO r O O N O O M 1 12,500 25,000 500 O O LO N O O (C) 10,000 25,000 50,000 O O LO O O LO N 5,0001 10,000 25,0001 50,0001 0 O NOOOO 0 O r 0 O CV 0 O d' 0 O O .- 20,0001 O O (010 O O N 5,0001 O O 0 O ,_ 25,000 50,000 O O OOOO r O O (n O O O r O O O N 50,0001 100,000 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE 'Restaurant T. I. 'Small Assembly 1 (.0 0) C a m Banks Laundromat Medical Office 1 (Offices 1 IBC /ICC CLASS co m m m m PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > _ — _ Z = 1 EACH ADM_ 1 100 SQ. FT. I o)rnrvncwnrn . Eft . N EA> . n ER . N ER . ER . M ER . r ,- . CO ER $17.171 N.rro(a . EA> . 4 ER . CA EA> . (O ,- . O ER $23.451 a cooc°DO . ER . ER $12.471 CO . EA> CO . 4 EFT . O ,- . M EA> . N EA $5.851 rnrrVr�°iLOCD0 . (O ER . . O rER . M ER . N ER . lA 69 . O) 69 . (n ER . M � CO. . V Oi� . M ER . ER BASE COST 0) LA r _ ER LO (!) co_ ER $1,500 $2,215 $2,937 0 O Co _ E ER $2,7841 1 $3,2551 CO O (O _ M ER 1 $5,3201 N (1) 0 n ER CO co r _ CA ER O 0) ER 1 $2,222 0 co 4 _ N ER M co co _ M ER CO r CO _ ER CD co N _ O (fl N CO (A _ M ER LC) co r _ ER r CO_ CO O CO _ O 69 1- N 0 0) ERT O) CD r 0) co N _ M ER (O 4 CO _ M ER $4,2581 $6,2861 $8,3341 $10,7871 0) (1) N _ N ER 8 _ N ER $2,9231 CO M _ ER E $5,7241 $7,4141 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR EACH ADD'L I100 SQ. FT. CO O (A CO M ER 00) 0,- . 6 M N 69 ER ER 1 $4.75 1 $14.71 n M ER dO' CA 1 $7.22 N (n ER $11.421 0 O ER $11.90 $29.31 CD (0 0) EFT ,- ER o $15.59 � 0) ER N. (A ER 1 $13.731 (NO V> ER M M ER M 1` lfl COO 69 69 � (n ER $12.671 N ER ER 0 M ER n CD ER m r ,- L0•L$ � 1- ER co to ER N . tt 69 N CA 64 ce 2 1 BASE COST 1 $1,4481 'd' 0) CO ER $1,875 $2,768 $3,671 0 (p N. 4 ER 0 (D C0 ER 0) co 0 4 69 1 $4,504 0 (1) CO c6 64 1 $8,815 0 N V' r '- CO N. CO N ER CO CO N. N. h o N C'� ER FR $4,5411 1020`9$ (!) 0) L. FR L $4,4521 CO 0 N (n EFT co O h to 69 O (A W 69 co CO N r CO M r r r ER (0 0 CO ER 1 $5,3211 co O CO t` ER co O rER $13,4831 1 $2,8231 O co C7 69 $3,6541 $5,3951 $7,1541 co co N O CR 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC LL CC 1 EACH ADD'L 1 100 SQ. FT. (O M ER (!) CO 'V' 69 $10.72 $3.61 $2.59 O - (f) ER O (O h ,- EA> 1 $10.45 $25.75 CO CO CD ER (f) N CO V9 0 L- M ER r r 4 NCR $14.28 $35.17 CO CO r r� N (f) M ER $18.71 0 CO r r- 0) CO (O ER $16.481 (f) (C) (C) CO3 0 O 4 69 I,- N■ W 69 M V O( r- M r ER $15.21 N r (C) ER M (O M ER 0) 0 M ER 1 $14.33 M CO ER 0) 00 O NN .4' 0 1� 69 L. 0 . (t) 69 N r . r ,- 1 BASE COST co co ER M co 0 N ER $2,250 $3,322 $4,405 O O L0 ER (O T 4 ER $4,882 (() O V (C) ER 0 a0 0) r ER 1 $10,5781 el- O N. ,— T $2,851 $3,334 $3,691 $5,449 $7,224 $9,354 $5,343 n 'cF N (0 ER co 0) (O EFT N N O rER $13,540 $17,540 $4,9341 $5,768 $6,3861 $9,4281 $12,5001 O w CO ER $3,388 (O 0) (0 ER $4,3851 V' 1- �t CO 69 $8,5851 O N _ ER ISQ. FT. 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 LC) 10,000 _ 20,000 50,000 100,000 0 O 0 0 O 0 10,000 20,000 50,000 100,000 500 2,500 5,000 10,000 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 N 40,0001 100,000 0 0 O 0N 0 N O 0 O 10,0061 20,0001 40,0001 0 O 0 d r 200, 0001 0 0 0 r O 0 0 L O 0 0 O r 20,0001 50,0001 100,0001 OCCUPANCY TYPE Office T. I. (Preschool /School ( Daycare Moderate Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Low Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Moderate Explosion Hazard IBC /ICC 1 CLASS m 1E-1/E-2 1E-3 LL N L.L. N S PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: Z > Z > Z _ Z = EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. CO N co CO N (O cA OD CO CA EA CO O O co 1 $21.671 $47.54 CO r .- EA9 CO h CO (A. n (ti ,- CO CO (t) 09 CO O 0 0) CD EA CO tt r .- CO I,- Cp EA I', Cp � CO CO (A EA CO 0 �} (A O 0) OD EA I- CD EA CO r (t) EA O h N d4 CO N 4 EA CO 0 CO EA CO h (O EA CO h (O EA O N N EA CO tO EA CO CO EA r M r EA (A CO N EA r (n CA EA co L EA $13.881 CO CO bb I . CO CO EA O CO I� EA 1 BASE COST 0) EA 0) CO EA 1 $1,875 O) CO I. N EA I� co C*) EA 1 $4,754 0 I- N EA 0) (O r 0) EA CO 0 (O 0) EA O) t\ r 0 EA CO CO CO (O EA CO 0) CO (D EA 0 I. N EA 0) CO r 0) EA CO 0 (n 0) EA O) t` r CC) EA (0 CO CO (O EA CO O) (b (O EA $6,180 $7,225 0) 0) O) is EA CO 0 co. r .- ea 0 CO CO 6. .- ea 0 CO N O CC) 0 '7 EA ooL'9$ Og L'g$ CO �t CO EA $11,1601 $14,440 0 t!) N N Ef} $2,6311 0 CO 4- Ea $5,700 $7,384 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR I EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. O) LO CO $45.34 O) CO r r 64 $37.58 co 0 I� CV $59.42 1 $14.33 co d' CC) EA EA O) CO O CV $7.041 N. 0. LO EA N r r U} $14.33 $8.481 $20.89 $7.04 $5.07 N r r • EA C)) LC) CO O (O .- EA $15.871 (C) CO (t) EFT LO CO 0) EA (n d' CD EA CO CD 4 EA (0 O) n f\ N CO EA EA (A N N b9 CO CO 1)) EA EA 0) CO r � (n 0 I: EA $17.351 CO CO (O EA CO N N V O EA EA 1 2 BASE COST .- CD EA T .- N EA $2,344 $3,461 $4,588 $5,942 $3,3881 (O Cr) M Ef} $4,385 $6,4741 $8,5851 O N_ r r'A $3,388 (O 0) (7 EA $4,385 $6,474 $8,585 0 N r ,- $7,724 $9,032 0) 0) 0) 0) EA 0 CO I`, -zi CA (n I-- (n O) EA 0 () CO (n CV 190g'g$ $6,4381 $7,125 0 N CO 0 fA 0 0 (n ([) O) 0 0) 05 EA EA $2,8131 d' (O M EA CO I` CO u) EA $7,125 $9,230 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IFR,IIFR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. O) a) $54.41 $134.03 (A O (f) $32.50 $71.31 $17.20 CO r0 cz; _ I� Lci N N N- (0(O EA O 0 EA $13.34 $17.201 CO r04O O(OOD(O ,- I� d' CO N EA EA V $13.341 I� OIN- COI- ,- EA $19.041 N d'COr(nCO.- (O4O(C)COON A N EA ,- 0) EA 0 (n EA- EA I-- EA N. CO CACO 4 EA EA $14.271 0 N- OD EA $20.821 (n O 0 Lri .- f} - BASE COST $2,173 $2,541 CO OD N EA $4,153 CO 0 (n (n EA CO r N- EA (n CO O EA $4,753 $5,2621 0) CD I- I` EA N 0 (O O r EA $13,344 (n CO O 4 EA 1 $4,753 $5,262 $7,769 $10,302 $13,3441 $9,269 $10,838 0) D) 0) r EA N I� N- 0 0) d_ (O N EA 0 N O CO EA I- 0 CO (O EA $7,725 $8,550 $12,6241 0 0 CO N- CO (O N EA EA $3,3751 0) CO CO EA $6,4511 0 CO (n h (n 0 OD r EA r EA 1 SQ. FT. 100 Oog 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 (n 10,000 0 0 0 .- 0 0 0 (n 10,000 0 0 0 O N 50,0001 100,000 0 0 O r 5,000 10,000 20,000 50,000 100,0001 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O T 30,000 60,0001 I 150,0001 0 0 0 O 0 CO 0 0 0 (n 25,000 50,000 100,000 250,000 500,000 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (0 1°,0001 0 0 O O N 50,000 100,000 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE Repair Garage Semiconductor 1 Fabrication Health Hazard 1 Materials Nursing Home/ Health Care Stores (Retail) Market 1 IBC/ICC 1 CLASS 1. 2 CO 2 I,- ± N N _ _ 2 2 (PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z- > Z = _ Z 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 r N OCOd'(OMIROtn.d'M69rERr-d� d9 CO O 0) CO EREi?E19Ei)EflEA<ft 0 O N CO N CA N d' . r L CO t- N co CO co E!?b9d9 0 co (0 o In O) V co EREAEf3Ell CO O) LC) ' MhNh000d'd'Nh 0) h h O) E9 CV 0) b9�Ef?EF}Ee N O r 00 co I- O N. (fl n . N r . EFT $35.541 'V fag Ea 00 0) N9 00 0 CO R O) N O� O to to $13.551 (n (C) 0) N Mn to N . EF? BASE COST CD O N _ EA 0 r d' _ ER CO (D _ ER CO 0 CO _ NMMCOIR ER (0 (() 0 _ ER O CO 0) _ EA 0) I� CO _ ER 0 r CO _ ER $8,6451 $12,7631 0 N O) _ CO EH r N O) _ CV $7,1241 0) N co _ M ER $9,2211 CO CO _ MMM CO d• O _ E CO I. co _ $1,7371 f• CO r- _ ER CO d• CO E<? CO d• N _ N VI $2,3351 $2,4291 CO CO M _ EE? L $1,5951 CO CO CD _ r ER $2,0221 (D 0) 0 _ NNN EA CD I- r _ EA CO 0) r Ed. $2,5681 CO 0) r _ ERMn ER. d• CO (n _ Ef3 CO 0 N _ cf) _ CONSTRUCTION TYPES: T > C M E X S 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $12.761 $7.541 CO Cp ER LO N (O to $4.521 O CA O) to 00 I� r E CO M CO co CO r I-: I` I`, (n EA CO r d' EA CO r O) Ef3 CO (n N CO d' ta Eri O CO 00 (O r cc; (f3 Ed. Ed d' n CA (f3 (d C (d C (d C (d C (d C n/a WI C (d � C (0 C N C N C Cd C (. r CO CO CO EA d• CD (O M CO (.C) to r r d• Ef) O m ER BASE COST CO O (() Ef? $1,7631 N (n 0) Efl $2,882 0 N 00 M ER 0 (f) co d• EF? $8,3491 N CO h O) ER (D O 00 O ER $15,9541 0 Cn r ER 0 Q) co N E (O O O) O N 4 O ER CO N (0 r EA CO O n ER O CO (O N ER 0 N N CA N C (d C (d C CO C n/a n/a «5 C «5 C «5 C C «5 C o C (0 r N 6H 0 N M to $3,5541 (D O) (O Efi 0 O 0) EH 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC Cl rf L.L — 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. 1_ $15.31 (n O M to $22.33 0 (D Ef-? N d' LD ER CO CO r (0 M r ,- E (0 CO 00 64 0) (O O E CO O co ER 0) O) d• EA CO O) O (0 $15.07 N O 00 FR (O O (0 CV O) CO El EiJ CO CO M Efi 0) CO r E CO C as C (d C as C (d C as C as C as C as C as C (d C as C $13.941 co N M va $20.331 co 00 (O Ef3 co O) d' vi 00 O (0 1 BASE COST 0) 0) r EA O r N EA $2,342 $3,458 $4,584 o O) (A (A 0) O O r ff3 d' r- r 64 O N_ Ef-J $19,145 $25,380 $32,868 (0 CO CO O EA $12,4941 CO CO (0 r ER O_) d' O N ER $27,072 $35,064 CO C n/a n/a n/a n/a (d C CO C ((00 C (mod C CZ C ((00 C (mod C $3,2951 $3,8621 1 - -- $4,2651 m N CO ER $8,3461 N r CO O EA 1— 0 500 0 0 (C) N 0 0 O (O 0 0 0 O 25,000 50,000 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 r 300,0001 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 6 150,000 300,000 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 3,0001 0 0 0 d' 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 d' 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 N- 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (f) 10,0001 0 0 0 N 50,0001 0 0 0 O r 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE Retail T. I. 'Apartment Building 1 'Hotels & Motels 1 Dwellings - Custom Models - 1st Master Plan Dwellings - Production Phase of Master Plan (Repeats) Residential Care Facilities IBC /ICC 1 CLASS 2 th th 1R-3 1 co th 1R-2 (PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY _ CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > Z = _ Z = 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 O)Tr CO h EA CO 44 NCONr- N r rEAEAEAEA I� M N. N O) CO CATr CO . CO NooNf. N r EA N M A N N EA CA tO (A M r 69 r- CO EA $16.541 1.rov CO In 64fAEArEA o 64 co (O co r I. CO NtN CO CO CO CO EAEflEAEA(A O 0 co MCA V o COO M CO r M 64 V o N M EA O t` (A CO ea EA MNCOM00 r– N EA 1` CO EA N . N EAKEA CO r (O M BASE COST N co co _ M EA $4,2531 N. O _ st (fl 0 CO 0) _ CO ea CO N _ CA EA CO M O) _ r r- h M CO _ M cfl $4,2531 140n 7S o CA 0) _ CO EA co N _ CA ea CO M 0) _ r r- $2,6821 n _ M EA $5,1251 O 0) N _ CO EA O O CO _ a0 EA $2,6821 'A r _ M EA _ M EA $5,1251 CO O) N _ CO EH O O O0 _ Cb EA $2,1391 O CO _ N Cfl O) M 1- _ N EA (O M 0 _ 4 cA $5,4201 O N 0 _ t\ cA n N N _ N EA $3,1881 0 M CO _ M ER 0 N _ CO EA CA O O) _ CO EA 0 (0 0) _ 00 EA CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 S > 2 2 —_ 2 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. N CO CA ea CO Cfl CO EA N 0 V $4.721 $3.40 CO 69 EA N CO CA EA CO CO . Cf) EA $14.021 $4.721 $3.40 CO 1- IA CA $14.181 0) M CO EA I- CO O N CO O) (O EA 0 Cn EA 0 0 r 64 CO r E 0) M 00 EA N (O O 69- CO 0) O EA O CO EA 0 0 r rrEA EA 0 Cl r EA CA CO CO 0) co � CO CO EA $4.001 N I- CO EA N N (O EA N M EA O co EA Cr) CO N EA O . N EA N '1t . 64 EA BASE COST $4,547 CO (0 CO fA $5,884 $8,688 O N co_ rfA $14,920 $4,5471 CO M CA EA $5,8841 co CO CO (b EA O N co r r(A O N (A rEA $3,3521 O N o M EA $4,3391 CO 0 d' (C) EA $8,4951 O 0 O r iA $3,3521 O N O ('7 EA 0) CO co V' EA CO 0 CO EA $8,4951 0 0 O $2,674] CO N M fi3 $3,4611 0 r r CO EA- CO N I� (O EA CO N 00 EA CA 0 tt M co $3,9851 $4,4121 $6,5121 $8,6351 I-- CO CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IFR,IIFR 1 EACH ADD'L [ 100 SQ. FT. Co r 64 N co M EA $16.82 CO CO . CO EA CO 0 [t (304 CO 0) CO EA $11.541 N CO CO EA $16.821 (O CO C(7 EA $4.081 LO 0) CO EA 0 I� 64 1L0'0 L$ $24.801 CO M CO EA 0 (fl EA O N M EA 0 f- FEA A $10.071 0 CO V 69- CO CO OD 0 (O EA 1 $13.201 $13.571 M 0 tl0 EA CA N. (A EA- CO CO o EA 0 CO d' EA $10.531 N 0) (O Ef) 0 r 64 EA CO 0 O A E 0 M EA CO N EA N M . CO EA BASE COST $5,456 0) f� M as EA CO 0 EA $10,426 $13,824 'd' O 0) N 1-- $5,456 0) 1� CO (0 6/4 EA co 0 n EA (0 N O 1- $13,8241 $17,904 $4,023 co 0 N 4 EA r- 0 N CO EA 1- CO CO ^ EA 4 CA r O ,- O 0 N M ,3 co N 0 T to co 0 r- v EA 1- 0 N CO EA INN CO co N- EA 'Cr CA r O -1– $13,200 CA 0 N M EA EA $3,7521 N co (O EA $8,1301 $10,530 O) O 4 EA $4,783 $5,2951 $7,8151 M CO M o FA $13,4251 'SQ. FT. 0 0 O N 10,000 20,000 40,000 100,000 0 0 O 0 0 N 0 0 O N 10,000 20,000 40,000 0 0 0 0 r 200,0001 0 0 O r 5,0001 0 0 O O 0 0 0 6 50,0001 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 CO 10,0001 20,0001 50,0001 100,0001 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N 50,0001 100,000 0 0 CO N 12,5001 25,0001 50,000 125,0001 0 0 0 0 co N 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE [Moderate Hazard Storage [Low Hazard Storage Repair Garage (Not H -4) Motor Vehicle Fuel J Dispensing Parking Garage (Not S -4) 1 Open Parking Garage 1 IBC /ICC CLASS (1) N th M Ch M Cn CO ch 1S -4 1 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: `Z `Z Z _ Z = EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. I CO ER vno�rcfli.vcoco ACA OTT ER S! 0) 03 V fA03 CO Tr 0303 LO 0 03 O 03 $4.54, ":1- ER N EA ocn 0) EA CO ER Cr ) 03 o N rte+ 0 0 ER BASE COST n 0)) _ c ER $4,6141 0) r0 _ Cn ER $7,5421 0 0 _ O -EF3ERERERERE9 0) N W- CO CO _ O c _ 0) _ CO CD _ N N _ c V d14)' _ d' $2,5611 .4-1 0) _ N E9 $3,3151 0 CO _ 4 K3 $6,4881 O OV _ a0 E9 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 C 2 = 2 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $10.43 OO r 0 ER $15.21 N •, - 0 ER 00 CO M 03 O) 0 CO E9 c) CO h (/3 - CO 4 03 CO (O O - O CD c) EA CO C1) N ER Co CO CC) ER r- f, CO ER O 4 ER CO co CA 03 N Co C'') E9 O) co N E9 1 N Cf) 03 $11.50 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof $16.30 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof $47 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof >. j O L BASE COST $4,934 (O N to E9 CO co o CO (R OO VN" E ER 1 $12,5001 0 0r CO ER $1,7321 $2,0251 $2,2421 000 Ch K3 E C09 ER ER co 0 Cn ER $3,2021 $3,7431 ,- E9 E 000 r Efl E9 r N E9 0 O J 00 0 CO N ER 0 O E ER $143.50 for first 1000 cubic yards Plus 1 $78.60 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards 1 $997.60 for first 100,000 cubic yards Plus 1 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 u- c Li. - EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $12.51 $7.42 $18.25 d- Co ER $4.42 - N. O) ER 0) N. CC) ER r N CC) ER $12.821 1 $4.321 O r r) E9 N 0 (O ER N r Cn ER r co d' ER CO CO r ,- O 0) Cv) ER N CO N ER O Cr) co Eg $40 for first 100 cubic yards Plus 1 $290.20 for first 10,000 cubic yards PII I BASE COST N O) CE) ER N O) ( O ER CC) CO I- ER d' C*) r r,9 000'91.$ CO d' CA ,- c0 0 N ER 0 d' N ER 0 CO N ER $3,972 $5,2681 0 73 (O E9 $3,842 $4,492 CO 0) 4. ER $7,344 n CA ER 0 CO N ISO. FT. 0 0 N 10,000 0 0 0 O N 40,000 100,000 200,000 0 0 .-- 0 0 0 CC) 10,0001 0 O N 50,000 100,000 0 O c\ 10,000 0 O N 40,000 0 0 O 0 200,000 )n and Gr 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE ILab/ R & D (Other T. l.'s 1 (Not Office or Retail) LDINGS All Shell Buildings 150 cubic yards or less 151 to 100 cubic yards 1101 to 1,000 cubic yards 11,001 to 10;000 cubic yards 110,001 to 100,000 cubic yards 1100,001 cubic yards or more PLAN CHECK IBC/ICC 1 CLASS 'SHELL BUI PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED NEOUSITEMS 1 COST 0 0 (A H9 0 0 O 0 0 O to EFT $75.00 0 0 O O EFT 0 0 c) O CO EFT $612.00 $459.00 $554.00 $315.001 $573.00 $459.00 $573.00 $497.00 0 0 O co CO EFT 0 0 i EFT 0 0 O ,— (9 0 0 O CO N E» 0 0 o) N Efl $516.00 $86.00' 0 0 co N. 64 $382.00 $459.001 0 0 O CO (o E» $975.00 0 0 N co E9 $344.00 0 0 O) N Ea 0 0 N- 0) EFT $58.001 0 0 h 0) d' E9 0 0 N- 0) [t 69 $58.00 $688.00 $58.00 0 0 (D r (n EFT INSPECTION $25.00, $37.501, 0 0 O E9 0 0 CO EFT $153.00 $115.00 $153.00 0 0 O co $344.00 0 0 T T Efl $172.00 $153.00 $229.00 $115.00 0 0 O fA 0 0 co (n 0 0 0 N 172.00 86.00 287.00 115.00 0 0 T 401.00 0 0 co tO 153.00 115.00 0 0 O N 153.00 0 0 o) N 153.001 153.001 0 0 O) N 229.001 0 0 O N 172.00 INTAKE/ PLAN CHECK $25.001 $37.501 0 0 O In EFT $459.00 $459.00 $344.00 0 O O 't EFT $229.00 $229.001 $344.00 0 O O EFT $344.00 0 O O EFT $229.001 0 0 O EFT 172.001 0 0 O 344.00 0 0 O 0 0 o) (n 0 0 h co N 344.00 459.001 459.00 459.00 229.001 0 0 O 344.00 0 0 o) N 344.001 344.001 0 0 o) N 459.001 0 0 O N 344.00 z per hour each each each each 1 0 m a) each each 1 each each each each each unit each each each each up to 100 I.f. each 100 I.f. up to 100 I.f. 1 each 100 I.f. each each each each each each each each up to 30 I.f. each 30 I.f. each up to 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. MISCELLAN valued at $1,001 - $2,500 Projects valued at $2,501 - $5,000 Fence or Freestanding Wall (non masonry) Wood Frame up to 1000 s.f. Partition - Commercial, Interior up to 30 I.f. 1 Additional enclosed cover 'Photovoltaic System Standard hourly rate Permit Center Processing Fee Minimum Building Permit Fee Projects valued at <$1,000'1 Equipment Shelter Cellular /Mobile Phone Awning /Canopy Carport 1 Certificate of Occupancy - Residential Certificate of Occupancy - Commercial Close Existing Openings Commercial Trailer Dock or Deck - ground floor Deck - second story and above C 0 0 E a) 0 (Duplicate /Replacement Job Card >six feet in height Each additional 100 I.f. 'Fence or Freestanding Wall (masonry) >six feet in height Each additional 100 I.f. Masonry Pre - fabricated /Metal Masonry up to 1000 s.f. 1 Greenhouse (non - commercial) Each additional pole 1 1 Each additional 30 I.f. 1 Partition - Residential, interior Open, all types Additional open cover Enclosed, all types 'Antenna ' Fireplace Flag Pole 'Garage 'Light Pole Patio Covert PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED NEOUSITEMS COST O 0 (o d' 0 0 r O N $612.00 0 0 ao u EH 0 0 O N 0 0 ui $573.00 $57.001 0 0 CM 0 ao $745.001 0 0 CV M 0 0 0 Co O $98.00 0 0 O M N 0 0 0 0 vi O CO $115.001 0 0 CD N 0 0 N N. 0 0 O (O $172.001 0 0 O 0 M 0 0 ui N 69. 0 0 O L() r 0 0 CV 0 ,�7} $57.00 $459.00 $459.00 0 0 N 0 vt ER 0 0 N 0 Nr ER 0 0 CV 0 fra 0 O CV 0 '7-J} INSPECTION 287.00 172.00, 153.00', 0 N 115.00 115.00 172.00 57.00 344.00 0 ( 459.00 573.001 459.00 0 ((00 115.001 229.001 344.001 0 , r 688.00 1 115.001 0 ^ 0) 115.001 287.001 150.001 O N O n 115.00 57.00 172.001 0 d 115.001 115.00 115.00 O u7 L 1 L Q H Z PLAN CHECK O 0) (0 O O) N 459.00 O O) N 115.00 O O 401.00 O O 459.00 172.00 172.00 O O) In 459.00 0 0) N 0 LO r r 115.00 459.001 O O 573.00 57.001 688.00 O 1: t!) 344.0( 150.00 00'0 00'9L 287.00 00'0 287.00 459.00 287.00 287.00 287.001 287.00 1-I Z up to 10 each 10 01. of do each 10 each hourly rate up to 501.f. each 50 I.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. each each up to 1500 s.f. each 500 s.f. vi O '4) O 0_ c each 500 s.f. up to 500 s.f. each 500 s.f. each up to 100 I.f. each 100 I.f. each each each each each each each each each MISCELLAN in place Concrete (1st 10 piers) Additional Piers (each 10) Driven (steel, pre- stressed concrete Seismic Retrofit* ( Fee reduced from $700 to provide an incentive)I 1 Each additional 100 I.f. 1 Seismic Retrofit per ABAG Plan or 2006 IEBC Rework of any existing ground sign Other Sign 1 Wall /Awning Sign, Non - electric Wall/ Electric 1 Pier /Pile Foundation Additional Piles (each 10 Pre -Plan Inspection (first hour) Each additional hour Retaining Wall /Foundation Repair First 50 I.f. Each additiona 50 I.f. Remodel - Residential Less than 300 s.f. Kitchen - OTC Bath OTC Kitchen - Routed Bath - Routed Additional Remodel Re- Roof with Sheathing Roof Structure Replacement Each additional 500 s.f. Residential Additon - First Story Up to 500 s.f. Each additional 500 s.f. Residential Addition - Multi -story Up to 500 s.f. Each additional 500 s.f. Sauna - Steam Directional Each additonal Ground /Roof /Projecting Master Plan Sign Check Re -Roof c CA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED NEOUSITEMS COST $258.00 $516.00 $372.00 $459.00 O O f: cm O O O u) E!T O O O Ea O O Ni Ps Ea- $1,147.00' O 0 ad C9 -Ea O 0 't M O O i Eft O 0 Ea 0 O EA $57.00 O O O 0 H3 O O r r E9 $172.00 $57.00 $115.001 $57.00 O 0 O 0 E9 O O O CO Ea O O O 64 O H 0 w d co Z 0 co I 172.00 143.00 115.00 0 N 115.00 0 N 344.00; 688.00 802.00 172.00 115.00 0 152.001 57.001 100% of the Plan Check Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 I00'0 58.001 57.001 460.001 finish, etc will be charged accordingly. 1 INTAKE/ PLAN CHECK 172.00. 344.00 229.00 344.00 o 0 0 344.00 0 0 0 430.00 459.00 516.00 172.001 229.001 00'0 287.00 0 0 0 O 0 o N 115.001 00 N L) 57.00 00 0 0 0 o 0 0 00 0 HI z n L a) N L L N first flight per flight first 100 I.f. each 100 I.f. each each each each upto5 each 5 upto5 each 5 each I each per 1/2 hour each per 1/2 hour each per 1/2 hour each Hourly (min 4 hrs.)I Hourly (min 4 hrs.) only. Associated work inluding plumbing, mechanical, electrical , sheetrock, fi MISCELLAN than 10 s.f. or structural Overtime Plan Check Fee (first 1/2 hour) 1 Each additional 1/2 hour (or portion thereof) Supplemental Plan Check Fee (first 1/2 hour) 1 Each additional 1/2 hour (or portion thereof) Supplemental Inspection Fee (first 1/2 hour) Each additional 1/2 hour (or portion thereof) Less than 10 s.f. Spa or Hot Tub Stairs - First Flight Each Additional Flight Storage Racks Each Additional 100 I.f. Swimming Pool /Spa Pre- fabricated E O 0 Commercial Pool Termite Report/Dry rot Repairs 'Window or Door Replacement Additional Replacement 0 O U z Additional New Window I Concurrent Plan Check I Board of Appeals Emergency Call -Out (Non - scheduled) 1 'After Hours Call -Out (Scheduled) 1* Seismic Retrofit Fee is for retrofit wort 'Skylight 0 0 0 N MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES I $115.00 0 o EFT. 0 o EA. 0 0 EFT $153.001 $38.00 $38.00 0 0 $57.00 $115.001 $115.001 $57.00 0 0 EFT $57.00 0 0 0 0 EFT 0 0 EFT. $57.00 0 0 El, 0 0 EFT $57.001 $57.00 0 0 Install /Relocate each forced air or gravity -type furnace or burner (including attached ducts and vents) up to and including 100,000 Btu /hr Repair /Alteration /Addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit cooling unit, absorption unit or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls regulated by code Install /Relocate each boiler or compressor, up to and including 3 HP, or each absorption system up to and 1 including 100,000 Btu /hr Each air - handling unit, including attached ducts. (Note: This fee shall not apply to an air - handling unit which is a portion of a factory- assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler, or absorption unit for which Residential - Installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such a O O L Commercial - Installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such a 0 0 L Each Appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code but not classed in other appliance categories, PLUMBING / GAS PERMIT FEE Each Plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap (including water, drainage, piping, and backflow Each Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent, excepting kitchen -type grease a permit is required elsewhere in the code.) Each Ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air conditioning system authorized by a permit interceptors functioning as fixture traps Installation, alteration, or repair of water piping and /or water treating equipment (each) Installation, alteration, or repair of gas piping and /or gas treating equipment (each) Repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture Each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including backflow protection devices therefor Backflow devices not included in other fee services (e.g., building sewer) each unit Stand -alone Mechanical Plan Check (hourly rate) 1 or for which no other fee is listed in the code Other Mechanical Inspections (per Hour) Stand -alone Plumbing Plan Check (hourly rate) 'Other Plumbing and Gas Inspections (per hour) protection therefore) Each Building Sewer Each Water Heater and /or Vent Gas test (each Sewer lateral test (each) CO 0 0 N PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED - ' ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES 0 )f) r Efi T O) g. 0 EO EH $57.00 $57.00 0 O) E9. 0 O T Ea 0 EA N E!3 $38.00 $57.001 O O 69. $38.00 $29.001 0 E Co EA 0 N: LE) 69. (Includes a complete system of necessary branch circuit wiring, bonding, grounding, underwater lighting, water pumping and other similar electrical equipment directly related to the operation of a Temporary Service power pole or pedestal, including all pole or pedestal- mounted receptacle outlets and appurtenances Temporary distribution system and temporary lighting and receptacle outlets for construction sites, - decorative lighting, Christmas tree sales lots, etc. (NOTE- SEPARATE FEE DUE TO ALAMEDA POWER AND TELECOM OF $250.00 PER SERVICE) 1 (Receptacle, switch, lighting or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, (For multi - outlet assemblies, each 5 feet or fraction thereof may be considered as one outlet) Fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same, including wall- mounted electric ovens; counter mounted cooking tops; electric ranges; self- contained room console or through -wall air conditioners; space heaters; food waste grinders; dishwashers; washing machines; water heaters; clothes dryers; or Residential Appliances and self- contained factory-wired nonresidential appliances, including medical and dental devices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drinking fountains; 1 Motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial heating, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment, and other apparatus, as follows: Note: These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contactors, thermostats, relays, and other directly related control equipment. 0 0 o_ o) c E 0 For all other types of swimming pools, therapeutic whirlpools, spas, and alterations to existing other motor - operated appliances (each) not exceeding one horsepower (HP) in rating. (each) ; or other similar types of equipment.) (each) Stand Alone Electrical Plan Check ( hourly rate) Private, Residential, In- ground swimming pools - -- - - - - - -- Receptacle, Switch and Lighting Outlets feeders, and meters) First 10 (or portion thereof) Each additional 10 (or portion thereof) Lighting Fixtures, sockets, or other lamp- holding devices First 10 (or portion thereof) Each additional 10 (or fraction thereof) swimming pools Temporary Power Service 115 or 20 amp - First 10 circuits (each) - Over 10 circuits (each) 125 to 40 amp circuits (each) 50 to 175 amp circuits (each) 'Lighting Fixtures Residential Appliances Non - Residential Appliances J Power Apparatus 0 N N 0) ro a 0 0 0 N PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES 1 0 o 6 N (A $38.00 0 0 co M EA 0 0 co n 69. $134.001 $172.001 $38.001 $115.001 (An additional fee will be required for lighting fixtures, motors and other appliances that are connected (NOTE: AN ADDITIONAL FEE OF $105 (UNDERGROUND) OR $150 (OVERHEAD) IS DUE TO ALAMEDA Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors for which a permit is required, but for which no fee is herein set forth (This fee is not applicable when a fee is paid for one or more services, outlets, fixtures, appliances, Additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline lighting system, or marquee (each) Services of 600 volts or less and over 200 amperes to 1,000 amperes in rating (each) Services over 600 volts or over 1,000 amperes in rating (each) 1 POWER AND TELECOM FOR THE RECONNECTION OR UPGRADE OF ANY SERVICE) 1 u A m co m Trolley and plug -in -type busways - each 100 I.f. or fraction thereof to trolley and plug -in type busways. No fee is required for portable tools.) Signs, Outline Lighting, or Marquees supplied from one branch circuit (each Services of 600 volts or less and not over 200 amperes in rating (each) Miscellaneous Apparatus, Conduits, and Conductors power apparatus, busways, signs, or other equipment) (Signs, Outline Lighting, and Marquees] Other Electrical Inspections (per hour) Services (PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED ZONING APPLICATIONS +T &MI *ZS 1— t +T &MI c S 1— t +T &MI e a t c a t O N Ef3 od t In O Z 1 H t otj I-- t N d9 +T &MI COO y} O N � LO +T &MI 06 1 t O included in cost of entitlements oiS 1— t 0 0 CO CR 10% of Contract Price' 0 O O r ffl 000'1. $ 0 0 O r EA 0 0 O 1- EH $ 500 0 0 O r 03 0 0 CO fA 0 0 N f�) 0 0 N EA 0 0 M ER 0 0 N Efl 0 0 0 r K} $ 1,000 a+ N O N c IAmendment to text of Chapter 30 "Development Regulations" of the Alameda Municipal Code Design Review - Major (New residential additions over 80sf.- Single Family and Duplex APPLICATION; APPLICATION; Initial Study, Negative Declaration, EIR (does not include Alameda County Clerk or Fish & Game fees) Administrative Charge on outside preparation of Initial Study, Negative Declaration or EIR [ Design Review - Major (New Comercial, residential additions over 80sf. >2 units Categorical Exemption (does not include Alameda County Clerk fee) GENER Master Plan or Amendment for Mixed Use Planned Developemnt Planned Development 1 Planned Developmemt or Amendment to Planned Devlopment Amendment to the General Plan (Diagram or Text) Periodic Review of Development Agreement Extension of variance which has not been vested Extension of use permit which has not been vested Design Review Design Review - Minor (Routed) Design Review - OTC Extension of Design Review not yet vested Parcel / tentative Map Amendment J Tentative /Pacel Map up to 4 lots Lot Line Adjustment (base of 2 lots) J Amendments Zone Change Master Plan Development Agreement Development Agreement [Variance Exception (Administrative) Use Permit Use Permit ITentative/Parcel Map Subdivision Map 5 -25 lots Subdivsion Map > 25 lots Condo Conversions (Lot Line Adjustment Environmental Review Mitigation Monitoring Rezoning Variance N N 0 0 0 N 'LICATIONS 0 ��� 0 0 +T &MI 0 0 +T &MI 0 +T &MI 0 1- + MI MI MI $ 300 $ 150 $ 200 0 0 N EA 0 0 N CO 0 0 N EA Demolition Certificate of Approval by HAB (Principal and accessory structure; removal of protected trees) Performance Agreement to allow occupancy before all requirements are completed Demolition Certificate of Approval by staff (accessory structures) Request for payment of parking in lieu fee Designation of Historical Sign or Monument Changes in Historical Building Study List Classification Investigation Fee = four times the activity fee Appeal to Planning Board Appeal to the City Council Home Occupation Zoning Compliance determination Deed Restriction Certificate of Complaince Alteration to City Monuments Traffic Study /Review IT & M = Time and Materials Appeals PUBLIC WORKS Fees noted in red or highlighted in red boxes are subject to Council Review. Maps & Prints: 500 scale - Alameda (color - 36" x 84 ") $22 500 scale - Alameda black and white $11 1000 scale - Alameda (color - 18" x 44 ") $15 1000 scale - Alameda (black and white) $11 500 scale - BFI 22 x30 $11 Aerials $11 plus $10 mailing Truck route, bike route $2 Traffic volume data sheets, radar speed data sheets $5 Assessor's parcel maps (whole page available at Alameda County Assessor's Office) $1.00 per portion Sanitary Sewer Plan (18 x 22) $16 Storm Drain Plans (18 x 22) $16 Other Prints (22 x 30) $22 Plans and Specifications: Standard Plans $30 Bike Plans $30 Standard Subdivision Improvement Specs $30 General Services: Research of Records (no charge for first 15 minutes) Transportation Operational Requests - nonsafety related Transportation Technical Team/Transportation Committee — Request for or appeal of actions* *Fee is refundable if enacted /approved Recycling/Trash Exception Application* $86 per hour Time and Materials $60 $86 * The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule. Time & Materials - Engineering time charged per cost allocation plan, approximately $99.82 /hour Master Fees - Revised 7/06 DEPOSIT * 8/16/2006 16 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED DEPOSIT 1._.._..-•---._.._.._.._.._.._..--•-.._.._..--------------•-•--••-•._.._.._-•-•--•--•--.._..---- Permit Center Applications: (Building Permit - Combination Building Permit (Non - Development) : Plan Check - Residential Remodel /Addition single family $260 + T &M ** ! Plan Check - Residential Remodel /Addition multi- family $400 + T &M ** I Plan Check - Commercial - multi building $400 + T &M Plan Check - Commercial - one building $260 + T &M Supplemental Plan Check T &M ** Development Applications Planned Development T &M Planned Development Amendment T &M Final Development Plan T &M 1 Parking in -lieu Fee Determination T &M :Review of Master Plans /Development Plans: !(Engineering services for review of developer applications will be at time and materials) I IMaster Plan T &M ** Master Plan Amendment T &M ** ! Development Plan (Also see Property Development category) T &M ** i j Development Plan Amendments T &M ** Development Agreement/Amendment (Also see Property Development Category) T &M ** j General Plan Amendment T &M ** Environmental Review T &M ** I Traffic Review T &M I :Concrete Permits ! Sidewalk repair /replace install 0 to 20 linear feet $0 I Sidewalk repair /replace install 21 to 50 linear feet $25 ; Sidewalk repair /replace install 51 to 200 linear feet $75 1 Sidewalk repair /replace install > 200 linear feet $300 j Curb Cut/Drivewa New (each) $200 • aa_ Sidewalk Repair - concrete permit Right-of -Way Permits: Encroachment Permits - Construction >1 week j Encroachment Permits - Temporary <1 week : Encroachment Permits - Permanent ! Excavation Permit - Includes inspection j Excavation Permit - Point Repair ; Each signalized intersection - additional charge ! 100% recovery to be phased in over three years: FY 07/08 390 /block 290 /sig. Intersection FY 08/09 520 /block 390 /sig. Intersection $520 $65 ** j $390 ** $290 Per Block $54 $195 ** The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule T &M = Time & Materials - Engineering time charged per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82/hour Master Fees, Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 17 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED Property Development - Applications may be reviewed by City staff or by consultant hired by the City at cost plus 10% Deposit is $10,000 unless otherwise specified Lot Line Adjustment Parcel Map (1 to 4 Tots) Tentative /Final Map review Assessment District Formation $1,500 $2,500 T &M (or Consultant Costs + 10 %) T &M (or Consultant Costs + 10 %) DEPOSIT $4,000 $2,500 —•-----•---•—•-------------------------------- ••---- •-- •-- •• - - - -- T &M (or Consultant-----•• - - -- Costs + 10 %) $6,900 $1,725 $1,100 T &M T &M $3,675 T &M $700 On /Off site Public Improvement plan review - Commercial > 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement plan review - Commercial < 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Commercial > 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Commercial < 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential >25 Lots On /Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential 5 to 25 Lots On /Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential < 5 Lots On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Residential >26 Lots On/Off site Improvement Inspection - Residential 1 to 25 Lots Grading Permit Inspection - Commercial < 1 Acre Grading Permit Inspection Grading Permit Inspection - Grading Permit Inspection - Grading Permit Inspection - Grading Permit Inspection - - Commercial 1 to 10 Acres Commercial > 10 Acres Residential 1-4 Lots Residential 5 to 25 Lots Residential 26 to 50 Lots $325 $575 T &M $450 $575 $700 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Applies to all development sites SWPPP <1 acre $1,900 1 SWPPP 1 =5 acres $2,550 j SWPPP 5 - 20 Acres $3,200 SWPPP > 25 Acres $3,800 Special Event Permits Not all special events will require review by Public Works. Review determination will be made at time of application. Fees will be waived for nonprofit or public benefit events. Banner Permit - per banner /per location for install removal of banner $200 Block Party Permit - Requiring Engineering Review $20 Boat Show Permit - requiring Engineering Review T &M ' Film Permit T &M Non- profit/Still Photography - street closure T &M All others - street closure T &M All Bridge dosures T &M . Rental of City Property (to be determined) j Race, Walk- a -thon, parade permit T &M Relocation Permit (housing moving) T &M Street Fair Permit T &M j Tent Permit Under 4,500 sq. ft. T &M Over 4,500 sq. ft. T &M Permits - Solid Waste & Recycling -Hauler Fees (C &D Fees) Basic fee Reporting fees ($100 per hour) Program Fee Impact Mitigation Fee Performance Security Bond $600 $100 minimum due at filing $8.67 per ton hauled $2.86 per ton hauled $95 T &M - Time and Materials (Engineering time charges per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82/hr. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 18 City of ALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Fee or Service Name / Description Current Fee Proposed Fee PLAN CHECKING / PERMITS Prebuild Conferences $ 125 $144/hr Fire Alarm $ 125 $ 147 Fire Sprinkler - New < 20 heads $ 188 $ 216 Fire Sprinkler - New 20-200 heads $ 250 $ 288 Fire Sprinkler - New 20 -200 heads (each head) $ 1 $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - New >200 heads $ 375 $ 432 Fire Sprinkler - New >200 heads (each head) $ 1 $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - TI < 20 heads $ 125 $ 144 Fire Sprinkler - TI 20-200 heads $ 188 $ 216 Fire Sprinkler - TI 20-200 heads (each head) $ - $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - TI >200 heads $ 250 $ 288 Fire Underground $ 250 $ 288 Fire Hydrants $ 25 $ 128 Each Additional Fire Hydrant $ 25 $ 25 Standpipes $ 250 $ 288 Standpipes Each Additional Outlet $ 10 $ 12 Suppression System - Hood $ 188 $ 216 Suppression System - Agents $ 250 $ 288 TANKS Install AGST <= 2K gals $ 125 $ 144 TANKS Install AGST> 2K gals $ 250 $ 288 TANKS Install UGST $ 375 $ 432 TANKS Install Piping only $ 125 $ 144 TANKS Remove Residential $ 188 $ 216 TANKS Remove Commercial $ 375 $ 432 TENT PERMITS 201 to 400 square feet (in total) $ 250 $ 48 401 to 1500 square feet (in total) $ 375 $ 72 1501 to 15,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 144 15,001 to 30,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 288 Over 30,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 432 SPECIAL PERMITS Bum & Weld (routine welding operation) $ 125 $ 144 Film Permit $ 63 $ 279 Fireworks - Display $ 125 $ 415 Fireworks - Theatrical $ 125 $ 415 Fireworks - Special Effects $ 125 $ 415 Fumigation and storage $ 125 $ 144 Camivals, Fairs & Special Events $ - $ 415 STANDBY FIRE PERSONNEL AND /OR EQUIPMENT (AT HOURLY RATE) Equipment without staff $ 72 $80/hr Standard Fire Engine without staff $ 150 $165/hr Staff Vehicle without staff $ 35 $39/hr Quint/Ladder Truck without staff $ 200 $221/hr Technical Rescue without staff $ - $110/hr Fire Boat without staff $ - $110/hr Ambulance $ - $83/hr Support Materials (variable) At cost per type and amount required At cost per type and amount required Personnel Per current contract salary including benefits Per current contract salary including benefits MISC FEES Copies of Fire Reports $ 1 $ 1 Approved as to Form CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING MASTER FEE RESOLUTION NO.12191 TO REVISE AND STREAMLINE THE PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC WORKS AND FIRE DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULES WHEREAS, the Alameda Municipal Code and the California Government Code provide that the City Council shall set fees reasonable to recover the cost of providing various services by resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council, at the August 27, 1991 Special Council meeting, directed City staff to amend the Alameda Municipal Code to reflect that City fees shall be set by City Council Resolution; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 12191 ( "Master Fee Resolution "), as amended codifies existing fees for various City services and permits; and WHEREAS, State law authorizes local governments to charge fees for services based on the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Alameda that fees for various City services and permits are set forth in the attached Exhibit "A ". BE IT FURTHER RESOVELED that pursuant to Ordinance No. 1928, the City fees are subject to administrative adjustments not greater than 5% annually over the existing recovery levels. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all fees established by Master Fee Resolution No. 12191 which are inconsistent with fees established by this Resolution are hereby repealed. Resolution #5 -D 10 -3 -06 'PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT W 111 o o O EFT o o CO CO Ef3 0 o r O EA- 0 O (p Ea 0 o do 1 $500.00 0 o Lfi co 0 o O 0 o Ln 0 r O ER 0 o U-?EA 0 o LV $15.00 Actual Costl 0 M E!) 0 M $100.00 0.3% of Permit Valuation 1 0 o N COY) _ 1% of Permit Valuation 1 0 Lo c Ea 0 o co CO EFJ 5% of Applicable Permit Fees HI Z D 1 per activity each permit each permit each each each each per cubic yard 1 per cubic yard 1 per Appeal 1 E Q) a a a) 0 _U c 0 a c L6 a 0 ) LL a m 0 0 •0 co a c as 0) c c c as 0 per unit per page C per connection esigner (Actual charge for copies as below) Retrieval of plans from offsite storage for copying after City obtaining required signatures of property owner and Copies of Plans from Microfiche after City obtaining required signatures of property owner and architect/d (See Development Services Fee Schedule) (See Public Works Department Fee Schedule) Permits with a Valuation of $5,000 and over 1 DMINISTRATIVI QI 'Permit Issuance (Charged on applicable Permit Center Activities) Monitoring Fee + ordinance Fees es (special machines) 11" x 17" microfiche copies (special machines) 18' x 22" Plans or Special Plans 'Filling on City -owned or controlled property ' 'Housing and Building Board of Appeal ' 'Impact Fees charged on Applicable Permits ' 'Addresses Assignment Existing New 'Archive Retrivals architect/designer 'Boarded/Vacant Building Fee 3' x 5' 5' x 8' Desk Flag (small) 8 1/2" x 11' copier prints 8 1/2" x 11" microfiche copi Other Documents Affordable Housing Fee City Development Fee Community Planning Fee Dwelling Unit Tax Improvement Tax Records Management Fee Sewer Connection Fee Technology Fee 'City Flags Copies: 'Dredging ' rn as 'PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED (/) I w W oo N EH $13.00 O 0 EA OOO 0 N Efl 10 d3 N Ell $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials oo (0 69. $250 deposit + Time and Materials $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials $250 deposit + Time and Materialsl $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials 0 2 C Cd a) E i= + o a) a) a 0 o 10 N EH to be determined! 0 o r EH $7,500 deposit + Time and Materials $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials .N 2 CO c CCS a) E F- + 0 o_ a) •o 0 u) te- $1,500 deposit + Time and Materials' LOLL Efl EA- I 69 Efl each structure per address per hour each each each CJ 0 c) a) each per day per day required per each metered parking space or 20 If.f. non - metered rper day per day per day 1 DMINISTRATIVI (regulated by State Law) Charges are determined by each Department's Plan Check time plus daily rates of: 0 O Cn (o ce 0 O O CO ER 0 O r 69 al 'Special Event Permits (Fees waived for Non - profit/Public benefit events) Permit History and Unit Determination 'Research of Records (over 15 minutes) Charitable Solicitation Permit E ■ EL E Non- Profit/Still Photography - no street closure Non - Profit/Still Photography - street closure All Others - no street closure All Others - street closure All Bridge closures Day One Day Two to Day Fifteen Day Sixteen onward Rental of City Property Race, Walk -a -thon, Parade Permit Use of Metered Parking Space Use of Non - Metered Space (per each 20 I.f.) 'INVESTIGATIVE FEE = Four times the Activity Fee ' 'Permit History I(Public Records Request) Banner Permit Bingo Permit Block Party Permit Boat Show Permit Relocation Permit 1 Street Fair Permit Tent Permit Under 4,500 s.f. Over 4,500 s.f. 'Temporary Parking Restrictions ' Signs PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: Z > Z > Z - Z EACH ADD'L. 100 SQ. FT. I 4 EA $24.871 CO CO O r Eft 1f) N n Eft N t0 00 Eft 0) CO O r Eit N N N Eft 1 $15.231 N L CO ER ' Eft $5.23_1 1- M CO Eft N CO V Eft 1 $25.851 1-- 0 .- r EA v L0 r Eft (o CO aD Eft O CO O r Eft $14.241 O (- Oi I-- ER $34.151 $23.251 $27.331 O Co M co (o Eft 4 CO ( Eft 1 $37.141 $15.931 $10.831 $12.741 $15.521 tri Eft $28.841 $12.361 I' C Eft O 0) of ER co 0 N r Eft BASE COST o Co 0) N ft $3,2851 $5,7721 O 0) 1� E9 $12,254 1- N. • O N ta $1,7951 $2,013 CO co (o M <R $4,840 h O (0 1� Et $12,734 $1,523 co 0 1` 609- r 0 0 aM Eft a0 0 r d- El.) 0 1- Co CO EA $10,801 0) O • Et O 00 LC)_ Eft $2,775 O O 0) C7 ER $5,892 O) 0) 0) Eft- $547 V r co o0 I-- O r ER co �t r Eft $2,288 0 co 00 M Et $850 $953 V N. (O_ $2,292 $3,554 co N O ai Eft CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 2 2 > 2 2 r E. CE 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. 1 (0 (O (!) fA co 0 co ff} $13.321 Co 0 0 Eft $10.651 $12.981 0 Eo EA- V O . 0) r Eft (o r Eft E co Lo (o Eft co Lo EA 69 CO 0) ER EA h r- (0 Eft $32.321 $13.841 N (A Eft 1. O r r Eft 0 (0 (0 E Eft 0 CO 1� r EA N CO O) E Eft 0) CO N Eft ER (O 0 o N Eft $34.16 $41.631 0) N . O Eft N (O V EA O) D) r Eft 1 $13.531 $19.40 CO (fl (0 O (O CO Eft $15.45 $10.52 $12.37 h 0 (o EA BASE COST co CO (O Co ER r 0 r Eft 1 $7,2151 O 00 CO o Eft (o r Co Cn -,- co (O 0) (o $2,2441 co r (O N Edo O N 'V' Eft O L() 0 (O Eft $9,383 (0 r 0) Cn rEft 0 0) r Eft $2,135 $3,751 $5,135 N CO 0) r EA 0) 0) V C0 Eft CO t` r EA $1,975 0) CO V C0 EA 0 (o 1- Eft $7,365 1 $12,489 V CO CO (- CO I"- $1,347 $1,845 0 (O CO N ER $4,850 N CO 0 Eft 0) r r Eft CO 0) 0 N Eft $2,865 $4,443 $7,535, CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 LL CE EACH ADD'L 1 100 SQ. FT. CO CO cc; Efl 0 Co h: co ff} 0) 0) (Ci r ff} $10.871 $12.781 $15.581 CO 0 4 EA $22.851 CO h 0) ER- n CD o EA Co - (it LO (O 0i ER Co 0) (O EA $38.781 (O (O Eft (0 r Eft $13.291 $16.20 $21.35 $119.54 $51.23 $34.87 0) 0) O Eft CD 0) 0) d' Eft (C) 0) 0) ER $55.70 $23.89 $16.24 0 0) EA $ 23.28 CO 1. r 64 $43.26 $18.54 $12.62 $14.84 $18.08 BASE COST in o (0 'd' Eft $4,928 $8,658 co (f) CO _ Eft $18,3801 O CO _ (o Eft $2,693 0) O (o Eft 4 0 CO (O (ft 0 CO N r ER 0 CO N r r Eft 0 0 r 0) Eft $2,285 $2,562 O (O 4 (ft N CO r o (f3 (o (o (O of Eft $16,200 $2,113 O Co N Eft $4,163 O O 1- (o Eft $8,838 n 0) 0) V Eft $821 $920 N- (O Eft $2,214 $3,432 0 N CO (n Edo 1 $1,275 0 Co V Efl $2,511 $3,438 $5,331 $9,042 SQ. FT. 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O N 40,0001 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 o 0 N 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 r 1 20,0001 40,000 100,000 200,0001 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (C 10,0001 0 0 0 O N 50,000 100,01 300 0 0 (o r 3,0001 000'9 15,000 30,000 250 0 (o N r 0 0 ( N 0 0 O (o 12,500 0 0 0 (o N 1 500 0 0 (o N 0 0 0 (C) 10,000 1 25,000 50,000 OCCUPANCY 1 TYPE Theater Church Auditorium 1 Restaurant 1 'Restaurant T. I. 1 'Small Assembly 1 'Buildings 1 IBC /ICC CO (/) CJ r Q N Q N Q N Q Co Q PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z Z Z — Z EACH ADD'L. 100 SQ. FT. - I LC) T (n to $28.841 $12.36 CO toe..- O 000 O co N O to ,- $83.981 $35.981 $24.49 $28.791 O) O (n 0) O) (C) O) CO (n CJ 0 O r .- 0) N: to N CO CC) ffy $10.741 T i O O ,- CA L) V try N r M (B h co M t n to CA N to •t N h t/3 r r M E9 N r N E9 CO V N E9 CO O M H9 CO n N EA $15.621 CO CO (O to (0 (C) 4 w- CO (!) to N an (O te BASE COST 1 O M 00 taw- co M n $1,6741 $2,2921 $3,5541 00 N O O O O) O O r r +f3 O) O r R O) CO 0 N $4,138 co 0 ER 1 LS L$ O) 00,4-01- r 0) r E9 r N (i Nr (0 5 8. 1 $5,3681 r CO O LOL$ $1,242,1 r 0 N Efl N. CO (0 R N $4,4741 $427 O) N. V fl $8411 N LC) r E3 $1,7871 r N 0 05 ! O N A r 0),- O r EA N 00 O 00 V N EJ $3,8481 0 N n (O (> _ CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > if 2 = cE 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. 4 . CO tam (C) O CO $15.451 $10.521 $12.371 h 0 (C) f $18.751 N. 0) V O to $44.981 r (OM O mm O) (C) $43.86 ,t1- N. (f) (ii r N (B $13.75 CO M CA Efl N O r try $13.42 O) CO N ER $13.37 4 I. (n 69 O CO M E!? O) M tn E!1 n) 0 (f) E!> N CO r Efl (C) O (A Efl CA CO (M Ef3 t CO N ffl 0 r M Efl CO 1. M ff3 CO '1 M E!4 $19.52 $8.35 0 n (C) W3 CO (O (O ffi (n r CC) Efl BASE COST N O0 O - Ef} r CA r r Ef3 CO CA 0 N Efl $2,8651 $4,4431 $7,5351 $1,2371 $1,3871 $2,437 $3,3361 $5,1731 $8,772 CO 0) 69 r CO O r Efi 't CO ao r f!3 $2,551 $3,955 0 h Cp 99. CO CO N. to V CO CO to $1,552 $2,127 $3,296 r CO (0 L) ce V CO (n (A $5981 to O - Z; 0 •ct - Z; $2,2331 CO CO N.1- a) to 0 (n r EA CO CO N_ H9 $2,265 Ioo vc$ $4,8101 0 (n co- H3 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: I FR, II FR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. co I- h Efi $43.261 $18.54 $12.62 $14.84 $18.081 1 $22.50 $125.96 $53.98 $36.731 $43.19 $52.63 00 co (n (A $38.53 0 an (O Ef) $11.23 $13.22 0 r (O r Ef} CO CO N (A $16.05 CA co (0 try COI- CO V E!? (C) (n Ef3 r N- O (B •t O) r (A (0 co O r EFT N. (O V Ef3 h r M (A $3.72 $4.54 CO V to $23.42 $10.02 .7' CO (0 try $8.02 CO I. 0) (A BASE COST $1,2751 0 CO 4 K3 $2,5111 $3,4381 $5,3311 N O 69 $1,485 (n (0 co E9 $2,9241 d' 00 0 69 CO N O 64 $10,5261 (t) CO r_ (A CO N. N (A $2,2361 r CO 0 C7 69 (D V h Cf3 $8,052 CO CA r CO O r Efl CO CO 00 69 $2,552 $3,9951 00 r r- CO cry '4' CO $718 r CO N Efl $1,728 0 00 CO N Ff3 $4,540 0 CO M EA $1,547 $2,718 0 N h M (�-1 $5,772 0 CO N. CA (�9 SQ. FT. 1 000 000 0 0 N 0 (n 10,0001 25,0001 50,0001 O O N O O O r- O O O N,f O O O 10,0001 0000 0000 0000 O N C\116 10,000 0 0 0 100.— N 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 5,0001 0 0 0 6 r 20,000 50,0001 000 0 0 6,-6' 0 0 0 0 0 10,000 20,0001 50,000 0 0000000 0000000 6,-6-6666 0 0 0 0 r 0 N 0 (n 0 O OCCUPANCY 1 TYPE Banks Laundromat Medical Office - - (n (U _U E 0 [ffice T. I. 1 Preschool /School IBC /ICC 1 1 CLASS CO CO CO CO m 1E -1/E -2 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > Z — — Z 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 1 100 SQ. FT. 4 d' ERNf0EFT O Q) . d' N. CO O CO N E co ID CD R O 'Cr O 3EREREREIiEREREIiE?H9EliEliERb9 CO O 6) N O CO CO d• d• r M O N M LO d' M O N O d' d' O O M CO LO M 0 CO d' 6) O d' $22.891 c0 O ER CO (O EO ER LO CO ER E N. LO O ER (O d' r ER $64.221 1 $27.521 $18.731 $22.021 $26.831 d' d• ER $24.691 N E ER CO d' . EO ER $10.321 BASE COST d' CO 64 N N M ER $1,4451 CO N. O M CO O C7 ER O O N Cn f,H r N N 1 $1,4251 d' O N ER O CO d' (7 ER $5,3141 d• O (A fR CO r N_ ER O (O M_ ER 0) CO M N ER 1 $3,2721 d' N. O Ln ER O O co 00 fR $1,349 N LO ER $2,657 $3,6381 0 d' CO Lr) ER N. O L() 0j ER M N. CO ER d• N d' to LC) d' f� ER r N 0 r ER $1,582 $2,683 $1,4551 CO O CO N ER $3,9251 CO CO 0 CO ER $10,3201 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. (O LO Ln ER $31.12 $13.341 M 0 0) ER (O (0 O $13.00 d' N ER $13.48 CO N- Ln ER N O) c6 ER N CO d' ER CO (O LC) ER $2.301 $12.871 1 $5.52 1 $3.75 dr d' ER $5.37 _ 6 ER $28.61 $12.26 $8.34 N CO 0) ER CO O r ER $14.331 (0 N O c0 1 $34.401 $23.41 $27.52 $33.54 $5.52 co M O CO $13.23 0 6) ER $10.58 $12.90 —_ 2 BASE COST I. r 0) to. c0 N O r ER (O 0 (0 ER $2,4731 1 $3,835 0 0 (L7 CO ER 1 $1,589 $1,7821 0 CO Ch ER $4,286 d' (O CO ER CO CO N r rER CO r (n ER 0 0 N. ER L $2,987 0 0) 0 d- ER $6,341 0 ID n O ,- (0 00 (0 r ER 0 6) C0 ER $3,321 (.0 d' LLB ER 0 LO 0 ER CO LC) 0) r ER $473 $530 N CO 0) $1,276 $1,978 $3,354 0) r N r FR 0 0 N ER $3,583 CO 0 Cr) d' ER 0 .- O N- ER 0 0 Q) N v- ER CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC L.L. CE - EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. (O CO ER $37.34 r 0 co E4 0 O O 64 L $12.79 0 (O LC) 64 0) CO . N CO r (4 rEa d" 0) EO ER r N. d' ER Lo LO LO ER CO N. EO EFT CO N. N EFT $15.44 N CO CO fR 0 L() d' ER 0) N Ln fR LO d' (O ER d' r EO ER $34.33, L- .- 64 $10.01 00 h 64 $14.35 0 N .- 64 N M 0) 69 $41.28 6) 0 CO 69 $33.03 $40.251 N (0 . Efl ER $37.03 $15.88 $10.82 $12.70 $15.481 BASE COST 001:1.$ $1,234 N. CO r N ER 00 (O 0) N ER N 0 CO d' ER 0 0 CO N ER N. 0 0) r fR $2,1381 $3,756 d' d' r 10 ER 0 h 0) � ER 0 N L(0O 0) ,- ER 0) 0 r EFT 0 d' N EFT $3,584 CO 0 0) d ER 0 ,- CO ( N- ER $12,900 CO 0 N ER 0) O N N ER LO M 0) M ER CO L( d' n ER 0 CO d- co ER $14,350 $568 CO M CO CO r r ER $1,5311 $2,374 LO N 0 V ER $2,1831 0 0 0) v ER n 00 (0 LC) ER N CO r 6) ER 15,480 Li_ 0 500 009`3 0 O O - CO 0 0 0 O r 25,000 50,000 000'3 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 N 1 40,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O r 20,000 40,000 100,000 0 0 0 6. 0 N 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O 50,0001 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 r 0 0 Ln 1,0001 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 1. 10,000 0 0 0 r(0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 N 50,000 0 0 0 O r OCCUPANCY 1 TYPE Daycare Moderate Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Low Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Moderate Explosion Hazard Repair Garage Semiconductor Fabrication IBC /ICC 1 CLASS () W LL N LL N 2 1H -4 (O 2 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IIN,IIIN,IVN,VN 1 EACH ADD'L. 100 SQ. FT. O �f (fl $27.461 � r rT O 00 64 CA H3 $11.481 CO _ 63 CO N 69 1L0'8$ O CV U3 N 64 O CM V3 CO n O V3 N 4 64 O N 69 43 CO M 69 O N 64 rs N V3 $15.211 C0 CO 69 CO �F (i3 N in 64 COO CO V3 CCO O N to $15.021 CO 64 CO 64 Cn 69 N CO 69 EA n 00 EA C7 Eft co N H3 00 N H) V C7 64 1 BASE COST CO CO E3 In c0 63 $3,1881 $4,3651 CO CO n (p A 0 CO v r r CA CO N EA CO N V' r ER O O N A $3,4221 1 $5,3041 000`6$ CD CO r 3 d �h 00 N fA 2 O CD 07 63 O 7 O CO EA $10,240 1- 0) CO LO O O r Eft CO (O I- r ER $2,418 $3,7481 0 CO CO (p (13 N 17 CD O) v V/ N N. CO Et V 0) r r Eft 0 LO CO r Eft CO CO r CO 64 $1,4441 0) CO Eft $2,844 $3,893 CO CO 0 V3 $10,248 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. r (O fR $34.33 $14.71 0 O V3 CO r $14.35 CO Ef 00) CD f3 $3.84 CO . N Et CO M ft I M ft 0 V3 CO CO Et co N f3 � A r0 N Et CO !)) N Et M A O 0) V3 r CD E) to C() Ei CMn co Et 00) n EA (0 M Et CD 3 co 0 (f3 V to ft (O ffl 0O0 I4 i3 ONO N O ER M 613 00) . N 64 Ln M e9- N 64 r - d 2 BASE COST - CO N O N 64 O CO N N EA $3,9851 1 $5,4561 0 CO 'd' (D Et $14,350 CO CO O 64 0) n I- r Eft- (0 N r ch Et $4,2781 0 co CO CO ft 0 (() N r 1- to O CO 64 $2,0231 $3,555 0 I- CO 64 0 in Cn t` Et 0 O CO N 1- N r ,- ft $1,257 $2,2071 N N 0 E9 $4,6851 0 Cn 0) Et CO O Cn 0 N CO 0 0) 0 N 0) Eft $2,3131 0 N 0) 69 0 0 r 0 ft $2,0241 $3,555 $4,866 1_ $7,5451 0 00 N r F} CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC LI_ EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. I"- M V3 0 N r V Eft $17.65 N O N 69 $14.14 $17.22 CO m ER $10.781 CO V Eft V r M Eft $3.701 $4.50 CO r V3 CO CO I— V3 CO r M Eft N Eft $2.52 I"- 0 (0 Eft n 0 V' V3 $22.81 CD n O) 64 O CO (O Efl V CO N- 64 1.0 0) ER $4.021 $22.54 CO CO 0) Ef3 (0 Cn (O 69 N n n Eft ccF 0) ER 0) r N 69 $12.25 V N O E& I-- O CO 69 $4.21 N Cf) Eft BASE COST $2,428 $2,722 $4,782 $6,547 $10,152 $17,220 O 0) (79. $2,135 $3,7511 $5,134 co to 0) n Eft $13,500 CC7 co N Eft $2,4271 $4,266 $5,844 O co O O Eft $15,360 $1,345 0 O in Eft $2,648 $3,6261 $5,622 $9,540 CO co ER V n ER N- O co r Eft O 0) n Eft $2,775 O n Eft $2,166 $2,428 $4,2661 0) M 0 O 69 C0 O M Eft 1 $15,3721 SQ. FT. 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 a5 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O N 0 0 0 O (n 1 100,000 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 O CO 60,000 150,000 300,000 O 0 0 Ln 25,000 50,000 100,000 250,000 500, 0001 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r 20,000 0 0 0 O CC) 100,000 0 0 (n 0 0 to N 0 0 0 to 0 0 0 O r 25,000 0 0 0 O to 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 CO 0 0 0 0 CC) 300,000 OCCUPANCY TYPE Health Hazard Materials Nursing Horne/ Health Care Stores (Retail) Market 4) 1 Apartment Building 1 IBC /ICC (f) (n U n _ N \ _ N — 2 2 2 ,- OC PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 II N, III N, IV N, V N EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 1-- N 69 r r EA Cp 0 M 69 t-- 0 N 69 to N 69 co CA N 69 CO CO N 69 co r r- $22.941 to N. (() 64 CO r I: 69 N CO NN 0 0 O 69 0 0 O 69 0 0 O E9 0 0 6 E9 0 0 O 69 0 0 O 69 0 ct N 69 $13.431 r- n W 64 $3.921 CO 69 N CO (A 64 Ch O N 69 u) C'7 r r� CO CO 4 EA r M Ch E9 0) CO c7 69 N. 4 E9 O CA r EA r- r r ,- 00 I. 4 EA CO N co 69 N co co 64 O Cp ��}} 69 BASE COST CO N 6463 O $2,4771 $3,3941 O (A (Ni 63 CO N O) VIEAEA69. CO N 0 0) N't (f) 0 $1,63 N 0) (D 69 $1,8351 O N E9 1 $2011 O N d3 O N EA O N EA O N 64 N 0) r- ER CO CO O E9 0) (f) (C) EA 1 $2,1361 CO CO 64EA63EAEAEA O) M CO N 0 co r- 07 O Co O O 0 O $9,4881 (p M ( $1,4751 $2,592 O) 'V' (n 6M4� 0 (C) $9,3281 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > 2 2 _ 2 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. O) (0 E9 O) co aD 69 $3.82 (A L1) N 64 CO O C`0 63 $3.72 (0 C (0 C 0) C n/al 1 n/a (0 C 00 c L _ n/a N C (0 c (0 c (0 c O O c0 63 O h (C) r 69 N N: 69 O CA 4 69 O N. CA 69 N O 69 d' (f) N E9 (A r V r 63 O_ CO EA ' r d' 64 CO c0 4 69 M (A CA 69 O v CV 64 CO Cn C7 r 69 c0 (A (fi E9 I� O 4 63 co f-- 4 f9 co (n Cfi 69 1- BASE COST N f- (p 64 C'7 CO N. 69 O 0) 0 64 1 $4,242 O f- (A 64 O CO r r69 (0 C n/a cd C CO C (0 C (0 C n/a (0 C (0 C (0 c N C (0 ca),-,4- O O O r r 69 O) CA r 63 O I-- CO 64 O ' r 64 O N 0 63 n CO 63 f� n CO 64 (O 0) N EA $4,5161 O 0 0 69 O CO 00 r69 (!) V O 63 $1,8441 O ' N 69 CO CO 69 O CO 00 69 O CO CO ,- CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IFR,IIFR 1 EACH ADD'L l~L 0 (n O O ,- EFi N. CO O 00 (c) V' EA O r CO 69 I. CO C'M 64 CO d' EA 63 (0 C CO C (0 C CO C (0 c (0 c R) c (0 C N C (0 C (0 C (0 C (n (n CR 69 CA r O NEA LO co 00 E9 CO 00 (n 69 a) C9 69 N 00 63 (E) O C'�) EA $17.031 co CO E 64 N. CA 63 E Co 00 (n 64 N r 63 63 0) O C0 EA Cn CO 00 r n 63 $4.89 I. Cn E9 $7.001 BASE COST $1,886 (n 63 $3,715 O EA $7,884 $13,392 n/a as c n/a as C at C n/a ((00 C (0 c (0 c (0 c (0 c as C O 0 EA Cm7 69 $2,3391 N EA 00 63 $8,4241 a) O Ea $2,252 $3,9551 6) tt 64 O ? 64 $14,2321 1 W 64 $2,2131 $3,8881 1 $5,3231 $8,2561 N 0 CO 63 'SQ. FT. O O 0 Ch 1 15,000 1 30,000 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O r LO 0 0 0 O o CY) 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 (0 0 0 0 '- 0 0 0 v7 1 7,000 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 O r 0 0 0 O N 50,0001 100,000 O O 0 CV 10,0001 O O 0 O N 40,0001 0 O 0 O 0 200,0001 co 0 0 N 10,000 O 0 0 O N 40,0001 O 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O N 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE Hotels & Motels 'Dwellings - Custom O a O 2 1 Master Plan (Dwellings - Production Phase of Master Plan (Repeats) Residential Care O EU 7U LL Moderate Hazard Storage 1 'Low Hazard Storage 1 IBC /ICC 1 CLASS 2 0) 2 c`) 2 1R -2 (n N (n PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z- > Z — Z _ EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. CD O co 1 $21.931 . O) EA CO O EA CO EA r CA EA O Ni EA $22.731 O) EA COO O EA C` EA (LO O 64 CO O FA N CO r EA CO ER E N Ni 69 CO Cn EA O ER (A d4 00 fA CD O EA N fA m N EA (1) O EA N N 69 1 $12.351 CO Cn fA COO O fA $4.231 1- (O (>3 (0 EA (0 O( (A (ft N b9 CO N EA (MO . O EA BASE COST N O) N FA 0) EA $2,5461 CO CO O 3 $5,4041 CO (O r � O) CO O EA r O L() EA 1 $2,6381 r CO 0 O CO (O C7) 't � O) 0) O) � r N r FA 0) (O O) fA (f) 0) (O � 0 CO r N CO O ^ 64 $1,2521 CO 0 d' EA $2,4651 $3,3771 $5,234 $8,884 CO (n EA $1,632 $2,8671 (O N O 69 CO CO O 69 � 0 N co ci (A $512 V N.- LO (A 0) O O fA $1,3821 $2,144 $3,632 — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > 2 2 = C 2 1 EACH ADD'L 1 100 SQ. FT. O CA ta EA 1 $27.41 co N. r r E!i O) O) C` (A ' O) EP) co r r 69 $5.071 $28.41 $12.17 CA N 0D EA 4 n O ER $11.87 (A r co EA O N N ER n O E EA CA r O EA N. N C` EA co CO 0D EA O 0) EA $10.62 CO LO ce EA O) O co EA C0 CO O EA 4 EA (O n N EA $15.44 N co CO EA O up ER EA O) N LO EA Lf) d- CO EA V 0) EA CO CO O EA E - O cP EA h r C9 Cf} N f-- O EA U) 69 E BASE COST (O O N 0Cr 0 r EA N CO 7 EA $4,358 $6,7551 0 CO 4_ $1,674 $1,877 N. 0) N M EA $4,514 0 0 0 : EA 0 N- CO r 3— 64 $1,2491 0 r EA (O N EA CO CO CO c0 EA $5,2251 $8,858 CO CO 10 EA $1,754 CO 0 C7 EA $4,221 LO (O EA 0 r r 1- O) CO. 0 , EA 0 0 N EA $3,584 OD 0) V' EA 0 O ( h EA 0 O O) N EA 3- 0 CO CO - N (O N ,- EA CO N n r EA 0 CO (fl N $4,540. CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 LL CE Li- — 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $5.88 1 $32.89 r r V O) LO . O) EA O) N r CO $13.75 CO 0 co EA 0) 0 (0 $14.60 (A O EA O) co r EE R $14.24 10 (n fl $25.44 $10.89 CO d' n EA N h O EA CO (O O 6EA 63 CO N N $12.74 N- V C EA N- O EA CO CO E A CO CO Cf) EA CO O EA $18.53 d- CD N.: EA O LC) EA (n CO O EA d' !- n EA CO CO N EA O O O EA O O CO EA CO O EA (O 4 EA LO 69 BASE COST o) co °_ EA 1 - $2,174 $3,818 $5,230 (0 O CD EA $13,752 00 O 0 N EA $2,252 co C[) 0) (6 EA $5,417 O O CO EA V N r EA (A CA r EA 00 CO EA $2,953 $4,0421 0 N- N O Uf 0 co CO O r fA $1,878 CO O r N EA (b O CO O EA CC) CO O 10 EA O to CO C- EA $13,325 $2,183 $2,448 O CO 4. EA O m 0) C( EA $9,132 1 $15,480 00 co I- EA N (O co EA co LC) r EA $2,074 co N 0) EA $5,4461 'SQ. FT. 1 0 0 S r 000`5 1 10,000 0 0 O O N 0 0 O O 10 100,000 0 0 O r 0 0 O Cn 10,0001 0 0 0 O N 50,0001 0 0 O r 0 0 O CA 10,000 20,0001 50,0001 0 0 O O O 0 0 LC) N 12,5001 25,0001 0 0 0 O (n 125, 000 250,0001 0 0 O N 0 0 O O r 20,0001 40,0001 0 0 0 O O 200, 000 0 0 O r 0 0 O t() 0 0 O O r 20,0001 50,0001 0 0 0 O O OCCUPANCY TYPE a) C>) T. C7 .(0 a a) Er (Not H -4) Motor Vehicle Fuel Dispensing Parking Garage (Not S -4) Open Parking Garage Lab/ R & D Other T. Is (Not Office or Retail) IBC/ICC 1 CLASS O (1) O C/) O (1) `it (1) PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED PLAN CHECK ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > Z Z EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 00 .- . ER N CO (O ER $2.831 d- O) r ER 1- N CV ER N. N. CV ER N h Ui 69 CO CO C6 69. CO CO 00 ER O 00 N ER N 0 N ER CO d' d' ER N N. Ui ER CO CO Ci ER COON CO 00 ER CO CV 69 0 N ER C9 d' Ni ER CO CO 00 ER 1_ $5.23-1 CO CO 4 ER CO r oi ER (O 00 (ti ER 0 0 ,- CO $18.341 $45.211 r- N Ui ER CO 0) O ER $24.051 1 BASE COST 0 co E` Ea d' n 00 ER $1,536 N O _ CV ER $3,2641 CO co U) (n ER $2,703 co M ER $3,499 CO (0 r (n 69 N d' CO (0 ER E` 0 00 00 ER M,- O n CV ER O r C7 (fl 0) 0) 4 M ER CO CO - (n ER h d' CO CO ER 1 $8,8671 0) 00 0 CV ER $2,442 co O N. N ER r O) 0) C'J ER O 0) N U) (R $6,8541 O) 0) r N ER r 1- U) (V ER $2,846 $4,202 O n U) (C) ER $7,214 — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC 2 — > 1 2 r — 1 2 1 EACH ADD'L • d (1) 0 o 6 N CO ER dr LO CO ER I" N ER CO Cdr N . ER CO ER . h ER N d ER $10.42 ( LO CO ER I N N ER dr LO () ER r h ER N d ER $10.42 LO CO ER ( N N ER LO (C ER O r EA O O Cfl 69. d' U A (O ER CO to $38.75 $22.93 $56.51 0 A $13.70 O O BASE COST (C) N- cm (fl co (A o r 69 0 N 0) r ER $2,628] 0 CO O ER 0 N 6) CO ER INSPECTION ONLY 0) N. 0) M ER U) O) M ER $4,373 co U) d• (O ER $8,558 co 00 O ,- '- 0) r- Co M 69 U) (A C7 ER $4,373 CO U) 4 (O ER $8,558 CO 00 O ,- ER 0 r CO N ER $3,052 CO r (o () ER $4,988 N co (0 ER $8,5661 $2,7481 CO N C) 69. $3,557 $5,252 CO (O co (O ER CO r o Oi ER - CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 I FR, II FR EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. N. 1� Ea N CA CA . ER U) N E R 0 CO N ER d' CO ER U) r d ER CO U) EO ER N. 0 U) ER 0 (f N E ER $4.20 $3.03 U) (O (O ER CO CO O ER N- 0 U ER $12.501 0 N d ER $3.03 U) O ca ER $13.25 $7.85 CO (A 6 ER 0 (0 (O ER O) CO d ER $10.281 O (0 O 69 ER $27.52 $67.81 $22.81 $16.44 h 0 (O CO ER BASE COST 0 I- r E{} N (0 ER $2,304 d' L) 01 ER $4,896 d' 0 CO 00 ER U) U) 0 d' ER $4,7411 $5,248 $7,748 0 I- N O ER 0 0 (o C7 r ER LO U) O d' ER r - N- d' ER $5,248 $7,748 $10,270 0 0 (o CO r ER CO CO r CO ER CO CO (0 M ER $4,055 CD CO co U) ER U) CO O) r Ea $10,280 $3,298 CD U) CO C7 ER Cr) CO N d' ER CO 0 CO (O ER $8,356 $10,822 E- 0 (n O 0 0 N 10,000 20, 000 40,0001 100,000 200,0001 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N 40,000 100,000 200,000 0 0 O N 0 0 O O 20,000 40,000 0 0 0 O — 200,000 0 0 0 ,- 000'9 0 0 0 O 20,000] 50,000 0 0 O 0 r 0 0 CO 0 0 U) r 1000'£ 0 0 0 (p 15,000 30,000 OCCUPANCY TYPE LDINGS All Shell Buildings Theater Church Auditorium Restaurant IBC /ICC 1 CLASS 1 SHELL BUI Q N Q N Q N Q PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY — 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z Z Z = – Z 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 $25.281 CO 0) .- E T CO OD CO . co 69 1 $12.401 d' 0) M E9 N CO M EfT O N E EfT $10.171 CO d M ea N. 0 O ER 1 $13.341 O N 1- EfT N. r O Efl $25.081 co d' CO to h 0 (O ET M ea N 0 ( O EfT 0 N O CO EfT $74.411 $25.03 d• 0 M EfT CO (n M CO EfT d' 0 CO ffl CO 0 O EfT $26.311 (n CO H E/9 N. CM O E/9 0) M M EfT CO O) E T 0 N. d EA $11.571 M co M EJ C O N . fT () r co ET 1 BASE COST $1,495 $1,7481 in co 0) El" $2,857 r co N. M4NN(NT EA d' O 0) E, co co O EA! N. h CO EA! eo CO EfT 1 $3,8851 O (n r (n EfT co CD (D CD EA $2,033' $2,377 $2,6311 O (p r (n EA co CO CD CO EA $2,4131 1 $2,8211 co N r Md'CflNN EA r CO EA co .T- EAT N. O) EA! co CO r EA! $2,4931 O CO N. Nd'(nCD EA CD N. 0 Ea d' 0 d' ER co 0) co EA $1,8751 $2,1921 1 $2,4271 $3,5841 O (n h Ea $6,1541 — 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 > 2 2 E iY 2 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. co C co EA $18.721 r(nr CO 4 EA O (n CO T■ r Ea 1_ $24.521 O Inn N Ea N r 69 $31.35 1 $10.54 M (O N.: EFT N. CO Cfl Ell O LI) N E. $12.711 $31.35 $10.541 M LO ER h CON. CD E9 N M CD EfT $37.75 O M 0) CO $31.291 $22.551 $49.48 $22.55 $13.35 1 $32.89 N- OM r 69 co I: EA M d' KT 0) M Ea N CO (n Ea 1 $14.46 co CD( d' Ea O M Ea M CD f� E9 1 BASE COST OD O M ea $2,1851 0) _ N E3 $3,5711 1 $4,734 0 CO CD fg 1 $2,5411 N. M N Ea $3,289 1 $4,856 CO CO d- o Ea $8,335 $2,541 $2,971 1 $3,289 $4,8561 $6,438 $8,335 CO O M EA $3,5261 CO 0 co M 69 $5,764 $7,641 CO 0) co M EfT CO (D co CV 69 $3,117 $3,451 A 0) O (n Ea LO (O N. (O ER $8,7451 $2,3441 0 d' N. N ER $3,034 0 CO d' 69 $5,9371 M CO !� Ea 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 LL EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $37.93 $22.461 $55.32 $18.60 $13.40 $29.42 0) N. M N ET (n N M . r ET N CO CO CO ET 1 $12.65 r r M E} O 0 O N ET 0) N. (n N ET $15.25 $37.62 (n D N . E fl r r M E3 0 0 O N 64 $76.521 CO ( EfT $37.551 O 0 N ET $59.381 CO O N T N O co E T N. d' M CO EfT $13.281 (O (n M Efl M M O N 69 0) CO T .- ffT (O O . E } $17.351 M CO M FR r N d 63 CO N M E3 BASE COST $2,242 N CO N Ea N 0 M N EfT 1 $4,285 CO CD (C1 EfT CO () CO r Ea 0) d 0 C7 Ea $3,5651 CO V 0) c6 Ea 1 $5,827 M N � h Ea- N 0 O O 1- 0) d' O C7 EA (!7 CO (f Ori 69 $3,946 $5,827 $7,725 N 0 0 O 1- M C O C7 Ea $4,231 $4,684 CO O(D ) (O 64 M r Cn ea (n Is CO r . M 0) .- Ch EA 0 d' N. C7 EfT $4,1411 1 d' r (O co CO 0 00 Ea $10,4941 $2,8131 $3,2891 d' CO CO ea CD N- M (C) ea (n N r N: E» 0 CO N Oi EA SQ. FT. 250 O in N(nO r O O N O O M 1 12,500 25,000 500 O O LO N O O (C) 10,000 25,000 50,000 O O LO O O LO N 5,0001 10,000 25,0001 50,0001 0 O NOOOO 0 O r 0 O CV 0 O d' 0 O O .- 20,0001 O O (010 O O N 5,0001 O O 0 O ,_ 25,000 50,000 O O OOOO r O O (n O O O r O O O N 50,0001 100,000 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE 'Restaurant T. I. 'Small Assembly 1 (.0 0) C a m Banks Laundromat Medical Office 1 (Offices 1 IBC /ICC CLASS co m m m m PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > _ — _ Z = 1 EACH ADM_ 1 100 SQ. FT. I o)rnrvncwnrn . Eft . N EA> . n ER . N ER . ER . M ER . r ,- . CO ER $17.171 N.rro(a . EA> . 4 ER . CA EA> . (O ,- . O ER $23.451 a cooc°DO . ER . ER $12.471 CO . EA> CO . 4 EFT . O ,- . M EA> . N EA $5.851 rnrrVr�°iLOCD0 . (O ER . . O rER . M ER . N ER . lA 69 . O) 69 . (n ER . M � CO. . V Oi� . M ER . ER BASE COST 0) LA r _ ER LO (!) co_ ER $1,500 $2,215 $2,937 0 O Co _ E ER $2,7841 1 $3,2551 CO O (O _ M ER 1 $5,3201 N (1) 0 n ER CO co r _ CA ER O 0) ER 1 $2,222 0 co 4 _ N ER M co co _ M ER CO r CO _ ER CD co N _ O (fl N CO (A _ M ER LC) co r _ ER r CO_ CO O CO _ O 69 1- N 0 0) ERT O) CD r 0) co N _ M ER (O 4 CO _ M ER $4,2581 $6,2861 $8,3341 $10,7871 0) (1) N _ N ER 8 _ N ER $2,9231 CO M _ ER E $5,7241 $7,4141 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR EACH ADD'L I100 SQ. FT. CO O (A CO M ER 00) 0,- . 6 M N 69 ER ER 1 $4.75 1 $14.71 n M ER dO' CA 1 $7.22 N (n ER $11.421 0 O ER $11.90 $29.31 CD (0 0) EFT ,- ER o $15.59 � 0) ER N. (A ER 1 $13.731 (NO V> ER M M ER M 1` lfl COO 69 69 � (n ER $12.671 N ER ER 0 M ER n CD ER m r ,- L0•L$ � 1- ER co to ER N . tt 69 N CA 64 ce 2 1 BASE COST 1 $1,4481 'd' 0) CO ER $1,875 $2,768 $3,671 0 (p N. 4 ER 0 (D C0 ER 0) co 0 4 69 1 $4,504 0 (1) CO c6 64 1 $8,815 0 N V' r '- CO N. CO N ER CO CO N. N. h o N C'� ER FR $4,5411 1020`9$ (!) 0) L. FR L $4,4521 CO 0 N (n EFT co O h to 69 O (A W 69 co CO N r CO M r r r ER (0 0 CO ER 1 $5,3211 co O CO t` ER co O rER $13,4831 1 $2,8231 O co C7 69 $3,6541 $5,3951 $7,1541 co co N O CR 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC LL CC 1 EACH ADD'L 1 100 SQ. FT. (O M ER (!) CO 'V' 69 $10.72 $3.61 $2.59 O - (f) ER O (O h ,- EA> 1 $10.45 $25.75 CO CO CD ER (f) N CO V9 0 L- M ER r r 4 NCR $14.28 $35.17 CO CO r r� N (f) M ER $18.71 0 CO r r- 0) CO (O ER $16.481 (f) (C) (C) CO3 0 O 4 69 I,- N■ W 69 M V O( r- M r ER $15.21 N r (C) ER M (O M ER 0) 0 M ER 1 $14.33 M CO ER 0) 00 O NN .4' 0 1� 69 L. 0 . (t) 69 N r . r ,- 1 BASE COST co co ER M co 0 N ER $2,250 $3,322 $4,405 O O L0 ER (O T 4 ER $4,882 (() O V (C) ER 0 a0 0) r ER 1 $10,5781 el- O N. ,— T $2,851 $3,334 $3,691 $5,449 $7,224 $9,354 $5,343 n 'cF N (0 ER co 0) (O EFT N N O rER $13,540 $17,540 $4,9341 $5,768 $6,3861 $9,4281 $12,5001 O w CO ER $3,388 (O 0) (0 ER $4,3851 V' 1- �t CO 69 $8,5851 O N _ ER ISQ. FT. 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 LC) 10,000 _ 20,000 50,000 100,000 0 O 0 0 O 0 10,000 20,000 50,000 100,000 500 2,500 5,000 10,000 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 N 40,0001 100,000 0 0 O 0N 0 N O 0 O 10,0061 20,0001 40,0001 0 O 0 d r 200, 0001 0 0 0 r O 0 0 L O 0 0 O r 20,0001 50,0001 100,0001 OCCUPANCY TYPE Office T. I. (Preschool /School ( Daycare Moderate Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Low Hazard Industrial /Manuf. Moderate Explosion Hazard IBC /ICC 1 CLASS m 1E-1/E-2 1E-3 LL N L.L. N S PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: Z > Z > Z _ Z = EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. CO N co CO N (O cA OD CO CA EA CO O O co 1 $21.671 $47.54 CO r .- EA9 CO h CO (A. n (ti ,- CO CO (t) 09 CO O 0 0) CD EA CO tt r .- CO I,- Cp EA I', Cp � CO CO (A EA CO 0 �} (A O 0) OD EA I- CD EA CO r (t) EA O h N d4 CO N 4 EA CO 0 CO EA CO h (O EA CO h (O EA O N N EA CO tO EA CO CO EA r M r EA (A CO N EA r (n CA EA co L EA $13.881 CO CO bb I . CO CO EA O CO I� EA 1 BASE COST 0) EA 0) CO EA 1 $1,875 O) CO I. N EA I� co C*) EA 1 $4,754 0 I- N EA 0) (O r 0) EA CO 0 (O 0) EA O) t\ r 0 EA CO CO CO (O EA CO 0) CO (D EA 0 I. N EA 0) CO r 0) EA CO 0 (n 0) EA O) t` r CC) EA (0 CO CO (O EA CO O) (b (O EA $6,180 $7,225 0) 0) O) is EA CO 0 co. r .- ea 0 CO CO 6. .- ea 0 CO N O CC) 0 '7 EA ooL'9$ Og L'g$ CO �t CO EA $11,1601 $14,440 0 t!) N N Ef} $2,6311 0 CO 4- Ea $5,700 $7,384 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: HR, V 1 -HR I EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. O) LO CO $45.34 O) CO r r 64 $37.58 co 0 I� CV $59.42 1 $14.33 co d' CC) EA EA O) CO O CV $7.041 N. 0. LO EA N r r U} $14.33 $8.481 $20.89 $7.04 $5.07 N r r • EA C)) LC) CO O (O .- EA $15.871 (C) CO (t) EFT LO CO 0) EA (n d' CD EA CO CD 4 EA (0 O) n f\ N CO EA EA (A N N b9 CO CO 1)) EA EA 0) CO r � (n 0 I: EA $17.351 CO CO (O EA CO N N V O EA EA 1 2 BASE COST .- CD EA T .- N EA $2,344 $3,461 $4,588 $5,942 $3,3881 (O Cr) M Ef} $4,385 $6,4741 $8,5851 O N_ r r'A $3,388 (O 0) (7 EA $4,385 $6,474 $8,585 0 N r ,- $7,724 $9,032 0) 0) 0) 0) EA 0 CO I`, -zi CA (n I-- (n O) EA 0 () CO (n CV 190g'g$ $6,4381 $7,125 0 N CO 0 fA 0 0 (n ([) O) 0 0) 05 EA EA $2,8131 d' (O M EA CO I` CO u) EA $7,125 $9,230 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IFR,IIFR 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. O) a) $54.41 $134.03 (A O (f) $32.50 $71.31 $17.20 CO r0 cz; _ I� Lci N N N- (0(O EA O 0 EA $13.34 $17.201 CO r04O O(OOD(O ,- I� d' CO N EA EA V $13.341 I� OIN- COI- ,- EA $19.041 N d'COr(nCO.- (O4O(C)COON A N EA ,- 0) EA 0 (n EA- EA I-- EA N. CO CACO 4 EA EA $14.271 0 N- OD EA $20.821 (n O 0 Lri .- f} - BASE COST $2,173 $2,541 CO OD N EA $4,153 CO 0 (n (n EA CO r N- EA (n CO O EA $4,753 $5,2621 0) CD I- I` EA N 0 (O O r EA $13,344 (n CO O 4 EA 1 $4,753 $5,262 $7,769 $10,302 $13,3441 $9,269 $10,838 0) D) 0) r EA N I� N- 0 0) d_ (O N EA 0 N O CO EA I- 0 CO (O EA $7,725 $8,550 $12,6241 0 0 CO N- CO (O N EA EA $3,3751 0) CO CO EA $6,4511 0 CO (n h (n 0 OD r EA r EA 1 SQ. FT. 100 Oog 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 (n 10,000 0 0 0 .- 0 0 0 (n 10,000 0 0 0 O N 50,0001 100,000 0 0 O r 5,000 10,000 20,000 50,000 100,0001 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O T 30,000 60,0001 I 150,0001 0 0 0 O 0 CO 0 0 0 (n 25,000 50,000 100,000 250,000 500,000 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (0 1°,0001 0 0 O O N 50,000 100,000 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE Repair Garage Semiconductor 1 Fabrication Health Hazard 1 Materials Nursing Home/ Health Care Stores (Retail) Market 1 IBC/ICC 1 CLASS 1. 2 CO 2 I,- ± N N _ _ 2 2 (PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY — CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z- > Z = _ Z 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 r N OCOd'(OMIROtn.d'M69rERr-d� d9 CO O 0) CO EREi?E19Ei)EflEA<ft 0 O N CO N CA N d' . r L CO t- N co CO co E!?b9d9 0 co (0 o In O) V co EREAEf3Ell CO O) LC) ' MhNh000d'd'Nh 0) h h O) E9 CV 0) b9�Ef?EF}Ee N O r 00 co I- O N. (fl n . N r . EFT $35.541 'V fag Ea 00 0) N9 00 0 CO R O) N O� O to to $13.551 (n (C) 0) N Mn to N . EF? BASE COST CD O N _ EA 0 r d' _ ER CO (D _ ER CO 0 CO _ NMMCOIR ER (0 (() 0 _ ER O CO 0) _ EA 0) I� CO _ ER 0 r CO _ ER $8,6451 $12,7631 0 N O) _ CO EH r N O) _ CV $7,1241 0) N co _ M ER $9,2211 CO CO _ MMM CO d• O _ E CO I. co _ $1,7371 f• CO r- _ ER CO d• CO E<? CO d• N _ N VI $2,3351 $2,4291 CO CO M _ EE? L $1,5951 CO CO CD _ r ER $2,0221 (D 0) 0 _ NNN EA CD I- r _ EA CO 0) r Ed. $2,5681 CO 0) r _ ERMn ER. d• CO (n _ Ef3 CO 0 N _ cf) _ CONSTRUCTION TYPES: T > C M E X S 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $12.761 $7.541 CO Cp ER LO N (O to $4.521 O CA O) to 00 I� r E CO M CO co CO r I-: I` I`, (n EA CO r d' EA CO r O) Ef3 CO (n N CO d' ta Eri O CO 00 (O r cc; (f3 Ed. Ed d' n CA (f3 (d C (d C (d C (d C (d C n/a WI C (d � C (0 C N C N C Cd C (. r CO CO CO EA d• CD (O M CO (.C) to r r d• Ef) O m ER BASE COST CO O (() Ef? $1,7631 N (n 0) Efl $2,882 0 N 00 M ER 0 (f) co d• EF? $8,3491 N CO h O) ER (D O 00 O ER $15,9541 0 Cn r ER 0 Q) co N E (O O O) O N 4 O ER CO N (0 r EA CO O n ER O CO (O N ER 0 N N CA N C (d C (d C CO C n/a n/a «5 C «5 C «5 C C «5 C o C (0 r N 6H 0 N M to $3,5541 (D O) (O Efi 0 O 0) EH 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: CC Cl rf L.L — 1 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. 1_ $15.31 (n O M to $22.33 0 (D Ef-? N d' LD ER CO CO r (0 M r ,- E (0 CO 00 64 0) (O O E CO O co ER 0) O) d• EA CO O) O (0 $15.07 N O 00 FR (O O (0 CV O) CO El EiJ CO CO M Efi 0) CO r E CO C as C (d C as C (d C as C as C as C as C as C (d C as C $13.941 co N M va $20.331 co 00 (O Ef3 co O) d' vi 00 O (0 1 BASE COST 0) 0) r EA O r N EA $2,342 $3,458 $4,584 o O) (A (A 0) O O r ff3 d' r- r 64 O N_ Ef-J $19,145 $25,380 $32,868 (0 CO CO O EA $12,4941 CO CO (0 r ER O_) d' O N ER $27,072 $35,064 CO C n/a n/a n/a n/a (d C CO C ((00 C (mod C CZ C ((00 C (mod C $3,2951 $3,8621 1 - -- $4,2651 m N CO ER $8,3461 N r CO O EA 1— 0 500 0 0 (C) N 0 0 O (O 0 0 0 O 25,000 50,000 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 6 r 300,0001 0 0 0 M 15,000 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 6 150,000 300,000 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 3,0001 0 0 0 d' 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 d' 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 N- 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (f) 10,0001 0 0 0 N 50,0001 0 0 0 O r 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE Retail T. I. 'Apartment Building 1 'Hotels & Motels 1 Dwellings - Custom Models - 1st Master Plan Dwellings - Production Phase of Master Plan (Repeats) Residential Care Facilities IBC /ICC 1 CLASS 2 th th 1R-3 1 co th 1R-2 (PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY _ CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 1 Z > Z > Z = _ Z = 1 EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. 1 O)Tr CO h EA CO 44 NCONr- N r rEAEAEAEA I� M N. N O) CO CATr CO . CO NooNf. N r EA N M A N N EA CA tO (A M r 69 r- CO EA $16.541 1.rov CO In 64fAEArEA o 64 co (O co r I. CO NtN CO CO CO CO EAEflEAEA(A O 0 co MCA V o COO M CO r M 64 V o N M EA O t` (A CO ea EA MNCOM00 r– N EA 1` CO EA N . N EAKEA CO r (O M BASE COST N co co _ M EA $4,2531 N. O _ st (fl 0 CO 0) _ CO ea CO N _ CA EA CO M O) _ r r- h M CO _ M cfl $4,2531 140n 7S o CA 0) _ CO EA co N _ CA ea CO M 0) _ r r- $2,6821 n _ M EA $5,1251 O 0) N _ CO EA O O CO _ a0 EA $2,6821 'A r _ M EA _ M EA $5,1251 CO O) N _ CO EH O O O0 _ Cb EA $2,1391 O CO _ N Cfl O) M 1- _ N EA (O M 0 _ 4 cA $5,4201 O N 0 _ t\ cA n N N _ N EA $3,1881 0 M CO _ M ER 0 N _ CO EA CA O O) _ CO EA 0 (0 0) _ 00 EA CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 S > 2 2 —_ 2 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. N CO CA ea CO Cfl CO EA N 0 V $4.721 $3.40 CO 69 EA N CO CA EA CO CO . Cf) EA $14.021 $4.721 $3.40 CO 1- IA CA $14.181 0) M CO EA I- CO O N CO O) (O EA 0 Cn EA 0 0 r 64 CO r E 0) M 00 EA N (O O 69- CO 0) O EA O CO EA 0 0 r rrEA EA 0 Cl r EA CA CO CO 0) co � CO CO EA $4.001 N I- CO EA N N (O EA N M EA O co EA Cr) CO N EA O . N EA N '1t . 64 EA BASE COST $4,547 CO (0 CO fA $5,884 $8,688 O N co_ rfA $14,920 $4,5471 CO M CA EA $5,8841 co CO CO (b EA O N co r r(A O N (A rEA $3,3521 O N o M EA $4,3391 CO 0 d' (C) EA $8,4951 O 0 O r iA $3,3521 O N O ('7 EA 0) CO co V' EA CO 0 CO EA $8,4951 0 0 O $2,674] CO N M fi3 $3,4611 0 r r CO EA- CO N I� (O EA CO N 00 EA CA 0 tt M co $3,9851 $4,4121 $6,5121 $8,6351 I-- CO CONSTRUCTION TYPES: IFR,IIFR 1 EACH ADD'L [ 100 SQ. FT. Co r 64 N co M EA $16.82 CO CO . CO EA CO 0 [t (304 CO 0) CO EA $11.541 N CO CO EA $16.821 (O CO C(7 EA $4.081 LO 0) CO EA 0 I� 64 1L0'0 L$ $24.801 CO M CO EA 0 (fl EA O N M EA 0 f- FEA A $10.071 0 CO V 69- CO CO OD 0 (O EA 1 $13.201 $13.571 M 0 tl0 EA CA N. (A EA- CO CO o EA 0 CO d' EA $10.531 N 0) (O Ef) 0 r 64 EA CO 0 O A E 0 M EA CO N EA N M . CO EA BASE COST $5,456 0) f� M as EA CO 0 EA $10,426 $13,824 'd' O 0) N 1-- $5,456 0) 1� CO (0 6/4 EA co 0 n EA (0 N O 1- $13,8241 $17,904 $4,023 co 0 N 4 EA r- 0 N CO EA 1- CO CO ^ EA 4 CA r O ,- O 0 N M ,3 co N 0 T to co 0 r- v EA 1- 0 N CO EA INN CO co N- EA 'Cr CA r O -1– $13,200 CA 0 N M EA EA $3,7521 N co (O EA $8,1301 $10,530 O) O 4 EA $4,783 $5,2951 $7,8151 M CO M o FA $13,4251 'SQ. FT. 0 0 O N 10,000 20,000 40,000 100,000 0 0 O 0 0 N 0 0 O N 10,000 20,000 40,000 0 0 0 0 r 200,0001 0 0 O r 5,0001 0 0 O O 0 0 0 6 50,0001 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 CO 10,0001 20,0001 50,0001 100,0001 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 (n 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 N 50,0001 100,000 0 0 CO N 12,5001 25,0001 50,000 125,0001 0 0 0 0 co N 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE [Moderate Hazard Storage [Low Hazard Storage Repair Garage (Not H -4) Motor Vehicle Fuel J Dispensing Parking Garage (Not S -4) 1 Open Parking Garage 1 IBC /ICC CLASS (1) N th M Ch M Cn CO ch 1S -4 1 PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED INSPECTION ONLY CONSTRUCTION TYPES: `Z `Z Z _ Z = EACH ADD'L. 1 100 SQ. FT. I CO ER vno�rcfli.vcoco ACA OTT ER S! 0) 03 V fA03 CO Tr 0303 LO 0 03 O 03 $4.54, ":1- ER N EA ocn 0) EA CO ER Cr ) 03 o N rte+ 0 0 ER BASE COST n 0)) _ c ER $4,6141 0) r0 _ Cn ER $7,5421 0 0 _ O -EF3ERERERERE9 0) N W- CO CO _ O c _ 0) _ CO CD _ N N _ c V d14)' _ d' $2,5611 .4-1 0) _ N E9 $3,3151 0 CO _ 4 K3 $6,4881 O OV _ a0 E9 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 2 C 2 = 2 2 EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $10.43 OO r 0 ER $15.21 N •, - 0 ER 00 CO M 03 O) 0 CO E9 c) CO h (/3 - CO 4 03 CO (O O - O CD c) EA CO C1) N ER Co CO CC) ER r- f, CO ER O 4 ER CO co CA 03 N Co C'') E9 O) co N E9 1 N Cf) 03 $11.50 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction thereof $16.30 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof $47 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction thereof >. j O L BASE COST $4,934 (O N to E9 CO co o CO (R OO VN" E ER 1 $12,5001 0 0r CO ER $1,7321 $2,0251 $2,2421 000 Ch K3 E C09 ER ER co 0 Cn ER $3,2021 $3,7431 ,- E9 E 000 r Efl E9 r N E9 0 O J 00 0 CO N ER 0 O E ER $143.50 for first 1000 cubic yards Plus 1 $78.60 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards 1 $997.60 for first 100,000 cubic yards Plus 1 1 CONSTRUCTION TYPES: 2 u- c Li. - EACH ADD'L 100 SQ. FT. $12.51 $7.42 $18.25 d- Co ER $4.42 - N. O) ER 0) N. CC) ER r N CC) ER $12.821 1 $4.321 O r r) E9 N 0 (O ER N r Cn ER r co d' ER CO CO r ,- O 0) Cv) ER N CO N ER O Cr) co Eg $40 for first 100 cubic yards Plus 1 $290.20 for first 10,000 cubic yards PII I BASE COST N O) CE) ER N O) ( O ER CC) CO I- ER d' C*) r r,9 000'91.$ CO d' CA ,- c0 0 N ER 0 d' N ER 0 CO N ER $3,972 $5,2681 0 73 (O E9 $3,842 $4,492 CO 0) 4. ER $7,344 n CA ER 0 CO N ISO. FT. 0 0 N 10,000 0 0 0 O N 40,000 100,000 200,000 0 0 .-- 0 0 0 CC) 10,0001 0 O N 50,000 100,000 0 O c\ 10,000 0 O N 40,000 0 0 O 0 200,000 )n and Gr 1 OCCUPANCY TYPE ILab/ R & D (Other T. l.'s 1 (Not Office or Retail) LDINGS All Shell Buildings 150 cubic yards or less 151 to 100 cubic yards 1101 to 1,000 cubic yards 11,001 to 10;000 cubic yards 110,001 to 100,000 cubic yards 1100,001 cubic yards or more PLAN CHECK IBC/ICC 1 CLASS 'SHELL BUI PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED NEOUSITEMS 1 COST 0 0 (A H9 0 0 O 0 0 O to EFT $75.00 0 0 O O EFT 0 0 c) O CO EFT $612.00 $459.00 $554.00 $315.001 $573.00 $459.00 $573.00 $497.00 0 0 O co CO EFT 0 0 i EFT 0 0 O ,— (9 0 0 O CO N E» 0 0 o) N Efl $516.00 $86.00' 0 0 co N. 64 $382.00 $459.001 0 0 O CO (o E» $975.00 0 0 N co E9 $344.00 0 0 O) N Ea 0 0 N- 0) EFT $58.001 0 0 h 0) d' E9 0 0 N- 0) [t 69 $58.00 $688.00 $58.00 0 0 (D r (n EFT INSPECTION $25.00, $37.501, 0 0 O E9 0 0 CO EFT $153.00 $115.00 $153.00 0 0 O co $344.00 0 0 T T Efl $172.00 $153.00 $229.00 $115.00 0 0 O fA 0 0 co (n 0 0 0 N 172.00 86.00 287.00 115.00 0 0 T 401.00 0 0 co tO 153.00 115.00 0 0 O N 153.00 0 0 o) N 153.001 153.001 0 0 O) N 229.001 0 0 O N 172.00 INTAKE/ PLAN CHECK $25.001 $37.501 0 0 O In EFT $459.00 $459.00 $344.00 0 O O 't EFT $229.00 $229.001 $344.00 0 O O EFT $344.00 0 O O EFT $229.001 0 0 O EFT 172.001 0 0 O 344.00 0 0 O 0 0 o) (n 0 0 h co N 344.00 459.001 459.00 459.00 229.001 0 0 O 344.00 0 0 o) N 344.001 344.001 0 0 o) N 459.001 0 0 O N 344.00 z per hour each each each each 1 0 m a) each each 1 each each each each each unit each each each each up to 100 I.f. each 100 I.f. up to 100 I.f. 1 each 100 I.f. each each each each each each each each up to 30 I.f. each 30 I.f. each up to 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. MISCELLAN valued at $1,001 - $2,500 Projects valued at $2,501 - $5,000 Fence or Freestanding Wall (non masonry) Wood Frame up to 1000 s.f. Partition - Commercial, Interior up to 30 I.f. 1 Additional enclosed cover 'Photovoltaic System Standard hourly rate Permit Center Processing Fee Minimum Building Permit Fee Projects valued at <$1,000'1 Equipment Shelter Cellular /Mobile Phone Awning /Canopy Carport 1 Certificate of Occupancy - Residential Certificate of Occupancy - Commercial Close Existing Openings Commercial Trailer Dock or Deck - ground floor Deck - second story and above C 0 0 E a) 0 (Duplicate /Replacement Job Card >six feet in height Each additional 100 I.f. 'Fence or Freestanding Wall (masonry) >six feet in height Each additional 100 I.f. Masonry Pre - fabricated /Metal Masonry up to 1000 s.f. 1 Greenhouse (non - commercial) Each additional pole 1 1 Each additional 30 I.f. 1 Partition - Residential, interior Open, all types Additional open cover Enclosed, all types 'Antenna ' Fireplace Flag Pole 'Garage 'Light Pole Patio Covert PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED NEOUSITEMS COST O 0 (o d' 0 0 r O N $612.00 0 0 ao u EH 0 0 O N 0 0 ui $573.00 $57.001 0 0 CM 0 ao $745.001 0 0 CV M 0 0 0 Co O $98.00 0 0 O M N 0 0 0 0 vi O CO $115.001 0 0 CD N 0 0 N N. 0 0 O (O $172.001 0 0 O 0 M 0 0 ui N 69. 0 0 O L() r 0 0 CV 0 ,�7} $57.00 $459.00 $459.00 0 0 N 0 vt ER 0 0 N 0 Nr ER 0 0 CV 0 fra 0 O CV 0 '7-J} INSPECTION 287.00 172.00, 153.00', 0 N 115.00 115.00 172.00 57.00 344.00 0 ( 459.00 573.001 459.00 0 ((00 115.001 229.001 344.001 0 , r 688.00 1 115.001 0 ^ 0) 115.001 287.001 150.001 O N O n 115.00 57.00 172.001 0 d 115.001 115.00 115.00 O u7 L 1 L Q H Z PLAN CHECK O 0) (0 O O) N 459.00 O O) N 115.00 O O 401.00 O O 459.00 172.00 172.00 O O) In 459.00 0 0) N 0 LO r r 115.00 459.001 O O 573.00 57.001 688.00 O 1: t!) 344.0( 150.00 00'0 00'9L 287.00 00'0 287.00 459.00 287.00 287.00 287.001 287.00 1-I Z up to 10 each 10 01. of do each 10 each hourly rate up to 501.f. each 50 I.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. up to 300 s.f. each 300 s.f. each each up to 1500 s.f. each 500 s.f. vi O '4) O 0_ c each 500 s.f. up to 500 s.f. each 500 s.f. each up to 100 I.f. each 100 I.f. each each each each each each each each each MISCELLAN in place Concrete (1st 10 piers) Additional Piers (each 10) Driven (steel, pre- stressed concrete Seismic Retrofit* ( Fee reduced from $700 to provide an incentive)I 1 Each additional 100 I.f. 1 Seismic Retrofit per ABAG Plan or 2006 IEBC Rework of any existing ground sign Other Sign 1 Wall /Awning Sign, Non - electric Wall/ Electric 1 Pier /Pile Foundation Additional Piles (each 10 Pre -Plan Inspection (first hour) Each additional hour Retaining Wall /Foundation Repair First 50 I.f. Each additiona 50 I.f. Remodel - Residential Less than 300 s.f. Kitchen - OTC Bath OTC Kitchen - Routed Bath - Routed Additional Remodel Re- Roof with Sheathing Roof Structure Replacement Each additional 500 s.f. Residential Additon - First Story Up to 500 s.f. Each additional 500 s.f. Residential Addition - Multi -story Up to 500 s.f. Each additional 500 s.f. Sauna - Steam Directional Each additonal Ground /Roof /Projecting Master Plan Sign Check Re -Roof c CA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED NEOUSITEMS COST $258.00 $516.00 $372.00 $459.00 O O f: cm O O O u) E!T O O O Ea O O Ni Ps Ea- $1,147.00' O 0 ad C9 -Ea O 0 't M O O i Eft O 0 Ea 0 O EA $57.00 O O O 0 H3 O O r r E9 $172.00 $57.00 $115.001 $57.00 O 0 O 0 E9 O O O CO Ea O O O 64 O H 0 w d co Z 0 co I 172.00 143.00 115.00 0 N 115.00 0 N 344.00; 688.00 802.00 172.00 115.00 0 152.001 57.001 100% of the Plan Check Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 I00'0 58.001 57.001 460.001 finish, etc will be charged accordingly. 1 INTAKE/ PLAN CHECK 172.00. 344.00 229.00 344.00 o 0 0 344.00 0 0 0 430.00 459.00 516.00 172.001 229.001 00'0 287.00 0 0 0 O 0 o N 115.001 00 N L) 57.00 00 0 0 0 o 0 0 00 0 HI z n L a) N L L N first flight per flight first 100 I.f. each 100 I.f. each each each each upto5 each 5 upto5 each 5 each I each per 1/2 hour each per 1/2 hour each per 1/2 hour each Hourly (min 4 hrs.)I Hourly (min 4 hrs.) only. Associated work inluding plumbing, mechanical, electrical , sheetrock, fi MISCELLAN than 10 s.f. or structural Overtime Plan Check Fee (first 1/2 hour) 1 Each additional 1/2 hour (or portion thereof) Supplemental Plan Check Fee (first 1/2 hour) 1 Each additional 1/2 hour (or portion thereof) Supplemental Inspection Fee (first 1/2 hour) Each additional 1/2 hour (or portion thereof) Less than 10 s.f. Spa or Hot Tub Stairs - First Flight Each Additional Flight Storage Racks Each Additional 100 I.f. Swimming Pool /Spa Pre- fabricated E O 0 Commercial Pool Termite Report/Dry rot Repairs 'Window or Door Replacement Additional Replacement 0 O U z Additional New Window I Concurrent Plan Check I Board of Appeals Emergency Call -Out (Non - scheduled) 1 'After Hours Call -Out (Scheduled) 1* Seismic Retrofit Fee is for retrofit wort 'Skylight 0 0 0 N MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES I $115.00 0 o EFT. 0 o EA. 0 0 EFT $153.001 $38.00 $38.00 0 0 $57.00 $115.001 $115.001 $57.00 0 0 EFT $57.00 0 0 0 0 EFT 0 0 EFT. $57.00 0 0 El, 0 0 EFT $57.001 $57.00 0 0 Install /Relocate each forced air or gravity -type furnace or burner (including attached ducts and vents) up to and including 100,000 Btu /hr Repair /Alteration /Addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit cooling unit, absorption unit or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls regulated by code Install /Relocate each boiler or compressor, up to and including 3 HP, or each absorption system up to and 1 including 100,000 Btu /hr Each air - handling unit, including attached ducts. (Note: This fee shall not apply to an air - handling unit which is a portion of a factory- assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler, or absorption unit for which Residential - Installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such a O O L Commercial - Installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such a 0 0 L Each Appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code but not classed in other appliance categories, PLUMBING / GAS PERMIT FEE Each Plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap (including water, drainage, piping, and backflow Each Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent, excepting kitchen -type grease a permit is required elsewhere in the code.) Each Ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air conditioning system authorized by a permit interceptors functioning as fixture traps Installation, alteration, or repair of water piping and /or water treating equipment (each) Installation, alteration, or repair of gas piping and /or gas treating equipment (each) Repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture Each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including backflow protection devices therefor Backflow devices not included in other fee services (e.g., building sewer) each unit Stand -alone Mechanical Plan Check (hourly rate) 1 or for which no other fee is listed in the code Other Mechanical Inspections (per Hour) Stand -alone Plumbing Plan Check (hourly rate) 'Other Plumbing and Gas Inspections (per hour) protection therefore) Each Building Sewer Each Water Heater and /or Vent Gas test (each Sewer lateral test (each) CO 0 0 N PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED - ' ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES 0 )f) r Efi T O) g. 0 EO EH $57.00 $57.00 0 O) E9. 0 O T Ea 0 EA N E!3 $38.00 $57.001 O O 69. $38.00 $29.001 0 E Co EA 0 N: LE) 69. (Includes a complete system of necessary branch circuit wiring, bonding, grounding, underwater lighting, water pumping and other similar electrical equipment directly related to the operation of a Temporary Service power pole or pedestal, including all pole or pedestal- mounted receptacle outlets and appurtenances Temporary distribution system and temporary lighting and receptacle outlets for construction sites, - decorative lighting, Christmas tree sales lots, etc. (NOTE- SEPARATE FEE DUE TO ALAMEDA POWER AND TELECOM OF $250.00 PER SERVICE) 1 (Receptacle, switch, lighting or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, (For multi - outlet assemblies, each 5 feet or fraction thereof may be considered as one outlet) Fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same, including wall- mounted electric ovens; counter mounted cooking tops; electric ranges; self- contained room console or through -wall air conditioners; space heaters; food waste grinders; dishwashers; washing machines; water heaters; clothes dryers; or Residential Appliances and self- contained factory-wired nonresidential appliances, including medical and dental devices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drinking fountains; 1 Motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial heating, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment, and other apparatus, as follows: Note: These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contactors, thermostats, relays, and other directly related control equipment. 0 0 o_ o) c E 0 For all other types of swimming pools, therapeutic whirlpools, spas, and alterations to existing other motor - operated appliances (each) not exceeding one horsepower (HP) in rating. (each) ; or other similar types of equipment.) (each) Stand Alone Electrical Plan Check ( hourly rate) Private, Residential, In- ground swimming pools - -- - - - - - -- Receptacle, Switch and Lighting Outlets feeders, and meters) First 10 (or portion thereof) Each additional 10 (or portion thereof) Lighting Fixtures, sockets, or other lamp- holding devices First 10 (or portion thereof) Each additional 10 (or fraction thereof) swimming pools Temporary Power Service 115 or 20 amp - First 10 circuits (each) - Over 10 circuits (each) 125 to 40 amp circuits (each) 50 to 175 amp circuits (each) 'Lighting Fixtures Residential Appliances Non - Residential Appliances J Power Apparatus 0 N N 0) ro a 0 0 0 N PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED ELECTRICAL PERMIT FEES 1 0 o 6 N (A $38.00 0 0 co M EA 0 0 co n 69. $134.001 $172.001 $38.001 $115.001 (An additional fee will be required for lighting fixtures, motors and other appliances that are connected (NOTE: AN ADDITIONAL FEE OF $105 (UNDERGROUND) OR $150 (OVERHEAD) IS DUE TO ALAMEDA Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors for which a permit is required, but for which no fee is herein set forth (This fee is not applicable when a fee is paid for one or more services, outlets, fixtures, appliances, Additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline lighting system, or marquee (each) Services of 600 volts or less and over 200 amperes to 1,000 amperes in rating (each) Services over 600 volts or over 1,000 amperes in rating (each) 1 POWER AND TELECOM FOR THE RECONNECTION OR UPGRADE OF ANY SERVICE) 1 u A m co m Trolley and plug -in -type busways - each 100 I.f. or fraction thereof to trolley and plug -in type busways. No fee is required for portable tools.) Signs, Outline Lighting, or Marquees supplied from one branch circuit (each Services of 600 volts or less and not over 200 amperes in rating (each) Miscellaneous Apparatus, Conduits, and Conductors power apparatus, busways, signs, or other equipment) (Signs, Outline Lighting, and Marquees] Other Electrical Inspections (per hour) Services (PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT CONTINUED ZONING APPLICATIONS +T &MI *ZS 1— t +T &MI c S 1— t +T &MI e a t c a t O N Ef3 od t In O Z 1 H t otj I-- t N d9 +T &MI COO y} O N � LO +T &MI 06 1 t O included in cost of entitlements oiS 1— t 0 0 CO CR 10% of Contract Price' 0 O O r ffl 000'1. $ 0 0 O r EA 0 0 O 1- EH $ 500 0 0 O r 03 0 0 CO fA 0 0 N f�) 0 0 N EA 0 0 M ER 0 0 N Efl 0 0 0 r K} $ 1,000 a+ N O N c IAmendment to text of Chapter 30 "Development Regulations" of the Alameda Municipal Code Design Review - Major (New residential additions over 80sf.- Single Family and Duplex APPLICATION; APPLICATION; Initial Study, Negative Declaration, EIR (does not include Alameda County Clerk or Fish & Game fees) Administrative Charge on outside preparation of Initial Study, Negative Declaration or EIR [ Design Review - Major (New Comercial, residential additions over 80sf. >2 units Categorical Exemption (does not include Alameda County Clerk fee) GENER Master Plan or Amendment for Mixed Use Planned Developemnt Planned Development 1 Planned Developmemt or Amendment to Planned Devlopment Amendment to the General Plan (Diagram or Text) Periodic Review of Development Agreement Extension of variance which has not been vested Extension of use permit which has not been vested Design Review Design Review - Minor (Routed) Design Review - OTC Extension of Design Review not yet vested Parcel / tentative Map Amendment J Tentative /Pacel Map up to 4 lots Lot Line Adjustment (base of 2 lots) J Amendments Zone Change Master Plan Development Agreement Development Agreement [Variance Exception (Administrative) Use Permit Use Permit ITentative/Parcel Map Subdivision Map 5 -25 lots Subdivsion Map > 25 lots Condo Conversions (Lot Line Adjustment Environmental Review Mitigation Monitoring Rezoning Variance N N 0 0 0 N 'LICATIONS 0 ��� 0 0 +T &MI 0 0 +T &MI 0 +T &MI 0 1- + MI MI MI $ 300 $ 150 $ 200 0 0 N EA 0 0 N CO 0 0 N EA Demolition Certificate of Approval by HAB (Principal and accessory structure; removal of protected trees) Performance Agreement to allow occupancy before all requirements are completed Demolition Certificate of Approval by staff (accessory structures) Request for payment of parking in lieu fee Designation of Historical Sign or Monument Changes in Historical Building Study List Classification Investigation Fee = four times the activity fee Appeal to Planning Board Appeal to the City Council Home Occupation Zoning Compliance determination Deed Restriction Certificate of Complaince Alteration to City Monuments Traffic Study /Review IT & M = Time and Materials Appeals PUBLIC WORKS Fees noted in red or highlighted in red boxes are subject to Council Review. Maps & Prints: 500 scale - Alameda (color - 36" x 84 ") $22 500 scale - Alameda black and white $11 1000 scale - Alameda (color -18" x 44 ") $15 1000 scale - Alameda (black and white) $11 500 scale - BFI 22x30 $11 Aerials $11 plus $10 mailing Truck route, bike route $2 Traffic volume data sheets, radar speed data sheets $5 Assessor's parcel maps (whole page available at Alameda County Assessor's Office) $1.00 per portion Sanitary Sewer Plan (18 x 22) $16 Storm Drain Plans (18 x 22) $16 Other Prints (22 x 30) $22 Plans and Specifications: Standard Plans $30 Bike Plans $30 Standard Subdivision Improvement Specs $30 General Services: Research of Records (no charge for first 15 minutes) Transportation Operational Requests - nonsafety related Transportation Technical Team/Transportation Committee— Request for or appeal of actions* *Fee is refundable if enacted /approved Recycling/Trash Exception Application* $86 per hour Time and Materials $60 * The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule. Time & Materials - Engineering time charged per cost allocation plan, approximately $99.82 /hour Master Fees - Revised 7/06 $86 DEPOSIT * 8/16/2006 16 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED DEPOSIT PermltCenterApplicat/ons: — — — _ .._.._.._.._.._.._.:_.._.._.._1 jBuilding Permit - Combination Building Permit (Non - Development) : Plan Check - Residential Remodel /Addition single family $260 + T &M ** ' Plan Check - Residential Remodel /Addition multi- family $400 + T &M ** I • ' Plan Check - Commercial - multi building $400 + T &M ; Plan Check - Commercial - one building $260 + T &M I j Supplemental Plan Check T &M ** • I Development Applications Planned Development T &M Planned Development Amendment T &M Final Development Plan T &M Parking in -lieu Fee Determination T &M :Review of Master Plans /Development Plans: (Engineering services for review of developer applications will be at time and materials) j I Master Plan T &M ** Master Plan Amendment T &M ** I Development Plan (Also see Property Development category) T &M ** j Development Plan Amendments T &M ** Development Agreement/Amendment (Also see Property Development Category) T &M *" I 1 General Plan Amendment T &M ** j : Environmental Review T &M ** ' Traffic Review T &M --------.._..—•---•------- •-- •-- .._...— •--- •---- - - - - -- .._.._.._.._ -• -• -- • - -•_I 'Concrete Permits , 1 Sidewalk repair /replace install 0 to 20 linear feet $0 j Sidewalk repair /replace install 21 to 50 linear feet $25 : Sidewalk repair /replace install 51 to 200 linear feet $75 . Sidewalk repair /replace install > 200 linear feet $300 j Curb Cut/Drivewa New each �._........_Y." �_. $200 _ .r t permit ._.._..-- •---- .._.._..— .. - -- -- --- $56 •-- •----- -- •-- •-- •• —• - -: Sidewalk Repair - concrete permit ir�yna- yr -rvay rerm�rs: — ""— --- Encroachment Permits - Construction >1 week $520 j Encroachment Permits - Temporary <1 week $65 ** Encroachment Permits - Permanent $390 ** ; Excavation Permit - Includes inspection $290 Per Block I j Excavation Permit - Point Repair $54 Each signalized intersection - additional charge $195 • ■ 100% recovery to be phased in over three years: j FY 07/08 390 /block 290 /sig. Intersection FY 08/09 520 /block 390 /sig. Intersection ** The Public Works Director shall set a deposit schedule T &M = Time & Materials - Engineering time charged per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82 /hour Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 17 PUBLIC WORKS CONTINUED Property Development - Applications may be reviewed by City staff or by consultant hired by the City at cost plus 10% Deposit is $10,000 unless otherwise specified Lot Line Adjustment Parcel Map (1 to 4 lots) $1,500 $2,500 T &M (or Consultant Tentative /Final Map review Costs + 10 %) T &M (or Consultant Assessment District Formation Costs + 10 %) On /Off site Public Improvement plan review - Commercial > 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement plan review - Commercial < 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Commercial > 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Commercial < 5 acres On /Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential >25 Lots On/Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential 5 to 25 Lots On/Off site Public Improvement Plan Review - Residential < 5 Lots On /Off site Public Improvement Inspection - Residential >26 Lots On/Off site Improvement Inspection - Residential 1 to 25 Lots Grading Permit Inspection - Commercial < 1 Acre Grading Permit Inspection - Commercial 1 to 10 Acres Grading Permit Inspection - Commercial > 10 Acres Grading Permit Inspection - Residential 1-4 Lots Grading Permit Inspection - Residential 5 to 25 Lots Grading Permit Inspection - Residential 26 to 50 Lots j Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Applies to all development sites • SWPPP <1 acre SWPPP 1 -5 acres SWPPP 5 - 20 Acres WPPP > 25 Acres $3,800 • DEPOSIT $4,000 $2,500 T &M (or Consultant Costs + 10 %) $6,900 $1,725 $1,100 T &M T &M $3,675 T &M $700 $325 $575 T &M $450 $575 $700 $1,900 $2,550 $3,200 Special Event Permits Not all special events will require review by Public Works. Review determination will be made at time of application. Fees will be waived for nonprofit or public benefit events. Banner Permit - per banner /per location for install removal of banner Block Party Permit - Requiring Engineering Review - - $200 Boat Show Permit - requiring Engineering Review Filrn Permit Non- profit/Still Photography - street closure I All others - street closure All Bridge closures . Rental of City Property (to be determined) I Race, Walk -a -thon, parade permit Relocation Permit (housing moving) Street Fair Permit Tent Permit Under 4,500 sq. ft. Over 4,500 sq. ft. $20 T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M T &M Permits - Solid Waste & Recycling - Hauler Fees (C&D Fees) - - Basic fee Reporting fees ($100 per hour) Program Fee Impact Mitigation Fee Performance Security Bond T &M T &M $600 $100 minimum due at filing $8.67 per ton hauled $2.86 per ton hauled $95 T &M - Time and Materials (Engineering time charges per Cost Allocation Plan, approximately $99.82/hr. Master Fees - Revised 7/06 8/16/2006 18 City of ALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Fee or Service Name / Description A -3 Occupant Load of 50 to 299 without a Stage A -2.1, Occupant Load of 300 or more without a Stage A -2 Occupant Load of less than 1000 with a Stage A -1 Occupant Load of 1000 or more with a Stage Group B Occupancies: 1 -2,500 SF Group B Occupancies: 2,501- Current Fee Proposed Fee 125 264 264 125 264 125 264 63 192 Group B Occupancies: each additional 2,500 SF $ 63 $ X72 Group E -1 Occupancies (Elem Schools) $ 125 $ 480 Group E -1 Occupancies (Jr High or Middle Schools) $ 125 $ 696 Group E -1 Occupancies (High Schools) $ 125 $ 1,417 Group E -2 Occupancies $ 125 $ 156 Group E -3 Occupancies (Non residential day care) or any residential bldg use for day care in excess 12 children) $ 125 $ 156 Group E -1 Occupancies (Public Elem Schools) $ 125 $ 120 Group E -1 Occupancies (Public Jr High or Middle Schools) $ 125 $ 174 Group E -1 Occupancies (Public High Schools) $ 125 $ 354 Group E -2 Occupancies (Public) $ 125 $ 39 Group H -1, H -2, H -3 Occupancies (1 -2,500 SF) $ 63 $ 91 Group H -1, H -2, H -3 Occupancies (each additional 2,500 SF) $ 63 $ 36 Group 11.1 Occupancies (1 -2,500 SF) $ 125 $ 156 Group 1 1.1 Occupancies (each additionl 2,500 SF) $ 125 $ 72 Group 11.2 Occupancies $ 125 $ 156 Group 12 Occupancies $ 125 $ 228 Group 13 Occupancies $ 125 $ 372 Group M Occupancies $ 63 $ 156 Group R -1 3 -10 Units $ 63 $ 192 Group R -1 11 -20 units $ 125 $ 228 Group R -1 21 -30 units $ 250 $ 336 Group R -1 31-60 units $ 250 $ 408 Group R -1. 61 -90 units $ 375 $ 552 Group R -1 >90 units $ 500 $ 696 Group S -1 Occupancies $ 63 $ 264 Group S -2 Occupancies $ 63 $ 264 Group S -3 Occupancies $ 63 $ 192 Group S-4 Occupancies $ 63 $ 264 Group S -5 Occupancies (hanger) $ 63 $ 264 Marinas $ - $ 408 PLAN CHECKING / PERMITS Prebuild Conferences $ 125 $144/hr Fire Alarm $ 125 $ 147 Fire Sprinkler - New < 20 heads $ 188 $ 216 Fire Sprinkler - New 20 -200 heads $ 250 $ 288 Fire Sprinkler - New 20 -200 heads (each head) $ 1 $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - New >200 heads $ 375 $ 432 Fire Sprinkler - New >200 heads (each head) $ 1 $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - TI < 20 heads $ 125 $ 144 Fire'Sprinkler - TI 20 -200 heads $ 188 $ 216 Fire Sprinkler- TI 20 -200 heads (each head) $ - $ 1 Fire Sprinkler - TI >200 heads $ 250 $ 288 Fire Underground $ 250 $ 288 Fire Hydrants $ 25 $ 128 Each Additional Fire Hydrant $ 25 $ 25 Standpipes $ 250 $ 288 8/16/2006 3 City ofALAMEDA USER FEE STUDY PROPOSED FEE REVISIONS Itigetwittormimo Fee or Service Name / Description Current Fee Proposed Fee Standpipes Each Additional Outlet $ 10 $ 12 Suppression System - Hood $ 188 $ 216 Suppression System - Agents $ 250 $ 288 TANKS Install AGST <= 2K gals $ 125 $ . 144 TANKS Install AGST > 2K gals $ 250 $ 288 TANKS Install UGST $ 375 $ 432 TANKS Install Piping only $ . 125 $ 144 TANKS Remove Residential $ 188 $ 216 TANKS Remove Commercial $ 375 $ 432 TENT PERMITS 201 to 400 square feet (in total) $ 250 $ 48 401 to 1500 square feet (in total) $ 375 $ . 72 1501 to 15,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 144 15,001 to 30,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ 288 Over 30,000 square feet (in total) $ - $ . 432 SPECIAL PERMITS Bum & Weld (routine welding operation) $ 125 $ 144 Film Permit $ 63 $ 279 Fireworks - Display $ 125 $ 415 Fireworks - Theatrical $ 125 $ 415 Fireworks - Special Effects $ 125 $ 415 Fumigation and storage $ 125 $ 144 Camivals, Fairs & Special Events $ - $ 415 STANDBY FIRE PERSONNEL AND /OR EQUIPMENT (AT HOURLY RATE) Equipment without staff $ 72 $80 /hr Standard Fire Engine without staff $ 150 $165/hr Staff Vehicle without staff $ 35 $39 /hr Quint/Ladder Truck without staff $ 200 $221/hr Technical Rescue without staff $ - $110 /hr Fire Boat without staff $ - $110 /hr Ambulance $ - $83 /hr Support Materials (variable) At cost per type and amount required At cost per type and amount required Personnel Per current contract salary including benefits Per current contract salary including benefits MISC FEES Copies of Fire Reports $ 1 $ 1 NEW FEES FALSE FIRE ALARM FEES 2nd false alarm 3rd false alarm 4th ea additional Excessive or Malicious residential False Alarms Causing Response of Fire Apparatus (per calaendar quarter) $ 63 $ 125 $250 $375 Excessive or Malicious Commercial False Alarms Causing Response of Fire Apparatus(percalaendarquarter) $ . 125 $ 250 $375 $375 Response due to "Failure to Notify" the Fire Department when working on or testing Sprinkler or Fire Alarm System $ 125 $ 125 $125 $125 8/16/2006 4 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in a regular meeting assembled on the day of , 2006, by the following vote to wit: AYES NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said City this day of , 2006. Lara Weisiger, City Clerk City of Alameda Beth Eiselman Michael R. Fassler Karen Miller Ernest J. Notar Patricka E. Powell CURRENT APPLICATIONS RENT REVIEW ADVISORY COMMITTEE Landlord Seat Re: Agenda Item 7 -A 10 -03 -06