HomeMy WebLinkAboutC25640 Ratify Acoustical Engineering Svcs-Modifications to Noise OrdinanceREQUEST:
SUBMITTED BY:
CONTRACTOR:
DATE:
CONTENTS:
Recommendation:
Contract No. C25640
CITY OF PALM DESERT
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
STAFF REPORT
\/l P
Ratify the City Manager's Authorization for Acoustical Engineering
Services and Modifications to the Noise Ordinance
Martin Alvarez, Senior Management Analyst
Gordon Bricken
1621 East Seventeenth, Suite K
Santa Ana, CA 992705-8518
August 24, 2006
Proposal/Contract
South Beach Acoustical Analysis Report
By Minute Motion: Ratify the City Manager's Authorization to contract with
Gordon Bricken & Associates, Santa Ana, California, to provide acoustical
engineering services/noise ordinance revisions in the amount of
$8,100.00.
Discussion:
On April 18, 2006, the City Manager authorized staff to contract with Gordon Bricken &
Associates (GBA) for acoustical engineering services to address issues relating to noise
produced by South Beach Nightclub. The acoustical services provided included the
following components:
• Visiting the site to review the nature of the issue.
• Inspecting the construction of the building, location, and type of music equipment
used by South Beach.
• Setting up a simulation of the equipment operation and determine the
interior/exterior noise levels.
• Recommend mitigation measures needed to produce a noticeable reduction in
noise emissions.
• Review the City's current Noise Ordinance and draft a revision to address low
frequency noise that can be enforced by City Staff.
• Attend City Council meeting to address the Noise Ordinance changes.
Contract No. C25640
Staff Report
Ratify Contract with Gordon Bricken & Associates
Page 2 of 2
August 24, 2006
The total proposal cost was $8,100.00. These technical services were required to
adequately address the low frequency noise issues and possible building mitigation
measures to reduce the noise levels at South Beach.
Attached please find the acoustical analysis report prepared by the GBA addressing
possible mitigation measures (building upgrades) needed to produce a noticeable noise
reduction at South Beach. A separate report outlining the consultant's proposed Noise
Ordinance modifications is also on the August 24, 2006, City Council agenda. under
Ordinances for Introduction.
Therefore, staff recommends that City Council, by minute motion, ratify the City
Manager's authorization to contract with Gordon Bricken & Associates in the amount of
$8,100.00.
Submitted By:
M in Alvarez
Senior Management Analyst
Approval:
Carlos L. Ortega
City Manager
Paul Gibson
Finance Director
Depart r lent H
Homer Ctoy
ACM for D:j-''opment Services
CITY COUNCILATION:
APPROVED DENIED
RECEIVED OTHER
MEETING DATE „19--0 (o
AYES : 63e.o5Cno , 1 S elk/ 1-1e..e„: C�
TOS. tJrnrl�. (
BSENT: j a(jrta_.
UBSTAIN: t1/41,.
JERIFIED BY: g,1 011I)-\
:Ir. iginaI on File wit' City Clerk ' a Office
G:IDevServiceslMartin Alvarez\Word Files120061StaffReportslgordonbricken.doc
06/455
1 \
O GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES
ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS
RECEIVED
JUN 2 9 2006
June 12, 2006
Development Services
City of Palm Desert
r
A C O U S T I C A L A N A L Y S I S
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
S O U T H
C I T Y
Prepared b
Gor n Bricken
President
/mmb
B E A C H
O F
1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K
Phone (714) 835-0249
N I G H T C L U B
P A L M D E S E R T
Prepared for:
MR. MARTIN ALVAREZ
CITY OF PALM DESERT
73-310 Fred Waring
Palm Desert, California 92260
Santa Ana, California 92705-8518
FAX (714) 835-1957 /
1 /
GORDON BRICKEN
06/455
1ATES
ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS
S U M M A R Y
This analysis has been completed'to determine the extent
of the changes needed at the South Beach Nightclub to effect a
meaningful reduction in the sound levels to areas outside the site.
A sound study by Medlin and Associates, Inc., did not provide a
clear opinion that the South Beach Nightclub was in violation of
the Palm Desert Noise Ordinance or the Rancho Mirage Noise
Ordinance at a residence located in Rancho Mirage. The study
identified a low frequency beat in the sound signature that was
attributed to the South Beach Nightclub and which had been the
subject of the complaints.
This study did not revisit the issue of compliance with
the Noise Ordinances. This study addressed what changes could be
made at the South Beach Nightclub that would produce a significant
reduction in the sound level outside the facility. The target
chosen was a reduction of ten (10) decibels simultaneously in the
A -Weighted and C-Weighted measures.
The study examined various combinations of modifications
to the building envelope as well as changes to the sound system.
To meet the design goal the following changes would need to be
made:
1. Replace the existing sliding glass door next to
the stage with a wall that has an STC 46
rating, or higher. A window with a similar rating may be
used as well.
2. Replace all remaining windows with windows
rated STC 39, or higher.
3. Replace the existing door to the deck with a
door rated STC 42, or higher. Alternately,
construct a double door vestibule arrangement for this
entry.
1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Santa Ana, California 92705-8518
Phone (714) 835-0249 FAX (714) 835-1957 /
2
06/455
4. An option to modification of the building
envelope is to modify the source frequency
spectrum by reducing the bass contributions so that the
A -Weighted and C-Weighted measures are within five dBA of
each other.
3
061 455
O GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES
ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report addresses the potential options for noise
reduction that could be employed at the South Beach
Nightclub relative to noise emissions into residential areas.
A vicinity map showing the general location of the club
is presented on Exhibit 1 -- Site Location Map. It is located at
the southwest corner of State Highway 111 and Painters Path.
Exhibit 2 shows an aerial of the area. The facility floor plan is
shown on Exhibit 3. Exhibits 4 and 5 provide the following
orientation photos:
Exhibit 4. The upper photo is a view from the corner of
State Highway 111 and Painters Path looking
toward the nearest residential area located in the City
of Rancho Mirage. There is some history of complaints
of excessive noise from residences in this location.
Note these residences have a seven foot high privacy
wall.
The lower photo is taken from the deck of
the South Beach Nightclub looking across a small pond and
in the direction of the residences seen in the upper
photo. The outdoor area is surrounded by a six foot (61)
wall.
Exhibit 5. Exhibit 5 shows two views of the interior of
the club. The upper photo is of the stage
that is located inside the deck area. Note that there
are two suspended speakers. It also appears that there
may be sub -woofers below the stage.
The lower photo is the sound system console,
which is the typical array of mixers, faders, amplifiers
and controllers.
1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Santa Ana, California 92705-8518
Phone (714) 835-0249 FAX (714) 835-1957
4
06/455
2.0 BACKGROUND
The City of Palm Desert had the firm of Medlin and
Associates, Inc., conduct a noise measurement study at a
residence located on Barbara Drive in the City of Rancho Mirage.
The intent of that study was to determine if the South Beach
Nightclub was in compliance with the noise criteria of the City of
Palm Desert even though the residence was not within the City's
limits. The Palm Desert Noise Ordinance, as it relates to
residential land uses, is listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1
ALLOWED LIMITS AT RESIDENTIAL USES
FOR THE CITY OF PALM DESERT (1}
ALLOWED LIMIT (dBA)
EXTERIOR
INTERIOR
ALLOWED DURATION
DAY
NIGHT
DAY NIGHT
TERM
30
minutes
in hour
55
50
-- --
L50
15
minutes
in hour
60
55
-- --
L25
5
minutes
in hour
65
60
55 45
L8
1
minute
in hour
70
65
60 50
L2
Anytime in
hour
75
70
65 55
Lmax
(1) a.
Day
= 7:00 A.M.
to
10:00 P.M.
Night
= 10:00 P.M.
to
7:00 A.M.
B.
dBA
= The symbol
for
A -Weighted
decibels
The noise limits of Rancho Mirage are the same as those
given in Table 1.
The Medlin study came to the following conclusions:
1. The exterior and interior levels exceeded the
allowed limits but the levels could not be
attributed for certain to the South Beach Nightclub due
to the Highway ill noise contributions.
2. There was a distinct 50 Hertz beat which was
attributed to the South Beach Nightclub. The
level was typically around 60 dB,.but it reached 70 dBA
once for some period of time after 1:00 A.M.
3. Crowd noise at the South Beach Nightclub was
audible, but it not quantified in the report.
In general, the Medlin report is somewhat inconclusive as
to whether the South Beach was exceeding the limits of the Noise
Ordinances.
5
06/455
3.0 MITIGATION MEASURES
3.1 MEASURES OF CHANGE
The object is to produce an amount of change
that can be noticed. The.degree.of recognition
of the change in a noise level varies with the individual
and any interference from noise sources other than the
one under study. In the ideal case, it takes about ten
(10) dB of change for nearly anyone to recognize a change
has taken place. A reduction of ten (10) dBA would be
characterized as half loudness. I
3.2 REFERENCE TRANSMISSION LOSS
The Noise Ordinance unit of measure is the
A -Weighted decibel. The A -Weighting is a form
of filter that is applied to the measurement instrument
to simulate the way the human ear filters sound. The
effect of this filtering can be seen by examining the
frequency distribution of a sound that might occur inside
the South Beach facility. Exhibit 6 shows the frequency
plot for the sound with and without the A -Weighting
filter. The case without the filter is referred to as
the C-Weighting. Notice that the filter knocks down the
contributions to the total sound below about 500 Hertz.
The reported 50 Hertz contribution in the Medlin study is
nearly 30 dB less with the A -Weighting. Therefore, any
A -Weighted measurement would not be affected to any great
degree by the energy at 50 Hertz. This does not mean
people cannot hear it, it just means that the overall
noise dBA level, which is the sum of the contributions at
every frequency, is not altered significantly by the
lower frequency contributions. Exhibit 6 indicates that
while the A -Weighted level is 110 dB, the unweighted
version is 119 dB, or nine (9) dB higher.
The object of this mitigation study was to
produce at least a ten (10) dB noise reduction in the
sound level emissions for both the A -Weighted and
C-Weighted conditions. The initial site visit indicated
that the stage is next to a large sliding glass door.
Permission could not be obtained to measure the actual
noise levels of a performance inside the facility.
Therefore, the source level is that described by Exhibit
1 taken from an actual nightclub measurement at another
location. Also, the actual noise reduction of the
building could not be measured, so the reference data
from other sources was used to pursue the analysis.
06/455
The estimated noise reduction of the glazing
next to the stage based on file data as a function of
frequency is plotted on Exhibit 7. When the transmission
loss of Exhibit 7 is applied to the source noise curve of
Exhibit 6, the result is the exterior noise curve of
Exhibit 8. The inside -to -outside noise reduction is 25
dBA (110-85=25). Exhibit 8 is the unweighted noise
curve. Note how the frequencies below 250 Hertz are even
more dominant than they were in Exhibit 6.
To increase the noise reduction, it is
necessary to increase the transmission loss of the
various potential components of construction. The
standard measure of transmission loss is the Sound
Transmission Class (STC) rating. A series of
calculations was carried out using candidate types of
window, wall and door construction. The results are
given in Table 2.
TABLE 2
WALL AND WINDOW CONSTRUCTIONS
TRANSMISSION LOSS VALUES (1)
LEVEL
CHANGE
DESCRIPTION
STC
dBA
dBC
dBA
dBC
Existing
26
85
97
25
22
dual pane window
34
80
92
30
27
1/4 inch laminated glass
35
80
97
30
22
1/2 inch laminated glass
39
75
89
35
30
1/4 inch laminated dual pane
53
73
93
37
26
Stucco wall
46
75
95
35
24
Double wall
57
66
86
44
33
Block wall
48
69
84
41
35
Door
26
85
99
25
10
Vestibule Door
42
77
96
33
23
(1) a. The level is just outside.
b. The change is from the inside to the outside.
C. The inside noise level is set at 110 dBA, 119 dBC.
The changes provided by the various
construction options are always higher for the A -Weighted
measure than the C-Weighted measure for individual
components. The reason lies in the change that occurs in
the 63 Hertz octave band which contains the 50 Hertz
element mentioned in the Medlin study.
7
06/455
3.3 STRUCTURE NOISE REDUCTION
The portion of the structure of interest is the
entire east wall, not just the sliding glass
door next to the stage. This wall consists of several
types of construction. It includes the existing sliding
glass door next to the stage, a door onto the deck, a
stucco wall section, a series of fixed windows and a
series of small movable windows. The noise reduction of
the building is a combination of the transmission loss
values of the various components and the square footage
of each type construction. A series of combinations was
calculated using the various component data given in
Table 2. The results are given in Table 3.
TOTAL 3
TOTAL TRANSMISSION LOSS OF THE
VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION
DESCRIPTION
Existing
Add fixed dual
Add Vestibule
Add Vestibule
Add Vestibule
+ replace
Add Vestibule
+ replace
Add Vestibule
+ replace
Add Vestibule
+ replace
LEVEL
dBA
dBC
25
14
pane windows
30
21
25
15
+ fixed dual pane
31
25
+ fixed dual pane
SGD with stucco wall
31
27
+ fixed dual pane
SGD with double wall
32
30
+ 1/2" laminated glass
SGD with stucco wall
35
27
+ 1/2 laminated glass
walls with double wall
36
30
Inspection of Table 3 indicates that the
combined noise reduction of the various components will
usually not be as great as some of the individual
components.
The changes from the existing condition are
given in Table 4 on the following page.
1.1
TOTAL 4
CHANGE IN TOTAL TRANSMISSION LOSS OF THE
VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION
COMPARED TO THE EXISTING CASE
DESCRIPTION
Add fixed dual
Add Vestibule
Add Vestibule
Add Vestibule
+ replace
Add Vestibule
+ replace
Add Vestibule
+ replace
Add Vestibule
+ replace
LEVEL
dBA dBC
pane windows + 5 + 7
0 + 1
+ fixed dual pane + 6 +11
+ fixed dual pane
SGD with stucco wall + 6 +13
+ fixed dual pane
SGD with double wall + 7 +16
+ 1/2 " laminated glass
SGD with stucco wall +10 +13
+ 1/2 laminated glass
walls with double wall +11 +16
06/455
The changes for the various combinations of
components are slightly better for the C-Weighted case
than for the A -Weighted case. This is attributable
mainly to the poor C-Weighted transmission loss of the
existing door which tends to dominate the outcome for
the entire wall section.
The various combinations suggest that every
aspect of the existing construction would need to be
modified to reach the tentative goal of a ten (10) dBA
noise reduction for both the A -Weighted and C-weighted
measures. Not all the components need be exactly the
choices made here but the STC ratings of the substitutes
would need to be similar.
3.4 MODIFICATION OF THE SOUND LEVEL
In this example, the source was set at 110
dBA/119 dBC. Since the object was not to
specify a certain target noise level but a specific noise
reduction goal, the absolute levels are not especially
important. What is important is the frequency
distribution. The distribution chosen for the
calculation was taken in a typical modern nightclub where
high sound levels with high bass are the norm. The
Medlin study indicated that the complaints which
generated the study were focused on the "boom, boom" of
the South Beach Nightclub music. This expression was
more technically noted in the Medlin report by the 50
Hertz component of the sound signature.
9
06/455
Exhibit 3 showed how the sound frequency
distribution is reshaped by the transmission loss effects
of the sliding glass door with the net result being an
increase in the relative contribution of the bass
components or those frequencies under 250 Hertz. As the
sound wave propagates outward from the South Beach
Nightclub, the atmospheric effects, and structure
interactions cause even more reshaping of the frequency
distribution so that the bass components can often be the
only significant audible components.
One way to address the problem of the bass
contribution is to simply eliminate or, at least, reduce
it at the source. The amplified sound being produced in
the nightclub is being modified by mixers that shape the
frequency distribution. The bass contribution, which is
being produced by a sub -woofer, could be adjusted out or,
at least, reduced in level. Since permission was not
given to access the sound system and to examine the
practices, it is not known how feasible this approach
might be in practice, although it is certainly feasible
in theory. The more the bass contribution is reduced,
the closer the C-Weighted Levels will come to the A -
Weighted levels. The closer the C-Weighted levels come
to the A -weighted levels, the less the contribution of
the bass parts of the frequency spectrum. Ideally, the
C-Weighted and A -Weighted measures should be within three
(3) dB of each other to insure a relatively small
contribution of the bass frequencies to the overall sound
level.
Another way to address the problem of the bass
contribution is to reduce the overall sound level whether
measured on an A -Weighted or C-Weighted basis. The ten
(10) dBA target change could be met fairly easily in that
manner. Whether this would reduce the complaints is not
known since the low frequency emphasis would still exist.
Also, any reduction of the sound level might affect the
acceptance by the patrons.
Without knowing what the current practices are,
it is not possible to arrive at a clear conclusion as to
whether reducing the overall level or reducing the
relative contribution of the bass components of the sound
is feasible from a patron perspective.
10
C.0
t--
c7�
r
e0i'
o
00
cz�
Q
;>
0
m
o
co
(0
00
CO'.
I==
_ �g Z,i�l�liti
ab
t tt a
/ ;/ ,:I II � � ► �� ley K
! 1
! r� Sry CC 7
v; a
Y
till
e
- p v 4 r d 5 iIS
-------------
'= o0
C p L
B -
ff S
®3
N
II
;-
I
w
E Mill
11
VAr
-.Meow,
is
U)
W
m
U
w
0
115
110 -_
105
100
95
90 �r
85
J
80 -
75
70
65
60 -
55 -
50
EXHIBIT 6
ESTIMATED THIRD OCTAVE SOURCE SOUND
LEVELS INSIDE SOUTH BEACH FOR MUSIC SAMPLE
63 125
UNWEIGHTED DBC = 119
- A -WEIGHTED DBA = 110
i I
250 500 1k
THIRD OCTAVE BANDS
I I
2k 4k
50
45 -
40
35 -
30 -
U)
J
w
m 25 -
U
w
0 20 -
15
10 -i
5 -
J
0
EXHIBIT 7
ESTIMATED THIRD OCTAVE TRANSMISSION LOSS
FOR 3/16 INCH GLASS IN SLIDING DOOR
I I 11 1 1 1 I I' i.
63 125 250 500 1k 2k
THIRD OCTAVE BANDS
4k
EXHIBIT 8
ESTIMATED THIRD OCTAVE LEVELS JUST OUTSIDE
THE SLIDING GLASS DOOR FOR MUSIC SAMPLE
(DBA = 85)
100 -
95•
90 _ j^
85 -
80
Lij m 75
W 70�''
65 -
60 -j
55 -
J
50
45
63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k
THIRD OCTAVE BANDS
/ 06/278
GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES
ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS
April 14, 2006
MR. MARTEN ALVAREZ
CITY OF PALM DESERT
73-310 Fred Waring
Palm Desert, California 92260
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL_ FOR.ACOUSTICAL'ENGINEERING ,SSERVICES
SOUTH BEACH NIGHTCLUB AND ORDINANCE REVISION --
CITY OF PALM DESERT
Dear Mr. Alvarez:
We are pleased to submit the attached proposal for
acoustical engineering services.
Thank you, and we look.forward to the opportunity of
working with you.
Prepared
Gordon Bricken
President
/mmb
Attachment: Proposal'06/278
1621 East Seventeenth Street. Site K Santa Ana, Cditmr a 92706-951 a
Phone (714) 83"249 FAX (714) 836-1957 1
1 /
t�J
GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES
ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS
06/278
P R O P O S A L
A
C
O
U
S
T
I
C A L
E N G I N E E R I
N G
S E R
V
I
C
E S
S
O_
U T_ H
B E_ A_ C H N_ I
G H T_
C L U_ B
-
C
I
T Y
O F P A.L M
D E S
E R T
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This proposal addresses the various steps needed to
examine the methods that might be employed to reduce
the amount of noise escaping from the nightclub as well as
addressing a revised standard for noise control in the community.
2,0 SCOPE-OF-WO&K -- PART 1
2.1 Visit the nightclub and review the nature of
the problem.
2.2 Inspect the construction of the building, the
location of the equipment and the types of
equipment.
2.3 Meet with the Staff and City Council to review
the issues.
2.4 Discuss the constraints on the facility's
operation.
2.5 On a separate visit, setup a simulation of
equipment operation and determine the interior
and exterior sound levels as well as the noise reduction
of the building envelope.
1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Santa Ana, CaMomia 92705-8518
Phone (714) 835-0249 FAX (714) 535-1957 i
2
06/27.8
2.6 On the same -day, measure the actual levels from
the nightclub -during typical operations.
2.7 Recommend the mitigation measures needed to
produce a noticeable reduction in the
facility's noise emissions.
2.8 Prepare -a written report to include
identification of the noise sources; noise
standards, explanations of terminology, noise levels and
mitigations.
2.9 Meet with the staff to review the results.
3.0 SCOPE OF WORK PART 2
3.-1 Review the current Noise ordinance.
3.2 Examine what techniques. might be available
'to account for the presence of low frequency
noise.
3.3 Set standards for low frequency noise that can
be . enforced by the City' s staff.
3.4 Draft -a revision to the.Noise Ordinance.
3.5 Prepare a written report.
3.6 Meet with the staff to review the proposals.
4.0 ITT SUPPLIED ITEMS
The client will supply -access to the site and any site
plans.
5.0 MEETINGS
Three meetings are included in the Scope -of -Work. Each
meeting is based on six hours of time.
6.0 FEE
The fee for the Tasks outlined in -the Scope -of -Work will
be a not -to -exceed figure of $5,400 for Part 1 and a not -
to -exceed figure of $2,700 for Part 2.
Tasks outside the Scope are invoiced at $250.00 per hour,
unless the subject of a.separate fixed quotation. Legal work is
3
06/278
not included in the fee -or hourly quotation.' The fee is due and
payable on a net 30 day basis. Payments after 30 days are subject
to a one percent per month interest fee on the.rema-ining balance.
7.0 SCHEDULE
The schedule will'be that required by the client.
8..0 INSURANCE
The firm carries the following coverage:
Work-man's Compensation:..
$1,000,000
per. accident
$1, 000, 000
Pol-icy limit for
_
Disease "
$1,00.0,000
per employee
General. Liabil-ity....
$1,000,000
General Aggregate
$1,000,000
Products
$1,000,000
Personal Injury
$1,000,000
each occurrence
$ 50,000
Fire Damage
$ 5,000-Medical
per person
Professional Liability
$1,000,000
each claim
(claims Made)
$1,000,000
Aggregate
Company class Ratings are:
Hartford Insurance - A+
Mercury Insurance = A+
If requested,. a Certificate of Insurance will be issued
at no additional charge..
Prepared by:
Gordon ricken
President
/Mmb
4
r
1.
GORDON BRICKEN & ASSOCIATES
ACOUSTICAL and ENERGY ENGINEERS
PROJECT
CONTRACT AGREEMENT FOR $ZRVICES
06/276
This agreement is between THE CITY OF PALM DESERT and
Gordon Bricken and Associates, Inc., for the project
known as SOUTH BEACH NIGHTCLUB AND ORDINANCE REVISION.
2. _WRVICE
Gordon Bricken and Associates, Inc., will provide the
services outlined in Proposal 06/278.
The fee will be $5,400 for Part 1, and $2,700 for Part 2.
4. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
Any charges for special delivery or insurance vouchers.
5. INSURANCE
The firm carries the following coverage:
Workman's Compensation... $1,000,000 per accident
$1,000,000
Policy Limit for
Disease
$1,000,000
per employee
General Liability...
$1,000,000
General Aggregate
$1,000,000
Products
$1,000,000-Personal
Injury
$1,000,000
each occurrence
$ 50,000
Fire Damage
$ 5,000
Medical per person
Professional Liability
$ 250., 000
each claim
(Claims Made)
$ 250,000
Aggregate
Company class -Ratings are:
The Hartford = A+
Mercury Insurance = A+
1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K Santa Ana, Caffamia 92705-8518
Phan (714) 635-0249 FAX (71 4) 835-1957
5
06/278
The firm'will provide a Certificate of Insurance upon
request.
6. FINAL PRODUCT
Two copies of the report shall be made available to the
client. No additional service.of reports i-s included.
Delivery is by standard U.S. Mail.. Special mailing services such
as UPS, Federal Express, Priority Mail,,etc., are not included.
7. ggMWT PROVI S IONS
Payment is due and payable on a net 30 day basis.
interest at Ilk per month will accrue on unpaid balance
starting on -the 30th day after.delivery. The party signing the
agreement agrees to.be the responsible payee. If an agent is
operating on behalf of a third party, and said party.is the .
responsible payee, that party will sign this contract. Payment
delays caused by failure of a.third party to pay the payee are not
considered grounds for failure to pay unless prior arrangements are
.made .
The above is mutually agreed upon on. 2006.
Client C
Zrilp s /, el/.e 9 -4
Name .(Print) Title
Telephone AuthorizatjO� signature
Gordon .9f'icken, President
Approved for Gordon Bricken and Associates, Inc.
6
CITY Of PLffl DESEPT
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
TEL: 760 346-0611
FAX: 760 341-7098
info@palm-deserc.org
NOTICE TO PROCEED
April 18, 2006
CONTRACTOR:
Gordon Bricken & Associates
1621 East Seventeenth Street, Suite K
Santa Ana, CA 92705-8518
PROJECT NAME: South Beach Acoustical Engineering Services
CONTRACT NO.: N/A
You are hereby notified to commence work on April 18. 2006. Work shall be completed
as specified in the attached proposal and agreement.
HOMER
ACM FOR DEVELO RVICES
CITY OF PALM DES T
P NT SE
ACCEPTANCE OF NOTICE
Receipt of the above NOTICE TO PROCEED is hereby acknowledged by:
(Print Name): this day of April, 2006.
SIGNATURE:
TITLE:
) PUNTED DO YEn(110 PA71r
G:\DevServiceslMartin AlvareztWord Files\Gordon Bricken1NOTICE TO PROCEED.doc